Environmentalism frustrates fire victims

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Thursday, June 27, 2002 | By Jon Dougherty

[Grampa Dave]

It would not surprise me if they did or will start forest fires as acts of terrorism. Of course, they could just make a phone call to their terrorist buddies at PETA, ELF, ALF or some other whacko enviral terrorist organization. These home grown hate Americans have a long track record of using arson for their political terrorism!

These enviral terrorists have started probably hundreds of fires since Jake Reno stopped any investigation of them.

Then, of course the Anarchists who live and operate in the open in Eugene, Oregon set a large part of Seattle on fire a couple of years ago. They would be prime suspects if anyone who is monitoring this board would like to check on!

[brityank]

The San Francisco-based Sierra Club, perhaps the nation's most prominent environmental group, also denied that environmentalism was to blame.

"Some public officials have tried to blame environmentalists for the forest fires" burning in Arizona and Colorado, the group said in a statement. "These attempts to scapegoat environmentalists are a disturbing display of cynical politics."

"Scientists have determined these fire problems stem from three problems: nearly a century of fire suppression that removed the natural role fire plays in healthy forests, an extreme multi-year drought and decades of commercial logging that removed large, fire-resistant trees," said the group.

The Sierra Club LIES !! !!

I recall seeing TV ads from back in the '60's ~ "Only YOU can prevent forest fires!" ~ that were run for the USFS sponsored by and underwritten by the Sierra Club.

Ping.

[Grampa Dave]

Club Sierra has been the key enviral organization in blocking existing fire roads and any new roads into their Druid Cathedrals for over a decade.

They have pushed the zero tree ever being used by man aagenda for decades. They have pushed the zero fire maintence for decades. Their card carrying Druids, (we used to call them Forestry People) enabled these agendas 24/7/365 on our tax $'s in their Druid Cathedrals, (we used to call them our forests). Club Sierra, also, spends vast sums to elect enviral Poster boy/girl governors, senators and congressits to push their anti humana/American/American agendas up and down any orifice in their way.

Like their no drilling for new oil any place including the most recent one, ANWR in Alaska. It takes big money to buy elite senators like Kerry, Da$$hole, Boxer, ChiFi and other rat enviral senators.

[BOBTHENAILER]

decades of commercial logging that removed large, fire-resistant trees," said the group.

He said that while many Americans no longer build homes in flood plain areas or areas prone to hurricane destruction, Westerners should consider not building homes in forests. "There are some places where people just shouldn't be building homes," he said. Environmentalists, he adds, "believe that plains, deserts, rolling hills and just about everywhere, are just plain bad places to build."

These people make me want to vomit. However, their policies are seeing the light of day and people are no longer thinking they are so pretty.

[blackie]

Stop the attacks by the wacko, extreme left-wing, enviro-nazis terrorist's on our Freedoms !!

Freedom Is Worth Fighting For !!

Molon Labe !!

[headsonpikes]

"...anti human enviral nazis..." bttt!

[blackie]

Stop the attacks by the wacko, extreme left-wing, enviro-nazis terrorist's on our Freedoms !!

Freedom Is Worth Fighting For !!

Molon Labe !!

[BOBTHENAILER]

Good post again, John. EV, check this one out, it fits what I sent you.

[Glutton]

Thanks for the ping. Truthfully, there is more to this then the new emotional hyperbole being blasted at environmentalists.

I live in the Willamete Valley where people have been fighting smoke from field burning for years, killing off the practice.

Fire is going to have to be more heavily reintroduced into the forest, making it a part of how different factors shape it. People are going to hate living with the smoke, but they will have to do it.

Silvaculture is made more expensive and fire could mean less board foot harvested per acre on the short-term with more fire cleaning out small, fast burning fuels.

I have been a wildlands forest firefighter and tree planter for years. I have worked on countless precription burns, (some of which caused massive complaints when the wind changed direction unexpectedly) and while some bile might be owed environmentalists over this as this piece pitches, it is more complicated an issue then this, with more people owning a piece of the blame then many people might be willing to owe up to in this heat of the moment. (No pun intended.

[Grampa Dave]

Bob, they don't want any of us to live except in the high density Goron inner cities. They hate the fact that Americans have the choice to live where they want to live if they have enough money.

This is what their decades of enviral cleansing of rural Americans for decades is all about. They hate us and want us either aborted, killed or crammed into high density Goron slums/inner cities. Then they will feed us recycled food.

This rural cleansing started with the spotted owl and that damn snail darter. Most of us stood back watched, and many of us probably cheered when evil farmers, ranchers, loggers, fishers, hunters, merchants and just plain people lost their homes and ability to make a living in the name of some critter.

They tried to Rural Cleanse the farmers, ranchers, workers and merchants in the Klamath Basin last year. Auntb warned us, Jeff Head, nunya business and others went there and started a small miracle. For the first time these enviral nazis were stopped in their rural cleansing of America. Their critter then was the slimey bottom feeding Sucker Fish.

Just remember the Elite Enviral Nazis hate you, your family, your friends, where you have your home and probably your job. They would be happy if about 300 million of us just disappeared.

[BOBTHENAILER]

You have freep mail. I'll be in the office for about ten minutes or so.

