Mt Whitney Webcam
Mt Williamson Webcam
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 155 guests, and 16 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
National Forest Management Plan - Settlement Agreement
#40746 10/24/14 07:23 AM
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
OP Offline
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/ltbmu/news-events/?cid=STELPRD3820877

Some interesting outcomes of this legal milestone. Based only on the NFS PR and other media summaries, they report a general trend toward more forest protection of old growth, threatened or endangered species, and less logging. Environmental groups acknowledge the benefits of controlled burning. Planning is supposed to be based on the best available science. Here we go, open season on the scientists, just like climate change. (Don't go there, people)

Now if they can allow some temporary roads necessary to clear out the down wood stacking up, and start investing in controlled burns, maybe they can make faster progress on that front. Its a potential super-disaster waiting to happen in many large swaths of forest.

Re: National Forest Management Plan - Settlement Agreement
SierraNevada #40775 10/25/14 08:01 PM
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,572
Offline
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,572
I am especially heartened by the more enlightened view toward the role of fire. I used to wonder how these delicate forests managed to survive for thousands of years before European settlement. We must have arrived just in time to start suppressing all these forest fires . . .


Wherever you go, there you are.
SPOTMe!
Re: National Forest Management Plan - Settlement Agreement
SierraNevada #40778 10/26/14 10:31 AM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,253
W
Offline
W
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,253
If you do not want a response on climate science, it is does not make sense to make a comment like this. It basically says go ahead make my day, comment.


Last edited by wbtravis; 10/26/14 10:32 AM.
Re: National Forest Management Plan - Settlement Agreement
wbtravis #40785 10/26/14 02:14 PM
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
OP Offline
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
Relax, WB, my statement is just a simple acknowledgment that scientists are in the cross hairs again on forest management. It happens whenever politics or religion is involved. Climate change is not the first time, nor will it be the last science topic to get this treatment.

Re: National Forest Management Plan - Settlement Agreement
SierraNevada #40796 10/27/14 08:37 AM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,253
W
Offline
W
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,253
Just emphasizing...we don't need any more left/right political stuff here. Most of come here for mountain stuff, which can get controversial but not politics.

That why I believe not mentioning it at all is a better course.

Re: National Forest Management Plan - Settlement Agreement
wbtravis #40802 10/27/14 12:14 PM
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
OP Offline
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
You're probably right. I didn't think it was that hard to distinguish between science under attack in general, which has happened throughout human history, versus a specific topic where science is under attack. Just goes to show how touchy that topic is. Other cutting edge science topics don't seem to generate such controversy. You see reasonable debate going on about without screaming about how wrong scientists are about nanotechnology, astrophysics, quantum physics, biotechnology, etc. Maybe missile defense or genetic scientists gets similar treatment, but its pretty rare to see so much doubt about so much science on one sensitive topic, whatever topic that may be. Its as if some organized industry was orchestrating it or something.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see how the "best available" forest science influences Forest Service planning efforts in the future, and how much doubt develops about that science.

Re: National Forest Management Plan - Settlement Agreement
SierraNevada #40803 10/27/14 01:17 PM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,505
Likes: 103
S
Offline
S
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 8,505
Likes: 103
SN wrote:
> ...but it's pretty rare to see so much doubt about so much science on one sensitive topic, whatever topic that may be.

Heh! I can name two:

Three states' politicians have passed laws requiring anyone returning from African areas where Ebola is present, to go into a mandatory quarantine for three weeks, ...against the recommendations of medical professionals.

The anti-vaccine crowd that refuses to vaccinate their children. I have relatives in that group.

Scientists? What? They don't know anything! crazy
I'd sure like to invite those groups to step back 40 years: Give them cars, communications, and medical technology from that period.

Re: National Forest Management Plan - Settlement Agreement
Steve C #40806 10/27/14 05:21 PM
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,572
Offline
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,572
Hee-hee. Thinking back 40 years, I am trying to think of a single 1974 model car that I would be caught dead driving. Maybe, the least year of the Karmann-Ghia. Otherwise, none of the above.


Wherever you go, there you are.
SPOTMe!
Re: National Forest Management Plan - Settlement Agreement
saltydog #40810 10/27/14 08:31 PM
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
OP Offline
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,158
This chart shows the amazing progress in the last 45 yrs since air pollution regulations went into effect. The science deniers of that day argued this progress was impossible. Had the science deniers prevailed, today's air would be 25 times more polluted than it is. We'd still have leaded gas and we'd probably get 10 mpg on average.



http://www.epa.gov/air/caa/progress.html


Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.4
(Release build 20200307)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.4.33 Page Time: 0.025s Queries: 32 (0.019s) Memory: 0.6136 MB (Peak: 0.6938 MB) Data Comp: Off Server Time: 2024-03-28 21:08:38 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS