Come on Irv you’re one of the smartest dudes on here you know that’s a ridiculous statement right there. Of course dried trees burn but you know dried under brush that’s been drying out in the heat for months and months and months is like fucking tissue paper for flames.Right, because dry trees don't burn.
Dry kindling at their trunks makes it 100 times worse.Right, because dry trees don't burn.
What states are those? Serious question.I guess every state that clears out their undergrowth is just batshit crazy and wasting their time. You know, since it doesn't really make any difference.
I know Colorado does it. Pretty sure Texas does it.
I don't think you should use Colorado as an example... this happened while Mr. "Rake the forest" Trump was in office:
North Dakota does it too, through the Badlands anyway. I don't know if they do along Lake Sakakawea through the Missouri River Valley. Every 2-3 years, they clear underbrush and have controlled burns. The state pays, and is subsidized by oil companies that have oil leases in the area. The more leases, the more their share. They gladly pay it, because if a fire raged through that area...? A lot of oil wells on the north flat would be gone.
Same goes for some of you here... fires are still raging and the blame game is in full effect.
It always circles back to this.
Yes, I know for a fact Colorado does controlled burns, too. I've been there when they're doing them.
Not even comparable. You are ate up by one man. One man controls your mind. The people in this thread are arguing against policy over a large period of time, which involves many, many people. Not one man. And those policies are very hard to defend. Unky gave some good examples of them. Yet you defend them. Why? Because of being absolutely fucking brain cramped. Over one man.
Oh stop... I'm not defending shit. I'm saying that there were a lot of people of many political persuasions who made decisions that put California in the situation they are in now. Unk, while pointing out those decisions, also attributed them to only one party, which is incorrect.
Which party has had control in California for quite some time now? I'm not seeing how some Republican mayor or councilman in northern California has much sway on policy in Orange County. Or in the Palisades area.
Again, almost half of the land in SoCal is federally owned. If you can't understand that, then I can't help you.
So, is that federally owned land responsible for not diverting water to fill reservoirs and storage tanks so little fishies can thrive? No? Or maybe that was some little Republican councilman's responsibility. That's only one example, but if you can't understand that, then I can't help you.
Nice attempt at a spinaway, but it's not going to work. So yeah, I am telling you that. Would there still be fire danger if California was an R led state? Absolutely. But would that state be still worried about protecting a flower over fire safety? Saving fish over fire safety? Letting our fire departments go to shit with DEI? Cutting millions from the fire budget to divert funds elsewhere?
