# Why forest managment is nearly impossible: STOP BLAMING THE FEDS BLAME YOURSELF



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

http://www.cedarcityutah.com/news/a...ge-scale-burn-near-bryce-canyon/#.VXIXv89VhBc

Frustrating that the same people who are pushing to have the control turned to the states because the feds aren't managing the forests and they're tinder boxes, but whine over smoke when the forest service trys to do prescribed burns and keep areas healthy.

There's going to be a hell of a lot more smoke down the road some day when all their properties are scortched because they couldn't handle a few days of discomfort. Being a BLM or Forest Service ranger/agencie would be nearly impossible now days with the picky, whiney people that exhist in our society and are never happy no matter what you do. If they do something they get sued from one side, if they don't do something they get sued from the other side. It's ridiculous the amount of things that are done just because people can't be happy with anything unless they are perfectly comfortable and everything is going the way they want. So today you complain and stop a prescribed burn, and tomorrow when you cabin and businesses burn up don't go crying to the forest service about how they didn't do enough.

If the state ever were to get a hold of this land, they would have lawsuits breaking their budget, so good luck you crooks, you better have deep pockets.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Or they could open it up to logging instead of burning it. 

Logging restriction has played a huge role in the fire issue. 

Folks like yourself can't handle a road being cut to get the lumber out.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> Or they could open it up to logging instead of burning it.
> 
> Logging restriction has played a huge role in the fire issue.
> 
> Folks like yourself can't handle a road being cut to get the lumber out.


Don't pin it on folks like me. I am not against logging, but fire is an ecological and scientifically based activity that goes on on our planet, and needs to happen to keep soils, and ecosystems healthy. Iron Bear you love to play the role of predators but apparently don't understand that development (housing, energy, logging, etc.) of all kinds have detrimental affects on wildlife, including breeding, raising their young, fawing/calving times, and push animals out of areas making them essentially useless or less valuable while the development is occuring.

I am not against opening areas up to logging for a few years, in fact I think it is very necessary in some areas that I freqent because of the pine beatle kill that has occured. It's also a good use for the lumber instead of just lighting it up and leaving a forest of dead standing trees. I would support logging but for it to happen there is a lot of people who would oppose it and sue if it wasn't done the way seen fit. As long as it is done responsibly I have no problem with it. But no Iron Bear I don't believe we need to run roads up every hillside opening up pristine places to abuse because people aren't really that respectful of beautiful places, it's nice to have places out of the way. I mean god forbid someone smells a little smoke for a few days.


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Oh it's exactly folks like yourself. 

Don't touch, don't change, stay out, conserve at any cost. Has given us 80 yrs of fire suppression logging restrictions and a sick forest. The fires that burn today in Utah are far from a natural burn. Often times the end result is the soils being sterilized. Too much fuel and the fire is just too hot. I'd far rather the local economies benefit from the resource. Then if it need be burnt, burn it in a fireplace to heat a home. 

But there you go. Treehuggers won't let you do that for much longer.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Iron Bear said:


> Oh it's exactly folks like yourself.
> 
> Don't touch, don't change, stay out, conserve at any cost. Has given us 80 yrs of fire suppression logging restrictions and a sick forest. The fires that burn today in Utah are far from a natural burn. Often times the end result is the soils being sterilized. Too much fuel and the fire is just too hot. I'd far rather the local economies benefit from the resource. Then if it need be burnt, burn it in a fireplace to heat a home.
> 
> But there you go. Treehuggers won't let you do that for much longer.


"This country has been swinging the hammer of development so long and so hard that it has forgotten the anvil of wilderness which gave value and significance to its labors. The momentum of our blows is so unprecedented that the remaining remnant of wilderness will be pounded into road-dust long before we find out its values."

Read that quote, think about it. In a world with 7 billion people and a population curve headed for the sky areas away from roads, homes, cabins, etc. to hunt and enjoy are at a minimum more than ever before, and they'll continue o disappear. As I said I'm not against logging and news flash they are doing prescribed burns and allowing logging in mechanically treated areas, I've been behind plenty of trucks off Monroe hauling off loads of timber. And yes fire suppression has been for far too long, but that trend is turning. Do you really think complaints wouldn't pour in if they wanted to log an area next to Bryce Canyon? Either way they're gonna lose because some can't be happy touching an area at all, and others see areas as a waste of space unless profit is being made off it. The fact you can't see use in an area other than economical value is the very attitude that will drive your deer and elk herds into the ground as there habitat is sacrificed for economic growth. You keep laying the predator side of things and I'll keep playing the side that gives deer and elk a place to live.


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

Sound forest management practices are NOT incompatible with preserving wilderness and anyone who doesn't understand that doesn't understand forest management. Anyone who claims otherwise and uses any paper or wood products is being hypocritical.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

LostLouisianian said:


> Sound forest management practices are NOT incompatible with preserving wilderness and anyone who doesn't understand that doesn't understand forest management. Anyone who claims otherwise and uses any paper or wood products is being hypocritical.


Agreed


----------

