Seems like California politicians want wildfires based on their forest (non)management

At least now we know why you have a chip on your shoulder and an apparent inferiority complex.

1 Like

You seem angry beyond the point of reasonable discussion.

You are a “farmer” but your wife and her family runs the business;

You are supposedly retired military and hooked into so many sources that are anti-Trump it would make our heads spin

Now your father was an Indian and you’re still active in the tribe yet you can’t figure out an axe from a Tomahawk and deride how your supposed ancestors respected and managed the land.

You come in here with a chip on your shoulder thinking you are going to teach us all and put us in our places.

When you are gone, and eventually you will be, you will then blame everyone but yourself, move on to countless places where you’ve been unwelcomed in the past and will be in the future.

The pattern isn’t us. It is you.


Yah, I’m a shrinking violet…a wallflower :expressionless:

It took you a week to discover this? You’re still struggling with tying your own shoelaces right?


There are no words…I’m just heartbroken, HEARTBROKEN I tell you!

I seem to own you for some sad reason.

And we’re done. No further replies to your inane speculations from me C’boi.

Scientific evidence of this was presented to Jerry Brown but he poo pooed it because he is blinded by the unproven science of global warming.

Not exactly true, but he did veto the bill.

Flash Report was somewhat self-contradictory in their characterization of this veto. On the one hand, the article claimed that Brown “did not properly address” his rationale for refusing to sign the bill, but it also accurately wrote that Brown had said, roughly speaking, he regarded the provisions of the legislation as redundant due to an initiative that was already under way. In his veto message, Brown wrote:

This bill requires the Public Utilities Commission to prioritize areas that have increased fire hazard associated with overhead utility facilities. Since May of last year, the Commission and CalFire have been doing just that through the existing proceeding on fire-threat maps and fire-safety regulations. This deliberative process should continue and the issues this bill seeks to address should be raised in that forum.

I could offer up analogous information here but I’ll refrain as it would serve no good purpose.

Where do you live? What do you know of seasonal weather differences between the West Coast and anything east of the Cascades and Sierras?

Just asking…no offense intended.

Oh this is burn candy!

Holy crap! Not only are you playing out your alter ego fantasy character on the internet, but you are just downright batshit delusional crazy!

You got burned with some truth dabomb on your big fat greasy head! HA HA!

This was better! Trump telling it like it is to the beta cuck loser Gaven Newsom!

Although the president’s timing was controversial — he was tweeting his criticism while firefighters were on the front lines battling the blaze — others agreed with his assessment.

Gotta strike while the fire is still hot (okay a bad joke, but still true).

Trump also referred to Newsom’s water policies, which seek to restrict the amounts allocated to rural communities and farms, and to increase the flow rates in rivers that drain into the Pacific Ocean, ostensibly to protect the Delta smelt and other endangered species.

That is insane.

As noted above, there is no scientific link between the current fires and climate change. Scientists have said that a warmer California could be more susceptible to fire in the future, but recent fires are partly a product of conditions already endemic to California, and wind patterns that have little to do with climate change.

An interesting read:


Yet the Little Hoover Commission report found poor management policies for the last century have left forests vulnerable to fires.

“The costs of long neglecting and mismanaging forests have become an unsustainable burden in California,” the report said.

Before Europeans settled in California, Native American fire practices, including periodic low-intensity fires, helped renew forests and kept them from becoming too dense. Policies of aggressively fighting every fire, however, have resulted in the loss of that natural thinning.

In addition, federal and state restrictions on logging caused timber harvesting in California to decline more than 70 percent between the late 1980s and 2012, according to a U.S. Forest Service report.

Trees in federal forests where timber harvesting is prohibited have high mortality rates from wildfire, and dying trees currently outpace new growth, according to a report by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).

“When John Muir arrived and discovered Yosemite we had about 40 trees to an acre. Today we have hundreds of trees to an acre,” said Rich Gordon, president of the California Forestry Association, an industry group. “We will be better off if we can get closer to the way our forests once were.”

CARB, which oversees the state’s aggressive climate change regulations, has estimated that 15 million acres, or nearly half of the state’s forestlands, were in need of restoration. If left to languish, the forests could become a source of overall greenhouse gas emissions by burning rather than a means to draw carbon from the atmosphere, CARB said.

Slideshow (6 Images)

Between 2010 and 2017, drought and bark beetle infestation contributed to the death of 129 million trees in the Sierra Nevada, increasing the risks of wildfires in the region, according to the U.S. Forest Service.


Recently, California has pushed for changes to the way its forests are managed, including performing more prescribed burns and advocating for harvesting timber from its forests for wood products or energy production. The U.S. Congress acted this year, too, creating a disaster fund to fight fires and stop diverting funds away from much-needed forest management.

Earlier this year California’s Brown doubled the amount of land open to vegetation thinning, to 500,000 acres from 250,000 acres, and streamlined permits for landowners to clear trees.

A new law also allocated $200 million a year for forest health and fuel reduction projects as well as a scrutiny of California’s 1970s-era logging laws.

More commercial harvesting could help pay for the hefty cost of clearing dry fuel, Oregon State Professor John Bailey said, though it would just be one part of a range of solutions.

“We can’t just log our way out of this,” Bailey said.

Way back I read an article about a Vietnamese immigrant who built a home in a known fire zone. All material non flammable. I don’t even think he had fire insurance.

I don’t think it is the same person, but the this guys ours survived the Thomas Fire.

You’re the one who brought logging into the conversation as an insult to capitalism without a thought in your head that since mankind has been able to “chop down trees” they’ve done it for a variety of reasons and uses including clearing forests so the place wouldn’t burn down around them!
Which proves the more primitive minds of the past had more brains then environmental liberal nut jobs running California today!

Nearly 50% of California is federal lands. If you want better forest management, tell the red hatter to get a rake and tomahawk and get busy instead of spending one in every four days on a golf course…:roll_eyes:

And 100% of lives lost and 100% of properties lost were not on federal lands.

Electricity should not have to be turned off to thousands because officials won’t allow the areas around the power lines to be properly maintained.

There are multiple ways to use common sense and science to help prevent the fires. Clinging to or blaming global warming isn’t going to solve anything.

Trumps too ignorant and won’t set for briefings because in his pea brain he doesn’t need to, he’s smarter than everybody.

“In a Wednesday morning tweet, Trump said the fires that killed more than 90 people last year would not have happened had the state’s forests been properly managed.”

So he doesn’t realize that half of California is federal land and therefore his responsibility to manage. Many of California’s deadly fires began on federal land and spread to state and private land… :roll_eyes:

I posted this somewhere upthread but the fastest moving fires and those most difficult to contain are not in forests. No one logs sage, creosote or coyote bush.

Most of these fires are in arid brushland near cities and agriculture.

Crowded forests and poor management, especially at the federal level are always an issue just not for the worst of the current fires.