California Governor Jerry Brown admits Trump was right about the cause of the fires

[BWK]

Any one here posting about Northern California fires live in California? my guess not.

I lived in N. California for 38 years. We were discussing and working on solutions to the fire issue back in the early 1990's and the biggest and best solution was to remove the tinder at the ground that caused a 'coal bed' situation in a fire.

We see these large and out of control fires because the underbrush acts as a coal bed when ignited allowing the flames to rise higher and hotter. This gets the fire into the canopy of the forest which does the real damage.

A quick-fire, robbed of its fuel, scorches the trees but leaves the canopy intact which helps to recover the forest a lot quicker.

When the underbrush is cleared enough and the clearing sustained, the amount that grows back each year is significantly reduced and as a consequence, reduces the threat of fires that get out of control and threaten human habitats.

The reduced undergrowth allows for a quicker containment of any fire that does break out.

All of this would reduce the fire damage to western states by over 85%.

And who is going to do that again? The Forest service? You? And how much will that cost? Loll! Get a grip on reality. That would be a round the clock, 24/7 operation in the hills of California. And after all the brush is cleared, guess what? What happens when it rains hard? You guessed it. Mudslides and serious erosion. Which destroys property as well.

There Aren't enough forest service employees out there to take control of even 1% of what you are talking about.

You have exposed your ignorance along with the rest.

Prescribed burning in forested areas is what's needed. Unfortunately, there are too many drawbacks. Man power, money, and time.

How much do these fires cost? Wow, simply wow.

It would NOT entail around the clock 24/7 watch. Just how stupid are you? Do you understand the concept behind the word 'management'?

A rotating schedule of management would see that the forests get swept on a timely schedule. Or are you now going to claim that combustible undergrowth would grow back to dangerous levels overnight?

Sheesh...

In California, there is already a large and sustainable workforce found in the welfare roles. The program of land management could get value in two ways from such a program that benefits California immensely.

1. The reduction of the threat of out of control fires and the reduction of the cost from trillions to millions would be a boon to the budget.
2. Those on the government dole who have lost jobs through obsolescence could be retrained in forest management or other similar fields associated with land management.

Do not make the mistake of saying that the only solution is one in which no fires occur or do nothing at all.

As for the environmentalist clowns who would file lawsuits, I would challenge them on how much harm they do the environment thought their litigious policies and hold them responsible for property damage and loss of life.

No one said 24/7 watch. Damn you people are dense. I'm talking about 24/7 maintenance of millions of acres. How hard is this people? Between the heavily forested/ thinned forests/urban interface/, the task is so impossible, one cannot get their heads wrapped around the concept. Which is why it has never happened in our history.

The fact that you try and divert the message someplace else, proves you have no argument. Your desperation tactics won't work on me.

And by the way, Republicans are about reducing government, not growing it. So keep that in your sock the next time you want to spout off this expert opinion of yours.

 

[BWK]

Of course Trump is right, but go and challenge them to undo the regulations and then watch judges jump into action to deny them the right of re-writing them!

California Gov. Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown, after denouncing the president as an environmental doofus, has, in recent days, quietly pushed state lawmakers to loosen restrictions on logging regulations that were put in place to satisfy raging environmentalists — “a move that appears to have confirmed that President Trump’s recent critiques of state logging practices” and lousy forest management “was correct.”

In August, The Santa Cruz Sentinel reported that Brown, one of the most environmental wacko governors currently in office, proposed that lawmakers change current rules to allow for some thinning of state-controlled forest lands...

Read more at dcdirtylaundry.com ...

either that or controlled burns.

Thinning is not the cure all. Not even close. And those burns should never be controlled burns. They need to be prescription burns. Big difference!

Prescribed fire is a planned fire; it is also sometimes called a “controlled burn” or “prescribed burn,” and is used to meet management objectives. A prescription is a set of conditions that considers the safety of the public and fire staff, weather, and probability of meeting the burn objectives.

A controlled burn has no initial plan. A prescribed fire does. There are two different types of burning methods. You folks don't have a clue.

