Give me a good'ol fashion Earthquake.

Furthermore, the bill does virtually nothing to protect homes and communities from wildfire. Rather than provide any new funding authorization or mechanisms for fuels reduction on public or private lands, the bill relies on scaling back environmental safeguards to reduce fire risk.
Click to expand...

I see. Using the trendy tactic of giving crap a feel-good name.
 
spike said:
I see. Using the trendy tactic of giving crap a feel-good name.
Click to expand...
Hold on. Thats just ones opinion of what the thing does and how its going to be used. The author of that quote seems to have a high environmental emotional attachment to keeping things exactly the way they are.

I just read 23 of the 50 pages of the act, and it did little more than fasttrack the kinds of things they do already. It actually made sense in terms of beetle infestations wiping out whole tracks of forest and seemed to make protecting the watershed a priority. In the past it took half a season to get permission to act on such a thing. Now it seems that the agencies can target danger zones more quickly and have it acted upon in a mere two weeks. The trouble is that it gives the agencies broad powers of emergency discretion and protection from legal challenges... which I'm sure aggrivates private landholders as well as various wildlife societies. They are just putting forth a position that the government is instantly going to use such powers to steamroll their own agendas and make money off of it somehow.
 
spike said:
I see. Using the trendy tactic of giving crap a feel-good name.
Click to expand...


City boy eh? . . . I think I'll call you "Flower"

We keep 1/3+ of our property clean, the McNalley Fire was a close call for us.

We have 2 properties that were at risk, one by a matter of yards.

2965.jpg





You have no idea how much damage it did.
 
unclehobart said:
It actually made sense in terms of beetle infestations wiping out whole tracks of forest and seemed to make protecting the watershed a priority. In the past it took half a season to get permission to act on such a thing. Now it seems that the agencies can target danger zones more quickly and have it acted upon in a mere two weeks. The trouble is that it gives the agencies broad powers of emergency discretion and protection from legal challenges... which I'm sure agrivates private landholders as various wildlife societies. They are just putting forth a position that the government is instantly going to use such powers to steamroll their own agendas and make money off of it somehow.
Click to expand...

The folks I talk with that live in the mountains, and I know a few , have no problems with what the USFS does, in fact I'd say most have alott'a for respect them and appreciate all the things they do. They're plenty busy in the early season with prevention, clearing, trail building, they do the job because they love the mountains. Yeah, yeah, yeah, corruption at the top (specially if its bush yadda yadda).


Forest sevice folks are damn good folks, the ones in the field anyway. I've met many over the years, we have official contact several times a year for controlled burns, and often enough 'just around'. The loggers come in and clean up after the fires anyway.

And it might be noteworthy that: NONE of the current fires have any marketable trees in them.




  1. Two of my daughters (and the Dog) playing on the site of the McNalley. You can see the post-fire cut logs in the background.
  2. Less than 2-miles from the fire zone, plenty-O-trees..
  3. Same type of view, 'cept its all burned-oft'd, you can see many trails made during the fire-fight.
 
spike said:
What does the tactic of giving crap a feel-good name have to do with the city?

I think I'll call you Candypants McHamdwarf.




I have no idea if you're going somewhere with this eventually.
Click to expand...


. . . which is why your not worth the time, . . . how do I say this nicely . . . .


You're not a sensable person, deranged and find pleasure in making little if any sense, running and twisting from real people, trollish in nature.

I guess I'll just have to quit actually trying to make any points with you, just beat up on you, as your life, no doubt, has been governed. :D
 
ResearchMonkey said:
You're not a sensable person, deranged and find pleasure in making little if any sense, running and twisting from real people, trollish in nature.
Click to expand...

Damn, that's exactly what I think of you. You call yourself a real person? That's a hoot.

You can't answer straight questions. WHen asked what your point is you refuse to answer.

Yopu like to use a lot of smilies I guess tho'.

I guess I'll just have to quit actually trying to make any points with you
Click to expand...

Problem is you never make any points and run away from straight questions and talk like someone who's brain has been addled and pickled by some sort of chemicals. If I'm not making any sense it's because I'm mocking your nonsense.

