- Messages
- 5,069
- Reactions
- 11,352
Make a five-year plan.
In general it would be thusly:
For five years, crews would actively scour all of the dead fall, under brush, and trash from the forests. Utilize prison labor like they did in the 70s and into the 80's for both clean up, and fire-fighting as necessary. They would also be cutting fire-breaks near developments and the borders of private lands to minimize the spread of wild fires.
After a given section of forest was cleared, that area would be designated a "natural burn zone" and allowed to burn itself out, which would become the standard practice moving forward. Fire-fighting resources would only be used to stop wild fires near developments (state parks for example) or cities.
Make land owners responsible for managing their land, but require fire-breaks for all properties over 5 acres, and underbrush clearing within 500 feet of any property boundary to curb the chance of a fire that breaks out on the private property jumping to public lands or adjoining private properties. Give property tax break for those rural land owners that install hydrants throughout their properties that can be used by fire fighters or the property owner themselves in the event of a wildfire - this would be extremely useful in cases where tankers run dry and would have to travel to god-knows-where for refilling, versus utilizing water already there.
At some point you need to let nature do nature's thing - but because of mismanagement of natural resources, those fires have gotten worse and worse. The wackaloons blame "climate change" when in fact it has been poor resource management - not carbon emissions that has lead to these disastrous fires. Once the forests are cleared of all the excess brush and deadfall , they'll return to a more balanced, natural state soon enough, and the fires won't be nearly as devastating.
In general it would be thusly:
For five years, crews would actively scour all of the dead fall, under brush, and trash from the forests. Utilize prison labor like they did in the 70s and into the 80's for both clean up, and fire-fighting as necessary. They would also be cutting fire-breaks near developments and the borders of private lands to minimize the spread of wild fires.
After a given section of forest was cleared, that area would be designated a "natural burn zone" and allowed to burn itself out, which would become the standard practice moving forward. Fire-fighting resources would only be used to stop wild fires near developments (state parks for example) or cities.
Make land owners responsible for managing their land, but require fire-breaks for all properties over 5 acres, and underbrush clearing within 500 feet of any property boundary to curb the chance of a fire that breaks out on the private property jumping to public lands or adjoining private properties. Give property tax break for those rural land owners that install hydrants throughout their properties that can be used by fire fighters or the property owner themselves in the event of a wildfire - this would be extremely useful in cases where tankers run dry and would have to travel to god-knows-where for refilling, versus utilizing water already there.
At some point you need to let nature do nature's thing - but because of mismanagement of natural resources, those fires have gotten worse and worse. The wackaloons blame "climate change" when in fact it has been poor resource management - not carbon emissions that has lead to these disastrous fires. Once the forests are cleared of all the excess brush and deadfall , they'll return to a more balanced, natural state soon enough, and the fires won't be nearly as devastating.
