Free Republic

Apparently, California environmentalists wanted the dry brush and dead trees to accumulate.The Wall St. Journal just wrote,“for environmental conservation reasons, the state doesn’t typically remove brush”Original: https://www.wsj.com/us-news/climate-environment/how-l-a-bureaucracy-made-it-harder-to-clear-flammable-brush-683f953eArchive: https://archive.ph/GVK6JI disagree with this policy.But I don’t live in California.And I respect the right of California voters to adopt policies that I disagree with.I would be curious to hear a more detailed explanation from California environmentalists, voters, elected officials, policy makers, and other people about why they chose to adopt this policy.

LOS ANGELES—Barry Josephson enjoyed a peaceful life in his hilltop home in the Pacific Palisades, save for one constant worry: the highly flammable brush that clogged the surrounding government-owned land. “We all take a risk living here,” the producer of films including “Enchanted” said. “But that land should be maintained.” There have been at least five fires in the area since Josephson moved there eight years ago. Most were fueled by brush, which consists of drought-resistant shrubs that burn easily and intensely. Impatient with government bureaucracy, including a $150 fee for permission to remove brush from state parkland, some of...