Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They use to manage the forest pretty well in Cali with the Smokey the Bear campaign in the 50's - the 70's and in came the tree huggers. Then they stopped clearing the under brush and fallen timbers.
Fuel!
Reap what you sew
No, Smokey the Bear was actually part of the problem, people were taught that all fire is BAD and should immediately be put out. The truth is that forests in many areas of the country evolved with frequent lower intensity fires that kept the underbrush to acceptable levels. When European settlers first came to North America they observed Native Americans intentionally setting forest fires because they knew it made the forests healthier, and it also made hunting easier. Of course, coming from Europe, the settlers thought forest fires were bad and stopped them, and the result is the overgrown mess we have today.
The problem here is that if the state or the Feds start conducting controlled burns, then people start complaining about the smoke “pollution” and want it stopped. The forestry service frequently burns the longleaf pine forests in my area (usually during the winter) and the smoke gets heavy sometimes for days, but most of us here know it’s important for it to be done.
There are a lot of good resources about forest fires, but I would like to recommend one in particular. I heard the author, Gary Ferguson, speak a couple of years ago, and his presentation was very enlightening.
Corey Gardner just stated on the Meet the Press, when asked about Trump's threat to withhold funds, he said "the senate controls the funds--of course there is funding for fires." Is Gardner lying, covering for the president, or does Trump think he has the unlimited power of a dictator?
Threatening a state in the process of fighting a disaster like this goes beyond inappropriate into the realm of idiotic and irresponsible behavior. And if we have more fires, thank the Trump administration and it's draconian beliefs about science for helping the country to burn.
"...Science played a vital role in this success story by helping develop the best ways to battle wildfires. But the Trump administration wants to slash federal funding for wildfire science, at a time when forest and brush fires are getting bigger, happening year-round and becoming increasingly erratic..."
"...California Professional Firefighters responded, calling the president's assertion that forest management is to blame is "dangerously wrong."
...Instead, they blamed the federal government for mismanagement..."Moreover, nearly 60 percent of California forests are under federal management, and another two-thirds under private control. It is the federal government that has chosen to divert resources away from forest management, not California." "...Governor-elect Gavin Newsom also responded..."Lives have been lost. Entire towns have been burned to the ground. Cars abandoned on the side of the road. People are being forced to flee their homes. This is not a time for partisanship. This is a time for coordinating relief and response and lifting those in need up."
"...It's the first comment by the president on any of California's major wildfires since the Camp Fire sparked, which has become the state's most destructive wildfire since record-keeping began. That fire has charred more than 105,000 acres, killed 23 people and injured at least three firefighters.The town of Paradise has been virtually wiped off the map, leaving about 80 percent of the town lost, according to firefighters.
I may have asked this question before when there was yet another California fire but is it a problem of lack of water to put out fires when they have these big ones?
If we can build the Alaskan pipeline for oil, why can't California buy water from states that get a lot (like my state) and pipe it to them like we do oil?
No, Smokey the Bear was actually part of the problem, people were taught that all fire is BAD and should immediately be put out. The truth is that forests in many areas of the country evolved with frequent lower intensity fires that kept the underbrush to acceptable levels. When European settlers first came to North America they observed Native Americans intentionally setting forest fires because they knew it made the forests healthier, and it also made hunting easier. Of course, coming from Europe, the settlers thought forest fires were bad and stopped them, and the result is the overgrown mess we have today.
The problem here is that if the state or the Feds start conducting controlled burns, then people start complaining about the smoke “pollution” and want it stopped. The forestry service frequently burns the longleaf pine forests in my area (usually during the winter) and the smoke gets heavy sometimes for days, but most of us here know it’s important for it to be done.
When I go to National Wildlife Refuges in assorted states (but not California because I have never been to a NWR there), I always see areas of controlled burns. This one below had been done in the Pungo Unit Of Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife Refuge in North Carolina. I've seen evidence of them in Cades Cove in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, too. So, you are right, the feds do, do them.
I may have asked this question before when there was yet another California fire but is it a problem of lack of water to put out fires when they have these big ones?
If we can build the Alaskan pipeline for oil, why can't California buy water from states that get a lot (like my state) and pipe it to them like we do oil?
I have seen proposals to pump water from the Great Lakes to the thirsty Western states, but the costs of implementing such a massive water diversion project would be prohibitive. Even if you could do such a thing, it wouldn't make all that much difference in putting out wildfires. The problem is severe drought which dries up the vegetation, making plenty of fuel available for fire and increasing temperatures which causes the soil to dry out, stresses trees which are already under attack by a plague of insects which have thrived under warmer conditions. Large swaths of trees in the forests of the Rockies and Sierras are either dead or dying. All it takes is a single spark and the whole forest goes up in smoke.
As I read the responses and research causes of the fire -- once again I see Trump is clueless.
That's the problem with this President. Some yahoo on TV or even close to him can tell him anything and he just eats it up and spews it out -- without reading, sometimes without understanding exactly what he is saying.
It is a problem that at this time he chooses to attack California and is obviously misinformed.
Folks are losing everything. Firemen are risking their lives and Trump gets political. Go figure. He's such a great politician.
While his fans claim he is different - he is almost the perfect example of a politician. Doesn't have any moral compass and just says whatever his base needs to hear to cheer him on.
He's so childish you know he is just doing this because its California, if this was Montana or anywhere else he would remain quiet.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
