Re: The unspoken truth about wildfires

On Sat, 01 Aug 2026 13:36:08 -0400, Noah Sombrero <[email protected]>
wrote:

>On Sat, 1 Aug 2026 13:27:31 -0400, Wilson <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>>On 8/1/2026 1:07 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
>>> On Sat, 1 Aug 2026 12:52:40 -0400, Wilson <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 7/31/2026 6:44 PM, Creon wrote:
>>>>> At Fri, 31 Jul 2026 16:20:28 -0400, Wilson <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7/31/2026 2:06 PM, Tara wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jul 31, 2026 at 12:40:32?PM EDT, "Wilson"
>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 7/30/2026 3:50 PM, Tara wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Julian <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 30/07/2026 19:56, Tara wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 30, 2026 at 2:53:09?PM EDT, "Julian"
>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 30/07/2026 19:29, Tara wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 30, 2026 at 2:04:17?PM EDT, "Julian"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sadly he was proved right. So was I. After I warned in these
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> very pages last year that government policy was worsening
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the fire risk on moorland, it gives me no pleasure to say:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ‘I told you so.’
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matt Ridley
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Indigenous peoples in North America have been conrolling the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> threat of wild fires with prescribed/controlled burns for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> centuries. Canada is looking to do the same in co-operation
>>>>>>>>>>>>> with our native people. We have a problem doing this however
>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of the acessibility and vastness of our forests. But
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a country the size of Britain (and other European
>>>>>>>>>>>>> countries), it seems to me that controlled fires are a no
>>>>>>>>>>>>> brainer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Are inaccessible fires in vast forests really a problem?
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think they're as likely good for the land's long term health.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> There is that, but an uncontrolled fire can massively grow and
>>>>>>>>>>> send a lot of smoke to people populated areas.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> A bit like a volcano.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yeah like that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The northeast US is hundreds of miles from the wildfires yet we've
>>>>>>>> had serious air quality warnings this year and last. A few weeks
>>>>>>>> ago it literally dimmed the sun for several days, making what was
>>>>>>>> otherwise a clear day look cloudy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.cbsnews.com/news/wildfires-smoke-millions-exposed-midwest-northeast-us/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Those pictures are not an exaggeration. That's what it really
>>>>>>>> looked like.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Meanwhile the idiot treehuggers think they know what's best.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am an admitted tree hugger but I am also a realist and think that
>>>>>>> one answer here is controlled burning. Another is education and
>>>>>>> strictly enforced laws against those who are careless and start
>>>>>>> fires through laziness and ignorance, clearing vegetation around
>>>>>>> and near dwellings and building fire resistent homes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes I agree. The funny thing is, the idiot treehuggers I'm talking
>>>>>> about are killing more trees by not allowing beneficial things like
>>>>>> controlled burns.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not true.
>>>>>
>>>>> You seem to be living about four decades behind, Sir.
>>>>
>>>> Because you say so?
>>>>
>>>> Who's stopping the controlled burns and brush clearing in California?
>>>> It's not the foresters.
>>> 
>>> Nobody, I suspect.  
>>
>>The government of California is not allowing controlled burns.
>
>If that is (maybe) true, then I suspect that the decision was made by
>somebody qualified to do that.  Not you, not me.
>
>>But as always, store clerks and truck drivers
>>> think they need to tell professionals how to do their job.  How to
>>> manage (where and when) controlled burning for instance.
>>
>>You seem quite happy to leave it to the politicians and functionaries 
>>who cosplay as experts.
>
>As I said, when you graduate with your degree in forestry management,
>you discover that the store clerks and truck drivers still think they
>need to tell you how to do your job.  That means the likes of us here
>who lack such training.

One of my degrees, for instance, was Wildlife Management.  What they
told us was that in spite of learning how to manage turkeys and deer,
the actual decisions are made in terms of what hunters want.  Deer,
for instance, like disturbed lands, not climax forest, so management
for hunters means harvesting the forests and getting lots of regrowth
with new low hanging leaves.  When deer start eating bark of trees
with leaves out of reach, you know they are starving.

So, yeh, make lots of regrowth, get large deer populations so hunters
can come in and in spite of being lousy shots, be mostly guaranteed a
deer or two if the population is high enough.

You see where this is going.  Maybe you do.  Lots of short lived
regrowth means lots of tinder for fires.  

Oh, god damn, how did we do such a stupid thing?  Idonno, ask the
clerks and truck drivers.
-- 
Noah Sombrero mustachioed villain
Don't get political with me young man
or I'll tie you to a railroad track and
<<<talk>>> to <<<YOOooooo>>>
Who dares to talk to El Sombrero?
dares: Ned
does not dare: Julian  shrinks in horror and warns others away