Shasta is burning

Salamanizer Skiwrote:

 However,  in the last 20 years with the EPA and misguided environmentalists stepping in with crippling and overbearing regulation, the forests have reached a critical and almost irreversible state.

Sorry to be blunt, but what a stupid comment.  Did the forest management you speak so highly of do anything to remedy the situation?  No, because they take large healthy trees that are more resistant to fire, leave brush, small trees and mounds of detritus, all of which are fuel to subsequent fire.  Also, how does one manage a prescribed burn now that, as other have pointed out, communities have sprung up in these areas?  I love how those who never advocated for preservation now have express a new found concern for wild places now that they've been armed with a convenient way to try to attack those who actually want to preserve them.    

Gumby Kingwrote:

1) Florida

2) Antarctica 

3) ??

Not Florida

I agree with fat dad and matt n. Trumpkins are trying to paint the picture that you just easily maintain a forest by logging the shit out of it. First, like fat dad noted, they take the trees that are most resistant to fire, and leave a shitpile of carnage in the wake. Second, a lot of california's terrain isn't very conducive to just "managing". It is big, rocky, steep, and generally a pain in the ass to deal with.

Matt Nwrote:

The EPA didn't sanction widespread development of housing to within high fire areas and up to the edges of those areas. That has greatly contributed to the increased desire of putting out fires ASAP, versus prior. People don't want to lose their homes or other investments, and demand a quick response. Expansion of the American Dream of homeownership to all areas is to blame. This includes areas that flood frequently, are along coastal blufftops, hit by hurricanes repeatedly, etc. All insurance and taxpayers payers subsidize those affected.

The great migration from urban centers is more to blame than tree-huggers and EPA regs, IMO. 

The great migration to the hills is not sustainable, similar to the big city leaches of the rivers. And yeah, its sad that we all pay for it.

Development in fire areas has been going on for a long time. Yes, it contributed to the idea of absolute suppression, but it’s not the cause of what we’re experiencing here today.  The negative effects of all out fire suppression is well known and understood. Problem is, there are those who won’t allow anyone to do anything about it. Namely the EPA and well intentioned but misguided environmentalists. People simply migrating away from urban centers and into more rural areas is not the cause of increasingly large and destructive fires. Expansion into these areas increases property loss totals, but has nothing to do with the increasingly large scale fires themselves. 

Far Dad, no apology needed. Because your ignorance of the totality of the subject is nothing out of the ordinary and shared with millions of Americans across the country. I don’t mean that to be rude or condescending. It’s a perfectly rational train of thought which errs on the side of caution, especially when viewed from the roadside after a large harvesting project. A viewpoint I used to share. But it’s a warped view and fails to see the bigger picture. I’m not advocating for increased and unregulated logging. No, we log enough already. It’s how we’re allowed to log, and the areas loggers are permitted to log that needs a change. Have you been to Yosemite Valley lately? Extensive logging inside the valley, multiple fire restoration projects done with more planned, massive slash piles and mulched underbrush. It looks like total hell, but is absolutely necessary and vital in restoring the choked out, sick fire hazard the Valley has become. In 20 years, the Valley will be a lush, healthy forest again. 

In the past, logging companies were permitted into more areas, not just for clear cutting, but for selective harvesting and thinning. Thinning was done to protect the larger trees for later harvesting. They also had their own localized fire response crews and could stop fires before they spread. This was to protect their assets. They would come in, thin areas and harvest when ready. Slash was burned in massive piles, small trees were left along with “heritage” trees and the areas were re-planted for future logging. This replanted forest is most of what you see today. Second and third generation forest which is in no way natural as people believe they understand it. Some of the practices of old were good, some not so much.  

