Report from Front Lines: Visit to Sierra Club Office

me | 6/25/2002 | me

[RooRoobird14]

Hubby just called to report on his visit to the local Sierra Club office in Phoenix.

He had tried calling many times yesterday, and couldn't get through on the phone lines.

Their office front doors were locked--he kept knocking and knocking until they gave up and let him in (LOL). The office window shades were drawn, and they obviously wanted everyone to think they were closed.

The woman who runs the office is one PISSED OFF bull dyke(not making this up). She was extremely angry that he was "bothering" them. She said she was "too busy" and "didn't have time to talk to people like him."

He asked her how many lawyers the Sierra Club employed, and she refused to answer. He asked her what the Sierra Club was doing to help put out the fires and she said "that's none of your business.". He asked her how much federal (taxpayer) grant money the Sierra Club got this year; she said "I don't have to answer that question."

There was a young man in the office who was actually polite and willing to talk to my hysband, but the B.D. was an absolute b*tch.

While hubby was in the office, the B.D. was replaying recorded phone messages left for them by angry callers. Hubby overhead three of the messages. All three were from enraged refugees of the fire who left f-word-peppered messages. One man (said he lost his home in the fire) said he was going to get even with them, he had a gun, and he'd take his time to get even. The BD was taking notes and muttering about filing police reports.

While I don't support anyone threatening violence on the Sierra Club, I can certainly understand how some of the displaced residents could be completely enraged at this point.

Frankly, I'm glad Governor Hull set off a firestorm criticizing enviro-wacko groups and how their lawsuits have paralyzed the Forest Service in general. The dialogue that's ensuing is a good thing.

[Mamzelle]

Nothing would be more delightful to me than to see the litigious mischief-makers dragged into court. However, your case would be that their litigation stalled and delayed efforts that might have prevented these fires. Hey, their litigation did exactly that! However, by that logic, we could hold judges responsible for not throwing the garbage out of court, and judges are immune from malpractice. Wish it could be done...

But if you can find another angle, go for it!

[Mamzelle]

When you let loggers in, they create their own roads which provide access for firetrucks....(live in Eastern logging area--we've got lots of dead pines from the beetle...looks like we could face some danger, too)

[.38sw]

My money says there were several in the parking lot and that the "BD" likely drives a Land Rover despite the fact that those type vehicles are enviornazi targets...

Many many of them are hypocrites. I saw a couple with a small child checking out of Trader Joe's a few weeks ago. They had brought all their own bags for the groceries, and they had an array of organic foods, lots of soy-based stuff. I figured they drove an old Volvo or something thing similar. Nope. I saw them loading their haul in their BRAND NEW 8 cylinder 4-wheel drive Land Cruiser.

The Sierra Club has been using YOUR MONEY to sue the Forest Service on all sorts of issues. Their bring a lawsuit, the agency settles, pay them a lot of money for legal fees, and the settlement agreements are full of concessions that severely restrict the FS's ability to manage the forests. Courtesy of your tax dollars.

[Grampa Dave]

Thanks for your scary answer.

When you find that link, please post it. It will be a very handy reference as these current fires roar on and more will come.

[Grampa Dave]

CO posted, "Actually, I think it is the Sierra Nevada that are in the worst shape, or at least the highest risk. What a crowning insult to the Sierra Club a massive burn and weed infestation there would be."

The only thing that is currently saving the N. Sierra Nevada is the massive snow fall left over from last winter. A fly fisher, I know went up into the mountains around Tahoe to fly fish the week of 9-15 of June. He and his fishing buddy had to use a lot of alternative sites as many of the upper roads and trails were covered by massive amounts of snow.

Of course that snow pack will go away in time, this summer. The normal danger season up there occurs later in July if we have a warm summer and into the first fall rains/snows.

[arm958]

Gifford Pinchot and Theodore Roosevelt would be shocked at what those who call themselves environmentalists have done.

[arm958]

And the revolution begins.............. how do we fan the fire of the revolution????

I think it's got to start local (in hundreds of towns). If the woodcutters and mill workers, supported by the good old boys, simply go into the forests and do what needs to be done, the message might get to Washington. That, of course, would require grass-roots organization, cajones, and a steely resolve. I would much prefer that this be accomplished in the political/legal arena, but how long can a minority push their will on the majority?

[BOBTHENAILER]

Thought I'd share this actual pic of the Montana fire....*sigh*....

Incredible. Thanks a million.

[Grampa Dave]

Absolutely. When loggers go in they create or fix old roads to get to the timber that is harvested and to bring the harvest timber and equipment back out.

