Replies

I am from California, I can see why you think that more than 1200 homes have been lost. I think the reason it would be around 1200 and not 12,000 is that there are vast hilly brushy areas that do not contain housing. So there are enclaves with homes that get burned but the majority of the fire is consuming unpopulated brushy areas. JMO.

I don't know what point you are trying to make but 1,200 plus homes lost is no minor matter.

What is sad is that much of it could have been avoided if they would just let them cut and thin. In Big Bear, they have actually tagged dead trees that were killed by beatles with signs that say you can not cut this tree. The Beatles thrive there, eat what they want, then move to the next tree. They say 90% of the trees on the north and east side of Lake Arrowhead are dead or dying.

Fuel for fire. Fuel for ire against these very whacked out environmentalist.

I don't know what point you are trying to make but 1,200 plus homes lost is no minor matter

I was not "trying" as you say to make a point. I was answering a query in a previous post. To your "attitude" I actually have my in-laws staying with me bc they have been evacuated from Big Bear. So I don't need you preaching to me about homes lost.