Free: Contests & Raffles.
Why do these enviro terrorist groups rein so much control over the populas ? Answer, because people are sheep and are afraid to stand up for their own good will.
Quote from: CAMPMEAT on August 23, 2018, 08:45:32 AMWhy do these enviro terrorist groups rein so much control over the populas ? Answer, because people are sheep and are afraid to stand up for their own good will. They’re great master manipulators of people’s emotions=donations....Right on. Plus they don't spend their own money...............
KFHunter,You make some good points, esp in unpacking the ignition source stat's. But you make some wild ones too. I'll just respond to a few things:Carbon: I dispute that wildfire is the biggest source of carbon emissions. These things are measured. First, fire only volatilizes 10-15% of the carbon in a forest, less than logging. Second, fire is inevitable, so it's background to the issue of climate change. Last, the life cycle calculations get really complicated and contentious. Roads/fire: Even if it turned out the open roads don't correlate well to ignition, there's an argument to be made over how well they correlate to successful suppression, at least under the extreme conditions that are the concern. I've already cited numbers of big, damaging fires that were in heavily managed/roaded landscapes. Cows: My views on public lands grazing and even cattle in general are complicated. It's enough to say that I'll call BS whenever somebody tries to mis-characterize grazing as a public service. To suggest that having enough cows across the backcountry that they could effect landscape fire patterns is feasible or desirable is frankly nuts.Beetles: You've ignored that the reason for the mountain pine beetle epidemic is climate change. Winters even in BC don't get cold enough anymore to kill the larvae, so we now have two or three beetle cycles per year, overwhelming the trees. Those forests have been heavily salvage logged, about as fast as humanly possible with the biggest mills in the world. But of course not every bettle-killed tree gets logged. Do beetle-impacted forests burn more/hotter than others? That's complicated. Predators: Ain't worth debating further, as there's no scenario in which we suppress predator pop's the way you propose. It public shouldn't and wouldn't stand for it. It's nuts.
What is your educational background and training that permits you to speak as a so called authority on forest fires, timber management, climatogy, apex predator managements etc?? A spokesman from organization has come on here and lectured us on many topics concerning predators, wildlife timber etc. Your online biography indicates that you spent at least 20 years of your career putting spikes in trees that injured hard working innocent guys just trying to make a beneficial lawful honest living and take care of their families. I think the unscientific policies you have been pushing your entire life has resulted in tremendous damage of our western ecology and caused the loss of a lot of trees, habitat and animals . I say this with all due respect. Quote from: MitchFriedman on August 24, 2018, 09:22:56 AMKFHunter,You make some good points, esp in unpacking the ignition source stat's. But you make some wild ones too. I'll just respond to a few things:Carbon: I dispute that wildfire is the biggest source of carbon emissions. These things are measured. First, fire only volatilizes 10-15% of the carbon in a forest, less than logging. Second, fire is inevitable, so it's background to the issue of climate change. Last, the life cycle calculations get really complicated and contentious. Roads/fire: Even if it turned out the open roads don't correlate well to ignition, there's an argument to be made over how well they correlate to successful suppression, at least under the extreme conditions that are the concern. I've already cited numbers of big, damaging fires that were in heavily managed/roaded landscapes. Cows: My views on public lands grazing and even cattle in general are complicated. It's enough to say that I'll call BS whenever somebody tries to mis-characterize grazing as a public service. To suggest that having enough cows across the backcountry that they could effect landscape fire patterns is feasible or desirable is frankly nuts.Beetles: You've ignored that the reason for the mountain pine beetle epidemic is climate change. Winters even in BC don't get cold enough anymore to kill the larvae, so we now have two or three beetle cycles per year, overwhelming the trees. Those forests have been heavily salvage logged, about as fast as humanly possible with the biggest mills in the world. But of course not every bettle-killed tree gets logged. Do beetle-impacted forests burn more/hotter than others? That's complicated. Predators: Ain't worth debating further, as there's no scenario in which we suppress predator pop's the way you propose. It public shouldn't and wouldn't stand for it. It's nuts.