As you pointed out explaining a prescribed burn, it has nothing to do with a controlled burn. Calling it a controlled burn just proves how uninformed you are.

Do you know the specific guidelines of a prescribed burn? No! And a controlled burn just takes in the need to control the underbrush without any consideration towards the ecological good of the forest.

controlled burn is a common defense tactic.

IF the conditions are not suitable, a controlled burn is not. Do you know when that is? Not hardly!

 

[BWK]

Of course Trump is right, but go and challenge them to undo the regulations and then watch judges jump into action to deny them the right of re-writing them!

California Gov. Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown, after denouncing the president as an environmental doofus, has, in recent days, quietly pushed state lawmakers to loosen restrictions on logging regulations that were put in place to satisfy raging environmentalists — “a move that appears to have confirmed that President Trump’s recent critiques of state logging practices” and lousy forest management “was correct.”

In August, The Santa Cruz Sentinel reported that Brown, one of the most environmental wacko governors currently in office, proposed that lawmakers change current rules to allow for some thinning of state-controlled forest lands...

Read more at dcdirtylaundry.com ...

Grab your rake... Let’s go!

------------------------------------------------------------ let the Foresters and politicians and 'gov' workers that caused the problem do the work . Course they'd just hire 'mexicans' and other third worlders to do the work and taxpayers would pay Slade .

People didn’t cause the problem dumbass... it was nature. People could have done a better job to prevent it... I’m all for that.

How about we let the Mexicans and third worlders get a green card if they come in and clear the Forrest’s. They can use the wood to build a home and live happily ever after. Doesn’t that sound like the American Dream?

No.

How about we take the unskilled and unemployed who are already here and are already American citizens and teach them how to do this.

That sounds like the American dream.

Sounds like an idea coming from an ignorant buffoon.

 

[BWK]

Of course Trump is right, but go and challenge them to undo the regulations and then watch judges jump into action to deny them the right of re-writing them!

California Gov. Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown, after denouncing the president as an environmental doofus, has, in recent days, quietly pushed state lawmakers to loosen restrictions on logging regulations that were put in place to satisfy raging environmentalists — “a move that appears to have confirmed that President Trump’s recent critiques of state logging practices” and lousy forest management “was correct.”

In August, The Santa Cruz Sentinel reported that Brown, one of the most environmental wacko governors currently in office, proposed that lawmakers change current rules to allow for some thinning of state-controlled forest lands...

Read more at dcdirtylaundry.com ...

Grab your rake... Let’s go!

ok

Put that Trackhoe onto the slopes of the urban interface in Southern California hill country and see what happens. Lol! The joke will be on you boss.

Oh, and how many Trackhoes will you need in the timbered regions of Northern California to take on that task? Lol! you folks are funny as hell. And you think Jerry Brown hasn't a clue.

 

[deanrd]

Of course Trump is right, but go and challenge them to undo the regulations and then watch judges jump into action to deny them the right of re-writing them!

California Gov. Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown, after denouncing the president as an environmental doofus, has, in recent days, quietly pushed state lawmakers to loosen restrictions on logging regulations that were put in place to satisfy raging environmentalists — “a move that appears to have confirmed that President Trump’s recent critiques of state logging practices” and lousy forest management “was correct.”

In August, The Santa Cruz Sentinel reported that Brown, one of the most environmental wacko governors currently in office, proposed that lawmakers change current rules to allow for some thinning of state-controlled forest lands...

Read more at dcdirtylaundry.com ...

either that or controlled burns.

Thinning is not the cure all. Not even close. And those burns should never be controlled burns. They need to be prescription burns. Big difference!

Prescribed fire is a planned fire; it is also sometimes called a “controlled burn” or “prescribed burn,” and is used to meet management objectives. A prescription is a set of conditions that considers the safety of the public and fire staff, weather, and probability of meeting the burn objectives.

A controlled burn has no initial plan. A prescribed fire does. There are two different types of burning methods. You folks don't have a clue.

As you pointed out explaining a prescribed burn, it has nothing to do with a controlled burn. Calling it a controlled burn just proves how uninformed you are.

Do you know the specific guidelines of a prescribed burn? No! And a controlled burn just takes in the need to control the underbrush without any consideration towards the ecological good of the forest.

a controlled burn is a common defense tactic.

Not in track housing.

Notice the houses are gone but the forest in the background is still green?

10,000 buildings at least.

 

[The Purge]

either that or controlled burns.

Thinning is not the cure all. Not even close. And those burns should never be controlled burns. They need to be prescription burns. Big difference!

Prescribed fire is a planned fire; it is also sometimes called a “controlled burn” or “prescribed burn,” and is used to meet management objectives. A prescription is a set of conditions that considers the safety of the public and fire staff, weather, and probability of meeting the burn objectives.

A controlled burn has no initial plan. A prescribed fire does. There are two different types of burning methods. You folks don't have a clue.

As you pointed out explaining a prescribed burn, it has nothing to do with a controlled burn. Calling it a controlled burn just proves how uninformed you are.

Do you know the specific guidelines of a prescribed burn? No! And a controlled burn just takes in the need to control the underbrush without any consideration towards the ecological good of the forest.

a controlled burn is a common defense tactic.

Not in track housing.

Notice the houses are gone but the forest in the background is still green?

10,000 buildings at least.

Thank you Gov. Brown and the Environment Wackos!

 

[BWK]

Thinning is not the cure all. Not even close. And those burns should never be controlled burns. They need to be prescription burns. Big difference!

Prescribed fire is a planned fire; it is also sometimes called a “controlled burn” or “prescribed burn,” and is used to meet management objectives. A prescription is a set of conditions that considers the safety of the public and fire staff, weather, and probability of meeting the burn objectives.

A controlled burn has no initial plan. A prescribed fire does. There are two different types of burning methods. You folks don't have a clue.

As you pointed out explaining a prescribed burn, it has nothing to do with a controlled burn. Calling it a controlled burn just proves how uninformed you are.

Do you know the specific guidelines of a prescribed burn? No! And a controlled burn just takes in the need to control the underbrush without any consideration towards the ecological good of the forest.

a controlled burn is a common defense tactic.

Not in track housing.

Notice the houses are gone but the forest in the background is still green?

10,000 buildings at least.

Thank you Gov. Brown and the Environment Wackos!

It's not about being proud. It's about your proof. Where is it?

Oh, and by the way. Gotta love your diversion from the topic. I think you and the other ignoramus's have had enough schooling, so you go off into your coward mode of blaming Brown. Gotta love it.

 

[The Purge]

Prescribed fire is a planned fire; it is also sometimes called a “controlled burn” or “prescribed burn,” and is used to meet management objectives. A prescription is a set of conditions that considers the safety of the public and fire staff, weather, and probability of meeting the burn objectives.

A controlled burn has no initial plan. A prescribed fire does. There are two different types of burning methods. You folks don't have a clue.

As you pointed out explaining a prescribed burn, it has nothing to do with a controlled burn. Calling it a controlled burn just proves how uninformed you are.

Do you know the specific guidelines of a prescribed burn? No! And a controlled burn just takes in the need to control the underbrush without any consideration towards the ecological good of the forest.

a controlled burn is a common defense tactic.

Not in track housing.

Notice the houses are gone but the forest in the background is still green?

10,000 buildings at least.

Thank you Gov. Brown and the Environment Wackos!

It's not about being proud. It's about your proof. Where is it?

Try reading about the underlying cause of the fires that could have been lessened the chances substantially....and proud of what, killing 83 so far?

 

[BWK]

either that or controlled burns.

Thinning is not the cure all. Not even close. And those burns should never be controlled burns. They need to be prescription burns. Big difference!

Prescribed fire is a planned fire; it is also sometimes called a “controlled burn” or “prescribed burn,” and is used to meet management objectives. A prescription is a set of conditions that considers the safety of the public and fire staff, weather, and probability of meeting the burn objectives.

A controlled burn has no initial plan. A prescribed fire does. There are two different types of burning methods. You folks don't have a clue.

