Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
raging wildfire that could become the largest in Arizona history is rekindling the blame game surrounding ponderosa pine forests that have become dangerously overgrown after a century of fire suppression.
Some critics put the responsibility on environmentalists for lawsuits that have cut back on logging.
Others blame overzealous firefighters for altering the natural cycle of lightning-sparked fires that once cleared the forest floor.
Either way, forests across the West that once had 50 trees per acre (half-hectare) now have hundreds, sometimes thousands, and much of the landscape is choked with tinder-dry brush.
The density of the growth has fueled immense conflagrations in recent years like the 525-square-mile blaze now burning in the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest northeast of Phoenix.
"I think what is happening proves the debate," said state Sen. Sylvia Allen, a Republican from rural Snowflake.
In the past, a 30-square-mile fire was considered huge. "And it used to be the loggers got right on it. Never in the past have you had these huge fires."
Today, it's not uncommon for fires to exceed 150 square miles.
What a bunch of dumb fucks! Give the Forest Service the money to thin and manage the forests, and they will.
What you fellow are pimping for are the companies that would clearcut the whole works.
raging wildfire that could become the largest in Arizona history is rekindling the blame game surrounding ponderosa pine forests that have become dangerously overgrown after a century of fire suppression.
Some critics put the responsibility on environmentalists for lawsuits that have cut back on logging.
Others blame overzealous firefighters for altering the natural cycle of lightning-sparked fires that once cleared the forest floor.
Either way, forests across the West that once had 50 trees per acre (half-hectare) now have hundreds, sometimes thousands, and much of the landscape is choked with tinder-dry brush.
The density of the growth has fueled immense conflagrations in recent years like the 525-square-mile blaze now burning in the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest northeast of Phoenix.
"I think what is happening proves the debate," said state Sen. Sylvia Allen, a Republican from rural Snowflake.
In the past, a 30-square-mile fire was considered huge. "And it used to be the loggers got right on it. Never in the past have you had these huge fires."
Today, it's not uncommon for fires to exceed 150 square miles.
Read more: Environmentalists Blamed for AZ Wildfires - Arizona Wildfire - Fox Nation
Remember Bush tried to do something about this? Letting people cut down the dry brush that causes fires?
Well, guess what dumbasses stopped that?
It's just common sense. Dry brush, especially underbrush is sooner or later going to catch fire.
How much will private industry pay for brush?
Who exactly was going to clear 500 sq miles of brush?
You are an idiot.
USCitizen:
How much will private industry pay for brush?
Just call it biomass instead.. NOW -- it's valuable. If you can burn corn and garbage for "alternatives" , why not brush?
Who am I shilling for Old Rocks? I'm shilling for Bambi and Thumper and the gang.
Huggy:
Who exactly was going to clear 500 sq miles of brush?
You are an idiot.
You clear it with controlled burns several sq miles at time. On days when that is relatively safe. Or you allow citizens to come in and PAY FOR the rights to take downed and diseased timber on public land.. A policy that just drives the eco-nuts wild. You clear it by allowing natural fires to take theiir course and lay off the extraordinary measures to extinguish natural fires.
Let the "idiots" with the degrees in forest management decide. NOT the NYC primadonnas who want the forests neglected and "pristine".
The forests on Indian land, the forests in Nature Conservancy hands, the forests in Private logging hands, don't have these "accidents". THey have consistent, politically neutral POLICIES that work..
Ask Bambi and Thumper whether they prefer to be managed by the Nature Conservancy or the BLM..
raging wildfire that could become the largest in Arizona history is rekindling the blame game surrounding ponderosa pine forests that have become dangerously overgrown after a century of fire suppression.
Some critics put the responsibility on environmentalists for lawsuits that have cut back on logging.
Others blame overzealous firefighters for altering the natural cycle of lightning-sparked fires that once cleared the forest floor.
Either way, forests across the West that once had 50 trees per acre (half-hectare) now have hundreds, sometimes thousands, and much of the landscape is choked with tinder-dry brush.
The density of the growth has fueled immense conflagrations in recent years like the 525-square-mile blaze now burning in the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest northeast of Phoenix.
"I think what is happening proves the debate," said state Sen. Sylvia Allen, a Republican from rural Snowflake.
In the past, a 30-square-mile fire was considered huge. "And it used to be the loggers got right on it. Never in the past have you had these huge fires."
Today, it's not uncommon for fires to exceed 150 square miles.
Read more: Environmentalists Blamed for AZ Wildfires - Arizona Wildfire - Fox Nation
Remember Bush tried to do something about this? Letting people cut down the dry brush that causes fires?
Well, guess what dumbasses stopped that?
It's just common sense. Dry brush, especially underbrush is sooner or later going to catch fire.
