• 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!

It just keeps getting worse...

Glitch said:
California burns every year. As do all the other States that have forests. California just gets the most attention because they whine the most.
Click to expand...
We're not real excited about our fires up here, either dude. I think CA gets more attention because when a fire is threatening rich people's homes, it's more newsworthy.
 
lurchadams said:
It's a combination of climate change and poor forest management. Regarding the forest management item - it's not all the governments fault - it's nazi environmentalists.

Each time the government wants to thin out the forest, environmentalists sue it. And it's not that environmentalists are all liberals - they're actually crooks - it's a business. Environmental agencies can be corrupt, like the NRA - they fundraise and make money off suing the government and the net result is again - poor forest management.
Click to expand...
The climate has absolutely nothing to do with it.
 
Glitch said:
The climate has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...
Sorry, dude. You're just wrong. When it's hot and dry with little rain for years in a row.. it's the very definition of climate change and also a perfect catalyst for a fire.
 
venice_ca said:
You are aware of the many national forests in California, 18 in total, that are controlled by the federal government, not the state. A Guide to California's National Forests

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
USDA Forest Service Temporarily Closes Nine Northern California National Forests for Public Safety, Joining Eldorado NF (See Regional Order No. 21-04: Emergency Forest Closure and Press Release)

To better provide public and firefighter safety due to extreme fire conditions throughout northern California, and strained firefighting resources throughout the country, the USDA Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region is announcing a TEMPORARY CLOSURE of nine National Forests. This closure will be effective at August 22, 2021 at 11:59 p.m. through September 6, 2021 at 11:59 p.m. USFS ClosesNational Forests in Northern California
Click to expand...
The state and federal governments are in full agreement. If the Left wing coastal states took the feds to court or else just sent muscle to evict the federal managers and took the forests back the issue would be resolved. They don’t want to fix the issues in federally “managed” land
 
lurchadams said:
We're not real excited about our fires up here, either dude. I think CA gets more attention because when a fire is threatening rich people's homes, it's more newsworthy.
Click to expand...
Nor are we, and we burn a lot more acreage every year than California ever does. I'm sure Oregon and Washington State have equally impressive wildfires, and they pose an equal threat of losing property as they do in California.

California declares a state-wide emergency over every little fire that breaks out. Wildfires are a cash cow for California. It may destroy homes and rob people of their livelihoods, but the California government is making out like a bandit from all those federal funds they are collecting - none of which ever go to the victims. I certainly wouldn't put it past Democrats in California to intentionally set these fires. That is what leftist filth do.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
The state and federal governments are in full agreement. If the Left wing coastal states took the feds to court or else just sent muscle to evict the federal managers and took the forests back the issue would be resolved. They don’t want to fix the issues in federally “managed” land
Click to expand...

Yea all they need is a good sweeping right?
 
lurchadams said:
Sorry, dude. You're just wrong. When it's hot and dry with little rain for years in a row.. it's the very definition of climate change and also a perfect catalyst for a fire.
Click to expand...
No, I'm not wrong. The climate has absolutely nothing to do with wildfires. If you actually understood what "climate" meant, you would know this fact, but you clearly have no clue.
 
Glitch said:
No, I'm not wrong. The climate has absolutely nothing to do with wildfires. If you actually understood what "climate" meant, you would know this fact, but you clearly have no clue.
Click to expand...
That is like saying the lack of rain has nothing to do with the drought.
 
iguanaman said:
LOL Yes we haven't been sweeping the forests enough. Get you broom out and get to work. :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
I would suggest you check with the forestry department at SFASU.
 
For those completely clueless leftists out there:
What Climate Means
In short, climate is the description of the long-term pattern of weather in a particular area.

Some scientists define climate as the average weather for a particular region and time period, usually taken over 30-years. It's really an average pattern of weather for a particular region.

When scientists talk about climate, they're looking at averages of precipitation, temperature, humidity, sunshine, wind velocity, phenomena such as fog, frost, and hail storms, and other measures of the weather that occur over a long period in a particular place.

For example, after looking at rain gauge data, lake and reservoir levels, and satellite data, scientists can tell if during a summer, an area was drier than average. If it continues to be drier than normal over the course of many summers, than it would likely indicate a change in the climate.
Click to expand...

Source: https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/noaa-n/climate/climate_weather.html
 
Glitch said:
No, that is not what it is "like." Which indicates that you have no clue what "climate" means either.
Click to expand...
Part of climate is the average rainfall and temperatures and that rainfall has declined steadily while average temperatures have increased over decades.

Their third finding was that there appeared to be an even more pronounced correlation between declining amounts of summer precipitation and the number and size of wildfires. More specifically, they found that between 82 and 94 percent of the land area they surveyed experienced less summer rainfall over the time period they studied. They also found that the average forest in the area under study had 4 percent less rainfall per decade, and the worst of them had a 47 percent decline. They also found that the average number of days that rainfall exceeded 2.5 mm in the impacted areas fell, as well—and that the average length of dry spells increased.

