Aggressive suppression of forest fires has left the forests full of deadwood

QuickHitCurepon

Diamond Member
Jul 8, 2013
47,165
71,924
3,645
Earth
I would really like to have a dialogue about this subject. I would greatly appreciate any contributions and comments on this subject.

For almost one hundred years, the U.S. forest service and local governments have fought just about all forest fires and put them out as quickly as possible. This has interrupted the natural process of how the forests grow. Throughout earth's history, it has been natural to have forest fires. They have spread widely through the forests and they burn out dead trees and heavy brush that build-up. But because we have been preventing this process, all the dead material has tremendously built up. Now all this dead material makes the fires burn far more intensely and then burns out everything in its path including all large trees which normally would not have been burned during normal fires. The large trees have heavy bark and have always survived these forest fires until now.

The remedy is a massive program including selective logging that would clear-out the heavy stands of forest with many smaller trees that would have previously been cleared out by fires. And to clear piles and piles of dead trees and heavy brush. And after that or anytime now, start to let many wildfires burn themselves out, returning the natural process. Of course, fires where multiple structures are directly threatened would still need to be aggressively fought. Prescribed burns are only a stop-gap measure, and ten years from now, if we don't do something different, we might just find that major wildfires may often be burning out-of-control for weeks.

:( There was a huge forest fire in Happy Valley, California, recently. This area of the forest is riddled and dotted with houses and recreational facilities.

Crews assessing the damage from a wildfire in Northern California have now determined that 68 homes were destroyed, up from the earlier tally of 37, a fire official said on Thursday.

The fire began Monday, Sept. 9, 2013 in the community of Happy Valley, about 150 miles north of Sacramento, and winds sent it spreading at 500 acres an hour. ...

Northern California wildfires

*VIDEO*:
Happy Valley home destroyed by fire | Local News - Home

Are there any fires now where you live?
 
A "Let it burn" policy was adopted by the national parks in 1964, and by the Forest Service in 1974. So I'm not sure how much brush is left now.

There is the problem of people moving into the fire zone. And misplaced priorities. The 19 firefighters killed in Arizona were fighting to save a run-down little town that had already been evacuated.
 
This isn't obama's fault. It's the fault of environmental activists that have been around long before obama. This is why forest fires in California are so bad. Environmentalists fight to have all forest fires put out. Now the interests of environmentalists in allowing the deadwood to build, and wildfire jihadists have converged in a "firestorm".
 
The natives of this land seem to know a lot about managing the forest. They let mother nature do her thing and stepped in only when necessary. Too bad most of them have been killed off or absorbed into society. i wonder how much knowledge has been lost regarding stewardship of our forests.
 
The natives of this land seem to know a lot about managing the forest. They let mother nature do her thing and stepped in only when necessary. Too bad most of them have been killed off or absorbed into society. i wonder how much knowledge has been lost regarding stewardship of our forests.

How many Etruscans are left? The same thing happened to them when Rome did it. I don't see any boo hooing over them.
 
The natives of this land seem to know a lot about managing the forest. They let mother nature do her thing and stepped in only when necessary. Too bad most of them have been killed off or absorbed into society. i wonder how much knowledge has been lost regarding stewardship of our forests.

How many Etruscans are left? The same thing happened to them when Rome did it. I don't see any boo hooing over them.

You were around then and know, eh?
 
The natives of this land seem to know a lot about managing the forest. They let mother nature do her thing and stepped in only when necessary. Too bad most of them have been killed off or absorbed into society. i wonder how much knowledge has been lost regarding stewardship of our forests.

How many Etruscans are left? The same thing happened to them when Rome did it. I don't see any boo hooing over them.


I bet if you asked 100 people about them maybe only 10 would know anything.
 
The problem is simple. People decide to live in wilderness areas that are fire prone.
The efforts made to save their homes are admirable, but in conflict with nature.
 
The problem is simple. People decide to live in wilderness areas that are fire prone.
The efforts made to save their homes are admirable, but in conflict with nature.

I don't agree there's no solution. It "has become standard practice to allow fires within preserves and parks." Maybe this is true during the off fire season. However, during the fire season, I believe that the current policy is still to try and put out almost all forest fires that governments have the resources for. As we've seen, government resources are running thin.
 
The natives of this land seem to know a lot about managing the forest. They let mother nature do her thing and stepped in only when necessary. Too bad most of them have been killed off or absorbed into society. i wonder how much knowledge has been lost regarding stewardship of our forests.

There were also only around 3-10 million of them (depending on estimates), so they could just relocate away from a fire and start over.

They didn't manage anything because there weren't enough of them nor did they have enough technology to have more than a local impact on their environment.

I find it comical to see the old "noble savage" stereotype pushed by a progressive.
 
The natives of this land seem to know a lot about managing the forest. They let mother nature do her thing and stepped in only when necessary. Too bad most of them have been killed off or absorbed into society. i wonder how much knowledge has been lost regarding stewardship of our forests.

There were also only around 3-10 million of them (depending on estimates), so they could just relocate away from a fire and start over.

They didn't manage anything because there weren't enough of them nor did they have enough technology to have more than a local impact on their environment.

I find it comical to see the old "noble savage" stereotype pushed by a progressive.

Dont take this personally but you have to be one of those clueless people that believe in European superiority with a comment like that. Its well documented that the Native Americans used fire to manage the forest, clear land to plant crops, and hunt. Lewis and Clark spoke about in their journals. What are you smoking?
 
Last edited:
The natives of this land seem to know a lot about managing the forest. They let mother nature do her thing and stepped in only when necessary. Too bad most of them have been killed off or absorbed into society. i wonder how much knowledge has been lost regarding stewardship of our forests.

There were also only around 3-10 million of them (depending on estimates), so they could just relocate away from a fire and start over.

They didn't manage anything because there weren't enough of them nor did they have enough technology to have more than a local impact on their environment.

I find it comical to see the old "noble savage" stereotype pushed by a progressive.

Dont take this personally but you have to be one of those clueless people that believe in European superiority with a comment like that. Its well documented that the Native Americans used fire to manage the forest. Lewis and Clark spoke about in their journals. What are you smoking?

Europeans were superior technologically and economically in every way, due to the level of population and smaller amount of land forcing innovation, that and the constant hordes invading from the east during parts of the middle ages.

The Native americans managed small sections of forest, something Europeans were doing as well. Observe a manicured forest in Germany that's been around for centuries if you want to educate yourself on it.
 
The natives of this land seem to know a lot about managing the forest. They let mother nature do her thing and stepped in only when necessary. Too bad most of them have been killed off or absorbed into society. i wonder how much knowledge has been lost regarding stewardship of our forests.

The natives routinely started huge fires to drive the animals before it. They didn't care, they just picked up and went somewhere else.

The combination of fire suppression/control and idiotic logging practices (they went through a stage here where nobody was allowed to drag slash out after logging). So after the forest service took a lot of money from people who technically own the land, they wouldn't let them clean it up, and left huge piles of deadwood littering the forests...threatening towns, animals, delicate ecosystems.

I think it's epically karmic that Obama is going to have us fight the fucking park rangers.
 
There were also only around 3-10 million of them (depending on estimates), so they could just relocate away from a fire and start over.

They didn't manage anything because there weren't enough of them nor did they have enough technology to have more than a local impact on their environment.

I find it comical to see the old "noble savage" stereotype pushed by a progressive.

Dont take this personally but you have to be one of those clueless people that believe in European superiority with a comment like that. Its well documented that the Native Americans used fire to manage the forest. Lewis and Clark spoke about in their journals. What are you smoking?


Europeans were superior technologically and economically in every way, due to the level of population and smaller amount of land forcing innovation, that and the constant hordes invading from the east during parts of the middle ages.

The Native americans managed small sections of forest, something Europeans were doing as well. Observe a manicured forest in Germany that's been around for centuries if you want to educate yourself on it.

That would be why they almost died when they got on American soil without Native American help. Little did those Native Americans know what the cost of helping the Europeans was going to be.

No one said Europeans didn't manage forests in Germany. One weird thing about some of you white folks is that you seem to get jealous when another civilization does something good. You start jumping up and down yelling "me too". Its OK if I give another ethnicity some props for their accomplishments right?
 
Last edited:
Dont take this personally but you have to be one of those clueless people that believe in European superiority with a comment like that. Its well documented that the Native Americans used fire to manage the forest. Lewis and Clark spoke about in their journals. What are you smoking?


Europeans were superior technologically and economically in every way, due to the level of population and smaller amount of land forcing innovation, that and the constant hordes invading from the east during parts of the middle ages.

The Native americans managed small sections of forest, something Europeans were doing as well. Observe a manicured forest in Germany that's been around for centuries if you want to educate yourself on it.

That would be why they almost died when they got on American soil without Native American help. Little did those Native Americans know what the cost of helping the Europeans was going to be.

No one said Europeans didn't manage forests in Germany. One weird thing about some of you white folks is that you seem to get jealous when another civilization does something good. You start jumping up and down yelling "me too". Its OK if I give another ethnicity some props for their accomplishments right?

A few groups almost died, then the rest of the hordes that came later had no issues establishing a foothold. How many groups died when the anscestors of the NA's came across the Bering land-bridge?

One of the things "this white folk" has an issue with is propping up certain groups with feel-good bullcrap that has a grain of truth to it with 10 tons of hyperbole. History is History, you dont get to play with it to make yourself feel better.
 
Europeans were superior technologically and economically in every way, due to the level of population and smaller amount of land forcing innovation, that and the constant hordes invading from the east during parts of the middle ages.

The Native americans managed small sections of forest, something Europeans were doing as well. Observe a manicured forest in Germany that's been around for centuries if you want to educate yourself on it.

That would be why they almost died when they got on American soil without Native American help. Little did those Native Americans know what the cost of helping the Europeans was going to be.

No one said Europeans didn't manage forests in Germany. One weird thing about some of you white folks is that you seem to get jealous when another civilization does something good. You start jumping up and down yelling "me too". Its OK if I give another ethnicity some props for their accomplishments right?

A few groups almost died, then the rest of the hordes that came later had no issues establishing a foothold. How many groups died when the anscestors of the NA's came across the Bering land-bridge?

One of the things "this white folk" has an issue with is propping up certain groups with feel-good bullcrap that has a grain of truth to it with 10 tons of hyperbole. History is History, you dont get to play with it to make yourself feel better.

What you dont seem to get is that if those first groups had not been successful the hordes would have been either delayed in coming or never came at all. Where was there hyperbole in my comment? The NA's worked with nature and as a result this was a pretty pristine place to live before everyone else started coming over. Only certain types of white folk believe History is History as long as it reflects that they were superior. How many times have historians been caught in lies trying to promote European superiority? By now I would be questioning everything after the Columbus fiasco.
 
It was pristine because there weren't enough of them to negatively impact the environment. Grow up. They were just people, just like any other people, and they still are. They did stupid shit, just like you do.
 

Forum List

Back
Top