As you pointed out explaining a prescribed burn, it has nothing to do with a controlled burn. Calling it a controlled burn just proves how uninformed you are.

Do you know the specific guidelines of a prescribed burn? No! And a controlled burn just takes in the need to control the underbrush without any consideration towards the ecological good of the forest.

a controlled burn is a common defense tactic.

Not in track housing.

Notice the houses are gone but the forest in the background is still green?

10,000 buildings at least.

Which is why they don't get it. Ignorance and stupidity continues to be the enemy of the people.

 

[BWK]

A controlled burn has no initial plan. A prescribed fire does. There are two different types of burning methods. You folks don't have a clue.

As you pointed out explaining a prescribed burn, it has nothing to do with a controlled burn. Calling it a controlled burn just proves how uninformed you are.

Do you know the specific guidelines of a prescribed burn? No! And a controlled burn just takes in the need to control the underbrush without any consideration towards the ecological good of the forest.

a controlled burn is a common defense tactic.

Not in track housing.

Notice the houses are gone but the forest in the background is still green?

10,000 buildings at least.

Thank you Gov. Brown and the Environment Wackos!

It's not about being proud. It's about your proof. Where is it?

Try reading about the underlying cause of the fires that could have been lessened the chances substantially....and proud of what, killing 83 so far?

I could stick a fork in your ignorance and stupidity, and I'd never punch through the other side. You are incapable of intelligent debate.

In other words, try putting a fork in "could have". You'll never get to the other end. Stop living in fantasy land. It makes you look like a total idiot.

 

[The Purge]

a controlled burn is a common defense tactic.

Not in track housing.

Notice the houses are gone but the forest in the background is still green?

10,000 buildings at least.

Thank you Gov. Brown and the Environment Wackos!

It's not about being proud. It's about your proof. Where is it?

Try reading about the underlying cause of the fires that could have been lessened the chances substantially....and proud of what, killing 83 so far?

I could stick a fork in your ignorance and stupidity, and I'd never punch through the other side. You are incapable of intelligent debate.

In other words, try putting a fork in "could have". You'll never get to the other end. Stop living in fantasy land. It makes you look like a total idiot.

Coming from an ABNORMAL with an IQ 10 points under a cockroachs, nothing shines a spotlight on a moron brighter than you do....would you like to continue being BBQ'd?

 

[pismoe]

Prescribed fire is a planned fire; it is also sometimes called a “controlled burn” or “prescribed burn,” and is used to meet management objectives. A prescription is a set of conditions that considers the safety of the public and fire staff, weather, and probability of meeting the burn objectives.

A controlled burn has no initial plan. A prescribed fire does. There are two different types of burning methods. You folks don't have a clue.

As you pointed out explaining a prescribed burn, it has nothing to do with a controlled burn. Calling it a controlled burn just proves how uninformed you are.

Do you know the specific guidelines of a prescribed burn? No! And a controlled burn just takes in the need to control the underbrush without any consideration towards the ecological good of the forest.

a controlled burn is a common defense tactic.

Not in track housing.

Notice the houses are gone but the forest in the background is still green?

10,000 buildings at least.

Thank you Gov. Brown and the Environment Wackos!

It's not about being proud. It's about your proof. Where is it?

Oh, and by the way. Gotta love your diversion from the topic. I think you and the other ignoramus's have had enough schooling, so you go off into your coward mode of blaming Brown. Gotta love it.

---------------------------------------------------------- 'Goveror jerry brown' killed a lot of people , its his fault for leaving the forest so flammable . Forests should be cleaned , raked up manually by workers hired for that purpose . Dry fuel on the ground blows around when ignited and causes more fires in the area . its only common sense BWK . And by the way , you aren't a very good defender of 'jerry brown' the nasty Governor of 'kalifornia' BWK .

 

[eagle1462010]

Any one here posting about Northern California fires live in California? my guess not.

I lived in N. California for 38 years. We were discussing and working on solutions to the fire issue back in the early 1990's and the biggest and best solution was to remove the tinder at the ground that caused a 'coal bed' situation in a fire.