That does two things. There are now roads to get heavy equipment to a fire and a lot of man power. If this is done in the early stages, the fire often can be maintained.

The second benefit is that these roads often serve as fire breaks that help to contain a fire.

So you can get to the fire via these roads with the right equipment and people. Then these roads in early stages of the fires serve as firebreaks that help to contain the fire.

The enviral whackos know all about this. This is why they use Bull Trout or some other Bravo Sierra EPA critter to block roads and let the old roads disappear as the brush over grows the older roads.

[SFmom]

As a Siera Club life member and a former staff member (don't laugh: ROGER HEDGECOCK was on the staff the same time I was. Believe it or not, there ARE conservative Sierra Club members. We're sort of like the early Christians...we draw a picture of Ronald Reagan or Newt Gingrich in the sand....) I have a few suggestions for countering some of the more unacceptable/stupid/irresponsi ble Sierra Club policies on land management.

The Sierra Club's best forestry consultant (now dead, unfortunately), supported sound forestry practices, like thinning and controlled burns. In the past, the Board of Directors of the Club was composed of (usually) men of sound professional backgrounds, whose avocation was conservation. Now the Board is dominated by professional "environmentalists", usually people who have questionable earning abilities and whose greatest skills seem to be leeching off non-profits.

The "conservation policy" in many places is controlled by small, easily invaded cells of people. You can become a voting member of the cell by attending a few meetings of the cell. First, you must join the Sierra Club and then you must attend local conservation meetings. It's very much a grass-roots organization and it can be returned to responsible practices, just as it has been turned to irresponsible practices by radicals in the past 20 years.

[Mo1]

Your welcome ..That pic was taken during the Montana Fire in September of 2000....

[1Old Pro]

Has anyone suggested that wild fires are terrorist acts?

 

[McGavin999]

If they can't be sued, then how can they have standing to file suit? I think this could be challanged in court. It would be wonderful if they were cut off from being able to file lawsuits as long as they can not be held accountable for their actions.

[RooRoobird14]

Hubby wasn't "stalking" anybody. He was looking for answers, and yes he did want to voice his opinions. (So call a policeman......).

I used to belong to Green Peace and the Sierra Club (yes, I did, when I was young and stupid--LOL). There's a reason why I tore up my membership cards. These EcoNazi groups become out-of-control, unaccountable "public interest" thugs that basically operate like the Mafia or Rainbow Coalition through blackmail (aka lawsuits).

Hubby and I are SICK AND TIRED of the way the Sierra Club and other EcoNazis have crippled and destroyed legitimate businesses and industries and seized private property, all under the so-called guise of "saving the environment." These @ssh*les are more concerned about screwing private landowners and businesses than they are about "protecting" the environment.

[RooRoobird14]

Sorry SFMom, no can do, but I appreciate the reasonable tone you're taking on all this.

I consider the Sierra Club to be the enemy. Before I got my engineering degree, I earned a bachelor's in wildlife biology and a master's in fisheries biology. I earned those degrees in the 70's when I was a young person who loved to camp, hike and listen to John Denver--LOL. I joined several conservation groups including the Sierra Club and Greenpeace, believing I could help promote the wise use of our priceless natural resources. I eventually quit both of these organizations in disgust because I realized they weren't interested in TRUE CONSERVATION, CONSERVATION LITERALLY MEANING "WISE USE." The Sierra Club doesn't give a damn about wise use--they want NO USE, as shown by their assinine position on ANWR and roadless forests.

The Sierra Club has also continued to LIE to the public about the impact of drilling in ANWR, and lie about that ridiculous 11th hour Clintonista executive order for arsenic in drinking water. As far as I'm concerned, SFMOM, the Sierra Club is the equivalent of the NAACP and NOW when it comes to environmental issues: they are more concerned about demonizing anyone who doesn't goose step along with ALL of their policies than actually coming up with with workable solutions.

And frankly, SFMOM, there are just too many left-wing anti-capitalism gay/lesbian "activist" Republican-haters in the Sierra Club. It's absolutely a gathering place for leftist politics. I'd rather have hot irons put to my face than hang around leftists like that. You seem like a reasonable person, SFMOM, but I'm sure members like you are few and far between.

[forester]

OK, forester, speaking professionally, what do we do first? Access roads, then clearing brush, then removing snags and deadfalls, then thinning? How long will it take to catch up with ten years of neglect?

Sorry for the delay. After thinking about this for a few days and I came up with the following:

1) Fire-proof existing roads by thinning out thickets, removing snags, and cleaning up woody debris. This should be done at least 200' above and 200' below the road for a 400' wide "shaded fuel break". Trees to be left would be large and well spaced 25' - 50' apart...leave the best, remove the rest.

