Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Carry_Okie
I have worked on many wildland fires, and know more about them then many people. I know that the problem of the removal of fire as part of the ecosystems our forest are was due to the public's fright at severe fires near the start of the twentieth century.

Many prescription burns (slash burning) I have worked on were only allowed after the stae or federal officials were reasionably assured by the weatherman that the winds would be blowing the smoke the right way, thus we have another political component in regards to our forest fire fighting policy: If the smoke makes tax paying voters unhappy, try to pretect them from it bothering them.

We all have to suffer a little bit if fires burning out light fuels making things as smokey as the first explorers to this land found it.

Private industry, and local, state, and federal governments also need to stop defering or not doing the vast amount of stewardship work there is to do in forest; much of which involved reducing fuels that are a hundred hours or less, (fuels often are graded this way, and it refers to dry-out time.)

I see everyone taking pot-shots and posturing to hurt everyone else on this issue. In fact, we all own a little of the blame for how we have removed fire from it's rightful place in forest ecosystems, and when the retoric cools off some, maybe we can all put the blame-game aside, roll up our sleeves, and work to make and keep healthy the forest we all love - and fight over so much.

Thanks for the bump.

48 posted on 07/11/2002 7:08:46 PM PDT by Glutton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]


To: Glutton
Private industry, and local, state, and federal governments also need to stop defering or not doing the vast amount of stewardship work there is to do in forest; much of which involved reducing fuels that are a hundred hours or less, (fuels often are graded this way, and it refers to dry-out time.)

How can they do that when they get sued nearly every time they try? Who brings those suits? Who sponsors those groups? EarthJustice ring a bell?

I see everyone taking pot-shots and posturing to hurt everyone else on this issue. In fact, we all own a little of the blame for how we have removed fire from it's rightful place in forest ecosystems, and when the retoric cools off some, maybe we can all put the blame-game aside, roll up our sleeves, and work to make and keep healthy the forest we all love - and fight over so much.

If you have read my work, you know that I have made exactly that commitment. This is no potshot. It is a body blow at an arrogant batch of urban lawyers who have never picked up a Pulaski in their lives.

No, it is time for these thugs in the Sierra Club to OWN the damage that they have done, and it isn't just fire. IMHO it is their aversion to herbicides abetting weeds excaping containment. In addition, it is the way they have driven production offshore, and impoverished landowners who would do that maintenance if they weren't putting EVERY AVAILABLE DIME into legal battles with idiot wack-jobs who don't know what they are talking about, and you DO know what I mean.

No, the shoe fits. These people have thrown every single hateful term in the book at landowners who didn't deserve it. The have witlessly abetted the investors who funded the very NGOs who fund EF! so that THEY could make bigger bucks on those offshore investments.

I hate to break it to you, but that is why those investors have poured BILLIONS into environmental NGOs every year. So now you know why Pew (SUNOCO) gave $100 million to the Tides Foundation alone.

49 posted on 07/11/2002 7:25:42 PM PDT by Carry_Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson