A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION

[mustafa]

http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/...ber/index.html

He who lives by the sword, gets shot by those who don't.

[SPONSOR]

Membership in the largest desert racing community has its advantages - Participate in Forum Discussions - Send and Receive Private Messages - Maintain Public Photo Albums - Access to Groups - User Profile in our Social Network - Increased Access to more Sub Forums - Reduced Online Advertisements Join our community today

[JCA]

clicky

www.andrewsracing.com

[Catawampus]

I see the logic behind this – if you cut down the trees, there will be nothing to burn, but the result is the same – no forest. This is yet another lame-brain idea from the corporate puppet Bush. Do not think for a second he his doing this for the good of the forest or serving the people – it is all about getting the timber industry back into our National Forests.

Just continuing to sell us out . . .

Kim

[mustafa]

Are you sure you're on the right site? Go to a Sierra Club website for your tree-hugging, Bush-bashing. What would our alternative be? Gore? By the end of his term,
we would be left with nothing. As it is, the roadless intiative has created enough problems already. Bush's plan is not to eliminate the forests, it's meant to remove
some of the excess fuel to prevent such catastropic fires. Over 6 million acres have burned this year alone.

Idyllwild? Isn't that the home of the CBD?


He who lives by the sword, gets shot by those who don't.

[Catawampus]

I am very familiar with the issues, and with the misdirection and priorities of the present administration. I disagree with the solution to this issue. I don’t think the alternate would be Gore – I am not sure if he knows how to fight fires. Living in the forest and dealing with fire abatement issues every year it is very apparent what needs to be done – development and manage fire clearance areas around homes and populated areas. Not logging. If you would care to discuss all the other issues and accusations you lumped together in your post, I would be happy to respond – just e-mail me.

In addition, - yes the CBD is in Idyllwild.

Kim

[Rodney]

Kim..Simply clearing fuel from homes and property is not nearly enough. How can you say logging and fires net the same result? The current rash of fires are completely out of control leaving only scorched earth. Logging is managed...the loggers are REQUIRED to re plant and control erosion. Have you ever seen a forest 2 years after being logged? It's beautiful, healthy, and not a risk like the old growth sections are. We could also go into jobs, community benefits, etc. but that is another arguement all together. A healthy, THINNED, managed forest can survive a wildfire..the unmanaged dense forest burnes to ashes leaving nothing but problems. I'll take the managed route anyday. Look at the science and stop listening to the doomsday crowd.

Winning IS everything

[martininsocal]

Kim- your issue with weed abatement up in Idyliwild is nothing compared to forest thinning and fuels management. just because you can switch from 30" to 100 feet because we tell you too will not save your house when a fire runs up Bee Canyon or Castille Canyon with 100-200 flame lengths off all those bug kill trees. Yes, I Know very well what the fire issues are in your neighborhood since I work for CDF in Riverside County. I have even been to fires in your neck of the woods over the last 13 years. from the Ronald MacDonald childrens camp this last April to Poppet Flats in 1989. That pretty mosaid being put up around your little village is designed to slow a fire down so we can stop it, but it will in no way stop it on its own.

Don't be fooled by all the LIES being tossed out there by the econazis. A healthy forest needs both fire and thinning to be healthy. There are studies that show huge devastating fires along the Sierras before man became involved in the eco system. Fires that would take 200-300 years for recovery. In a managed scenario, you will still have fires, even bad fires, the damage will be restricted to smaller areas. The "leave only footprints, take only pictures" theory of the Sierra Club will guaranty devastating fires every 20-30 years. That is how long its been since logs were last taken from around your village on the hill.

martin



If your gonna go, go BIG

[Catawampus]

I think you lost the jest of my first two posts. I am all for a comprehensive fire reduction plan (and I am not speaking of weed abatement). You sure have a lot more confidence in our government's ability to manage a forest then I do. The fire problems we are suffering in the western states are the results of a "forest management plan". The issue of Idyllwild was brought up because this forest is a prime example of the conditions that develop years after logging. The elimination and thinning of trees offer little or no canopy and the result (is basic science) eliminates the competition for light and moisture which allows the undergrowth to flourish. The Idyllwild area and many other areas where the trees are gone or thinned are among the worst fire hazards in the west. I am skeptical being that there is no profits to be made thinning brush and immature trees (which are the primary fuel in many forest areas that have been logged) so I anticipate all the fire reduction efforts will be focusing at logging “sellable” trees, and we will see little, if any, fuel reduction efforts being taken where there is a critical need. So, we will see what happens. I hope I am wrong. However, studying the political motives of the present administration lead me to these conclusions. Doonsday’ish – hardly. It is my patriotic duty to question our government, and I am glad to see people challenging my post – it shows that there is someone out there that cares.

Finally - Don't assume that because I question the motives behind different issues means that I support some eco-nazi or Sierra Clubbers. I feel these are rather immature responses. I place tremendous value on the use and "management" (notice the quotes) of our public lands. I do not see the credibility when individuals "jump on the band wagon" against every single pro environment issue - "Choose your battles well". Our public lands must be handled responsibility.

Best wishes,
Kim

[martininsocal]

Kim- what you fail to understand is that there will never be another tree sold of the Cleveland or San San Bernardino National Forest because of politics(the green kind) There used to be harvests off the Berdoo up until about 1982. That is when enough environmental pressure was used to end the "forest killing practices" of the timber industry. Just for the sake of science, do you understand that some species of trees require clearcutting to allow the species to grow the next generation? Trees have a life span just like any other living. Until they die and rot to the ground, they inhibit the new growth of their own species. removing some of these older trees allows the next generation to begin growth without having a die off period where you have unhealthy trees that are now succeptible to things like root rot, bug kill, and leaf freeze. These are the things that set up catastrophic fires, not just drought. We have had plenty of droughts over the last century without catastrophic fires like you are seeing now. When you look at the time line, you will see a marked increase in catastrophic fires after about 1975, approximately 10 years after the first big push for anti-timber industry and the beginning of the huge reduction in timber harvests. Man was removed from the equation, not anything else, just man. You make a huge assumption in the belief that industry just wants to come in, clear cut, and bail out. that is not the case. There are huge timber plantations here in California, some private held, some owned by the state. They do not have the problems the Federal forests have because harvests and mans ability to manage have not been removed from the landscape. That is not the case with the federal lands, especially wilderness areas. You talk about "managing the lands" to manage means to use efforts by man to direct and control an outcome. The environmental push is to remove man entirely from that equation.
As for Idyllwild, check out the facts about the continued loss of forest to sage and brush over the last 100 years in southern California. You will see that this is just a natural phenomenon and has been occuring over time. Ice age, seas to land, forests to meadows. Those hills below you in Sage and Anza were once covered in Pines and Oaks. Man didn't remove them, nature did.

martin

If your gonna go, go BIG

[Catawampus]

Fail to understand? Why all the assumptions? I agree absolutely. It is the political motives I question. (Again)

Kim