We see these large and out of control fires because the underbrush acts as a coal bed when ignited allowing the flames to rise higher and hotter. This gets the fire into the canopy of the forest which does the real damage.

A quick-fire, robbed of its fuel, scorches the trees but leaves the canopy intact which helps to recover the forest a lot quicker.

When the underbrush is cleared enough and the clearing sustained, the amount that grows back each year is significantly reduced and as a consequence, reduces the threat of fires that get out of control and threaten human habitats.

The reduced undergrowth allows for a quicker containment of any fire that does break out.

All of this would reduce the fire damage to western states by over 85%.

And who is going to do that again? The Forest service? You? And how much will that cost? Loll! Get a grip on reality. That would be a round the clock, 24/7 operation in the hills of California. And after all the brush is cleared, guess what? What happens when it rains hard? You guessed it. Mudslides and serious erosion. Which destroys property as well.

There Aren't enough forest service employees out there to take control of even 1% of what you are talking about.

You have exposed your ignorance along with the rest.

Prescribed burning in forested areas is what's needed. Unfortunately, there are too many drawbacks. Man power, money, and time.

How much do these fires cost? Wow, simply wow.

It would NOT entail around the clock 24/7 watch. Just how stupid are you? Do you understand the concept behind the word 'management'?

A rotating schedule of management would see that the forests get swept on a timely schedule. Or are you now going to claim that combustible undergrowth would grow back to dangerous levels overnight?

Sheesh...

In California, there is already a large and sustainable workforce found in the welfare roles. The program of land management could get value in two ways from such a program that benefits California immensely.

1. The reduction of the threat of out of control fires and the reduction of the cost from trillions to millions would be a boon to the budget.
2. Those on the government dole who have lost jobs through obsolescence could be retrained in forest management or other similar fields associated with land management.

Do not make the mistake of saying that the only solution is one in which no fires occur or do nothing at all.

As for the environmentalist clowns who would file lawsuits, I would challenge them on how much harm they do the environment thought their litigious policies and hold them responsible for property damage and loss of life.

No one said 24/7 watch. Damn you people are dense. I'm talking about 24/7 maintenance of millions of acres. How hard is this people? Between the heavily forested/ thinned forests/urban interface/, the task is so impossible, one cannot get their heads wrapped around the concept. Which is why it has never happened in our history.

The fact that you try and divert the message someplace else, proves you have no argument. Your desperation tactics won't work on me.

And by the way, Republicans are about reducing government, not growing it. So keep that in your sock the next time you want to spout off this expert opinion of yours.

Impossible is the term for losers.

 

[eagle1462010]

Of course Trump is right, but go and challenge them to undo the regulations and then watch judges jump into action to deny them the right of re-writing them!

California Gov. Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown, after denouncing the president as an environmental doofus, has, in recent days, quietly pushed state lawmakers to loosen restrictions on logging regulations that were put in place to satisfy raging environmentalists — “a move that appears to have confirmed that President Trump’s recent critiques of state logging practices” and lousy forest management “was correct.”

In August, The Santa Cruz Sentinel reported that Brown, one of the most environmental wacko governors currently in office, proposed that lawmakers change current rules to allow for some thinning of state-controlled forest lands...

Read more at dcdirtylaundry.com ...

Grab your rake... Let’s go!

ok

Put that Trackhoe onto the slopes of the urban interface in Southern California hill country and see what happens. Lol! The joke will be on you boss.

Oh, and how many Trackhoes will you need in the timbered regions of Northern California to take on that task? Lol! you folks are funny as hell. And you think Jerry Brown hasn't a clue.

Loggers have been turning and burning on harsh ground forever...........but someone like you always think it is impossible..............You don't have to clear the whole forest............You only have to create fire breaks to protect towns and people.

Your a loser..........face it.........Your whole argument is trolling............We could waste miles of forests in between the Federal and State land without the large problems you laugh about.

