Not clouds

[Mad Machinist]

There's blame on both sides. If the eco freaks weren't on a mission to have everything declared wilderness and thus being hands off to everything, we wouldn't have the situations. The Camp Fire was a perfect storm of events caused by the build up of fuel loads from a lack of logging and thinning.

Kinda same thing happened here in 2012 during the Wallkw fire. It was started in the Bear Wallow Wilderness area by two hikers. They wouldn't let the firefighters in there with chainsaws because it was a wilderness area. The result instead of a few hundred acres was 546,000 acres burnt.

76 it of 145 known nesting sites for the Mexican Spotted owl destroyed. Chirachau leppard frogs and their habitat destroyed. Loach and spikedace minnow habitat destroyed. All endangered species and I wont even get into the endangered plants.

These eco freaks need taken to Gitmo and crucified.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[deducer]

There's blame on both sides. If the eco freaks weren't on a mission to have everything declared wilderness and thus being hands off to everything, we wouldn't have the situations. The Camp Fire was a perfect storm of events caused by the build up of fuel loads from a lack of logging and thinning.

76 it of 145 known nesting sites for the Mexican Spotted owl destroyed. Chirachau leppard frogs and their habitat destroyed. Loach and spikedace minnow habitat destroyed. All endangered species and I wont even get into the endangered plants.

These eco freaks need taken to Gitmo and crucified.

This isn't the first forest fire and it won't be the last.

Those complaining about lack of grazing or thinning to keep growth in check, apparently didn't think about the fact that the Superstitions somehow survived for millions of years before cattle was introduced.

In the past, animals could just escape the mountains whenever there was a fire. Now, they can't because the base of the these mountains are densely populated, and there are many fences and walls, and on the north there's a giant man-made river that no animal can swim across. So they're effectively trapped in the mountains.

A devastating number of nesting sites have been destroyed because these owls have been forced into a confined wilderness, along with the frogs and minnows, instead of all over the TNF, because of human intrusion.

Sorta reminds me of the game they're playing in Africa with the preserves where they cut the national parks in half, and then go "oh there's too many antelopes.. we gotta cull" which leads to cutting down the herd, then they say "Oh mebbe they don't need that much space, let's shrink that there park just a wee bit. They'll be fine."

Kinda same thing happened here in 2012 during the Wallkw fire. It was started in the Bear Wallow Wilderness area by two hikers. They wouldn't let the firefighters in there with chainsaws because it was a wilderness area. The result instead of a few hundred acres was 546,000 acres burnt.

This is completely false. The fire which started in 2011 didn't start there, and while it reached crown fire intensity when it went through the "protected" areas, it was well out of control by then, to the point that cutting down trees became useless. I don't know why you have such hatred for what you term "eco freak" but it's uncalled for.

 

[azdave35]

This isn't the first forest fire and it won't be the last.

Those complaining about lack of grazing or thinning to keep growth in check, apparently didn't think about the fact that the Superstitions somehow survived for millions of years before cattle was introduced.

In the past, animals could just escape the mountains whenever there was a fire. Now, they can't because the base of the these mountains are densely populated, and there are many fences and walls, and on the north there's a giant man-made river that no animal can swim across. So they're effectively trapped in the mountains.

A devastating number of nesting sites have been destroyed because these owls have been forced into a confined wilderness, along with the frogs and minnows, instead of all over the TNF, because of human intrusion.

Sorta reminds me of the game they're playing in Africa with the preserves where they cut the national parks in half, and then go "oh there's too many antelopes.. we gotta cull" which leads to cutting down the herd, then they say "Oh mebbe they don't need that much space, let's shrink that there park just a wee bit. They'll be fine."




This is completely false. The fire which started in 2011 didn't start there, and while it reached crown fire intensity when it went through the "protected" areas, it was well out of control by then, to the point that cutting down trees became useless. I don't know why you have such hatred for what you term "eco freak" but it's uncalled for.

you might check facts before you spout off...i have friends that live there and the rotten power lines were a ticking time bomb..also if you think we (humans) are the cause of all fires and evil in the wilderness then maybe you should do your part and stay out of the hills just sayin

 

[Oroblanco]

This isn't the first forest fire and it won't be the last.

Those complaining about lack of grazing or thinning to keep growth in check, apparently didn't think about the fact that the Superstitions somehow survived for millions of years before cattle was introduced.

