State & national parks won't be too far behind. Some of them are in very close proximity to the forests.
Forest Service officials close all California national forests
61–70 of 236 posts
Re: Forest Service officials close all California national forests
#62Perfect timing for Newsom
Biden manages national forests, Newsom had no say.
> Regarding reducing the fuel load, in an interview four months ago, Newsom said that there are “Hundreds of millions of dead trees” in the state and that it cost his father $35,000 to clear “a small little patch of dead trees” on his property.
> Newsom didn’t admit it, but the outrageous cost to remove a few dead trees from private land is a consequence of California’s Byzantine environmental regulatory patchwork.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckdevore/2019/02/25/wildfire...
Re: Forest Service officials close all California national forests
#63The US National Forrest and Calfire have been on the losing side of this fire so far. All the technology that produces memes that spread across the globe in seconds and launches and lands orbital rockets flawlessly cannot stop this fire. This has been a dry summer which can be attributed to global warming. I for one am not a defeatist that will let global warming beat me. We need to think of solutions to fires like t…
> I for one am not a defeatist that will let global warming beat me.
Thinking about it in terms of victory and defeat isn't very helpful IMO. The reality is pretty clear: humans need to adapt to climate change. We are already past the point of no return, and in places like California the effects of climate change are mounting at a faster rate than we can realistically mitigate them.
> We need to think of solutions to fires like this. 1. We need to apply Phos-Chek from ground based units. 2. Building codes need to be updated to only allow fire resistant structures in wildfire prone areas. 3. Inhabited locations in fire prone areas need need active fire suppression infrastructure around them (agricultural level irrigation at the ready). 4. Forest management around inhabited areas need to reduce forest fire fuel.
I'm an advisor and investor in a company that serves this market and while all of the things that you mention can help, they are not "solutions" per se. For example:
1. "Fire resistant" structures are not fire proof. Many rural homeowners in the most vulnerable areas don't have the income to make significant upgrades to their homes. A lot more funding for retrofit subsidies would be required and then you need adequate man power to run inspections and perform upgrades.
2. California already has water problems. "Agricultural level irrigation" in every rural community simply isn't realistic.
2. Forest management could definitely be improved, but it's costly and labor intensive. Where are you going to get the labor?
The sad truth is that a lot of places in California (and the Western US in general) are becoming uninhabitable. Lots of people will need to relocate, or they'll eventually be forced to.
Re: Forest Service officials close all California national forests
#64The US National Forrest and Calfire have been on the losing side of this fire so far. All the technology that produces memes that spread across the globe in seconds and launches and lands orbital rockets flawlessly cannot stop this fire. This has been a dry summer which can be attributed to global warming. I for one am not a defeatist that will let global warming beat me. We need to think of solutions to fires like t…
> global warming Calling it that can be a trap. Stick to climate change.
It doesn't matter what you call it, people won't change their feeling about it whether you call it Global Warming or Climate Change - it's kind of like the people who said they were waiting for FDA approval before they'd take the vaccine. Now that it's been approved, many are still saying "Well, it was rushed, I still want to wait", or "it was a political approval, not based on science".
Re: Forest Service officials close all California national forests
#65Sad but probably efficient. I'm in bc where we've been devastated by forest fires, with cities burning and thousands evacuated. And yet, every other time I get out into the forest I see idiots smoking their freaking joints. The soil is half buried in super dry pine needles, but people still want their kick.
Do you think that smokin' a joint is really enough to set off something like this? Because it's clearly a combination of things that are required to create a fire of this magnitude.
Sure a joint could "start a fire" but a lot of other things could too.
Maybe we just don't like to admit it but climate change is here and it's here for real.
Re: Forest Service officials close all California national forests
#66The US National Forrest and Calfire have been on the losing side of this fire so far. All the technology that produces memes that spread across the globe in seconds and launches and lands orbital rockets flawlessly cannot stop this fire. This has been a dry summer which can be attributed to global warming. I for one am not a defeatist that will let global warming beat me. We need to think of solutions to fires like t…
We need to apply Phos-Chek from ground based units Phos Chek is not great for the environment, especially to aquatic life. So ideally there'd be some solution that doesn't use more of it. agricultural level irrigation at the ready The fires are exacerbated by California's long term drought, if there's large quanties of water laying around, then they probably wouldn't have such a bad fire season. Inhabited locations i…
1. Phos Chek is probably better than the long term effects from a wildfire. I would recommend looking more into consiquentalists ethics. 2. The mountains have excesses of water in the spring which could easily be sequestered for wildfire season. 3. I own land and live in a wildfire prone area. I will not be moving out to live in a human shit ridden city. I am prefer nature over close human habitation.
Re: Forest Service officials close all California national forests
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, we need to stick with global warming. Overwhelmingly the direction is warming.
I’ll stick with ‘impending climate disaster’ as winters are getting colder and more intense and infrastructure is more likely to fail in cold than heat.
What does impending mean to you?
Re: Forest Service officials close all California national forests
#68Was planning to hike the JMT starting tomorrow from cottonwood meadow and ending on the 22nd. Permits canceled at 6pm tonight. Anyone got recommendations for a last minute 20 day off grid vacation? Have car, supplies, ready to go.
It's a bit of a haul but you could head for CO and do part/all of the Colorado Trail (485 miles, "the most beautiful trail in the USA"). Probably too long for the 20 days.
Re: Forest Service officials close all California national forests
#69Was planning to hike the JMT starting tomorrow from cottonwood meadow and ending on the 22nd. Permits canceled at 6pm tonight. Anyone got recommendations for a last minute 20 day off grid vacation? Have car, supplies, ready to go.
Go north. Montana, Idaho, etc. Wind River range is absolutely breathtaking. Just be grizzly aware.
Glacier NPS is sweet and so is the Bob Marshall Wilderness. Both have a section of the CDT.
Re: Forest Service officials close all California national forests
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
> global warming Calling it that can be a trap. Stick to climate change.
No, we need to stick with global warming. Overwhelmingly the direction is warming.
Except that the actual global atmospheric warming is minimal, 0.14 C/decade. [0]
The actual problem is climate change in the western part of the United States, coupled with higher population density, poor forest management, and poor power line maintenance.
[0] https://www.drroyspencer.com/2021/08/uah-global-temperature-...