[Vision2020] Whackos and the Western U.S. Forest Wildfire Activity

[Glenn Schwaller]

Yes Mr Solomon,  it was indeed the Nixon administration who formed the
Environmental Protection Agency and the National Environmental Protection
Act.  According to the NEPA web site, their stated purposes were:

      "To declare a national policy which will encourage productive and
enjoyable harmony between man and his environment."

      "To promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate damage to the
environment and biosphere and stimulate the health and welfare of man."

      "To enrich our understanding of the ecological systems and natural
resources important to the Nation."

Unfortunately these directives have been used, abused and misused by
environmentalists and the Carter and Clinton administrations to bring true
environmental progress to a standstill.

To address the wildfire crises that have plagued the county in the past
several years, the NEPA directives have been abused to bring more than a
doubling of NEPA-related lawsuits since 1997.  This increase has been led in
part by the Healthy Forests Initiative, proposed by President Bush in 2002.
This called for thinning forests to reduce wildfire danger and exempted many
logging projects of 1,000 acres or less from review.  The inability of the
Forest Service to provide for management by controlled burns, logging, and
removal of burned and insect-infested trees has contributed enormously to
the current wildfire problems.

In the past two years over 700 Forest Service proposals for controlled
thinning have been forwarded to the GAO for review.  Sixty percent of these
proposals have been tied up in litigation spearheaded by the Sierra Club,
Alliance for Wild Rockies, and Forest Conservation Council, to name a
few.  These
frivolous lawsuits have delayed efforts to treat 900,000 acres of forests,
results in the Forest Service spending over 50% of their time and more than
$250 million dollars in addressing these lawsuits.

The cycle of uncontrolled, devastating fires will continue as long as the
Forest Service continues to be hamstrung by a handful of radical, ignorant
whackjobs.

GS


On 10/26/07, Mark Solomon <msolomon at moscow.com> wrote:
>
>  The Endangered Species Act was signed by that known environmental whacko
> Richard Nixon.
>
> m.
>
> At 3:19 PM -0700 10/26/07, Glenn Schwaller wrote:
>
> It has EVERYTHING to do with whacko environmentalists and the radical
> policies implemented by the Clinton administration, which brought an abrupt
> and unfortunate end to rational forest and brush management techniques.
>
> Only a few short years ago these enviro-freaks successfully passed laws
> prohibiting SoCal residents from clearing brush near their homes because of
> an "endangered" kangaroo rat and the spotted mesquite weevil.  Do you think
> that had controlled burns and brush clearing be allowed, these catastrophic
> fires could have been avoided, or at least lessened in their intensity, thus
> preserving homes, (as well as the legally-privileged weevils and rats, who
> by the way lost their lives and homes as well . . )
>
> As far as any "global warming" connection to the fires, I would think if
> there was any influence at all it would be to REDUCE the incidence of brush
> fires.  Global warming would create a more hot and arid climate with reduced
> rainfall, hence reduced growth of brush to fuel the fires, hence less fire.
> So what ya need is a long term drought to cut down on the amount of brush to
> burn.
>
> GS
>
>
>
>
>
> On 10/26/07,* Sunil Ramalingam* <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Roger,
>
> I don't disagree that there's a lot of underbrush in lots of national
> forests, along with a lot of skinny trees that will never get big, that
> are
> great fuel for fires.  This has little if anything to do with the actions
> of
> environmentalists.  This is from a century of putting out fires when
> they're
> small, and a lot of that had to do with preserving timber.  Firefighting
> has
> been in transition away from that practice for a while now, but there's
> plenty of brush out there.
>
> I disagree that it's the USFS policy to not clear out brush.  Prescription
> fires are lit to clear out brush, and a lot of those take place every
> spring
> and fall.
>
> This is a separate issue from the SoCal fires.  The vegetation in these
> areas is primarily brush, not timber.
>
> I think you're making blanket statements about environmentalists
> here.  Some
> don't want any intervention, some agree there should be some intervention.
> Those saying there should be no intervention aren't making any of the
> policies currently in place.  I consider myself an environmentalist, but I
> don't think we should let all fires burn freely.  At the same time, even
> though I fought wildland fires for ten summers, I don't think we should be
> putting them all out either.  I certainly think anyone living out in the
> urban-rural interface should be clearing out the brush around their
> property.
>
> Sunil
>
>
> >From: lfalen < lfalen at turbonet.com>
> >Reply-To: lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com>
> >To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> >Subject: [Vision2020] Fw: Re:  Western U.S. Forest Wildfire Activity
> >Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 11:08:02 -0700
> >
> >Sunil
> >There seems to be a problem with "reply all" for this email so I am
> >forwarding it instead.
> >
> >The underbrush problem is a general one. Not clearing out underbrush is
> >part of the Forest Service's policy. It has been well documented that at
> >least some vocal environmentalist do not want any intervention by man or
> >management of the forests. This includes thinning out underbrush  or
> insect
> >control. Dead trees due to insect infestation adds to the fire hazard
> >provided by underbrush. They are partly right in that before man's
> >involvement ther were small fires that cleared the underbrush which
> >prevented a hotter fire from wiping out the entire forest. Not all
> >environmentalist or forest managers see it this way. There is legislation
> >being proposed at the state and national level to change this policy.
> >Roger
> >-----Original message-----
>
> >
> >From: "Sunil Ramalingam" sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
> >Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 22:05:05 -0700
> >To:
> >Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Western U.S. Forest Wildfire Activity
> >
> >Roger, what is the basis of your statement:
> >
> >'The extent of the fires we exacerbated by the dense underbrush that
> >resulltd from environmetalist not allowing it to be cleared out,'
> >
> >and which fires are you talking about?
> >
> >Sunil
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto: Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20071030/02cf1c7f/attachment.html