[Glutton]

The only environmentalists I ever saw light an arson fire is the two twits who burned SUVs here in Eugene, Oregon to protest them. Or those that did the Oakridge Ranger Station and those fires aimed at USFS or BLM infrastructure and ski lodges.

Many fires (like the infamous Warner Creek fire locally) have been set in spotted owl reserves, and some were togenerate work, or as in the case of the USFS employee in Colorado, to make them seem like heroes for calling them in.

As someone who has had a friend die before his eyes when a burnt snag split open his head, I hate arsonists, passionately. But I caution about hyperbole that the preponderance of these filthy creatures are enviro whackos.

The evidence is just not there to make that case.

[jenny65]

Thanks Glutton for the non-inflamatory comments. It's difficult to sort out the facts when everyone is screaming "enviro-nazis" and other such nonsense.

Before everyone attacks me, let it be made clear that I'm NOT a "tree-hugger". In fact, I've been no more than a disinterested observer of this topic in the past.

But it seems evident to me that the environmentalists are being set up as easy scapegoats. It's the underbrush and smaller trees that are the problem here, not the large trees that the "enviro-wackos" wanted to save, that turned these fires into major disasters.

Has there been a concerted effort in the past to clean up this kindling, and if so, was it stopped, and by whom? I'm not asking retorically, I simply don't know.

Furthermore, the impression I get from the "anti-environmentalists" is that the forests need logging to stay healthy. So how did they get by for thousands of years before we came along? Again, it sounds like nothing short of complete non-intervention is the only true way to maintain a healthy balance. Barring that, clearing out the underbrush and dead wood is the next best option. Cutting down the large growth is NOT a solution, although I suppose that if you cut down enough it becomes a moot point.

Flame me if you want, but I'm not necessarily defending either side at this point. I'm simply trying to get past all the finger-pointing and get to the truth. Any reliable references would be welcome.

[Lil'freeper]

I was not speaking of arson or arsonists (how you came to that conclusion is your problem). The twit who started the fire did not do so with the intentions you list. The drama queen wanted to be 'rescued'. That still makes her a twit and all- yes I mean ALL- of the avowed environmentalists I have met conduct themselves as if they are above the laws of the average people and certainly smarter than mother nature. If there is an enviro-wacko that doesn't think he is smarter than the rest of us, please write an article about him and sing his praises- I *might* change my opinion. No promises, though. /rant

[Lil'freeper]

As for forest management, you're right. The culprits are the small trees choking the forests that are usually culled by the small, fast moving fires that occur naturally. These things are so dense they are known as 'doghair thickets'. A tree might be 4 inches in diameter but be close to a hundred years old- neither normal or healthy in a ponderosa pine.

The key is to go in and clear them out so that in a given area there is a healthy balance of young and old trees with upwards of 10ft in between each tree.

Trouble is, the little trees have no value to timber companies as they are more trouble than they are worth and there aren't enough funds for legions of forest service personnel to go forth with saws and get the job done. The cost effective solution is a series of perscribed burns which sometimes get out of hand and tend to freak people out (they think that someone is trying to burn the whole forest down). Another thing that many people don't grasp is the magnitude of the task. Those forests in AZ are the size of some states! If the Sierra Club et al, truly cared, they'd get volunteers out and start chopping.

[Lil'freeper]

Just for comparison:

Northern Arizona forests in 1909 (click for larger image)

Northern Arizona forests in 1990s (click for more info on the evolution of this area)

[editor-surveyor]

I can guarantee you one thing, Rose Davis has no clue how to fight a fire.

In the 60's they used to put up a roadblock on the highway and take all of the able-bodied men to fight the fire (and it worked).

[editor-surveyor]

" If the Sierra Club et al, truly cared..."

They care about Gaia, the 'goddess' of the forest (Satan to normal folks).

[farmfriend]

It's the underbrush and smaller trees that are the problem here, not the large trees that the "enviro-wackos" wanted to save, that turned these fires into major disasters.

This statement makes this this former statement obvious.

I've been no more than a disinterested observer of this topic in the past.

If you have not been paying attention, you wouldn't know that you can't clear the trees and underbrush if you have no roads. They want NO activity in the forests because it might disturb something. And heaven forbid those evil lumber companies should make a profit!

[jenny65]

If you have not been paying attention, you wouldn't know that you can't clear the trees and underbrush if you have no roads.

OK, point taken.

But isn't the most effective way to keep these forest fires from becoming disasters of biblical proportions, ironically enough, letting them burn naturally every few years?

It keeps coming back to the logging industry saving the day. So I'll repeat - how were the forests able to survive before loggers arrived?

Who has been dictating policy when it comes to putting out fires? I can't imagine the logging industry being happy about letting large forests just burn, so I assume they do have a say. If that's the case, then they have to bear some responsibility.

Don't get me wrong. Given a choice, I'd much rather have the lumber put to good use rather than let it burn. That doesn't mean that they should be given free reign to cut down everything in sight and turn it into a shopping mall though. I cannot believe everyone here wants that.

It's obvious that there needs to be a much smarter policy put into place that isn't dictated by lobby groups from either side. A policy that allows reasonable access to the logging industry, while maintaining a healthy eco-system. The environmentalists absolutely have to give, no doubt about it. But I can't lay the blame solely on their shoulders. That may not sit well with cookie-cutter conservatives, but I'm not one of them.