Today we who actually study forest management have a much better understanding of what those differences are and how to utilize them effectively. I don’t have the time or energy to go into all the details, but understanding different forms of harvesting, thinning and logging throughout different terrain, environments, sensitivities in ecosystems etc… while utilizing appropriate restorative fire techniques throughout each area individually and allowing the application of these tools specifically to each area makes more sense than the blanket rules we have today. And yes, misguided environmentalists and the EPA (who is run by the former) bare a large part of the blame. They essentially intensify and cause the ill effects from logging you complain about. Would you be surprised to know that those small and sickly trees they leave behind, in many places they are not allowed to cut down, including non native tree species? And those slash piles sit idle for years because the EPA will not allow them to be burned, which causes those fire hazards you speak of? 

In my area, we had a forest restoration project paid for by the federal government. Regulated logging was used to thin the forest, the largest trees were left and the underbrush was removed on state forest ground near a rural community. The slash piles  were left for several years along with the dead and downed wood on the forest floor because the EPA had to approve the burn. They did not and would site any excuse they could find to not permit the disposal by burning this debris. Several appeals/grievances were filed by the forest service and ecologists who oversaw the project with no success. Last year, a fire came through and quickly ignited this area of dead and downed wood which ripped through the understory causing a crown fire which quickly spread and overwhelmed the limited resources on hand to fight the fire. The result was 29,500 acres of scorched earth, seven sensitive watersheds impacted, millions of trees dead, and 9 homes lost with a cost nearing one billion dollars. And that was a small one comparatively.  This year, a fire was started by lightning in a semi remote area. A crew was sent out to monitor the fire and assess its potential threat. During that process, a local farmer was spotted disking fire line around the small fire in an attempt to stop it before it spread. He was on state forest land adjacent to his property and told he had to stop because the tilling caused by disking fire line was damaging to the environment. That fire burned for about a week before taking off and burning over 105,000 acres, most of which was on a wildlife refuge which is now almost completely eradicated while also destroying several homes in its wake. A perfect example of the nonsense contributing to these massive fires were experiencing. 

It’s all to easy to just cry “global warming” and ignore the larger picture because it washes your hands of the out right negligence caused by horrible policy decisions. The dry conditions and warming earth isn’t even the half of it. 

Trying to ignorantly propose this is a one sided political issue just shows how stupid, close minded and removed from reality some have become. Plenty of Democrats with boots on the ground in my neck of the woods trying to make meaningful common sense changes to the policies here in California right alongside their Republican neighbors. In fact, it’s one of the few issues locally those from both parties, who are actually out in the field agree on. That and the moron governor here in Cali, who has made things exponentially worse throughout the state needs to go in September. 

We need localized environmental and EPA deregulation. Permittance of sustainable logging practices in all forested areas. Increased incentive for wild land firefighters. Funding for local and state wildland restoration projects starting in the most vulnerable areas which utilize, pay for and/or subsidize year round wildland firefighters, volunteers, non profits, qualified incarcerated populations etc… There’s a lot more to it than that of course, but it’s a start. A total pipe dream with our current leadership in California.

Salamanizer Skiwrote:

Development in fire areas has been going on for a long time. Yes, it contributed to the idea of absolute suppression, but it’s not the cause of what we’re experiencing here today.  The negative effects of all out fire suppression is well known and understood. Problem is, there are those who won’t allow anyone to do anything about it. Namely the EPA and well intentioned but misguided environmentalists. People simply migrating away from urban centers and into more rural areas is not the cause of increasingly large and destructive fires. Expansion into these areas increases property loss totals, but has nothing to do with the increasingly large scale fires themselves. 

Far Dad, no apology needed. Because your ignorance of the totality of the subject is nothing out of the ordinary and shared with millions of Americans across the country. I don’t mean that to be rude or condescending. It’s a perfectly rational train of thought which errs on the side of caution, especially when viewed from the roadside after a large harvesting project. A viewpoint I used to share. But it’s a warped view and fails to see the bigger picture. I’m not advocating for increased and unregulated logging. No, we log enough already. It’s how we’re allowed to log, and the areas loggers are permitted to log that needs a change. Have you been to Yosemite Valley lately? Extensive logging inside the valley, multiple fire restoration projects done with more planned, massive slash piles and mulched underbrush. It looks like total hell, but is absolutely necessary and vital in restoring the choked out, sick fire hazard the Valley has become. In 20 years, the Valley will be a lush, healthy forest again. 

