• 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!

Trump suggests proper raking might have spared California from its wildfires

NeverTrump

Exposing GOP since 2015
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
25,357
Reaction score
11,557
Location
Post-Trump America
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Dumbest. President. Ever. I mean at least in his smaller press conferences he could speak. Now it's just baseless rambling.

“You gotta take care of the floors. You know the floors of the forest, very important,” he said before mentioning a conversation with Finnish president Sauli Niinistö. “They spent a lot of time on raking and cleaning and doing things and they don’t have any problem.”

The above quote was completely made up by the President of the United States. Nothing in that statement is true.

Trump suggests proper raking might have spared California from its wildfires
 
He’s still your president.
 
He’s still your president.

Therefore __________ ?




If you're going to say something ridiculous, go all he way. None of this useless wink wink nudge nudge know what I mean crap, spell it out: he's the president, therefore what exactly?
 
Yep, get rid of the leaf litter in the ground so the detritivores that break down fallen timber and reduce the severity of fires are gone. Trump the ecologist.
 
'needed brush clearing'

The federal government controls 46 percent of California’s land, much of it managed by the U.S. Forest Service. In the three decades before 1990, foresters harvested 10-12 billion board feet of timber from national forests every year. By 2013, restrictive environmental policies cut that to 2.5 billion. While the harvest declined, so too did tree thinning and the clearing of brush and diseased trees. The Trump administration is reversing that trend with the biggest harvest of trees on federal land in 20 years, selling 3.4 billion board feet on some 3 million acres—still just a third of the typical pre-1990 harvest.

Harvesting trees on public land is controversial but helps pay for needed brush clearing. Many environmental groups vigorously oppose both. But fighting the larger, hotter fires that result without active forest management is even more costly and threatens lives.

In California, tighter environmental controls, higher prices for timber harvesting permits and competition from overseas and pine forests in American Southeast led to a collapse of the state's timber industry. Employment in the industry in 2017 was half of what it was in the 1990s.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckd...ve-been-mitigated-by-prevention/#5533408341ba

If harvesting 10-12 billion board feet of timber from national forests every year would make massive fires like what we've seen, growing larger each year it also seems, I'm prepared to harvest those 10-12 billion board feet of timber.

I wonder if the environmentalists eco-Nazis are going to allow this common sense measure, or not. More likely not.

Welp. Cali. I guess you'll just have to learn to live with these fires, if you prevent the clearing of the brush fuel that feeds them. But at least the ecomentalists will be happy.
 
'needed brush clearing'



If harvesting 10-12 billion board feet of timber from national forests every year would make massive fires like what we've seen, growing larger each year it also seems, I'm prepared to harvest those 10-12 billion board feet of timber.

I wonder if the environmentalists eco-Nazis are going to allow this common sense measure, or not. More likely not.

Welp. Cali. I guess you'll just have to learn to live with these fires, if you prevent the clearing of the brush fuel that feeds them. But at least the ecomentalists will be happy.

So wait? Conservatives are now for environmental policies and pre-existing conditions? Is illegal immigration and abortion next??? Give me a break. This trump worship crap is ridiculous.
 
So wait? Conservatives are now for environmental policies and pre-existing conditions? Is illegal immigration and abortion next??? Give me a break. This trump worship crap is ridiculous.

No, if anything, I'm poking fun at how stupid the ecomentalists and absolutist policies are, and how they both contributed to the increasing fire threat and increasing fire damage.

If this is just going to be yet another bash Trump with thinly disguised poor logic, I'm just going to bail. Far too much of it already in this forum.
 
No, if anything, I'm poking fun at how stupid the ecomentalists are, and how they contributed to the increasing fire threat and damage.

If this is just going to be yet another bash Trump with poor logic, I'm just going to bail. Far too much of it already in this forum.

First. WTF is an ecomentalist? Second. what you are saying and what Trump is saying do not match in any way whatsoever. He simply has no idea what it is you are talking about and instead talks about raking the forest floor....

So either Trump thinks the only way his supporters (which I assume is you) will understand him, is to say these stupid things. Or he is really that stupid.
 
No, if anything, I'm poking fun at how stupid the ecomentalists and absolutist policies are, and how they both contributed to the increasing fire threat and increasing fire damage.

If this is just going to be yet another bash Trump with thinly disguised poor logic, I'm just going to bail. Far too much of it already in this forum.

But Climate Change in an environment where we have had twenty-six 500 year storms over ten years is just not a factor. Please....until Trump knuckles under on Climate Change he has no credibility in any discussion of forest management.
 
But Climate Change in an environment where we have had twenty-six 500 year storms over ten years is just not a factor. Please....until Trump knuckles under on Climate Change he has no credibility in any discussion of forest management.
So if he doesn't cave to crazy lefty pseudo-environmentalists, then he has no credibility.

Now thats crazy.
 
Dumbest. President. Ever. I mean at least in his smaller press conferences he could speak. Now it's just baseless rambling.



The above quote was completely made up by the President of the United States. Nothing in that statement is true.

Trump suggests proper raking might have spared California from its wildfires

The Europeans who first explored that area almost 500 years ago wrote in their journals about the wild fires.

Todays Leftists environmental hands off policies have recreated those conditions.

With proper forestry management and logging most fires would not happen.

That is what the President is suggesting.
 
Last edited:
This guy is an absolute moron in every respect of the word.
 
He kinda got the basic idea. It had probably just been explained to him, so it's not like he thought about it. I give him a C.
 
Who are these environmentalists against forest management. I've been an environmentalist over 20 years, lots of school, and I never met one.

Is there one here at this site? No. There isn't, is there. So who.
 
Who are these environmentalists against forest management. I've been an environmentalist over 20 years, lots of school, and I never met one.

Anyone who doesn't support indiscriminate logging is against forest management.
 
Dumbest. President. Ever. I mean at least in his smaller press conferences he could speak. Now it's just baseless rambling.



The above quote was completely made up by the President of the United States. Nothing in that statement is true.

Trump suggests proper raking might have spared California from its wildfires

He was referring to CLEAN CUTTING brush from around trees, and is absolutely correct, as any forest manager would tell you.


Leave it to the TDS left to be TOO STUPID to understand that.
 
Anyone who doesn't support indiscriminate logging is against forest management.

I think you're correct. This "environmentalists are against forest management" has got to be BS. There's just no way I, most interested in ecology, missed that.
 
Back
Top Bottom