Western fires. Climate change or the climate change cult

Selling off federal land is exactly what they should be doing. It brings in money to the federal treasury and it adds tax money to the local economy.

 

Actually, the major culprit appears to be a lack of forest control by the California government. They've so greatly reduced or eliminated controlled burns that it ensures a fire can cause powder kegs like this. Gov. Newsome admitted it.

If it was just global warming, fires like this would be happening across the country and globe, they aren't.

So, I'd look into specifics. Blaming global warming is like blaming a boogeyman. You can't begin to prove it, you just make an assumption that happens to be politically expedient.

 

Which is an entirely different subject.

https://www.sierrasun.com/opinion/my-turn-court-sierra-club-increase-fire-danger/

"Lawsuits from environmental groups are snagging badly needed efforts to log forests in California’s fire-prone Sierra Nevada mountains, lawmakers and witnesses told a House of Representatives subcommittee Thursday.

Accompanied by stark photographs of forests ravaged by the 2013 Yosemite-area Rim Fire, Randy Hanvelt, a Tuolumne County, Calif., supervisor, urged action to speed both salvage and green-tree harvests on Forest Service lands as a way to reduce potential fuel for forest fires.

“Where I come from, I think the process is broken,” Hanvelt said. “I worry about the problem with litigation.”


https://www.sacbee.com/news/california/fires/article21016266.html

 

I would disagree. As a life long westerner I love our open spaces compared to the East side of America that's all developed and properly managed multiple use forest can be an ongoing revenue resource for the federal gov and the local economies.

 

Got a link? How many lawsuits or other court proceedings are we talking about? Enough to make a difference?

Remember, we're talking about 20,061,888 square miles of forest. In addition, there are over 14,000 inventoried protected areas administered by public agencies and non-profits, so who, exactly, are these so-called "eco warriors" taking to court?

 

Most of that forest is rarely even seen by a man, let alone provide any revenue. Most of the local governments wish they could get some tax revenue off all of that empty land.

The companies are not going to suddenly create towns or civilization. They will most likely do some logging which, if done properly, helps new growth.

 

If only that were true.

The issue is that with this administration, integrity is #1 issue, and time and time again, Trump proves he is pro-oil & anti-environment and deficient in integrity department.

https://www.americanprogress.org/is...administration-selling-public-lands-internet/

On Monday, December 4, President Donald Trump signed proclamations eliminating protections for more than 2 million acres of Utah’s Bears Ears National Monument and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument. The action, which puts wild red rock canyons; prized hunting and fishing areas; and tens of thousands of Native American archaeological sites at risk of destruction, was the largest elimination of protections for public lands in American history.1 Before a crowd of cheering supporters in the Utah Capitol, President Trump said, “With your help in treating our natural bounty with respect, gratitude, and love, we will put our nation’s treasures to great and wonderful use.”2

President Trump left little ambiguity about the “great and wonderful use” to which Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments will be converted: The proclamations specify that, at 9:00 a.m. on February 2, 2018, the lands will be immediately available for mining and drilling.3 Without paying a dime to the federal government, speculators will be able to stake a claim to mine for uranium, potash, and any other mineral that they believe can be extracted from the monuments. The oil and gas resources in the area, meanwhile, will be eligible to be sold off to energy companies through recently established private internet auctions that are highly susceptible to waste, fraud, and abuse.

As the Trump administration prepares to auction off oil and gas leases in the very national monuments that it is attempting to eliminate, the broken oil and gas leasing system raises all sorts of red flags. The strategies that oil and gas companies are using—with implicit cooperation from the Trump administration—to purchase and hold federal oil and gas leases are nontransparent, limit fair competition, and may be illegal. Policymakers and government oversight officials should launch an immediate investigation of the BLM’s oil and gas leasing program to determine areas that are vulnerable to fraud and abuse and to introduce more transparency and oversight. Potential areas to explore include how companies use online lease sales; affiliates and subsidiaries; and landmen to exploit current laws and regulations. A more transparent oil and gas leasing system on public lands would benefit taxpayers and ensure that the government is serving as an accountable and responsible steward of the public’s resources.

I find it curious that when it comes to mail in voting, Trump is concerned about fraud and abuse, but when it comes to selling government land, he could care less.