In the past, logging companies were permitted into more areas, not just for clear cutting, but for selective harvesting and thinning. Thinning was done to protect the larger trees for later harvesting. They also had their own localized fire response crews and could stop fires before they spread. This was to protect their assets. They would come in, thin areas and harvest when ready. Slash was burned in massive piles, small trees were left along with “heritage” trees and the areas were re-planted for future logging. This replanted forest is most of what you see today. Second and third generation forest which is in no way natural as people believe they understand it. Some of the practices of old were good, some not so much.  

Today we who actually study forest management have a much better understanding of what those differences are and how to utilize them effectively. I don’t have the time or energy to go into all the details, but understanding different forms of harvesting, thinning and logging throughout different terrain, environments, sensitivities in ecosystems etc… while utilizing appropriate restorative fire techniques throughout each area individually and allowing the application of these tools specifically to each area makes more sense than the blanket rules we have today. And yes, misguided environmentalists and the EPA (who is run by the former) bare a large part of the blame. They essentially intensify and cause the ill effects from logging you complain about. Would you be surprised to know that those small and sickly trees they leave behind, in many places they are not allowed to cut down, including non native tree species? And those slash piles sit idle for years because the EPA will not allow them to be burned, which causes those fire hazards you speak of? 

In my area, we had a forest restoration project paid for by the federal government. Regulated logging was used to thin the forest, the largest trees were left and the underbrush was removed on state forest ground near a rural community. The slash piles  were left for several years along with the dead and downed wood on the forest floor because the EPA had to approve the burn. They did not and would site any excuse they could find to not permit the disposal by burning this debris. Several appeals/grievances were filed by the forest service and ecologists who oversaw the project with no success. Last year, a fire came through and quickly ignited this area of dead and downed wood which ripped through the understory causing a crown fire which quickly spread and overwhelmed the limited resources on hand to fight the fire. The result was 29,500 acres of scorched earth, seven sensitive watersheds impacted, millions of trees dead, and 9 homes lost with a cost nearing one billion dollars. And that was a small one comparatively.  This year, a fire was started by lightning in a semi remote area. A crew was sent out to monitor the fire and assess its potential threat. During that process, a local farmer was spotted disking fire line around the small fire in an attempt to stop it before it spread. He was on state forest land adjacent to his property and told he had to stop because the tilling caused by disking fire line was damaging to the environment. That fire burned for about a week before taking off and burning over 105,000 acres, most of which was on a wildlife refuge which is now almost completely eradicated while also destroying several homes in its wake. A perfect example of the nonsense contributing to these massive fires were experiencing. 

It’s all to easy to just cry “global warming” and ignore the larger picture because it washes your hands of the out right negligence caused by horrible policy decisions. The dry conditions and warming earth isn’t even the half of it. 

Trying to ignorantly propose this is a one sided political issue just shows how stupid, close minded and removed from reality some have become. Plenty of Democrats with boots on the ground in my neck of the woods trying to make meaningful common sense changes to the policies here in California right alongside their Republican neighbors. In fact, it’s one of the few issues locally those from both parties, who are actually out in the field agree on. That and the moron governor here in Cali, who has made things exponentially worse throughout the state needs to go in September. 

We need localized environmental and EPA deregulation. Permittance of sustainable logging practices in all forested areas. Increased incentive for wild land firefighters. Funding for local and state wildland restoration projects starting in the most vulnerable areas which utilize, pay for and/or subsidize year round wildland firefighters, volunteers, non profits, qualified incarcerated populations etc… There’s a lot more to it than that of course, but it’s a start. A total pipe dream with our current leadership in California.

Fake news alert

^^^

With no retort?

It has been very difficult to find this balance regarding logging and forest fuels management.   It sure hasn't been based on ecological principles.

The Yurok has had it right all along.

M Rwrote:

Fake news alert

Care to defend that quote? 

I have degrees in fire science, environmental science, as well as deeply involved in silviculture projects in Northern California. I work with federal and state agencies involved in forest management through both State Correctional Facilities as well as local volunteer fire departments. What do you do exactly?

splitclimberwrote:

^^^

With no retort?

It has been very difficult to find this balance regarding logging and forest fuels management.   It sure hasn't been based on ecological principles.

The Yurok has had it right all along.

You can say that again. 

Cheap logs are/were the death of our national and private forests..  in many areas, logging companies are basically faced with clearcut or die, and simply can't pay their bills with any type of ecologically compatible forestry.  Because clear-cutting isn't really compatible with good forest or ecosystem management, we end up losing one possible important management tool because there is no way to make money with selective harvest where you leave almost all of the bigger wood behind.  

F*** cheap logs, they kill both loggers and forests... Like most everything else, we should pay more for almost everything if we want nicer things like healthy employed people and healthy well managed forests.  

tallguywrote:

Cheap logs are/were the death of our national and private forests..  in many areas, logging companies are basically faced with clearcut or die, and simply can't pay their bills with any type of ecologically compatible forestry.  Because clear-cutting isn't really compatible with good forest or ecosystem management, we end up losing one possible important management tool because there is no way to make money with selective harvest where you leave almost all of the bigger wood behind.  

F*** cheap logs, they kill both loggers and forests... Like most everything else, we should pay more for almost everything if we want nicer things like healthy employed people and healthy well managed forests.  

I dont believe it completely boils down to everyone paying more for better forest management, we just need politicians who try to understand the real issues instead of just raising more money for the coffers. The insurance lobbyists are not good at what they do IMO, give it a couple more years

Salamanizer Skiwrote:

Care to defend that quote? 

I have degrees in fire science, environmental science, as well as deeply involved in silviculture projects in Northern California. I work with federal and state agencies involved in forest management through both State Correctional Facilities as well as local volunteer fire departments. What do you do exactly?

You can say that again. 

Eliminating the EPA then logging all forests will never be the answer, despite what the timber industry pays your professors to teach you in forestry school. 

You're so off the deep end with your logic, it doesn't even deserve a point by point response--it's best to just call it what it is and move on. 

The 2020 Eldorado Fire that burned the western part of the San Bernardino Mtns was able to spread so far because the forest firefighters were defending homes instead of protecting the forest.  The fire crossed the Mill Creek drainage near Frustration Creek because homeowners in Mountain Home village were the priority.

Yet those homeowners paid NOTHING for this massive firefighting subsidy.  The tiny fee that the state attempted to impose a few years ago was repealed by irate rural screaming sprawlers who demanded their subsidy.

M Rwrote:

Eliminating the EPA then logging all forests will never be the answer, despite what the timber industry pays your professors to teach you in forestry school. 

You're so off the deep end with your logic, it doesn't even deserve a point by point response--it's best to just call it what it is and move on. 

Who said anything about eliminating the EPA and logging everything? And it’s very apparent you know nothing about forestry let alone the logging industry which saying pay for any forestry professors is downright laughable.

My logic is based on in the field experience as well as hundreds of studies in the field over the past 50 years by leading Forestry professionals in biodiversity, soil and water management, agriculture, conservation, wildlife preservation, fire science, silviculturists, as well as forestry logging management professionals just to name a few. None of which are exactly “Pro Logging”. My points don’t deserve a response because you don’t have a point to make. You’re all feelings and assumptions and no facts. You should study more and think less. 

tom donnellywrote:

The 2020 Eldorado Fire that burned the western part of the San Bernardino Mtns was able to spread so far because the forest firefighters were defending homes instead of protecting the forest.  The fire crossed the Mill Creek drainage near Frustration Creek because homeowners in Mountain Home village were the priority.