 

[eagle1462010]

The bomb extinguished fires up to 100 meters from the blast..........interesting hmmmm

 

[pismoe]

check out American RED ADAIR the guy that out out Oil Well fires as his specialty using explosives through parts of the 20th century --- Red Adair, 1915-2004: He Put Out Dangerous Oil and Natural Gas Fires Around the World --- check it out Eagle

 

[BWK]

Of course Trump is right, but go and challenge them to undo the regulations and then watch judges jump into action to deny them the right of re-writing them!

California Gov. Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown, after denouncing the president as an environmental doofus, has, in recent days, quietly pushed state lawmakers to loosen restrictions on logging regulations that were put in place to satisfy raging environmentalists — “a move that appears to have confirmed that President Trump’s recent critiques of state logging practices” and lousy forest management “was correct.”

In August, The Santa Cruz Sentinel reported that Brown, one of the most environmental wacko governors currently in office, proposed that lawmakers change current rules to allow for some thinning of state-controlled forest lands...

Read more at dcdirtylaundry.com ...

Grab your rake... Let’s go!

ok

Put that Trackhoe onto the slopes of the urban interface in Southern California hill country and see what happens. Lol! The joke will be on you boss.

Oh, and how many Trackhoes will you need in the timbered regions of Northern California to take on that task? Lol! you folks are funny as hell. And you think Jerry Brown hasn't a clue.

Loggers have been turning and burning on harsh ground forever...........but someone like you always think it is impossible..............You don't have to clear the whole forest............You only have to create fire breaks to protect towns and people.

Your a loser..........face it.........Your whole argument is trolling............We could waste miles of forests in between the Federal and State land without the large problems you laugh about.

You are a glutton for punishment. Only a complete idiot goes for more. "You only have to create fire breaks to protect towns and people." Holy shit, you are just too stupid. One thing for sure, you have never worked in fire control, and you have never studied fire science. Fire breaks in the pacific northwest? Are you high on drugs? If fire breaks through heavy equipment were possible in mountainous terrain, don't you think they would have already been doing that? You can't possibly be this stupid. But you are. Even if fire breaks were possible, fire breaks are useless in crown fires, where embers can fly for miles beyond the head of a fire. You know absolutely nothing. Get lost!

 

[BWK]

check out American RED ADAIR the guy that out out Oil Well fires as his specialty using explosives through parts of the 20th century --- Red Adair, 1915-2004: He Put Out Dangerous Oil and Natural Gas Fires Around the World --- check it out Eagle

What does an oil and natural gas fire have to do with anything? More retarded counter arguments. You folks have got to love making total idiots of yourselves.

 

[BWK]

The bomb extinguished fires up to 100 meters from the blast..........interesting hmmmm

The bomb extinguished fires up to 100 meters from the blast..........interesting hmmmm

Yes, you confirmed our worst suspicions. You are retarded. Bombs in urban interface?

 

[BWK]

A controlled burn has no initial plan. A prescribed fire does. There are two different types of burning methods. You folks don't have a clue.

As you pointed out explaining a prescribed burn, it has nothing to do with a controlled burn. Calling it a controlled burn just proves how uninformed you are.

Do you know the specific guidelines of a prescribed burn? No! And a controlled burn just takes in the need to control the underbrush without any consideration towards the ecological good of the forest.

a controlled burn is a common defense tactic.

Not in track housing.

Notice the houses are gone but the forest in the background is still green?

10,000 buildings at least.

Thank you Gov. Brown and the Environment Wackos!

It's not about being proud. It's about your proof. Where is it?

Oh, and by the way. Gotta love your diversion from the topic. I think you and the other ignoramus's have had enough schooling, so you go off into your coward mode of blaming Brown. Gotta love it.

---------------------------------------------------------- 'Goveror jerry brown' killed a lot of people , its his fault for leaving the forest so flammable . Forests should be cleaned , raked up manually by workers hired for that purpose . Dry fuel on the ground blows around when ignited and causes more fires in the area . its only common sense BWK . And by the way , you aren't a very good defender of 'jerry brown' the nasty Governor of 'kalifornia' BWK .

And you continue to say nothing, by presenting retarded solutions to problems. You don't clean up forests with rakes. Why are people so damn stupid?