 

Selling government land has little to do with what you were saying. The buyer, not Trump, does what he wants with it within limits.

It is absurd for the federal government to own that much land in California or any other state. Most of it is not maintained or even seen by many people. it is just there sitting idle.

 

Bottom line, slapping a $300 dollar surcharge on the energy bill for every American household to line the pockets of a few dozen billionaires will end massive wildfires in California. Massive amounts of underbrush as a contributing is fake science.

Never mind the exponential growth in emissions of China/India. Never mind what that represents (the exportation of manufacturing emissions overseas to countries with no laws regarding the environment). We will pretend that a historically massive wealth transfer from the working and middle classes to the 0.0001% will somehow impact CO2 emissions on a worldwide basis. We also won't try to explain to anybody how that could possibly work.

 

Forest lands provide local jobs in timber and tourism and hunting and fishing

 

Not as idle as you think or l would like. Forest service land is crawling with people these days

 

Between 1989 and 2008, according to a study presented Thursday, 1,125 lawsuits were filed challenging Forest Service land management decisions.

Read more here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/california/fires/article21016266.html#storylink=cpy


https://www.sacbee.com/news/california/fires/article21016266.html

 

And you think all those would disappear. Seems more likely that more would be available if it was turned over to someone who hires people.

We have a nearby national park. Even it, is not crawling with people. I can wander around for days away from the river and never see a soul.

 

Please help me in following your thinking....what do BLM protesters gain from starting wildfires?

 

Chaos and destruction which is the goal of all who desire insurrection

 

What does any arsonist get from it?

 

That makes no sense. Air temperature never gets hot enough to ignite a fire. Drought can't ignite one either. It can only make the fire worse. The only possible natural causes are lightning and meteorites. The only other possible cause has to include humanity. I don't think there is any way to prevent wild fires. The only thing we people can do is mitigate their scope.

 

Show me the data proving a spike in lightning strikes year over year. for a length of time. Exceeding 1 year.

 

Mineral extraction does not necessarily destroy the environment as your treehugger article implies. I’ve mt biked all over Utah by gas wells and mines. They have a very small footprint and do not destroy huge areas just by their existence. Multiple use is something people like the ones you quoted can’t seem to grasp that.

 

Since you're injecting yourself into the conversation I was having with @kriman he wrote:

My reply, noting the red highlighted section, refuted his rebuttal. Thus, you missed the point of the reply entirely.

 

You're nitpicking whether or not the 12,000 plus lightning strikes are AGW related.

I don't know, but there are published papers ( one is below highlighted ) but drought and more dry fuel to burn certainly are.

Also, wildfires are on a steady increase, and lightning strikes are one of the prime movers of fires. It wouldn't be a stretch to conclude the lighting strikes are related to AGW/ACC as well.

https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/08/20/1007478/california-wildfires-climate-change-heatwaves/

Is human-driven climate change to blame? Did it make the latest fires more likely or more severe?

Climate scientists, who long resisted linking global warming to any specific extreme event, now say its influence is all but certain.

David Romps, director of the Berkeley Atmospheric Sciences Center, said in an email that we’re living in a fundamentally climate-altered world. He noted that average daily highs for this time of year are now about 3˚ or 4˚ F warmer in Berkeley, California, than at the beginning of the 20th century. He was also the lead author of a 2014 Science paper finding that every additional 1 ˚C (1.8 ˚F) of warming could increase lightning strikes over the US by about 12%.

https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/g...ightning-storm-can-start-wildfire/3412729001/

Many of the blazes were sparked by an unprecedented lightning siege of nearly 12,000 strikes over several days.

https://www.azcentral.com/story/new...aking-wildfires-worse-across-west/5643391002/

Wildfires sparked by an unusual siege of lightning have been raging through parched forests, brush and grasslands across Northern California. The fires have burned more than 1.3 million acres, an area bigger than the state of Delaware. At least seven people have died.

 

See post #97

 

Intelligent post, well done Sir/Ma'am!!

 

They are happening in the western states, which are geographically, geologically & meteorologically are different that other areas of the country.

So, your statement is not necessarily true, or outright false.

No, blaming AGW is logical, blaming the 'left' is a boogeyman and 'politically expedient'. Notwithstanding the fact that inaction just happens to be more common on the right than the left, at this juncture, so there is that.