KFHunter,You make some good points, esp in unpacking the ignition source stat's. But you make some wild ones too. I'll just respond to a few things:Carbon: I dispute that wildfire is the biggest source of carbon emissions. These things are measured. First, fire only volatilizes 10-15% of the carbon in a forest, less than logging. Second, fire is inevitable, so it's background to the issue of climate change. Last, the life cycle calculations get really complicated and contentious. Don't take my word for it https://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=110580*note -this is a 2007 article, I wanted to illustrate that in 2007 there was a big fear about global warming and a big increase in fires (the sky is falling)...but turns out it's just normal for California to have lot's of fires. Somethings never change! Now let's fast forward back to 2018*Also, once the fire has pumped tons or even gigatons of pollutants into the atmosphere it's a double whammy, those burnt trees, grass and shrubs aren't consuming CO2 or cleaning the air, nor making 02. So while fire is inevitable it doesn't have to be as distructive as it is, opening roads and suppressing them earlier is doable, and the responsible thing to do! Roads/fire: Even if it turned out the open roads don't correlate well to ignition, there's an argument to be made over how well they correlate to successful suppression, at least under the extreme conditions that are the concern. I've already cited numbers of big, damaging fires that were in heavily managed/roaded landscapes. If you can't get to the fire you can't suppress it, in rural Washington we have volunteers who get on the fires very quickly when they can, but often they can't. If a lightening strike crates a plume of smoke it often takes days to get a dozer in to open a road so they can reach it, very very frustrating when you can see it across a canyon but the dang road is impassible due to kelly-humps and brush that heads over there. I've had firefighters sitting and twiddling their thumbs because they can't get to a fire..a few days later after the lightening storm things dry out and that fire takes off and it's out of control. Any brush-land firefighter knows that access to the fire is the number one hurdle to putting it out quickly. This is a no brainer. Cows: My views on public lands grazing and even cattle in general are complicated. It's enough to say that I'll call BS whenever somebody tries to mis-characterize grazing as a public service. To suggest that having enough cows across the backcountry that they could effect landscape fire patterns is feasible or desirable is frankly nuts.The Horns fire burning right now is following a cattle grazing line. I talked about this very issue a number of years ago right here on this forum, and in the very same area that's being burned now. I talked about how the wolves are keeping the cattle pushed down in the very same area that is now scorched. I talked about how you can drive up the road and you'll see shorter grasses where cattle have grazed then it transitions into 5 foot tall grasses where they quit grazing. The wolves kept the cattle pushed down from the peaks (where the fire now burns) even though cattle historically grazed right to the top prior to wolves. There is even an old water tank on Horns mountain for this but now the cattle want to hug the corrals where the cattlemen park, they have to constantly push them to new grazing areas then they just come right back down, sometimes overnight. As a hunter I witnessed this first hand, it was weird seeing the DMZ between wolves and cows, and now that area denied cattle has gone up in flames. Beetles: You've ignored that the reason for the mountain pine beetle epidemic is climate change. Winters even in BC don't get cold enough anymore to kill the larvae, so we now have two or three beetle cycles per year, overwhelming the trees. Those forests have been heavily salvage logged, about as fast as humanly possible with the biggest mills in the world. But of course not every bettle-killed tree gets logged. Do beetle-impacted forests burn more/hotter than others? That's complicated. There's no denying the current warm/dry trend is giving the beetles a big boost, that is inevitable and unpreventable. I'm less focused on things like carbon tax credits (which do no one any good let alone the climate) and instead more focused on tangible benefits, such as managing beetle kill in the forest. Opening roads is a big part of that, some spraying and logging, burning..(we don't really need to discuss all the methods for controlling pine beetle kill do we?) Eventually climate change will lead to a cooler trend, then like in the 70's well all be yelling about global cooling! Like I said before when talking about climate change we must do so on a global scale. Washington is already a pretty clean state, and it's the Evergreen state! Our trees more than make up for any pollution Washingtonians may put out. Predators: Ain't worth debating further, as there's no scenario in which we suppress predator pop's the way you propose. It public shouldn't and wouldn't stand for it. It's nuts.There's plenty to debate about with predators! And as I've shown above predators can have a direct correlation to wild fires, even more so than stream erosion and beavers. The public is getting less and less supportive of predators, that's a battle you're loosing and not because of anything we who support more management of predators are saying, but the predators themselves are winning that battle for us; they (predators) are begging to be managed each time they kill a bicycler just outside of Seattle, or attack a 10 yr old Washington boy in YNP, or send a government employee up a tree.
For those who worry about cougar or wolf encounters, here's some useful info to keep you out of a tree:https://www.conservationnw.org/understanding-wolf-behavior/
And probably about time to schedule another meeting with WDFW and the rest of the fake environmentalists, on how to keep the suing going, just like happened with the original illegal wolf introduction.
Quote from: wolfbait on August 25, 2018, 03:36:16 PMAnd probably about time to schedule another meeting with WDFW and the rest of the fake environmentalists, on how to keep the suing going, just like happened with the original illegal wolf introduction.Well heck, Wolfbait, you had to go and invoke me again. So since you mention the suing, here's this:https://www.conservationnw.org/news-updates/statement-on-togo/Now I'm off, back to my lair. M
For those who worry about cougar or wolf encounters, here's some useful info to keep you out of a tree:https://www.conservationnw.org/understanding-wolf-behavior/[/quoteI did not even read the above article because I think I know where it’s going. I hunt lions and wolf ever year and have no fear for myself my fear is for other wildlife. Recent fires destroyed 9 times more spotted owl habitat than logging. That’s a fact you should look up instead of just using worn out talking points based on nothing.Spotted owl population has spiraled since you and others shut down logging. I would like you and others to look at Results of your efforts before jumping on the next fake environmental crisis. I care about conservation deeply but hate mismanagement and for what? Results of most environmental groups efforts are usually counter productive to what they are “saving “