In the past, animals could just escape the mountains whenever there was a fire. Now, they can't because the base of the these mountains are densely populated, and there are many fences and walls, and on the north there's a giant man-made river that no animal can swim across. So they're effectively trapped in the mountains.

A devastating number of nesting sites have been destroyed because these owls have been forced into a confined wilderness, along with the frogs and minnows, instead of all over the TNF, because of human intrusion.

Sorta reminds me of the game they're playing in Africa with the preserves where they cut the national parks in half, and then go "oh there's too many antelopes.. we gotta cull" which leads to cutting down the herd, then they say "Oh mebbe they don't need that much space, let's shrink that there park just a wee bit. They'll be fine."




This is completely false. The fire which started in 2011 didn't start there, and while it reached crown fire intensity when it went through the "protected" areas, it was well out of control by then, to the point that cutting down trees became useless. I don't know why you have such hatred for what you term "eco freak" but it's uncalled for.

It is true that the Superstitions existed for millions of years - but without humans as any part of the equation. The "wilderness" we have today was basically rough cow pasture until the creation of this man-made "wilderness" and drove the cattle ranchers out. Before the arrival of the Europeans, the Hohokam were using the area too. It is not a true wilderness untouched by man. Most of the old-timers said the area had changed radically over the past two centuries, greatly increased the amount of mesquite for one and changed the flora balance dramatically. It is a fact that areas that have livestock grazing have far less wildfires, due to the removal of the burnable materials by the livestock.

Just look at the statistics for the number of wildfires affecting the region, before the declaration of "wilderness area" and after.

 

[azdave35]

It is true that the Superstitions existed for millions of years - but without humans as any part of the equation. The "wilderness" we have today was basically rough cow pasture until the creation of this man-made "wilderness" and drove the cattle ranchers out. Before the arrival of the Europeans, the Hohokam were using the area too. It is not a true wilderness untouched by man. Most of the old-timers said the area had changed radically over the past two centuries, greatly increased the amount of mesquite for one and changed the flora balance dramatically. It is a fact that areas that have livestock grazing have far less wildfires, due to the removal of the burnable materials by the livestock.

Just look at the statistics for the number of wildfires affecting the region, before the declaration of "wilderness area" and after.

exactly...most of these eco types dont realize that the earth is constantly changing...as far as the wilderness goes...they big shots that run the world didn't create wilderness area's to save anything...they could care less about the wildlife or plant life...or us for that matter

 

[Mad Machinist]

This isn't the first forest fire and it won't be the last.

Those complaining about lack of grazing or thinning to keep growth in check, apparently didn't think about the fact that the Superstitions somehow survived for millions of years before cattle was introduced.

In the past, animals could just escape the mountains whenever there was a fire. Now, they can't because the base of the these mountains are densely populated, and there are many fences and walls, and on the north there's a giant man-made river that no animal can swim across. So they're effectively trapped in the mountains.

A devastating number of nesting sites have been destroyed because these owls have been forced into a confined wilderness, along with the frogs and minnows, instead of all over the TNF, because of human intrusion.

Sorta reminds me of the game they're playing in Africa with the preserves where they cut the national parks in half, and then go "oh there's too many antelopes.. we gotta cull" which leads to cutting down the herd, then they say "Oh mebbe they don't need that much space, let's shrink that there park just a wee bit. They'll be fine."




This is completely false. The fire which started in 2011 didn't start there, and while it reached crown fire intensity when it went through the "protected" areas, it was well out of control by then, to the point that cutting down trees became useless. I don't know why you have such hatred for what you term "eco freak" but it's uncalled for.

First of all you should know I have a Master's Degree in Environmental Science and a Minor in Forest Management.

When you have 700-1000 trees to an acre where only 70-100 can be supported you have a SERIOUS problem. Whether it is resource competition or disease, you set up a situation where bad things are going to happen. The bark beetle epidemic isn't from climate change. It is from the forests being overstocked and being weakened from resource competition. Same goes for forest fires. They ARE NOT getting worse because of climate change. They are getting worse from overstocked trees creating ladder fuels.

An overstocked forest uses more water leaving less for other species line the loach minnow and others that depend on an aquatic environment. And this snowballs on down the line.

The reason I have such an intense dislike for eco freaks is the fact that they have to lie, misrepresent the truth, and have to tug on people's heart strings to advance their agenda. If they told people the truth, people would tell them to take a flying leap of the South Rim of the Grand Canyon.

 

[azdave35]

First of all you should know I have a Master's Degree in Environmental Science and a Minor in Forest Management.

When you have 700-1000 trees to an acre where only 70-100 can be supported you have a SERIOUS problem. Whether it is resource competition or disease, you set up a situation where bad things are going to happen. The bark beetle epidemic isn't from climate change. It is from the forests being overstocked and being weakened from resource competition. Same goes for forest fires. They ARE NOT getting worse because of climate change. They are getting worse from overstocked trees creating ladder fuels.

An overstocked forest uses more water leaving less for other species line the loach minnow and others that depend on an aquatic environment. And this snowballs on down the line.

The reason I have such an intense dislike for eco freaks is the fact that they have to lie, misrepresent the truth, and have to tu

g on people's heart strings to advance their agenda. If they told people the truth, people would tell them to take a flying leap of the South Rim of the Grand Canyon.

well said...its nice to see someone here that has a background like yours..carry on

 

[deducer]

you might check facts before you spout off...i have friends that live there and the rotten power lines were a ticking time bomb..also if you think we (humans) are the cause of all fires and evil in the wilderness then maybe you should do your part and stay out of the hills just sayin

Read again carefully. I didn't say that humans are the cause of forest fires, or are evil. As I said, forest fires have existed forever, and will continue to occur.

What's been the big gamechanger in the last 100 years is how human beings have changed the equilibrium of how everything on Earth, co-exist. They've taken far more than their share of natural resources, and left very little for the rest of the ecosystem to survive on. So now, as opposed to 100 years ago, forest fires are much more devastating to the ecosystem.

 

[azdave35]

Read again carefully. I didn't say that humans are the cause of forest fires, or are evil. As I said, forest fires have existed forever, and will continue to occur.

What's been the big gamechanger in the last 100 years is how human beings have changed the equilibrium of how everything on Earth, co-exist. They've taken far more than their share of natural resources, and left very little for the rest of the ecosystem to survive on. So now, as opposed to 100 years ago, forest fires are much more devastating to the ecosystem.

you must also have a Master's Degree in Environmental Science and a Minor in Forest Management...i didn't know you were such a highly educated man

 

[deducer]

First of all you should know I have a Master's Degree in Environmental Science and a Minor in Forest Management.

When you have 700-1000 trees to an acre where only 70-100 can be supported you have a SERIOUS problem. Whether it is resource competition or disease, you set up a situation where bad things are going to happen. The bark beetle epidemic isn't from climate change. It is from the forests being overstocked and being weakened from resource competition. Same goes for forest fires. They ARE NOT getting worse because of climate change. They are getting worse from overstocked trees creating ladder fuels.

An overstocked forest uses more water leaving less for other species line the loach minnow and others that depend on an aquatic environment. And this snowballs on down the line.

The reason I have such an intense dislike for eco freaks is the fact that they have to lie, misrepresent the truth, and have to tug on people's heart strings to advance their agenda. If they told people the truth, people would tell them to take a flying leap of the South Rim of the Grand Canyon.

Well, how do you go out and tell nature to stop growing 700-1000 trees an acre? Nature has been doing that for millions of years- if it was truly and inherently a problem, nature would have evolved away from that.

This is exactly what I'm talking about when I talk about the self-justifying downsizing going on in African game reserves.

And yes, climate change is causing more and more forest fires because there's much less rainfall/snowfall except for brief torrential periods. A lot more drought. For example, the Colorado river has shrunk for 14 straight years. That's completely unheard of.

 

[azdave35]

Well, how do you go out and tell nature to stop growing 700-1000 trees an acre? Nature has been doing that for millions of years- if it was truly and inherently a problem, nature would have evolved away from that.

This is exactly what I'm talking about when I talk about the self-justifying downsizing going on in African game reserves.

And yes, climate change is causing more and more forest fires because there's much less rainfall/snowfall except for brief torrential periods. A lot more drought. For example, the Colorado river has shrunk for 14 straight years. That's completely unheard of.

deducer..it may be unheard of for the last 100 years (and i haven't fact checked that just taking your word) but how about the last few million years when no records were kept...the only info you have about the environment is what you read on the internet and we all know that's all true

 

[deducer]

deducer..it may be unheard of for the last 100 years (and i haven't fact checked that just taking your word) but how about the last few million years when no records were kept...the only info you have about the environment is what you read on the internet and we all know that's all true

Colorado River Drought Forces a Painful Reckoning for States

And yes, scientists are able to compare today's climate to that from millions of years ago by drilling down through deep ice in Antarctica. You probably don't want to know what kind of conclusions they came to.

 

[azdave35]

Colorado River Drought Forces a Painful Reckoning for States

And yes, scientists are able to compare today's climate to that from millions of years ago by drilling down through deep ice in Antarctica. You probably don't want to know what kind of conclusions they came to.

sorry but i dont believe in most of these government paid studies ..most of them are scams to get free grants from the govt....if you knew how easy it was to get a govt. grant for research you would probably get a few for yourself...these so called researchers get millions in tax free money and steal most of it

 

[deducer]

sorry but i dont believe in most of these government paid studies ..most of them are scams to get free grants from the govt....if you knew how easy it was to get a govt. grant for research you would probably get a few for yourself...these so called researchers get millions in tax free money and steal most of it

Except Antarctica doesn't belong to America, or to any country. The scientists that gather there come from major countries from all over the world. For them all to agree that the events of the last 100 years is very unusual in Earth's history, would require a massively coordinated conspiracy beyond belief.

We are talking about hundreds of thousands of scientists who agree that humans have changed the planet for the worse.

Scientists from every country that you can think of.

 

[azdave35]

Except Antarctica doesn't belong to America, or to any country. The scientists that gather there come from major countries from all over the world. For them all to agree that the events of the last 100 years is very unusual in Earth's history, would require a massively coordinated conspiracy beyond belief.

We are talking about hundreds of thousands of scientists who agree that humans have changed the planet for the worse.

Scientists from every country that you can think of.

funny i never heard of these scientists ....names please?..also the organizations they belong to

 

[deducer]

funny i never heard of these scientists ....names please?..also the organizations they belong to

Statements by scientific organizations of national or international standing

 

[PotBelly Jim]

Science for the sake of science is one thing...but when our scientific models predict one outcome of change, and then that change doesn't occur, and something totally unexpected and unpredicted happens, the only conclusion that makes sense from a scientific perspective is to acknowledge we've got the math wrong and there's something going on we don't understand. As far as I'm concerned, this whole climate change thing is too highly politicized to believe one side or the other. Dedcuer, I just checked the USGS site on the Colorado River, their data seems to contradict the NY Times article. Just sayin.

 

[deducer]

Science for the sake of science is one thing...but when our scientific models predict one outcome of change, and then that change doesn't occur, and something totally unexpected and unpredicted happens, the only conclusion that makes sense from a scientific perspective is to acknowledge we've got the math wrong and there's something going on we don't understand. As far as I'm concerned, this whole climate change thing is too highly politicized to believe one side or the other. Dedcuer, I just checked the USGS site on the Colorado River, their data seems to contradict the NY Times article. Just sayin.

What data are you looking at?

 

[PotBelly Jim]

https://www.usbr.gov/lc/riverops.html

A NY Times article (or any article from any outlet) should not be taken as a scientific study until all the applicable data is considered. These stories are, unfortunately, cherry-picked to support the author's agenda. Unfortunately this is happening in our scientific community as well, just look at the peer-review process and how peer review, if it even happens, is also cherry picked.

While our short term climate is changing, and our geophysical math models predict a hell-like outcome, this is not happening as predicted...if anything, I would say our droughts in the SW are something that happens all the time over eons, what is making it worse is huge human populations and water demand...Mad Machinist makes a good point about vegetation management, and there is too much vegetation whether it's natural or farmed. The water table is going away, fast.

 

[deducer]

https://www.usbr.gov/lc/riverops.html

A NY Times article (or any article from any outlet) should not be taken as a scientific study until all the applicable data is considered. These stories are, unfortunately, cherry-picked to support the author's agenda. Unfortunately this is happening in our scientific community as well, just look at the peer-review process and how peer review, if it even happens, is also cherry picked.

While our short term climate is changing, and our geophysical math models predict a hell-like outcome, this is not happening as predicted...if anything, I would say our droughts in the SW are something that happens all the time over eons, what is making it worse is huge human populations and water demand...Mad Machinist makes a good point about vegetation management, and there is too much vegetation whether it's natural or farmed. The water table is going away, fast.

I'm not sure how the data you're looking at states anything else than that the Colorado River is producing less and less water every year.

Climate change does play a big role because the water that supplies the Colorado River comes from the snowcaps of the Rocky Mountains which are growing thinner every year.

This forced seven states to sign the Drought Contingency Plan:

Drought Contingency Plan