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

[BWK]

Jerry Brown deserves any, and all backlash from this issue. If there ever was a politician that deserves to be TARRED, and FEATHERED it is him.

Stop being stupid.
Description
Western United States land managers are conducting fuel reduction and forest restoration treatments in forests with altered structural conditions. As part of the National Fire and Fire Surrogate (FFS) study, thinning and burning treatments were evaluated for changing forest structure. Shifts between pretreatment and posttreatment diameter distributions at seven western FFS study sites were determined by assessing live tree diameter frequency distributions and the 10th and 90th percentile and mean diameter. Diameter distributions were based on 31,517 live trees within 76 pretreatment units and 25,061 live trees within 85 posttreatment units. Cross-site comparisons were made using meta-analysis. Values for l0th-percentile diameter increased at two sites, values for 90th-percentile diameter increased at six sites, and values for mean diameter increased at five sites (P < 0.05) after active treatments (thin, burn, or thin + burn) compared with control sites. Across the seven western FFS study sites, the overall effect size of the thin treatment increased for 90th percentile and mean diameter; the overall effect size of the burn treatment increased for 10th percentile, 90th percentile, and mean diameter; and the overall effect size of the thin + burn treatment increased for l0th percentile, 90th percentile, and mean diameter. This work indicates that although each of the active treatments was effective in shifting diameter distributions toward larger trees, no single treatment or entry will probably mitigate nearly a century of fire exclusion and fuel accumulation in dry coniferous forests of the Western United States.

Has nothing whatsoever to do with Jerry Brown.

Do you understand the biological influences associated with burning conifers in the west? No!

Thinning a forest lightens the fuel load, for a short period of time, while almost immediately "succession of a forest" takes control, sometimes making things more combustible. Depending on whether you know what that means? Thinning for a very short period of time can help. But right after that, it can actually be worse. You need to know vegetation, weather, climate, Biomes, terrain, and have a key understanding of biological succession to formulate an intelligent conclusion. You have not done any of that. All you can do is create an idiotic post about Jerry Brown.

Thinning for a very short period of time can help. But right after that, it can actually be worse.

Rinse, repeat.

Which is what I have been telling these Sheep for about two days. Too bad Sheep don't get it.

They are too busy hating, talking stupid, and blaming Jerry Brown. Typical Sheep talk.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Jerry Brown deserves any, and all backlash from this issue. If there ever was a politician that deserves to be TARRED, and FEATHERED it is him.

Stop being stupid.
Description
Western United States land managers are conducting fuel reduction and forest restoration treatments in forests with altered structural conditions. As part of the National Fire and Fire Surrogate (FFS) study, thinning and burning treatments were evaluated for changing forest structure. Shifts between pretreatment and posttreatment diameter distributions at seven western FFS study sites were determined by assessing live tree diameter frequency distributions and the 10th and 90th percentile and mean diameter. Diameter distributions were based on 31,517 live trees within 76 pretreatment units and 25,061 live trees within 85 posttreatment units. Cross-site comparisons were made using meta-analysis. Values for l0th-percentile diameter increased at two sites, values for 90th-percentile diameter increased at six sites, and values for mean diameter increased at five sites (P < 0.05) after active treatments (thin, burn, or thin + burn) compared with control sites. Across the seven western FFS study sites, the overall effect size of the thin treatment increased for 90th percentile and mean diameter; the overall effect size of the burn treatment increased for 10th percentile, 90th percentile, and mean diameter; and the overall effect size of the thin + burn treatment increased for l0th percentile, 90th percentile, and mean diameter. This work indicates that although each of the active treatments was effective in shifting diameter distributions toward larger trees, no single treatment or entry will probably mitigate nearly a century of fire exclusion and fuel accumulation in dry coniferous forests of the Western United States.

Has nothing whatsoever to do with Jerry Brown.

Do you understand the biological influences associated with burning conifers in the west? No!

Thinning a forest lightens the fuel load, for a short period of time, while almost immediately "succession of a forest" takes control, sometimes making things more combustible. Depending on whether you know what that means? Thinning for a very short period of time can help. But right after that, it can actually be worse. You need to know vegetation, weather, climate, Biomes, terrain, and have a key understanding of biological succession to formulate an intelligent conclusion. You have not done any of that. All you can do is create an idiotic post about Jerry Brown.

Thinning for a very short period of time can help. But right after that, it can actually be worse.

Rinse, repeat.

Which is what I have been telling these Sheep for about two days. Too bad Sheep don't get it.

They are too busy hating, talking stupid, and blaming Jerry Brown. Typical Sheep talk.

You've been telling someone that we can't just thin once, that we have to do it continuously?

I don't believe you ever told anyone that, let alone for two days.

 

[BWK]

yeah , never said it before but this guy is a troll .

I'm about to circular file this troll .......he's a waste of bandwidth

You are going to circle, because you are cowardly quitter. You got your ass fried with real information. Take a hike.

 

[BWK]

Jerry Brown deserves any, and all backlash from this issue. If there ever was a politician that deserves to be TARRED, and FEATHERED it is him.

Stop being stupid.
Description
Western United States land managers are conducting fuel reduction and forest restoration treatments in forests with altered structural conditions. As part of the National Fire and Fire Surrogate (FFS) study, thinning and burning treatments were evaluated for changing forest structure. Shifts between pretreatment and posttreatment diameter distributions at seven western FFS study sites were determined by assessing live tree diameter frequency distributions and the 10th and 90th percentile and mean diameter. Diameter distributions were based on 31,517 live trees within 76 pretreatment units and 25,061 live trees within 85 posttreatment units. Cross-site comparisons were made using meta-analysis. Values for l0th-percentile diameter increased at two sites, values for 90th-percentile diameter increased at six sites, and values for mean diameter increased at five sites (P < 0.05) after active treatments (thin, burn, or thin + burn) compared with control sites. Across the seven western FFS study sites, the overall effect size of the thin treatment increased for 90th percentile and mean diameter; the overall effect size of the burn treatment increased for 10th percentile, 90th percentile, and mean diameter; and the overall effect size of the thin + burn treatment increased for l0th percentile, 90th percentile, and mean diameter. This work indicates that although each of the active treatments was effective in shifting diameter distributions toward larger trees, no single treatment or entry will probably mitigate nearly a century of fire exclusion and fuel accumulation in dry coniferous forests of the Western United States.

Has nothing whatsoever to do with Jerry Brown.

Do you understand the biological influences associated with burning conifers in the west? No!

Thinning a forest lightens the fuel load, for a short period of time, while almost immediately "succession of a forest" takes control, sometimes making things more combustible. Depending on whether you know what that means? Thinning for a very short period of time can help. But right after that, it can actually be worse. You need to know vegetation, weather, climate, Biomes, terrain, and have a key understanding of biological succession to formulate an intelligent conclusion. You have not done any of that. All you can do is create an idiotic post about Jerry Brown.

Thinning for a very short period of time can help. But right after that, it can actually be worse.

Rinse, repeat.

Which is what I have been telling these Sheep for about two days. Too bad Sheep don't get it.

They are too busy hating, talking stupid, and blaming Jerry Brown. Typical Sheep talk.

You've been telling someone that we can't just thin once, that we have to do it continuously?

I don't believe you ever told anyone that, let alone for two days.

Negative! If you search back, I said that thinning is only a temporary fix, and that it could make the fire danger even greater after a short period of time. You will have to go back, but I definitely put that in there. But the bottom line, thinning is no cure all. It opens the forest floor up to annual grasses in the first year of successional growth, leading to the second and third year of weeds and small brush. A prime ignitor for a possible high fire danger category 5 day, if the weather conditions permit. All it takes is a dry lightning storm, and we have ourselves a raging fire from a first, second, or third year thinning.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Jerry Brown deserves any, and all backlash from this issue. If there ever was a politician that deserves to be TARRED, and FEATHERED it is him.

Stop being stupid.
Description
Western United States land managers are conducting fuel reduction and forest restoration treatments in forests with altered structural conditions. As part of the National Fire and Fire Surrogate (FFS) study, thinning and burning treatments were evaluated for changing forest structure. Shifts between pretreatment and posttreatment diameter distributions at seven western FFS study sites were determined by assessing live tree diameter frequency distributions and the 10th and 90th percentile and mean diameter. Diameter distributions were based on 31,517 live trees within 76 pretreatment units and 25,061 live trees within 85 posttreatment units. Cross-site comparisons were made using meta-analysis. Values for l0th-percentile diameter increased at two sites, values for 90th-percentile diameter increased at six sites, and values for mean diameter increased at five sites (P < 0.05) after active treatments (thin, burn, or thin + burn) compared with control sites. Across the seven western FFS study sites, the overall effect size of the thin treatment increased for 90th percentile and mean diameter; the overall effect size of the burn treatment increased for 10th percentile, 90th percentile, and mean diameter; and the overall effect size of the thin + burn treatment increased for l0th percentile, 90th percentile, and mean diameter. This work indicates that although each of the active treatments was effective in shifting diameter distributions toward larger trees, no single treatment or entry will probably mitigate nearly a century of fire exclusion and fuel accumulation in dry coniferous forests of the Western United States.

Has nothing whatsoever to do with Jerry Brown.

Do you understand the biological influences associated with burning conifers in the west? No!

Thinning a forest lightens the fuel load, for a short period of time, while almost immediately "succession of a forest" takes control, sometimes making things more combustible. Depending on whether you know what that means? Thinning for a very short period of time can help. But right after that, it can actually be worse. You need to know vegetation, weather, climate, Biomes, terrain, and have a key understanding of biological succession to formulate an intelligent conclusion. You have not done any of that. All you can do is create an idiotic post about Jerry Brown.

Thinning for a very short period of time can help. But right after that, it can actually be worse.

Rinse, repeat.

Which is what I have been telling these Sheep for about two days. Too bad Sheep don't get it.

They are too busy hating, talking stupid, and blaming Jerry Brown. Typical Sheep talk.

You've been telling someone that we can't just thin once, that we have to do it continuously?

I don't believe you ever told anyone that, let alone for two days.

Negative! If you search back, I said that thinning is only a temporary fix, and that it could make the fire danger even greater after a short period of time. You will have to go back, but I definitely put that in there. But the bottom line, thinning is no cure all. It opens the forest floor up to annual grasses in the first year of successional growth, leading to the second and third year of weeds and small brush. A prime ignitor for a possible high fire danger category 5 day, if the weather conditions permit.

That's why you have to keep doing it.
Put in more logging roads too, pull out the dead trees.

 

[BWK]

And Purge with the funny face is nothing more than a trolling coward who is afraid to debate the facts. Take a hike.

 

[Wry Catcher]

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 ...

Jerry Brown has been a cancer on California since before I moved there in the 70s. He and his father, whom I met once.
He will never admit that Trump was right.
And currently Jerry Brown is in deep trouble because of all of the deaths his regulations have caused.
Voters are holding him personally responsible.

Brown has won every election in which he has run. Voters have affirmed that he is a visionary, highly intelligent and a very hard worker. He is fiscally responsible and socially liberal, a hard balance for sure. He has never kicked the can down the road and tackles issues with an upfront and transparent response. When wrong he admits it, and being wrong is rare for him.

The only reason hacks like you are trying to assassinate his character, is because he may toss his hat in the wrong for the Democratic Nomination for President.

His intelligence, experience and education likely scares the crap out of you, and other hacks who are intimidated by facts. Facts which require preparation in advance for more fires, floods, tornadoes, hurricanes, earthquakes and social disruptions, this last exacerbated by Trumpism.

It's never smart to ignore Mother Nature.

 

[The Purge]

Why would I beat you down while at least 2 others are doing it...you enjoy humiliation?....but, of course you do.....moron, but so entertaining and easy to TRIGGER!

 

[BWK]

Stop being stupid.
Description
Western United States land managers are conducting fuel reduction and forest restoration treatments in forests with altered structural conditions. As part of the National Fire and Fire Surrogate (FFS) study, thinning and burning treatments were evaluated for changing forest structure. Shifts between pretreatment and posttreatment diameter distributions at seven western FFS study sites were determined by assessing live tree diameter frequency distributions and the 10th and 90th percentile and mean diameter. Diameter distributions were based on 31,517 live trees within 76 pretreatment units and 25,061 live trees within 85 posttreatment units. Cross-site comparisons were made using meta-analysis. Values for l0th-percentile diameter increased at two sites, values for 90th-percentile diameter increased at six sites, and values for mean diameter increased at five sites (P < 0.05) after active treatments (thin, burn, or thin + burn) compared with control sites. Across the seven western FFS study sites, the overall effect size of the thin treatment increased for 90th percentile and mean diameter; the overall effect size of the burn treatment increased for 10th percentile, 90th percentile, and mean diameter; and the overall effect size of the thin + burn treatment increased for l0th percentile, 90th percentile, and mean diameter. This work indicates that although each of the active treatments was effective in shifting diameter distributions toward larger trees, no single treatment or entry will probably mitigate nearly a century of fire exclusion and fuel accumulation in dry coniferous forests of the Western United States.

Has nothing whatsoever to do with Jerry Brown.

Do you understand the biological influences associated with burning conifers in the west? No!

