"I swear, I've been kinda watching this thread for eight pages now - and I still don't know if Liberty's wanting to burn down the woods or not, or why."--Ozark
Hellbender is the one that likes to see them burn completely into nothing, I want to allow loggers in to thin these overcrowded forests, Hellbender wants the forests to remain overcrowded tinderboxes that burn away in firestorms.
Hellbender lived in a damn desert when he was out here and he has no damn clue what these fires are doing in the sub-alpine and alpine forests, it ain't sagebrush and juniper trees going up, it's ponderosas, lodgepoles, firs, and whatever else happens to be in the way. And if someone wants to thin out the forest, some liberal ecoterrorist files a damn lawsuit that stops any activity. Hell they even sue to stop people from going in and removing the burned dead trees.
It's an ecological disaster that no one cares about because it is mostly on federal land, which is typical when everybody owns something nobody will take responsibility for it.
I saw paths of destruction from the valley below, all the way up a mountain, then back down the other side, then through the valleys and canyons then up the next mountain, then down the other side 700 square miles of it and it was pretty much contiguous, but we should just let nature take its course, my ass.
Previous
Index
Next
Flat
Re: Forest Fires are for Suckers?like you!
Edit
Reply
Quote
