The most environmental state in the union is now making the air toxic and unbreathable for half the country. Great job California ECO Warrior democrats, learning nothing from the Paradise and Carr fires, smoking out California with decades of feelgood policies and ignoring science!
California’s Native American population had for years shaped this landscape with fire. Old Pictures show the first branches on the pine trees started about 20 feet up, lower branches having been burned off by low-intensity grassfires.
In the not so olden days of 1960's there were small logging communities dotted all over California, which maintained the forests. Then the ECO Tree Huggers went wild and closed them all down, suppressed every small fire, suppressed forest management science and each decade got worse as the fuel load built up. Even dead trees from fires can't be harvested thanks to Eco law suits. Result pine beetles galore and dying trees.
The last straw two decades ago in California, excess forest fuel load fed renewable biomass powered electric generating plants in California. But air quality concerns led to the closure of many biomass generators. Whoops now look at the air quality.
Democrats SCIENCE claim climate change is the cause, not their policies. In 2006 the Western Governors’ Association warned that, “…over time the fire-prone forests that were not thinned, burn in uncharacteristically destructive wildfires (SCIENCE!!!).
Like it or not Trump was correct in his criticism of the role bad environmental policy played in California’s ever worsening wildfire seasons, so remember that this election.
My family came to California in the mid-19th century and worked in the logging industry for three generations.
Sure, as flicker4me2 says, in the '60's we had timber harvesting and mills around the Sierra and in the coast range. The part of the story he left out was the 1980's, when financiers used junk bonds to take over the logging industry, and greatly accelerated the harvest in order to service their debts. Now, as then, much of the issue comes down to money. We can use controlled burns to thin the forest, or we can use chainsaws, but the small trees and brush we need to remove have no commercial value. So doing the maintenance work that we need is going to cost a LOT of money. Meanwhile, USFS is spending LESS on fire prevention, because they are spending MORE on firefighting.
So yeah, let's relax the restrictions on controlled burns—we're getting used to the smell of smoke now, right?—and let's rebuild some lumber mills, and have the hard conversation about how many grand old trees we need to cut, in order to defray the cost of the work that needs to happen. But don't tell me that climate change is not driving a lot of this crisis (tree-huggers didn't kill 100 million trees in the Sierra Nevada), and don't tell me that you don't want to spend taxpayer dollars to improve the health of our forests. Chainsaws alone are not the answer.
You said: But don't tell me that climate change is not driving a lot of this crisis (tree-huggers didn't kill 100 million trees in the Sierra Nevada),
No pine beetles were a major factor in their death, ecologist's policies made their habitat a priority. Clean up after a fire by willing logging companies(willing even to pay for the access) lead to eco law suits stopping work, leaving the ground a veritable insect growing plantation. Colorado has the same problem, drive Highway 70 from Grand Junction to Denver to see the damage from similar policies. Fuel load build up as a result made the ecological fire disasters we see today. The road to hell is paved with good intentions!
.Throughout history, California has experienced many droughts, such as 1841, 1864, 1924, 1928–1935, 1947–1950, 1959–1960, 1976–1977, 1986–1992, 2006–2010, and 2011–2019. As the most populous state in the United States and a major agricultural producer, drought in California can have a severe economic as well as environmental impact. Drought may be due solely to, or found in combination with, weather conditions; economic or political actions; or population and farming. Talk about bad droughts during a severe drought in the early 1930s, Tahoe's surface level fell below the rim and exposed tree stumps off the beach near South Lake Tahoe, the examined the stumps determined that they had lived for 100 to 150 years before rising water levels submerged them. These trees grew well before California or even the United States were industrialized.
in the late 13th century, the Anasazi Indians had to abandon their lands due to a terrible long lasting drought, which occurred well before the Industrial Revolution. Global Warming has been around for eternity, but I think our definitions are different, with your placing the majority of blame on man not natural processes. I am all for clean air, clean rivers, responsible management for whatever % we effect the balance.
A lot of money you cry! More than what we are spending now on fire fighting, lost towns,and massive damage to our eco system? The small logging towns did not cost us money, they employed people, kept fires at bay, provided thinning. and paid taxes. Proper thinning does not have to clear cut the Grand Old tress that are left. Trees are a rotational crop. Legend trees can be ID and protected while new growth that is 50 to 60 years old can be harvested in a thinning manner, under rotation. While deep dark forests can benefit a few animals, open forests properly thinned benefit a majority of animals. Deep dark forest with there heavy fuel load burn so hot they can sterilize the ground. That is why the Indians practiced low slow burns that did not turn into crown (tree tops) fires. With the fuel loads we have now I agree responsible controlled burns are harder to do and more expensive - but what other choice?
We do have some common ground, and it is clear our policies of the last 60 years have been a disaster of epic proportions. I fear our current fuel loads and cycle of forest fires, then later brush fires maybe with us a long time before we see clean air again.