You don't need to tell me about how a forest should be managed. My dads brother, my uncle was the head forester for the State of Washington back in the 60's and 70's. We have one of the best managed State forests in the whole country. We allow logging companies to go in and thin the forests and in doing so they cut much needed access roads into remote areas, remove much of the unwanted undergrowth, and the timber sales goes to help pay for our public schools. The advantage a place like Washington has is there is enough harvest able timber to make it economically viable for a private company to pay the state and still make a good profit.
All my college roomates were in forestry or wildlife management. I traveled with them into the Snake/Salmon river valleys for a summer and learned TONS of good stuff. We KNOW how to either ignore or neglect a forest OR manage a forest. And what the consequences are. Public lands should be multi-purpose and multi-use. Therefore the management paradigm wins. Like your experience in Washington. This political intervention and ping-ponging between strategies is gonna KILL Bambi and Thumper for sure. Even the Nature Conservancy adopts the multi-use paradigm and ASKS for liens and access to private lands to supplement it's private holdings. It's NOT into intimidation and TAKING. (That's a blatant plug for a (usually) GREAT enviromental org! Except for some of their AGWarming stuff)
Huggy:
You don't need to tell me about how a forest should be managed. My dads brother, my uncle was the head forester for the State of Washington back in the 60's and 70's. We have one of the best managed State forests in the whole country. We allow logging companies to go in and thin the forests and in doing so they cut much needed access roads into remote areas, remove much of the unwanted undergrowth, and the timber sales goes to help pay for our public schools. The advantage a place like Washington has is there is enough harvest able timber to make it economically viable for a private company to pay the state and still make a good profit.
So Huggy isn't hugging ALL the trees eh?
Huggy:
You don't need to tell me about how a forest should be managed. My dads brother, my uncle was the head forester for the State of Washington back in the 60's and 70's. We have one of the best managed State forests in the whole country. We allow logging companies to go in and thin the forests and in doing so they cut much needed access roads into remote areas, remove much of the unwanted undergrowth, and the timber sales goes to help pay for our public schools. The advantage a place like Washington has is there is enough harvest able timber to make it economically viable for a private company to pay the state and still make a good profit.
So Huggy isn't hugging ALL the trees eh?
When I was a kid up on Orcas Island we didn't have electricity for a couple of years. I cut down hundreds of trees...mostly Alders..and we cooked on a big cast Iron stove and heated the house with a wood heater in the living room. For light we used oil lamps...but mostly just hung it up at nightfall. Early to bed...early to rise...
I do believe in saving some of the old growth. Ever been to one of the Sequoya forests in Northern California? MAJESTIC! Cutting those trees down would be a national tragedy. There is plenty of useable wood/timber to manage and consume. It is not an all or nothing proposition. Those that think cutting down ANY trees is a sacrilege are fucking idiots.
Huggy:
So Huggy isn't hugging ALL the trees eh?
When I was a kid up on Orcas Island we didn't have electricity for a couple of years. I cut down hundreds of trees...mostly Alders..and we cooked on a big cast Iron stove and heated the house with a wood heater in the living room. For light we used oil lamps...but mostly just hung it up at nightfall. Early to bed...early to rise...
I do believe in saving some of the old growth. Ever been to one of the Sequoya forests in Northern California? MAJESTIC! Cutting those trees down would be a national tragedy. There is plenty of useable wood/timber to manage and consume. It is not an all or nothing proposition. Those that think cutting down ANY trees is a sacrilege are fucking idiots.
Huggy, we have been agreeing today. What is this world coming to!
USCitizen:
How much will private industry pay for brush?
Just call it biomass instead.. NOW -- it's valuable. If you can burn corn and garbage for "alternatives" , why not brush?
Who am I shilling for Old Rocks? I'm shilling for Bambi and Thumper and the gang.
Huggy:
Who exactly was going to clear 500 sq miles of brush?
You are an idiot.
You clear it with controlled burns several sq miles at time. On days when that is relatively safe. Or you allow citizens to come in and PAY FOR the rights to take downed and diseased timber on public land.. A policy that just drives the eco-nuts wild. You clear it by allowing natural fires to take theiir course and lay off the extraordinary measures to extinguish natural fires.
Let the "idiots" with the degrees in forest management decide. NOT the NYC primadonnas who want the forests neglected and "pristine".
The forests on Indian land, the forests in Nature Conservancy hands, the forests in Private logging hands, don't have these "accidents". THey have consistent, politically neutral POLICIES that work..
Ask Bambi and Thumper whether they prefer to be managed by the Nature Conservancy or the BLM..
You don't need to tell me about how a forest should be managed. My dads brother, my uncle was the head forester for the State of Washington back in the 60's and 70's. We have one of the best managed State forests in the whole country. We allow logging companies to go in and thin the forests and in doing so they cut much needed access roads into remote areas, remove much of the unwanted undergrowth, and the timber sales goes to help pay for our public schools. The advantage a place like Washington has is there is enough harvest able timber to make it economically viable for a private company to pay the state and still make a good profit.
Never happens!!!