2) Start small, use local people, work on priority roads first. Involve boy scouts, church groups, rotary clubs. Gain public trust that what is being done is to protect, not harm, the forest.

3) Once a network of fuel breaks has been established, gradually impliment a thinning regime around towns. In our area, there is enough large dead and dying trees to subsidize the removal of the smaller, unmerchantable trees. The program should be self-sufficient -- the value of the trees removed should pay for the clean-up cost of the unmerchantable material.True, the public may not see any return on the trees logged, but they would save millions in firefighting costs.

4) Provide incentives to the biomass power generation industry to develope small portable, biomass electrical generation units. (ie ten years of free fuel to the first company that puts one to work in each national forest). Utilizing the previously unusable (small trees)to generate electricity becomes economically viable if we eliminate or reduce the transport costs (trucking). It is just a matter of setting these portable generators up along existing power lines and thinning the forest within a twenty or thirty mile radius. When that area is cleaned up, simply move the plant to the next area in need of thinning.

5) Ideally, thinning projects should be located in places that would expand areas that are already fire proof. For example, around here (northern California), the higher elevations have slower growth rates and thus less fuel build-up. Thinning next to these areas and then working down slope would expand the areas that could burn under a natural fire cycle (ie lightning fires every 7 - 12 years). Fire proofed areas near towns would be thinned in the same manner.

The goal of this program would be to reduce the past 90 years of fuel build-up, and get the forests back into a state in which they could withstand periodic fires. Utilizing dead and dying timber for lumber, and small trees for power generation would create jobs, and make the program self sufficient. It would take at least a decade or two to complete -- any quicker and the market would collapse due to the flood of federal timber.

Unfortunately, existing regulations implimenting the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), National Forest Management Act (NFMA), Endangered Species Act (ESA), National Forest Planning regs etc, etc. would virtually ensure that this program would never get off the drawing board due to appeal by environmentalists. Congress has two options to fix this: A) overhaul the above laws to eliminate the "analysis paralysis" and political micro-management from Washington; or B) Exempt this program from the above laws.

Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho) and Representative Richard Pombo (R-California) have been working on option A. Option B was tried under the Clinton Administration (aka the salvage rider) and became a political nightmare for Gingrich and the Republican Contract with America group. The enviros claimed that congress exempted logging from environmental rules to enrich the timber industry.

Really, the best option is set up pilot projects that employ Carry_Okie's ideas of free market based environmental management. This stuff should be contracted out to the private sector under competitive bidding and monitored by independent third party scientific firms. Hope this helps!

[Grampa Dave]

Forester, you might want to consider posting your excellent plan to protect the US from burning up as separate thread.

Somehow, we need to link you and Carrie with the people who will be looking at how to change all of this after the fires that we will have until September/October this year.

You and Carry have ways to do this critical job of saving and rehabing our forests without breaking the country. In fact private industry can make a profit and in many case do the job better than the Club Sierra Druids posings as US Forestry people.

Of course the Enviral Whackos and their Druids pretending to be US Forestry People will be totally against this. Remember they didn't want the private industry cats/bulldozers containing the Colorado fires. They are like Union stewards wanting to preserve dinosaur ways to insure jobs for their fellow Druids posing as US Forestry people.

Thanks again for the thought and work in your common sense proposal.

[AnAmericanMother]

I agree w/ Grampa Dave 100%, forester.

We need to get this plan out where all the freepers can see it, and write their congressmen and senators in support of it. It's a great plan.

We gotta Boy Scout troop right around the corner just rarin' to go!

[madfly]

Thanks for the Ping.

I agree. Forester and Carry_Okie's plan needs to be a new thread. I will ping it to the nth degree!! Opportunity knocks.

[forester]

Thanks for your kind words. The plan I outlined is nothing new (except maybe the portable generation plants). Portions of it are straight out of the Quincy Library Group Plan that Congress passed and the USFS refused to impliment. Dave is right, the USFS is completely dominated by so-called "conservation biologists" who believe the best course of action is to do nothing. They stubbornly cling to the "balance of nature" mentality that says if we leave it alone, nature will take care of it and everything will be alright. This idealogy needs to be exposed for the lunacy it is. The only constant in nature is change. Forests evolve due various disturbances.... they do not reach a steady state (ie old growth) and stay there. Forests continue to change whether humans are there or not.

IMHO congress needs to give clear direction to the USFS and BLM that their mission is to actively take care of the public forests. These fires are proving the ramifications of benign neglect.