So About That "Poor Forest Management"...

[Initech]

Last edited Sat Nov 17, 2018, 09:54 PM - Edit history (1)

Let me ask you something, Trump fans, if forest management is so poor then how come my parents' home was nearly incinerated in a fire 9 years ago - and there's no forests anywhere where I live? And 9 years later, we're still finding remnants of the fires in the backyard!

Look you can blame Jerry Brown and California's democratic leadership for this, but you should be aware that Gov. Brown is retiring in January and we elected an even more liberal governor, so you can't blame this on him, so you might as well stop trying. But we all know that you won't.

You know what's causing the fires? This thing called science. Yeah you probably skipped over those classes in high school and college or fell asleep during the part about how weather works. It's not controlled by the president or some Geostorm-esque weather machine. It's not partisan politics or Trump's completely asinine claim of "poor forest management". It's science.

Let's break it down. We have not had a fucking inch of rain in the last 10 months. No rain means that the trees and crops dry up quickly. Which means that a single spark that can come from literally anywhere, can ignite acres and acres of dried brush. Add winds that can reach 55 MPH+, and you can easily get an inferno going that can be beyond the control of firefighters.

Thankfully California has some of the best firefighters in the country, and we desperately need them, or these fires could have been much worse. And no, it's not "poor forest management". It's just science.

[smirkymonkey]

1. K&R

Thank you! So sorry you and your fellow Californians have to deal with a continuous stream of insults coming from the ignorant, moronic, apricot hell-beast. And now you have him visiting you on top of all that. My condolences.

[Initech]

5. Yeah I am so sick of conservatives trashing my state.

Fuck 'em. But this claim is so idiotic and absurd that I just can't even...

[BamaRefugee]

17. Trash us all you want, just DON'T COME HERE, Reich Wingers. You couldn't handle living here anyway!

[mr_lebowski]

2. Science is FAKE NEWS ... Reality is what IQ45, Hannity, Alex Jones, Limpballs ... tell them ...

Every so-called 'scientist' in the entire world is in AlGore and Soros' back pocket, totally on the take.

It's really that simple.

IOW, wingnut's live in a carefully-constructed fantasy-world of made-up bullshit and propaganda.

It's a sickness, really.

Well, where it's not just abject stupidity, I mean.

[Initech]

6. It's all Soros' fault!

[LakeArenal]

15. No, everything is Obama's fault.

😉

I haven’t heard any (useless) thoughts or (useless) prayers either.

[Initech]

18. Well I heard a guy on the internet say it, so it must be true!

[LakeArenal]

21. Ehhh throw Hillary in with them.

All scapegoats covered.

[mchill]

3. I was a forester in California

And worked campaign fires for 20 years.

These large fires are totally due to drought and the low fuel humidities. Not much can be done in the face of high winds.

The Republicans are using it to push for more logging. What most don’t realize, in California, logging is greatly subsidized by taxpayers. If they think they are going to add more costs for unreasonable fuel treatments, besides not working, impractical!

Raking? Got a laugh out of that one. Those are McClouds, not rakes, btw.

[Beartracks]

4. Aren't mature "loggable" trees harder to burn?

I thought young trees, that would grow in the wake of logging, would be more fuel-ready?

======

[mr_lebowski]

8. Pretty sure that'd be an over-generalization TBH ... (nt)

[Hortensis]

29. Yeah, I laughed at the raking too. The more of his

astonishing ignorance that he reveals to those who vote for him, the better. Here in Georgia wood- and farmlands where most people have acreage, I haven't had a chance to ask any of our friends for advice on what to do with all the rakings from our woods yet.

A background in forestry must give you a really good view of what's happening and likely to. Another huge problem for those mountains is of course the billions of dying and dead trees from climate change. I heard that people in Paradise were aware of this, and of course the severe drought. A woman said it made her nervous, but she never thought it'd happen. She didn't say it, but she would have envisioned a "normal" devastating fire, not one that could rage a football field's distance in 2 seconds.

For decades now my sister who lives in those mountain woods has had to keep all her trees limbed up to I think 15 feet and the ground clear below. And her community/county has fire breaks and whatever, especially combustible natives forbidden, etc. California was doing some good things to try to protect communities from fire, but everything's going to have to be rethought.

The expense is going to be enormous. We're going to have to ask that 0.01% for our tax dollars back. I suggest we should start by defaulting on the payment about to come due on the $1.6 trillion we're gifting them.

[flibbitygiblets]

7. Didn't Trump admin cut forest services budget in 2017?

forestpolicypub.com/2017/05/24/a-deeper-dive-into-trumps-forest-service-budget/

And now he's claiming "poor management". More victim-blaming from the gaslighter-in-chief.

[former9thward]

10. The fiscal year 2017 began in Oct 2016 which was the last year of the Obama administration.

There was a small cut in Wildfire Management in that budget.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Forest_Service

[flibbitygiblets]

11. I'm talking about Trump's first Forest Service budget

Former Secretary Vilsack’s “all lands” approach is dead. “All lands” called for “using all USDA resources and authorities, in collaboration with NRCS, to sustain the entire matrix of federal, state, tribal, county, municipal, and private forests.” Trump’s vision is narrower. To justify zeroing out Urban Forestry, Open Space Conservation, Forest Legacy, and the Collaborative Forest Restoration program, USDA’s “focus will be on the maintenance of the existing National Forest System lands.”

