Oregon's wildfire season has become an annual monument to failed forest policy.
State leaders hold press conferences, celebrate "climate resilience," and point to prescribed burns that are often most visible along highways—while vast areas of overgrown forest remain untreated.
We've replaced active forest management with reactive emergency management.
Instead of supporting the logging, thinning, and fuel reduction practices that once helped reduce wildfire risk, Oregon now spends billions responding to fires after they start.
The fire economy has replaced the timber economy.
More bureaucracy. More emergency spending. More dependence on government.
It's hard not to wonder how many of these catastrophic fires could have been reduced if we'd spent decades managing forests instead of managing the politics around them.
@GovTinaKotek@OLCEQshow@BLMFire
@KatTimpf I lost my father at 31. 6 weeks from diagnosis to death. He never met his grandkids. He would have been an amazing grandfather. It still hurts. That was 14 years ago. I try to remember the joy and not let my anger grow.
I suspect our entire almost 40 trillion dollar national debt is due to fraud. I actually suspect the amount stolen from us is way higher. We are being robbed blind and almost nothing is done about it
@Erling You will likely never see this but I felt I had to post. You and your team were amazing. Sorry for the loss you won our attention and my loyalty. Keep it up brother!!
“Plotting the overthrow of the country isn't constitutionally protected activity.”
Pass it on, patriots. Because apparently everyone has become numb to communist musings.
They aren’t simple musings anymore.
They’re telling us who we are.
And we believe them.
Think about this for a moment.
The U.S. Navy has operated nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and submarines for over 60 years.
There are 11 big deck nuclear-powered carriers and 71 submarines currently in service that, mind you, are largely operated by 18–30-year-old men.
Yet, for some reason, the vast majority of “green” energy pundits I encounter online think nuclear fission is too dangerous to power society.
My theory is that this is because nuclear guarantees an economically prosperous future. Most climate activists, who are on the left, want economic activities to cease to “save the planet” (or in reality, redistribute wealthy. They know deep down that modern industrial economies like the U.S. and China cannot run on solar and wind power alone. That’s why China isn’t decommissioning coal despite massive solar additions in recent years.
Government-mandated solar and wind guarantees that the left achieve the economic policies they want. If they make it difficult for industries to thrive, they drive them out of business.
The forests you know and love here in the American West are likely not in their natural state. After more than a century of aggressive fire suppression, our Western forests are unnaturally dense. Despite the cries of the left wing NGOs, this is one of the biggest drivers of wildfires, disease outbreaks, and tree mortality here, not climate change. Dense overstocked forests mean more trees compete for the same resources during our wet and dry weather cycle which reduces tree size and resilience. Forest density in the American West has increased six to seven fold over the last century. Overstocking of forests mean trees die more easily, creating heavy fuel loads and increasing the chances of crown fires.
“Environmentalists” love to decry logging or forest treatments stating that forests need to be kept in their natural state. However, their current state is not natural. The removal of fire has created the perfect conditions for the outbreak of mega fires that we’ve seen across the West. Land must be managed. Either fire will do it or we can.
Which forest would you rather hunt and recreate in? I know my answer.