After Libs Blame West Coast Fires on Global Warming, Forester Speaks out

[KFhunter]

read a couple posts up by NOCK NOCK.

I never understood prescribed burns myself due to the small scope of them.  If they did a lot more of it perhaps it would be a good thing, but people whine about smoke 

[NOCK NOCK]

Prescribed burns, lol.
Yea they prolly can’t hurt, and may actually help if done in the proper spot......problem is no one one knows where lightning is going to strike next. Last year the FS did some burning up the 5900 rd.......in 6-7 spots along the road, all less than 50yard diameter, what good is that going to do?

I am a firm believer the FS likes to burn for the sake of saying they are actually doing something. Burning off 1-100 acres has little effect on summer wildfires.

[bearpaw]

 and the fact that we have to import timber products from Canada as a result of enviro laws was pure economic ignorance at it's finest!

The economic ignorance was logging off all our lands and selling it to Japan for pennies on the dollar through legal loopholes and buying off special interests.

The Spotted Owl was used to stop this unethical practice that made a few rich at the expense of the taxpayers/citizens. It cost the Forest Service far more to sell trees than it took in in revenue.. majorly stupid!

Also if you look at old growth forests (200+ years old.) they have little burnable under brush, cooler temperatures and far higher humidity. They fight their own fires..


All timber sales should take into account fire suppression, road management, and sale set-up cost. The taxpayers don't need to subsidize home ownership in America. Let the Canadians..

I have to disagree, the spotted owl was used to stop all logging! It didn't matter where the trees were going! 

I'm not a fan of shipping whole logs, but that's not the core issue, the issue is "all logging" on public lands and especially USFS. I don't care if they make it illegal to export whole logs, it would likely be better for our economy and provide more jobs if they did. I want to see these thick fire prone forests getting logged, providing jobs, creating mozaic forest breaks, making money rather than burning up and costing taxpayers more to fight fires. We will all be much safer in rural areas and taxpayers everywhere will benefit if logging is greatly increased.

https://www.statesmanexaminer.com/content/fire-line-fire-district-4-news
As of this writing, there are around forty wildland fires in the western United States, plus one in Minnesota. All the western states, from Montana to New Mexico, California to Washington and in between are impacted.
Some of the fires are in truly wildland areas only, but most are in the “wildland urban interface”. The area where a wildland fire can readily extend into the areas of human habitation.
According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), sixty percent of the new homes built in the U.S. since 1990 were built in the “wildland urban interface”, which now represents 40 percent of the single-family homes in the U.S. Essentially, nearly half of the homes in the United States are at risk for wildfire.
Between 1999 and 2015, 2,750 structures (homes and other buildings) were destroyed by wildfire annually, but in 2015, 4,636 structures were destroyed by wildfire. The 2017 Tubbs fire in California consumed 5,500 structures alone.
In 1990, the cost of suppression of wildfire was reported to be about $400 million and nearly $1.5 billion in 2000. According to the national Interagency Fire Center, these costs reached nearly $2 billion in 2016 and in 2017 the costs neared $3 billion. These costs do not include the insured and uninsured losses or the economic impact to communities.

[bearpaw]

Prescribed burns, lol.
Yea they prolly can’t hurt, and may actually help if done in the proper spot......problem is no one one knows where lightning is going to strike next. Last year the FS did some burning up the 5900 rd.......in 6-7 spots along the road, all less than 50yard diameter, what good is that going to do?

I am a firm believer the FS likes to burn for the sake of saying they are actually doing something. Burning off 1-100 acres has little effect on summer wildfires.

   great points...

How about some prescribed logging that makes money rather than costing money! 

[buglebrush]

forest service to be reduced to only what they were originally created for, to fight forest fires.

So, where does that leave us?

Realistically I doubt that will happen! I would be happy to see more logging rather than letting all that good timber burn! Sure, any land with growth can burn, but there is a much better chance of controlling a fire where there are breaks in the dense forest, and logging makes breaks in the forests. Having more logging will keep more dollars and jobs in the US rather than buying Canadian lumber and leave much better economies in rural towns!

More vegetation for animals to feed on also

  My best hunting is on private lands that are regularly logged and thinned every 10 years or so. The USFS lands would support so much more wildlife if so many acres weren't dead on the forest floor caused by all the overaged timber.

I've had quite a bit of success hunting Harvest units also, but that doesn't mean we should Harvest everything out there. The animals we hunt aren't the only ones that deserve a place to live in the woods

Nobody's pushing for logging everything out there.  Stop coming up with false calamities to muddy the issues.  Without a return to logging areas that we used to log, wildlife will suffer immensely; and frankly must of us don't love wolves and grizzlies like you do.  What's wrong with managing for healthy ungulate populations for a change?  It'll actually improve long-term predator populations as well.