Forest planning will slow even further, hard as that is to believe, as planning not only faces the same 11% cut, but has to fight with inventory and monitoring functions (which spend almost four times as much money) for its piece of a smaller pie. Insofar as planning makes policy, don’t expect any new ones anytime soon.

Hazardous fuels treatment faces a 7% cut and a sharper focus to treat “priority areas near communities that reduce risk to communities and firefighters and increase resilience of forests to catastrophic fire.” It’ll be interesting to see if managers get the message to stop wasting money treating fuels in the backcountry.

Whatever rebuilding the nation’s infrastructure may mean to Trump, the Forest Service isn’t going to have a seat at that table. The budget calls for a 73% cut in capital improvement and maintenance, including zeroing out the Legacy Roads and Trails program that pays for replacing fish-blocking culverts. Trail maintenance will drop from $77 million to $12 million, so visitors should be prepared to scramble over downed trees and be proficient with maps and GPS as disappearing trail signs are not replaced.
As for roads, which are slated for a 56% funding cut, the budget’s nostalgia for the good-old-days envisions timber sales, salvage no less, paying for road up-keep. Maybe the reimposition of tariffs on Canadian lumber will boost Forest Service stumpage prices, but I wouldn’t bet my house on it.

Last, but not least, Forest Service research is slated for a 16% budget cut from FY 2017 levels. The only logic to the specific cuts I can see is that the Forest Service will spend a little more on counting things like trees, i.e., inventory, and a lot less on basic science.
In sum, this budget narrows the Forest Service focus to taking minimal care of its own land. The Heritage Foundation is happy. Is anyone else?

[former9thward]

27. Yes, but what did they end up getting?

Congress determines the budget. I don't know the answer.

[Initech]

13. Yup!

And the one thing they do excel at is victim blaming when they should be blaming themselves.

[former9thward]

9. Things can't burn without something to burn.

That is science. Forests have become overgrown with brush and smaller trees. That is what burns. Even environmental groups have admitted they have to go a different way. The undergrowth needs to be eliminated and natural fires -- which are part of nature and part of SCIENCE - need to be able to burn. That is nature's way of forest management.

[qwlauren35]

12. Forgive my ignorance.

What is the solution?

In my dumb mind, I'm thinking irrigation from the ocean, but I really don't know.

[BigmanPigman]

14. Brown says that this is the new ABNORMAL and we have to adapt.

He has been trying to prepare for Climate Change for about 20 years. CA and Hawaii have signed renewable energy by 2030 bills, using technology to help fight fires, funding, infrastructure, emissions laws, etc but there is just so much you can do when the Federal Govt fights you every step of the way.

[qwlauren35]

19. Trying to think this through.

My first thought is that the only way to fight fire is with water. And y'all don't have any.

My next thought is chemicals sprayed from aircraft.

I think it's time for me to go look it up.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/12/09/us/wildfire-fighting-tactics/index.html

https://www.popsci.com/california-water-conservation-fire#page-5


Thanks for sparking my brain.

[BigmanPigman]

22. I was near two of the 5 worst CA fires in 2003 and 2007.

When I Google both the Cedar and Witch Fires today I read about the problems that we faced then and how we have learned. We are constantly learning, whether it is how to prevent or to fight fires better in the future. Changes have been made as far as planes to use, helicopters, chemical retardants, early warning systems, manpower to fight the fires, using the state's military manpower, planes, trucks, etc., utility companies, issuing govt restrictions on water usage at local and state levels. During severe droughts we aren't allowed to water lawns. People have ripped out their grass and planted desert type succulents and ground cover. We have stopped serving water at restaurants. We flush toilets less often, shower and do laundry less, have rolling blackouts during Santa Anas, recycle any rainwater, and the list is growing.

[qwlauren35]

23. California is a very unique state.

I always think of the earthquakes, but now I will also think about the fires.

Man's "war" with nature is here to stay. In my naivete, I have often wondered why people live near dangerous areas. But in fact, most areas have some dangers to them. It's just how nature works.

I am also thinking about my ignorance about fire as a naturally occurring event. I think of fire as something humans create to provide light and warmth. And yet, whenever I have read about "elements" it has always been earth, wind, fire. Or earth, air, water, fire.

I will respect fire more now.

Maybe if we put it in a picture book, the president will understand, too.

[BigmanPigman]

24. A friend called me this past week and she said,

"Gosh, why would anyone want to live in CA?". She lives in PA. Another said, "I never thought of this when I moved here 20 years ago". She has been evacuated three times so far.

The thing is, no one expected this 20 years ago. What I found surprising was when I googled the best places in the US to live during Climate Change San Diego was in the top 10! The reasoning being that rising sea levels wouldn't effect our coast much. Whoever wrote it obviously didn't look at our past 15 years of really bad fires, and this is from an article written this year.

[certainot]

16. forest management to them means turning wilderness over to loggers

it's a regular talking point on 1500 radio stations whenever global warming gets some blame

[Beartracks]

28. Republican answer to forest fires: no forests! n/t

[malaise]

20. He's a complete and total

Moron.

[Conflict]

26. What's your tagline from?

[Conflict]

25. From the aerial views I've seen...

Entire neighborhoods are gone but a few houses/properties are untouched, with trees still green but large gaps between them and the forest. An old Floridian told me you just have to keep a buffer of sand around the house. This guy had a house on the Cape (Canaveral) before the Apollo program took it. He said the gov't would move your house if you wanted but you were leaving either way.