That’s what they do around here but to prevent power failures. Big todo from environmentalists when trees were blown down in a storm. Wouldn’t let loggers go in and harvest but instead left everything to rot to feed the next fire. Clean up brush, thin the trees, create fire breaks seems to be left out of the text books now.
In these parts, one of the fire-prevention controversies is that the “spend less money” business-minded folks prefer the clear cut and remove everything method, and the environmental-folk prefer the remove the small stuff but leave the bigger trees standing method. Neither seems much interested in removing all trees and limbs near to power lines.
You have to let the harvesters in to thin out the trees. That means the big trees are taken down for lumber which gives rhe small trees room to grow. It’s called forest management. But these people would rather have devastating fires killing people and destroying property just so they can look at a virgin forest.
No, they don’t want that. It’s an education problem. The Department of Natural Resources should do what they think is best and let the dopes complain. The DNR can provide good reasons for managing forests properly when interviewed by the press or pressed for information by elected representatives that receive complaints about good forest management.
Ran across this WSJ article. Its behind the paywall but if you hit the X in the upper right should be able to read it.
That’s a fair point, but why do you think these same folks aren’t appearing in front of a press conference daily, or at least once a week, 52 weeks a year, and expounding on the importance of removing trees and tree limbs that are located such they could fall onto power lines, especially in rural fire prone hill-side areas? I don’t recall ever seeing such a press conference by state forestry experts focusing on that particular topic.
Some people just see what fits their world view or read the la times. Plenty of contrary studies out there. Another article today saying there is no crisis. All chicken little from grade school.
Along the same line, brewers of beer are afraid of a beer shortage due to a short supply of co2. Something about contamination from the main volcano source. Small brewers most affected. I’m not a beer drinker but fair warning to stock up. Kill all the co2 and unintended consequences, kill the plants and no beer today.
Leave Mother Nature alone.
What a load. If 97% of the scientists studying this agree, that’s not enough?
Do scientists agree on climate change? – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet (nasa.gov)
2 Likes
Maybe those great government nasa scientists could comment on those German steel and aluminum plants having to close down because the can’t sustain a 1000% increase in energy costs and still produce a product others can buy? Just one example in one country but I think I’ll take a .02 degree temp increase in January even if centuries of temp fluctuations are man made. Silly humans.
Hmm, looking in the mirror?
3 Likes
They are state employees, not elected officials. Unless elected officials want them to comment, they won’t. The DNR people could get into trouble for making public comments with explicit approval from the state government. I’m thinking the governor’s office. The press could also ask DNR about it and report the answers.
+1
As a former employee of both local and state government agencies, we were repeatedly warned to NEVER make any comments to reporters, other than to say, “Please contact the Superintendent’s/Commissioner’s Office for information”.
1 Like
Elected officials and the press are to blame for the power line/tree limb forest fire problem then? hmmmm …
Jump to conclusions much @George_San_Jose1?
1 Like
Who do you think is responsible @jtsanders ?
I don’t live in California and don’t pay close enough attention to your problems to offer an authoritative response. That said, I suspect it’s far larger than elected representatives and the press. People that oppose controlled burns are part of the problem. Mother Nature is likely the largest contributor. You are in the greatest drought in about 1200 years. It could be that starting any fire would destroy all the forest. That seems to be the case doesn’t it? How can the government and press cure the problems without a huge amount of rain over a long period of time? We are just people and nature is far more powerful that we ever will be.
4 Likes
Fair enough. But shouldn’t people at least remove the tree’s near power lines in forest fire prone areas? It’s not rocket science. Can’t all be done at once, but a little at a time seems very possible. I don’t see much focus on that aspect of the forest fire problem, and wondering why is all.
Cali seems it does not want to spend the money on fire prevention forestry. like removing dead trees, dead underbrush, fire breaks, ect.
In my state, the electric utility companies trim trees that are close to electric lines, and they also remove dead trees and underbrush on property that abuts their high-tension lines.
At least in Minnesota, I have noticed over the past 20 years or so a new generation has taken hold along with the top management. Dnr used to be packed with people that loved to hunt and fish but I think the emphasis has changed to wetlands, runoff, water quality, etc. so you might not get any different response from the rank and file. I don’t have any specific items but I’ve been waiting for a call back from the local game warden for two years. Guess she has other things on her mind.
We had a tornado in 18, and there is still quite a lot of blow down making river navigation a problem as well as a fire issue. No one is making any attempt to organize anyone to help clean it up.