Yet those homeowners paid NOTHING for this massive firefighting subsidy.  The tiny fee that the state attempted to impose a few years ago was repealed by irate rural screaming sprawlers who demanded their subsidy.

You are correct. However, they also weren’t allowed to construct proper fire line around those communities prior to an emergency to help free up assets during a wildfire because of nonsense environmental regulations. They’d rather dig haphazard fire line in an emergency then spend a dime to construct proper, sustainable and effective precautionary protections prior to said emergency. It’s almost as if these agencies and the state would rather see everything turn to ash then bend or give up any bit of their power. Weird! What exactly are they protecting again? 

"We need localized environmental and EPA deregulation. Permittance of sustainable logging practices in all forested areas." - SS

'Deregulation' and 'sustainable logging' are doublespeak--you probably picked this jargon up in forestry school.

PS - using incarcerated labor to fight fires is a possible human right abuse--please tell me you're at least not involved with this.

M Rwrote:

"We need localized environmental and EPA deregulation. Permittance of sustainable logging practices in all forested areas." - SS

'Deregulation' and 'sustainable logging' are doublespeak--you probably picked this jargon up in forestry school.

PS - using incarcerated labor to fight fires is a possible human right abuse--please tell me you're at least not involved with this.

“Localized” as in each area is different. Calling deregulation and sustainable double speak is a blanket statement. An excuse made by those who do not understand the multiple facets involved.

How are Inmate Firefighters a human rights abuse exactly? It is one of the few rehabilitation programs that actually works. There isn’t one Inmate Firefighter who isn’t proud of what he is doing. To them, it is nothing less than a privilege and an honor to become a Wildland Firefighter. It gives them sense and purpose while they’re putting their lives back on track. The recidivism rate for Inmates who serve as Wildland Firefighters is far lower than those who don’t. Once again, feelings and no facts. 

Did you or did you not call for EPA deregulation and logging on all forested areas? You now say you never said that--WAIT--did you just admit your original, long-winded-spray-of-a-post was in part: fake news? Let's stick to the facts, or do you only do that when it's convenient for you?

Why are prisoners paid $2 a day to risk their life just to be subsequently barred from ever working as a forest firefighter when they get out of prison? Sounds like a privilege to me.

Let's cut to the chase SS, how many #TimberUnity protests have you been to lately?

PS - using incarcerated labor to fight fires is a possible human right abuse--please tell me you're at least not involved with this.

What an idiotic point to make.

I'll take this one

We need localized environmental and EPA deregulation. Permittance of sustainable logging practices in all forested areas. 

/=

eliminate the EPA and log all forests

M Rwrote:

Did you or did you not call for EPA deregulation and logging on all forested areas? You now say you never said that--WAIT--did you just admit your original, long-winded-spray-of-a-post was in part: fake news? Let's stick to the facts, or do you only do that when it's convenient for you?

Why are prisoners paid $2 a day to risk their life just to be subsequently barred from ever working as a forest firefighter when they get out of prison? Sounds like a privilege to me.

Let's cut to the chase SS, how many #TimberUnity protests have you been to lately?

You misinterpreted the meaning of my original post and  substituted it with what you preferred it to mean. Never said we should eliminate all regulation or log every last bit of our forests. Some deregulation is necessary to allow for forest restoration projects which includes utilization of logging as a resource. Didn’t think it was necessary to have to dumb it down that far. My bad!

Assembly Bill 2147. Look it up! Again, you have no idea what you’re talking about and it’s apparent. It’s like a sports fan trying to tell Nolan Ryan how to throw a fast ball. You just roll your eyes and smirk. Prisoners are paying back a debt to society. They volunteer for the position and have to work hard to get it. The selection process is rigorous. Their compensation is the valuable experience they gain. They are treated well and earn their respect. They should not be compensated monetarily for it as that creates a whole different set of problems. However, I do believe Wildland firefighters should be paid more. A lot more.