Thinning a forest lightens the fuel load, for a short period of time, while almost immediately "succession of a forest" takes control, sometimes making things more combustible. Depending on whether you know what that means? Thinning for a very short period of time can help. But right after that, it can actually be worse. You need to know vegetation, weather, climate, Biomes, terrain, and have a key understanding of biological succession to formulate an intelligent conclusion. You have not done any of that. All you can do is create an idiotic post about Jerry Brown.

Thinning for a very short period of time can help. But right after that, it can actually be worse.

Rinse, repeat.

Which is what I have been telling these Sheep for about two days. Too bad Sheep don't get it.

They are too busy hating, talking stupid, and blaming Jerry Brown. Typical Sheep talk.

You've been telling someone that we can't just thin once, that we have to do it continuously?

I don't believe you ever told anyone that, let alone for two days.

Negative! If you search back, I said that thinning is only a temporary fix, and that it could make the fire danger even greater after a short period of time. You will have to go back, but I definitely put that in there. But the bottom line, thinning is no cure all. It opens the forest floor up to annual grasses in the first year of successional growth, leading to the second and third year of weeds and small brush. A prime ignitor for a possible high fire danger category 5 day, if the weather conditions permit.

That's why you have to keep doing it.
Put in more logging roads too, pull out the dead trees.

You can't thin all the time. That is a horrible forest management tactic. Timber management involves and manages for higher yields of pulp or lumber. There is a specific plan for that. You first remove the culls or the overcrowded timber to gain more volume for the healthier trees. That initial cutting is timber stand improvement. Which does not take fire control into consideration. To obtain quality lumber, you must manage the stems to get the tallest and straightest. Position of the trees, slope, competition, cat faces, etc. decide which one's are removed initially. Has nothing to do with fire protection.

 

[BWK]

Why would I beat you down while at least 2 others are doing it...you enjoy humiliation?....but, of course you do.....moron, but so entertaining and easy to TRIGGER!

Lol! If i were being beat down sonny, someone on here would have supplied me with documentation from reliable sources pointing out how wrong I am. None of these cowards have done that yet.

 

[Aba Incieni]

Looks like Moonbeam was lying again.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Thinning for a very short period of time can help. But right after that, it can actually be worse.

Rinse, repeat.

Which is what I have been telling these Sheep for about two days. Too bad Sheep don't get it.

They are too busy hating, talking stupid, and blaming Jerry Brown. Typical Sheep talk.

You've been telling someone that we can't just thin once, that we have to do it continuously?

I don't believe you ever told anyone that, let alone for two days.

Negative! If you search back, I said that thinning is only a temporary fix, and that it could make the fire danger even greater after a short period of time. You will have to go back, but I definitely put that in there. But the bottom line, thinning is no cure all. It opens the forest floor up to annual grasses in the first year of successional growth, leading to the second and third year of weeds and small brush. A prime ignitor for a possible high fire danger category 5 day, if the weather conditions permit.

That's why you have to keep doing it.
Put in more logging roads too, pull out the dead trees.

You can't thin all the time. That is a horrible forest management tactic. Timber management involves and manages for higher yields of pulp or lumber. There is a specific plan for that. You first remove the culls or the overcrowded timber to gain more volume for the healthier trees. That initial cutting is timber stand improvement. Which does not take fire control into consideration. To obtain quality lumber, you must manage the stems to get the tallest and straightest. Position of the trees, slope, competition, cat faces, etc. decide which one's are removed initially. Has nothing to do with fire protection.

You can't thin all the time. That is a horrible forest management tactic.

We've tried never thinning, how'd that work out?

To obtain quality lumber, you must manage the stems to get the tallest and straightest.

Yup, harvest that quality lumber.

Has nothing to do with fire protection.

Every tree you take out is one less tree that can burn.

 

[The Purge]

Brown's FOLLY!

 

[The Purge]

Why would I beat you down while at least 2 others are doing it...you enjoy humiliation?....but, of course you do.....moron, but so entertaining and easy to TRIGGER!

Lol! If i were being beat down sonny, someone on here would have supplied me with documentation from reliable sources pointing out how wrong I am. None of these cowards have done that yet.

Child you now have 3 (Three) people telling you, you are an asswipe...LOLOLOL..keep going!

 

[Wry Catcher]

Looks like Moonbeam was lying again.

You're so full of shit it stinks up the entire Internet. Why do you post when you have nothing of substance or thoughtful to share? I guess you need attention, and don't care if it is negative.