What areas did we "used to log"??  Pretty much EVERYTHING, which has helped get us into this problem.  Managing for healthy ungulate populations is great- but you can't just manage for ungulates.  You do recognize that there are more nongame species than just wolves and grizzlies right??? 

I think it's remarkable that this thread has made it 3 pages and no one has mentioned prescribed fire as being a possible solution.

I think it's remarkable a person would actually favor burning timber up rather than responsible logging practices.  I'm sure you favor the no spring bear in 113, right?  It's a joke to manage that whole area based on the local grizzlies greatly to the detriment if moose, elk, and deer.   Besides, Idaho's liberal predator Management sure have hurt the grizzly population in the rest of the Selkirks.  Don't pretend that WDFW'S management is isn't predicated on predators first and foremost.

[bearpaw]

forest service to be reduced to only what they were originally created for, to fight forest fires.

So, where does that leave us?

Realistically I doubt that will happen! I would be happy to see more logging rather than letting all that good timber burn! Sure, any land with growth can burn, but there is a much better chance of controlling a fire where there are breaks in the dense forest, and logging makes breaks in the forests. Having more logging will keep more dollars and jobs in the US rather than buying Canadian lumber and leave much better economies in rural towns!

More vegetation for animals to feed on also

  My best hunting is on private lands that are regularly logged and thinned every 10 years or so. The USFS lands would support so much more wildlife if so many acres weren't dead on the forest floor caused by all the overaged timber.

I've had quite a bit of success hunting Harvest units also, but that doesn't mean we should Harvest everything out there. The animals we hunt aren't the only ones that deserve a place to live in the woods

Nobody's pushing for logging everything out there.  Stop coming up with false calamities to muddy the issues.  Without a return to logging areas that we used to log, wildlife will suffer immensely; and frankly must of us don't love wolves and grizzlies like you do.  What's wrong with managing for healthy ungulate populations for a change?  It'll actually improve long-term predator populations as well.

What areas did we "used to log"??  Pretty much EVERYTHING, which has helped get us into this problem.  Managing for healthy ungulate populations is great- but you can't just manage for ungulates.  You do recognize that there are more nongame species than just wolves and grizzlies right??? 

I think it's remarkable that this thread has made it 3 pages and no one has mentioned prescribed fire as being a possible solution.

I think it's remarkable a person would actually favor burning timber up rather than responsible logging practices.  I'm sure you favor the no spring bear in 113, right?  It's a joke to manage that whole area based on the local grizzlies greatly to the detriment if moose, elk, and deer.   Besides, Idaho's liberal predator Management sure have hurt the grizzly population in the rest of the Selkirks.  Don't pretend that WDFW'S management is isn't predicated on predators first and foremost.

  If we were talking about junipers or scrub maples that have taken over areas in some states it would be understandable. But I haven't been able to figure out why anyone would rather burn up trees suitable for lumber or fiber than log them either, the lack of critical thinking and poor economics of burning trees verses logging them is mind boggling!

[NOCK NOCK]

Do you really want to know why the fires are so big these days? It's all about the money.
Millions of dollars go to the FS,DNR,BLM, and private FF agencies. It's all about "use it or lose it" funding. Thousands of employees in these organizations would not be making any money if fires were put out early.

Take a look at the below screen shot from the Cougar creek fire dated 8-7-18. Notice the yellow line. Some will argue this, but in reality, everything inside this line has already been decided by the FS to "let it burn" instead of trying to get it put out early. Notice how close that line is to the town of Ardenvoir. Why?
Once the fire gets big enough that it will keep the agencies employeed on it till the snow flies, and it is starting to threaten the public, they get serious about fighting it. They now look good to the public and are doing a great job protecting property and lives......and the circle of Money continues to flow their way.

Speaking of "let it burn" policy, If fires are a natural part of the ecosystem, and huge fires are because we have suppressed them to well for the last 100 years, Why not let them burn? Its natures way right?

PS; I am in no way ranting on those who are out there on the fireline doing the dirty work, they bust their hineys and deserve what they earn. The upper managers, well that's another story. 

[jstone]

Earth is a big glowing ball with a crust.?? Correct. Our volcanoes are like zits letting pressure out. It’s been heating up sense the ice age. This is the cycle of earth.! That’s my 

[Alan K]

Do you really want to know why the fires are so big these days? It's all about the money.
Millions of dollars go to the FS,DNR,BLM, and private FF agencies. It's all about "use it or lose it" funding. Thousands of employees in these organizations would not be making any money if fires were put out early.

Take a look at the below screen shot from the Cougar creek fire dated 8-7-18. Notice the yellow line. Some will argue this, but in reality, everything inside this line has already been decided by the FS to "let it burn" instead of trying to get it put out early. Notice how close that line is to the town of Ardenvoir. Why?
Once the fire gets big enough that it will keep the agencies employeed on it till the snow flies, and it is starting to threaten the public, they get serious about fighting it. They now look good to the public and are doing a great job protecting property and lives......and the circle of Money continues to flow their way.

