• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Democrats were warned they would burn down CA.

Robertinfremont

Photo of me taken in the Army 1963
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2018
Messages
30,122
Reaction score
3,395
Location
Meridian, Idaho
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
But they ignored the warnings.

150 million dead trees are fueling huge Sierra wildfires - Los Angeles Times

By BETTINA BOXALLSTAFF WRITER
SEP. 13, 20205 AM
Two years ago scientists warned that a massive tree die-off in the Sierra Nevada could set the stage for forest conflagrations akin to World War II fire bombings.

The Creek fire, which forced the dramatic helicopter evacuations of more than 200 campers over Labor Day weekend in California, may be a hint of far worse to come in future years.
 
Last edited:

Most of the land on fire is fed property.
 

Sierra National Forest - Home
 

Well that makes me very sad for all the republicans in california. Vote trump so he can take no responsibility for the federal lands burning. Go team go.
 
These fires are actually good for the forests right now. In 40 years what grows back will be more bio diverse and healthier than what is there now.
 

Biden killed JFK. Pass it on.

:roll:
 


How exactly were the Democrats supposed to prevent a massive die-off of trees? It was probably due to climate change, which means that it falls solidly on the backs of the Republican climate deniers.
 
watsup said:
How exactly were the Democrats supposed to prevent a massive die-off of trees? It was probably due to climate change, which means that it falls solidly on the backs of the Republican climate deniers.
Click to expand...

They can start with less regulation and litigation. There are many hurdles to the issue in California, but some of the hurdles have to do with local regulations and threats of lawsuits. California has been getting better with this, but it's a slow process unfortunately.
 
OrphanSlug said:
Forget it, the OP is rolling... facts are entirely irrelevant to him and those likeminded.
Click to expand...

49 days until we can donate all of our spare ammo to Michael Caputo of HHS... Manafort-Stone operative assigned to "an Oleg Deripaska project"
Deripaska is the Putin dispatched oligarch who polluted the Steele dossier and bribed Moscow Mitch with a so far "vapor aluminum plant" investment in Kentucky.

https://twitter.com/ericgarland/status/1260045221276143616



Cesspool leak, in aisle one! I am trying mightily, but I cannot even keep up with the "prolific authorship" of the author of this thread, let alone the constant assault on reality, seemingly, "raining like cats and dogs" down on all of our heads.

I just paid $30+ to renew my annual digital subscription to "Left wing" WaPo let one "slip through", or?:



https://pamplinmedia.com/pt/9-news/...-invites-timber-unity-to-take-dc-victory-lap-
President invites Timber Unity to take D.C. victory lap
July 03, 2019
..similarities with their movement and President Trump's populist rise.
Click to expand...


 
In the grand scope of things its probably gonna be good for the forest

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
bongsaway said:
Well that makes me very sad for all the republicans in california. Vote trump so he can take no responsibility for the federal lands burning. Go team go.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Trump should have been over there cutting that s*** down and clearing it out. You bozo' s know there are people given those job responsibilities. But California has so many stupid conservation laws you can't do anything.
 

Another linkless rant? Really....?

And we can start by winning the election and investigating and prosecuting "Putin's maggots" to the fullest extent of the law!

This senator was interviewed this evening after finishing a 600 mile fact finding drive across his state, he saw no air not filled with choking smoke.
He said that every year, republican controlled senate blocks his requests for $1 billion appropriation for forest maintenance. He said second growth forests are
a major fire threat due to even height of all trees and that they grow too close together as they grow older....

 
Last edited:

I don't suppose you realize that the federal government is in charge of most of the forest land in CA and that foresters are not an elected position.
 
Anyone who claims this fire season is because climate change has likely never picked up a history book to learn this sort of thing has been a constant occurance is california oregon, nevada arizona etc during drought years, or even in non drought years when large numbers of trees die off.

Those saying it is probably better likely also ignored history, as science does show fires are good for the forests, however it used to be a policy to ignore fires for the natural effect, until the great yellowstone fire, which caused govt and scientists to evaluate natural fire progression and instead try to balance it with controlled fires and fire prevention methods as the great yellowstone fire went from natural fires to out of control fairly quickley.
 
Court Jester said:
These fires are actually good for the forests right now. In 40 years what grows back will be more bio diverse and healthier than what is there now.
Click to expand...

Considerably fewer than 40 years... take a look at Yellowstone 5-10 years after burning ..
40 years growth is icing on the conservationist's cake.
As you said... it will be healthier.
 
Thom Paine said:
Considerably fewer than 40 years... take a look at Yellowstone 5-10 years after burning ..
40 years growth is icing on the conservationist's cake.
As you said... it will be healthier.
Click to expand...

And this current condition isn't about climate change anyway. 200 years ago long before there were that many people in California, every year 5-10 million acres would burn. But after 1900 and with fire suppression, only about 300,000 to 600,000 acres would seasonally burn in the state. So yes, a MAN MADE cause, but not changing the climate. It has to do with how we manage forests just as the President is pointing out. We try too hard to prevent forests from burning, and by doing so we create MORE fuel, and more conditions for fire.

It is estimated than since Europeans arrived in California, the amount of wood and debris in our forests are has increased to five times what it was before Europeans arrived here.
 
post said:
Another linkless rant? Really....?
Click to expand...

Another? You sound like my wife. Not sure what the absurd conspiracy theory about Putin has anything to do the conversation, but kudos on letting us all have a glimpse into your thought process and sanity.

For those who may be both uninformed and Google-inept:

Why isn’t California using more prescribed burns to reduce fire risk? | Ars Technica


Access Denied

 
Last edited:
Thom Paine said:
Considerably fewer than 40 years... take a look at Yellowstone 5-10 years after burning ..
40 years growth is icing on the conservationist's cake.
As you said... it will be healthier.
Click to expand...

Not so sure. A large portion of Yellowstone was lodgepole pine. Lodgepole pine is a fire dependent species.

"Lodgepole pine forests grow and die uniformly. Most of Colorado’s lodgepole pine forests developed following hot, stand-replacing crown fires (CSFS 2008)1. Lodgepole pine is intolerant to shade and thrives in the aftermath of fire; many lodgepole produce serotinous cones, which open in response to extreme heat and release an abundance of seeds. These long-lived cones may remain viable for decades, waiting for a fire to release their seeds. The prolific regeneration that naturally occurs in the open, sunny areas left in the fire’s wake often results in dense stands of 20,000 or more trees per acre. These forests often are referred to as dog-hair stands."
Lodgepole Pine | Colorado State Forest Service

The forests burning California, Washington and Oregon are made up of Redwoods along the coast, oak, fir, spruce, ponderosa pine and other species of pine. They don't rely on stand replacement fires. They are more adapted to lower intensity ground fires.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…