Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Forest Service officials close all California national forests

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 236 posts

Re: Forest Service officials close all California national forests

#161

Post by OneEyedRobot »

pokstad wrote: post #62
jdavis703 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. h…

Although I'm not sure what difference it really makes vs. more heavily managing public land but our local planning commission makes it essentially impossible to remove trees.

This is in an extreme fire risk area.

Also, it's quite expense to remove general green waste. High dump fees, long distances to dump, burn piles not allowed, impossible to throw away various types of plants outside house garbage flow.

Re: Forest Service officials close all California national forests

#162

Post by guyzero »

jdavis703 wrote: post #125
rch wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not make it clear that people building structures in fire-prone areas are on their own, and should design appropriately?

Entire towns are burning down. This isn’t just people out playing settler in the forest. South Lake Tahoe (currently under an evacuation order) has hotel towers.

Yeah, suburbs of Santa Rosa burned down in the Tubbs Fire of 2017. It burned down suburban neighbourhoods. This isn't people out in the middle of nowhere.

Re: Forest Service officials close all California national forests

#163

Post by downWidOutaFite »

gorwell wrote: post #111

Can anyone explain this? "So early on, Newsom identified some key wildfire prevention projects, and that includes things like forest thinning and prescribed burns, and they were meant to protect some of the most vulnerable communities in California. And he claimed 90,000 acres were treated, but we found that's not true. The state's own data shows that, in reality, it was less than 12,000 acres, so just a fraction of…

According to this, the Cal Fire Chief blames it on the pandemic and the early fire seasons the last couple of years

https://www.capradio.org/articles/2021/06/23/newsom-misled-t...

Re: Forest Service officials close all California national forests

#164

Post by MichaelApproved »

olivermarks wrote: post #145
MichaelApproved wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That video is produced by the Epoch Times. From wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Epoch_Times > The Epoch Times is a far-right international multi-language newspaper and media company affiliated with the Falun Gong new religious movement. > The Epoch Media Group's news sites and YouTube channels have spread conspiracy theories such as QAnon and anti-vaccine misinformation. In 2020, The New York Times called it…

So what? The person who is being interviewed is a California forestry expert with years of experience. https://www.nationalforests.org/who-we-are The NYT is owned by the Sulzberger family, Time magazine is owned by Marc Benioff, the Washington Post by Bezos. If you dislike any of those people (some of whom are very closely affiliated with the DNC) does that make you refuse to look at anything they produce?! There is…

If a media company promotes anti-vaccine and QAnon conspiracies, as the Epoch Times does, I will refuse to look at anything they produce.

Those are my basic standards for how trustworthy a media company is.

You’re free to choose your own.

Re: Forest Service officials close all California national forests

#165

Post by Johnny555 »

guyzero wrote: post #160
guyzero wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure there's an appropriate design for something to survive a major forest fire.

Although that said, this article goes into how they defended the Sierra-at-Tahoe resort buildings: https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Sierra-at-Tahoe-... Spoiler: it turns out that if you have a multi-million dollar insurance policy, the insurance company sends over guys to spray everything with fire retardant gel.

Plus, not everyone has a bunch of snowmaking machines laying around that they can use to blow water on their structures.

Re: Forest Service officials close all California national forests

#166

Post by olivermarks »

olivermarks wrote: post #128
mistrial9 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"we also found that the state's fire prevention work overall dropped by half last year" that is utterly not true by any stretch of the words .. it is literally political theater hit piece. see for yourselves... https://www.gov.ca.gov/2021/04/13/governor-newsom-signs-land... https://fmtf.fire.ca.gov/press-publications/ the claim is that a particular State of Calif, Dept of Forestry perhaps, program was supposed to thi…

It's sadly very accurate and apologies were made. https://www.capradio.org/articles/2021/06/23/newsom-misled-t...

Very under reported, here's the latest https://www.capradio.org/articles/2021/08/24/as-lawmakers-in...

Re: Forest Service officials close all California national forests

#168

Post by bronson »

fasteddie31003 wrote: post #83
Johnny555 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're more of a "Let's sacrifice the fish before I'll sacrifice my lifestyle" person?

Yes, I would sacrifice the Sacramento River Smelt for more water for agriculture and humans. Again, I'm more of a consequentialist. I'm for forest management, which means cutting down some trees. Many modern environmentalist deontologists will call me a racist for suggesting we need to cut down some trees for the greater good.

Your last sentence appears incoherent. Got links?

Are you willing to move out of fire country for the greater good?

Re: Forest Service officials close all California national forests

#170

Post by olivermarks »

MichaelApproved wrote: post #164
olivermarks wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what? The person who is being interviewed is a California forestry expert with years of experience. https://www.nationalforests.org/who-we-are The NYT is owned by the Sulzberger family, Time magazine is owned by Marc Benioff, the Washington Post by Bezos. If you dislike any of those people (some of whom are very closely affiliated with the DNC) does that make you refuse to look at anything they produce?! There is…

If a media company promotes anti-vaccine and QAnon conspiracies, as the Epoch Times does, I will refuse to look at anything they produce. Those are my basic standards for how trustworthy a media company is. You’re free to choose your own.

I happen to know fire personnel in California and also people working as docents in redwood forests. If you choose to have your information laundered through your preferred political channels good luck with that. I think most of us can read or watch perspectives on RT, the BBC etc and know what their perspective is likely to be without being seduced or tainted by it. That video is very close to what I've been hearing from real people on the ground. I urge you to watch it.
Post reply on HN