 

[BWK]

Why would I beat you down while at least 2 others are doing it...you enjoy humiliation?....but, of course you do.....moron, but so entertaining and easy to TRIGGER!

Lol! If i were being beat down sonny, someone on here would have supplied me with documentation from reliable sources pointing out how wrong I am. None of these cowards have done that yet.

Child you now have 3 (Three) people telling you, you are an asswipe...LOLOLOL..keep going!

Three people telling me I am an "asswipe", just proves that they are cowardly children, who cannot play this game with a fist of counter information that debunks mine. I've given those three children their lesson plans. What they do with them, is up to them. And if "asswipe" is their counter argument, then that just proves to this forum, who is right, and whom is wrong. Now you cowardly children, you are free to go.

 

[BWK]

Looks like Moonbeam was lying again.

You're so full of shit it stinks up the entire Internet. Why do you post when you have nothing of substance or thoughtful to share? I guess you need attention, and don't care if it is negative.

Which is why I never replied to that one.

 

[The Purge]

Why would I beat you down while at least 2 others are doing it...you enjoy humiliation?....but, of course you do.....moron, but so entertaining and easy to TRIGGER!

Lol! If i were being beat down sonny, someone on here would have supplied me with documentation from reliable sources pointing out how wrong I am. None of these cowards have done that yet.

Child you now have 3 (Three) people telling you, you are an asswipe...LOLOLOL..keep going!

Three people telling me I am an "asswipe", just proves that they are cowardly children, who cannot play this game with a fist of counter information that debunks mine. I've given those three children their lesson plans. What they do with them, is up to them. And if "asswipe" is their counter argument, then that just proves to this forum, who is right, and whom is wrong. Now you cowardly children, you are free to go.

Why go when you are like the mulatto, a narcissist, and believe you know it all....so much entertsinment!..ROTFLMFAO,...Let's see how long you can continue to make yourself look like the asshole we all know you are!

 

[Aba Incieni]

Looks like Moonbeam was lying again.

You're so full of shit it stinks up the entire Internet. Why do you post when you have nothing of substance or thoughtful to share? I guess you need attention, and don't care if it is negative.

Good non-response. Maybe Moonbeam was just wrong again.

 

[BWK]

Which is what I have been telling these Sheep for about two days. Too bad Sheep don't get it.

They are too busy hating, talking stupid, and blaming Jerry Brown. Typical Sheep talk.

You've been telling someone that we can't just thin once, that we have to do it continuously?

I don't believe you ever told anyone that, let alone for two days.

Negative! If you search back, I said that thinning is only a temporary fix, and that it could make the fire danger even greater after a short period of time. You will have to go back, but I definitely put that in there. But the bottom line, thinning is no cure all. It opens the forest floor up to annual grasses in the first year of successional growth, leading to the second and third year of weeds and small brush. A prime ignitor for a possible high fire danger category 5 day, if the weather conditions permit.

That's why you have to keep doing it.
Put in more logging roads too, pull out the dead trees.

You can't thin all the time. That is a horrible forest management tactic. Timber management involves and manages for higher yields of pulp or lumber. There is a specific plan for that. You first remove the culls or the overcrowded timber to gain more volume for the healthier trees. That initial cutting is timber stand improvement. Which does not take fire control into consideration. To obtain quality lumber, you must manage the stems to get the tallest and straightest. Position of the trees, slope, competition, cat faces, etc. decide which one's are removed initially. Has nothing to do with fire protection.

You can't thin all the time. That is a horrible forest management tactic.

We've tried never thinning, how'd that work out?

To obtain quality lumber, you must manage the stems to get the tallest and straightest.

Yup, harvest that quality lumber.

Has nothing to do with fire protection.

Every tree you take out is one less tree that can burn.

Get it straight. Thinning serves very little good as a fire management tool. There is a little thing called "succession" that destroys any notion that thinning is nothing more than a short term tactic. Does anyone here understand what succession is? You must know this, then understand the types of vegetation that come into the picture after a thinning. If not, an intelligent debate is not possible.

At the end of the day, the timber companies care about volume of wood, and what revenue it brings. A very small percentage of the forestry industry other than the government concerns itself with fire protection. Lumber companies are not in the business of fire control. Their interest is volume/money.

At the end of the day, not thinning in national forests, or thinning on lumber company lands, changes very little of the fire danger potential of each area. Nature recovers extremely rapidly in fresh cut areas as it's need for succession becomes evident very quickly. Nature is always working towards a climatic forest in the end. But the first three years of that change come the quickest in those years. Therefore, we are back to square one as if nothing ever happened.