Example:

1. I see. Using the trendy tactic of giving crap a feel-good name.

2. City boy eh?

What kinda sense does that make? Which is why I asked "What does the tactic of giving crap a feel-good name have to do with the city?".

Did you answer? No, you just move on to some other nonsense. Rinse and repeat.

If you expect anyone to take you seriously you have to eventually make a point of some sort. Until that happens you're just acting like Winky.
 
spike said:
Damn, that's exactly what I think of you.
Click to expand...

. . . Well honestly, thats NOT what I think of you, but I'm being civil.

spike said:
You can't answer straight questions. WHen asked what your point is you refuse to answer.
Click to expand...

. . . Maybe you're not quite bright enough, most people do.



Problem is you never make any points and run away from straight questions and talk like someone who's brain has been addled and pickled by some sort of chemicals. If I'm not making any sense it's because I'm mocking your nonsense.
Click to expand...

Actually its because you're truly someone not that does not deserve it, has not shown that you earned it.. I work with insane people, they use tactics much like yours.

And as for my having a history of drugs, go fuck yourself, you're an idiot.

Example:

1. I see. Using the trendy tactic of giving crap a feel-good name.

2. City boy eh?

What kinda sense does that make? Which is why I asked "What does the tactic of giving crap a feel-good name have to do with the city?".
Click to expand...

Again, you just don't track well, OR quote context.

Did you answer? No, you just move on to some other nonsense. Rinse and repeat.

If you expect anyone to take you seriously you have to eventually make a point of some sort. Until that happens you're just acting like Winky.
Click to expand...

I didn't plan on answering you, it would be a waste of my time and playing into your "tactics"

I love winkelstien. I tolerate you.
 
spike said:
You can't answer straight questions. WHen asked what your point is you refuse to answer.
Click to expand...

. . . Maybe your not quite bright enough, most people do.
Click to expand...

Yet another example. Most people DO what? Answer or refuse to answer?

Again your reply makes no sense in context with what you're replying to.


Actually its because you're truly someone not that does not deserve it, has not shown that you earned it.. I work with insane people, they use tactics much like yours.
Click to expand...

Oh it's my fault you don't make any points or sense and run away from straight questions and rant about nonsense. :rofl4:


Again, you just don't track well, OR quote context.
Click to expand...

I quoted the context you replied to. It's your fault if it doesn't make any sense. Go ahead and add any other context that would actually make it sensible. I dare ya.

I didn't plan on answering you, it would be a waste of my time and playing into your "tactics"
Click to expand...

Don't like my crazy "tactics" where I point out your nonsense. Tough.
 
spike said:
Yet another example. Most people DO what? Answer or refuse to answer?

Again your reply makes no sense in context with what you're replying to.

Oh it's my fault you don't make any points or sense and run away from straight questions and rant about nonsense. :rofl4:

I quoted the context you replied to. It's your fault if it doesn't make any sense. Go ahead and add any other context that would actually make it sensible. I dare ya.

Don't like my crazy "tactics" where I point out your nonsense. Tough.
Click to expand...




Well, since its dare . . .






. . . Anyway, there all these fires in California, over one-million people have been evacuated. Wyoming is sending three fire-fighting air-tankers. Three other states are sending assets and men as well.

siren.gif

1,300 structures burned.

People running naked in the streets.
 
“One reason why we have the fires in California is global warming,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told reporters Tuesday, stressing the need to pass the Democrats’ comprehensive energy package.

Moments later, when asked by a reporter if he really believed global warming caused the fires, he appeared to back away from his comments, saying there are many factors that contributed to the disaster.

Source
Click to expand...

Yeah Harry, thats it. Santa Ana winds/fuel not being cleared = global warming. :laugh:
 
ResearchMonkey said:
Can you say Liberal litigations? :hippy:

Over 1,200 homes WOOF! up in flames.:hippy:. . . but the Kangaroo rat is safe. :hippy:
Click to expand...

As a native of the southwest who watched the influx of people from everywhere else, the one lesson that was lost over time and has been taught but ignored is...

CLEAR THE LAND AROUND YOUR HOME!!!! If you live in an area that is prone to fire & you don't create space, it's your fault. Much like living on a SoCal hill right over the ocean or living on the Outer Banks. You are the master of your fate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top