Skip to main content

Save the Earth, punch a greenie





So here's this Wall Street Journal editorial on the fires consuming the west, which lays the blame squarely at the feet of the environmental extremists, which more and more is coming to mean all environmental groups.



[T]here's the "science" the groups continue to ply on their Web sites to justify opposition to forest management. The Sierra Club says that "the only real environmental damage associated with forest fires comes from human attempts to extinguish and prevent them." The Center for Biological Diversity and the National Forest Protection Alliance inform us, counter-intuitively to say the least, that logging is responsible for the fires. And the National Wildlife Federation says that "In fact, many animals and plants not only survive, but thrive, after fire." They don't manage to explain how thinning "destroys habitat," while burning it down in its entirety makes animals "thrive."



...



Even worse are the continuing appeals and litigation. Environmental groups swamp the Forest Service and other agencies with appeals and lawsuits each year, in an attempt to block even modest cleanup efforts. Readers can visit the Forest Service site (http://www.fs.fed.us/forests) to see for themselves.
Which put in mind of a front page story I saw in the New York Times several days ago, titled Away From the TV Cameras, Fire Consumes Apache Land, and which reads in part:



The tribal economy is devastated. This is the time when the trees are supposed to be harvested but that will not happen. More than $300 million worth of timber has been turned to ash. The sawmills have shut down and 300 people are out of work.



...



Tim Rash, a white man and a firefighter with the Bureau of Land Management, was clearing underbrush near the Apache crew as trees exploded like popcorn kernels. He does the job for thrills. "I saw a fire like this once in 1988 in Yosemite," Mr. Rash said. "You know what we did? We let it burn until the snows came."



Although the Yosemite decision proved wise, as the national park is green and thriving again, letting their forests burn is not an option for the Apache people. To let the forest burn will mean economic ruin. The Hon Dah Resort and Casino, the second-largest employer in the White Mountain region after the county government, brings in more than $130 million a year, and is now closed for what is normally its busiest season.



The tribe also operates Sun Rise Ski Resort. "We sell our beautiful lakes and streams to tourists," Roger Leslie, the general manager of the resort, said. "We don't know what we'll have until the smoke clears."



Other potential losses of income come from the damage to wildlife. The tribe sold about 65 permits to hunt elk on the reservation last year at an average price of $15,000. There are also bear and mountain lion hunts. The hunting grounds are in the area of the Chediski fire, along with a sacred lake, burial grounds and archeological sites.
Light jabs at the white man and industry aside, the article makes the (unintentional?) point that "East Coast" environmental policies put western people out of work, destroying community economies, personal livelihoods, etc. The irony here is that those being so effected are the Native Americans that greenies like the parade around as being "truly one with nature."



And they are loggers!



I also question the quote that Yosemite is now green and thriving. Last time I was there (last month) the areas devastated by that 1988 fire still look devastated. Oh, some trees are beginning to think about growing, and there's a tinge of green, but nothing like it was. The Los Alamos fires (damn, just last year?) were even harsher. They burned so hot that even bacteria was killed; the ground was literally sterilized.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania

Wow, it’s been over a year. What a way to get back to this blog because… Are the films of the MCU getting worse? It’s a serious question because the latest that I’ve seen, Thor: Love and Thunder and Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania , are strong arguments that the answer is “yes.” Summary: Ant-Man & Ant-Family get sucked into the quantum realm, where skullduggery is afoot. A load of crap ensues. I’m an Ant-Man fan. I loved the first film despite its flaws. It would have been wonderful to see what Edgar Wright may have wrought. It was clear, though, that replacement director Peyton Reed kept some of Wright’s ideas alive. The result was one of the MCU’s most intimate films, a straight-forward tale of a Scott Lang (Paul Rudd) desperate to remain in his daughter’s life while being “gifted” the life of a superhero. Ant-Man and the Wasp sorta stayed that course, but naturally, because this is the modern MCU, we had to have a female superhero take over, the titular Wasp (Hope van Dyne,

John Wick: Chapter 4

No sense in playing coy, this is a great film. I’ve seen it twice and while I don’t quite love it in the way I love the first, original John Wick , it’s my #2. It’s a little overlong, has some wasted space and time, has one absolutely pointless and useless character, and generally ignores the realities of firefights, falling, getting shot, hit, etc. All that notwithstanding, it’s a great action flick, has a genuine emotional core, and is well worth your time if you’re into that sort of thing. Like I am. Summary: John Wick (Keanu Reeves), last seen saying he was fed up with the High Table, goes to war to obtain his freedom. Some of the most incredible action scenes ever filmed ensue, culminating in a very satisfactory finale and a devastating post-credit scene. The first Wick film was a surprise hit. It was a simple, straight-forward tale of vengeance told in a simple, straight-forward manner. Where it stood out was its devotion to human stunt work, on exploiting long camera shots that

Rogan

The entire Joe Rogan controversy is an example of the kids being left in charge and the adults refusing to teach them any better. I’m not a regular consumer of podcasts. There are a couple I listen to from time to time, but nothing on a regular basis. While I’ve caught a few minutes of the Joe Rogan Experience on YouTube, I’ve never listened to his podcast. One of the primary reasons for that is that you have to subscribe to Spotify to do so, and I prefer Qobuz, Tidal, or even Amazon Music. Rogan is behind Spotify’s paywall and that’s that. But the nature of the fight is about more than who does or does not listen to Rogan. This fight goes to the very nature of the First Amendment and the fundamental concept of the United States. And yes, I understand that cuts both ways. What’s his name and Joni Mitchell are free to yank their creations from Spotify, no ifs, ands, or buts. I’m not denying their right, I’m questioning their reasons. Rogan talks to people. He does so largely unfiltered.