Dead Trees Pose 'Apocalyptic' Calif. Wildfire Threat

Reuters via Yahoo! ^ | 10/29/03 | Gina Keating

[goldstategop]

What's wrong with letting the trees burn down? They're dead and dying anyway and we simply don't have the manpower to chop em all down. Anyways, it can hardly get worse than it is now. We've already been through the worst of the apocalypse.

[Poohbah]

What's wrong with letting the trees burn down?

Nothing, if you don't live adjacent to them...

[Steven W.]

I was watching some mindless exchange between Katie Couric and Tim Russert this AM (emphasis on mindless) and it was clear they were missing the elephant in the room. what's that you ask? after months of threatening fillibusters and lots of overblown hyperbole from her pantsuitedness, Hillary!, the DemoncRATs just gave in quietly yesterday and allowed Gov. of Utah to be confirmed as Bush's choice for EPA secretary. Why is that? mere coincidence? I think not. Me thinks that the environmental issue has turned broadly for the Republicans over the past year, one in which we've seen eco-terrorists burning housing developments and, now, with all the fires and other outright incompetence brought by the liberals in CA government (especially Grayout Davis) - the last thing in the world Californians will want to hear about in next year's election is why we need to be more sympathetic to the now totally homeless gnatcatchers or bark beetles which left the entire California ecosystem in such an unhealthy state of disease and decay, nature came back with a vengeance to correct, undo, refertilize & regerminate the terrible errors wrought by the enviro-wacko's ways.

[dead]

When a fire eats 400,000 acres of dead trees, it's going to really really really big and still out looking for fuel.

Houses, office buildings, cars, and people will do.

[goldstategop]

Oh I agree. Why did the enviro wackos oppose clear cutting in the first place? Then we wouldn't to worry about the possible effects on homes, buildings, cars, and people. That's par for the course in a state in which common sense is the last thing to be found in its environmental policy. So Mother Nature has to take care of what people should have been taking care of in the first place as a result of their own blindness and plain old-fashioned stupidity.

[Libertarianize the GOP]

ping

[theFIRMbss]

>Nothing, if you don't live adjacent to them...

I've been wondering
if in some small way this fire
might be a message

to the noisy, rich
liberals who do live there...
Maybe they'll catch on

that rational use
and clear-cutting of timber
is a good, good thing...

[goldstategop]

Exactly my point. The liberals have learned a VERY expensive lesson. Now let em pay for it.

[dead]

Why did the enviro wackos oppose clear cutting in the first place?

Because they're enviro-wackos, of course.

I hope they can learn their lesson without too much more damage.

The government and insurance companies will pay to rebuild their mansions, and that's coming out of our pockets one way or the other. Plus having your house burn just really sucks, and I wouldn't wish that on anybody, no matter how stupid they are.

[So Cal Rocket]

San Diego, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties are major Republican strongholds.

[KC_for_Freedom]

Now let em pay for it.

I would suggest that they start paying for it by letting Bush pass some forest management legislation and open up federal land for thining.

FOX had a San Francisco liberal on to discuss what should be done, and all he could think of is spend more money (our money) and complained that management of federal land would do little for the brush areas of southern california. But this does show the Sierra Club and liberal management of the environment can have some expensive consequences.

[goldstategop]

Yep, politics at work. If San Francisco were ablaze, I wonder how soon the state government would have acted to deal with the situation.

[Wolfstar]

It was a REALLY mindless exchange. Katie (whose head must be about as empty as a deflated balloon) was almost giggling with glee over all the trouble Arnold Schwarzenegger will inherit from Gray Davis. Thousands of human beings are losing all they worked for, and all that witch can think of is how difficult the fires make it for Arnold to succeed as governor. If that isn't evil in a smiley face, I don't know what is. (I thought Dems were supposed to be the sensitive, care-about-the-little-people party.)

Then, just to reinforce how stupid she is, she had the gall to ask Russert whether Californians will be unhappy with Arnold because he's in Washington instead of back home while the emergency is going on. Well, duh, Katie. NOoo. The man is not governor yet. He's actually more effective back in Washington lobbying for the state than he would be standing around on the sidelines here at home. When Russert began to answer her stupid question in the affirmative, I switched channels. Had about all I could stomach.

[ItsOurTimeNow]

The liberals have learned a VERY expensive lesson.

Ideally, yes.

But you, I, and everyone else here knows that liberals don't learn sh#t from their mistakes. They'll just simply turn around and find some way to blame this on Bush, all the while refusing to admit that it was their own fault.

[sinkspur]

Me thinks that the environmental issue has turned broadly for the Republicans over the past year, one in which we've seen eco-terrorists burning housing developments and, now, with all the fires and other outright incompetence brought by the liberals in CA government

The Republicans OWN the environmental issue, especially after this conflagration in California.

How can anybody oppose clear-cutting now?

These fires belong to the Democrats, a point the Republicans should make for the next twelve months.

[Wolfstar]

Why did the enviro wackos oppose clear cutting...

The problem is that they oppose ANY forest management in favor of letting nature take its course. Clear-cutting isn't necessary if the forests are thinned and managed properly over time.

[SoCal Pubbie]

I'm afraid Perky Katie is in for a big letdown. Taking over a horrible situation like this virtually guarantees that Arnold will be a success as governor. It's like a new coach after a winless season, one victory and you look like a genius.

[tray-sea]

I'm not sure you have to clear cut a forest.. Perhaps I have the meaning of clearcutting wrong. My thought is that as long as we maintain our forests (like the Indians freekin did) we'd be in good shape. I think there is a post somewhere on these wildfire threads about a scientist that said our forests from 400 or so years ago (as documented by explorers) were not soooo dense as some are today b/c we used the timber and they were maintained by the Indians-- that you could in theory ride a horse through the forest easily without a lot problems (like hitting a tree!). Makes you wonder how messed up those enviro whackos really are and how stupid we've been for letting them run their campaigns as if they really want to save the environment.. what's that saying...
THE ROAD TO HELL IS PAVED WITH GOOD INTENTIONS..
good going Sierra Club!

California is one big burning Hell right now. Many prayers for those affected by the fires.

[Simmy2.5]

Exactly. Not only that though, these fires are UNNATURALLY out of whack since the ecofrauds allowed the forest to decay without some sort of management before (specifically, cutting down old dead trees which allows the forest to thrive...and if there is a fire...allows the "old growth" trees that the econuts say they are for protecting to surive a fire). At the moment, the entire forest is killed due the EXTREME amount fuel that makes the fires more intese and dangerous. As for all those nutrients? Well, those nutrients in the soil are no good if they are washed away in a rain storm. Something the left seems to forget in the environment debate. For more info...check out