The researchers suggest their data shows declines in rainfall in the western United States are a major factor causing an increase in the number of wildfires and how big they grow.

https://phys.org/news/2018-08-rainfall-western-major-contributor-wildfires.html

maxresdefault.jpg
 
Glitch said:
No, I'm not wrong. The climate has absolutely nothing to do with wildfires. If you actually understood what "climate" meant, you would know this fact, but you clearly have no clue.
Click to expand...
Ok, glitch. Have fun arguing with yourself. I'm trying to be reasonable and you're just not.
 
Glitch said:
Nor are we, and we burn a lot more acreage every year than California ever does. I'm sure Oregon and Washington State have equally impressive wildfires, and they pose an equal threat of losing property as they do in California.

California declares a state-wide emergency over every little fire that breaks out. Wildfires are a cash cow for California. It may destroy homes and rob people of their livelihoods, but the California government is making out like a bandit from all those federal funds they are collecting - none of which ever go to the victims. I certainly wouldn't put it past Democrats in California to intentionally set these fires. That is what leftist filth do.
Click to expand...
Oh - my - gosh!

I'm out!
 
lurchadams said:
Ok, glitch. Have fun arguing with yourself. I'm trying to be reasonable and you're just not.
Click to expand...
And I tried to educate you about the meaning of climate, but as a typical leftist, you refuse to learn. Stuck with your nonsensical self-delusions.
 
Glitch said:
Nor are we, and we burn a lot more acreage every year than California ever does. I'm sure Oregon and Washington State have equally impressive wildfires, and they pose an equal threat of losing property as they do in California.

California declares a state-wide emergency over every little fire that breaks out. Wildfires are a cash cow for California. It may destroy homes and rob people of their livelihoods, but the California government is making out like a bandit from all those federal funds they are collecting - none of which ever go to the victims. I certainly wouldn't put it past Democrats in California to intentionally set these fires. That is what leftist filth do.
Click to expand...
What a dumbass thing to say.
 
Glitch said:
No, I'm not wrong. The climate has absolutely nothing to do with wildfires. If you actually understood what "climate" meant, you would know this fact, but you clearly have no clue.
Click to expand...

Climate Change, Division of Community and Regional Affairs

www.commerce.alaska.gov

"Every new day brings with it new evidence of climate change in Alaskan communities – warmer, record breaking temperatures have resulted in thawing permafrost, thinning sea ice, and increasing wildfires. "
 
Glitch is playing with you all.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
The state and federal governments are in full agreement. If the Left wing coastal states took the feds to court or else just sent muscle to evict the federal managers and took the forests back the issue would be resolved. They don’t want to fix the issues in federally “managed” land
Click to expand...
sigh.
You mean evict members of Congress. :unsure: You do realize that Congress controls the money and sets policies / guidance for the federal land agencies.

Who is "they" that you speak of? If you mean members of Congress then you would be correct. Congress does not want to address the issue with poor forest health and wildfires.
 
mike2810 said:
sigh.
You mean evict members of Congress. :unsure: You do realize that Congress controls the money and sets policies / guidance for the federal land agencies.

Who is "they" that you speak of? If you mean members of Congress then you would be correct. Congress does not want to address the issue with poor forest health and wildfires.
Click to expand...
That’s the problem, elected bodies keep deferring to unelected offices which have been infiltrated by ideological leftists. The purpose of the forest service when established was to manage forestry and mining claims and since the 80s it’s been slowly changed into a secondary national park system where the federal occupiers keep arbitrarily limiting resource industries
 
A good site for Wildfire articles is Wildfire Today. The link is to one of the articles regarding the Caldor Fire in California
wildfiretoday.com

South Lake Tahoe under evacuation warning due to Caldor Fire - Wildfire Today

Some locations in Lake Tahoe Basin are under mandatory evacuation orders
wildfiretoday.com wildfiretoday.com

What the US is experiencing in wildfires can partly be attributed to drought, low relative humidity, rising temps (Global Warming).
There are other factors not associated with Global Warming that is causing the large intense wildfires.
- heavy fuel loads
- overgrown forests and brush fields
- low fuel moisture due to drought
- high wind events during the fire increasing the rate of spread and spotting.

Adding to the complexity during the wildfire is the Wildland Urban Interface.
- building in fire dependent ecosystems.
- not following FIREWISE standards.

The problem of improving forest/range health will not happen overnight. it will take decades to get things back to a more manageable situation.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
That’s the problem, elected bodies keep deferring to unelected offices which have been infiltrated by ideological leftists. The purpose of the forest service when established was to manage forestry and mining claims and since the 80s it’s been slowly changed into a secondary national park system where the federal occupiers keep arbitrarily limiting resource industries
Click to expand...

I spent 30 years for one of the federal land management agencies in Fire management.

From personal experience, State Government would not do any better. Privatizing federal lands is not the answer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom