Who's fault?

[Abe]

Perhaps I have missed it on this site because I have not seen any mention on this subject, but what is everybody's view on what Arizona's Senator Kyl's comment on the fires in the west being the environmentalist fault. This in part because the lumber companies could not go in and harvest the crop, thus creating an overgrown forest. Is this a sign of things to come from our government?

[azhiker96]

I missed Senator Kyle's comments. I really don't have enough first hand knowledge of the interactions of the conservationists, BLM, Nat'l Forest service, etc. to figure out who's at fault. I do get tired of all the people waiting in the wings to find fault and point fingers when something bad happens. Lots of people and organizations are great when it comes to fault finding but rather lacking when it comes to taking positive actions. In fact, I would propose that, from an environmental point of view, the fire was not a bad thing. I bet there were forest fires way back when we were still crouching under bushes and tossing rocks at our dinner. The earth seems to have recovered from those.

[MaryPhyl]

How does one find the $$ to do what needs to be done in the forest without a profit. We can regulate the loggers anyway we want--it is our woods-- but to run all of them out of business which is what has happened seems self defeating to me. It seems a silly sin to me not to harvest some
of the trees. Buying all of our lumber from Canada can't be the solution. Our houses have to come from somewhere.....

[bbmcritt]

I think the issue is preservation vs. conservation.Here's a link to Senator Kyl's comments:

http://kyl.senate.gov/#statmnt

"Environmentally-sound strategies such as forest thinning and controlled burns clear away small, dry, and disease-prone trees and underbrush that serve as kindling for fires and prevent healthy growth. Arizonans can see the results of such proper forest-management techniques firsthand. The White Mountain Fort Apache Indian Reservation, Mount Trumbell, and other places in our state prove that properly-thinned forests are not only healthier and fire-resistant, but much more attractive.

"Yet standing in the way of these efforts are radical environmentalists who file litigation and seek to otherwise obstruct forest treatment. They would rather the forests burn than to see sensible forest management. As of last month, there were 5,000 legal challenges pending against the U.S. Forest Service, which devotes nearly 40 percent of its resources to defending against lawsuits and complying with environmental regulations. This is time and money taken away from fighting fires.


Regards,

Bill

[azhiker96]

Thanks for posting the link Bill. Hopefully we can move forward to better manage our forests.

[Abe]

Thanks for the comments and Kyl's statement. I brought this up because everybody does appear to be pointing fingers. As a matter of fact, one of my fellow co-worker even went so far as to blame the enviornmentalist for starting the fire! I found it amusing.

[Pellegrino]

I'm curious. What's the environmentalists take again? They don't want to touch the forest because of the squirrels/owls'??? Is that what all their lawsuits are about???

Sorry so uninformed, but would like to be informed.

[azhiker96]

I checked out the Sierra club website. It says they support prescribed burning but oppose logging. It doesn't say what materials they support for building homes, furniture, etc.

[AZHiker]

It seems to me that the environmentalist are scurrying for cover, and are now qualifying their positions after public opionion seems to have shifted against them. Their spin now is that they favored thining all along. Thining, but no logging. Who is going to do it when they and their liberal activist judges have run the logging companies out of business? Oh Paleeeze!

[Snick33]

I know that the company that is foresting at 87 and 260, is responsible for cutting down a certain number of dead trees desiginated by the rangers. They are also responsible for putting limbs and fallen debris in brush piles as they log.

I've heard what the Forest Department wants and the Wacko Enviromentlalist are opposed to, is to make the price of harvesting the trees the clean up of the forest.

Moving forward: Back in Michigan, where I grew up, there was an old chimney from a saw mill. It stood some 120' and was beautiful. It was the areas landmark for 100 years. The Sierra Club successfully sued to have it torn down because it distracted from the natural beauty of the forest. I don't think everthing man made is ugly. I don't object to the number of forest roads we have currently, and I don't have a problem with a few more in order to cut timber. They make dandy hiking trails.