Speaking of "let it burn" policy, If fires are a natural part of the ecosystem, and huge fires are because we have suppressed them to well for the last 100 years, Why not let them burn? Its natures way right?

PS; I am in no way ranting on those who are out there on the fireline doing the dirty work, they bust their hineys and deserve what they earn. The upper managers, well that's another story. 

Unfortunately this is very true... I know several guys who get deployed on fire each year and they all say the same thing. If they were allowed to attack these things when they're small they could get them out in a hurry. Instead they 'assess' until things grow out of control.

Of course these guys don't mind those fat paychecks though, and I cant blame them because fire checks supplementing their normal income is needed to get them decent annual pay.

[jstone]

I watched that video on that guy talking about the fires. Not to impressed on how he talked about the locations, and what was going on. People that don’t understand just keeps them in the dark. Be more spacific on names and locations for the locals.

[wolfbait]

Do you really want to know why the fires are so big these days? It's all about the money.
Millions of dollars go to the FS,DNR,BLM, and private FF agencies. It's all about "use it or lose it" funding. Thousands of employees in these organizations would not be making any money if fires were put out early.

Take a look at the below screen shot from the Cougar creek fire dated 8-7-18. Notice the yellow line. Some will argue this, but in reality, everything inside this line has already been decided by the FS to "let it burn" instead of trying to get it put out early. Notice how close that line is to the town of Ardenvoir. Why?
Once the fire gets big enough that it will keep the agencies employeed on it till the snow flies, and it is starting to threaten the public, they get serious about fighting it. They now look good to the public and are doing a great job protecting property and lives......and the circle of Money continues to flow their way.

Speaking of "let it burn" policy, If fires are a natural part of the ecosystem, and huge fires are because we have suppressed them to well for the last 100 years, Why not let them burn? Its natures way right?

PS; I am in no way ranting on those who are out there on the fireline doing the dirty work, they bust their hineys and deserve what they earn. The upper managers, well that's another story. 

Unfortunately this is very true... I know several guys who get deployed on fire each year and they all say the same thing. If they were allowed to attack these things when they're small they could get them out in a hurry. Instead they 'assess' until things grow out of control.

Of course these guys don't mind those fat paychecks though, and I cant blame them because fire checks supplementing their normal income is needed to get them decent annual pay.

Agree X2, Folks are getting fed up with the let it burn policy, the DNR BS in 2014 woke many people up also.

Sucking smoke a good part of the summer or on alert for evacuations for those that run, is not high on anyone's list. I think this policy is on its last legs and more logging etc. will be implemented in the future as those with common sense take control and demand management instead of burning.

As has been made clear above, the change has to come from the very top.

[magnanimous_j]

Smart forest management is key. I think if we do it intelligently, we can provide jobs, lumber resources, better wildlife environments AND protect the forests.

But every time fires are brought up, sportsmen always go right to management issues and ignore the elephant in the room which is climate change. No one can deny that record high temperatures and wildfires are clearly linked.

We can ignore this issue for a while. The PNW is less affected than many other regions in the country, but we will have to deal with it eventually. From a capitalistic standpoint, most of us now own land that will only become more valuable in the future BECAUSE of climate change. But if we don't get on it soon, we'll wreck our region too.   

[wolfbait]

read a couple posts up by NOCK NOCK.

I never understood prescribed burns myself due to the small scope of them.  If they did a lot more of it perhaps it would be a good thing, but people whine about smoke 

Back in the early 80's control burns were lit at night when it was cool, burning the brush and wood trash, and they really were controlled, now all the control burns I have seen have been more in the form of wildfire, leaving more fire fuel then before it was lit, it's more in the line of quantity versus quality.

Just like letting the fires get huge before they are fought, it is a waste of money etc..

[wolfbait]

Smart forest management is key. I think if we do it intelligently, we can provide jobs, lumber resources, better wildlife environments AND protect the forests.

But every time fires are brought up, sportsmen always go right to management issues and ignore the elephant in the room which is climate change. No one can deny that record high temperatures and wildfires are clearly linked.

We can ignore this issue for a while. The PNW is less affected than many other regions in the country, but we will have to deal with it eventually. From a capitalistic standpoint, most of us now own land that will only become more valuable in the future BECAUSE of climate change. But if we don't get on it soon, we'll wreck our region too.

You should look into geoengineering, which will explain much of your "climate change".

[Holg3107]

You should look into geoengineering, which will explain much of your "climate change".

WOW!!! You just took the tinfoil hat to the next level there Wolfbait!!! You throw around a whole lot of fringe sites and links on this website but getting into chemtrails and SRM... Damn... you're ummmm… making yourself more "credible" by the second...