Environmentalists blasted over wildfires at Arizona forest panel
Paul Gosar
Republican Congressman Paul Gosar testifies Tuesday at a meeting of a state House committee on forest health, blamed some "extreme environmental groups" for killing the state's timber industry and, by extension, the resulting devastating fires.
Welcome to the discussion.
-
Current users sign in here.
16 comments:
Rules of Conduct
Happening Now...
-
Tuesday 5/21/2013
-
Monday 5/20/2013
© Copyright 2013, East Valley Tribune, Tempe, AZ. [Terms of Use | Privacy Policy]
A Division of 10/13 Communications
NothingButTheTruth posted at 7:49 pm on Tue, Jul 5, 2011.
More proof that liberals are mentally ill. Let the forest burn to the ground and then maybe we can forget about some freaking owl. Time to retire all these libertards before they totally metal fastener with a spiral grooved shaft the country up.
onerebel posted at 8:29 pm on Tue, Jul 5, 2011.
It appears the Democrats are in denial, they know darn well who stopped forest thinning ,and it appears they care more about covering for fellow Liberals then Arizona. I say lets sue The Center for Biological Diversity that just happens to be in Tucson for the lose of our forest,
shrinkingviolet posted at 9:31 pm on Tue, Jul 5, 2011.
....and it appears they care more about covering for fellow Liberals then Arizona....
It's called politics, and they didn't invent it alone.
LIBERALISM_ROCKS posted at 10:15 pm on Tue, Jul 5, 2011.
unbelievable I can't believe the good people of AZ elect somebody like Mr. Goser..Does he have a brain?? Also,since when do we need livestock to graze in burned areas to help it "recover" that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever ready..livestock will PREVENT the fire from recovering by eating new grass, sprouts and riparian vegetation as well has compacting the soil. No wonder the cattle industry and timber industry are hurting..your leaders don't know what there talking about. That type of thinking leads to environmentalists wanting to litigate everything...Keep it up cattle and timber industry you have only yourselves to blame.
LIBERALISM_ROCKS posted at 10:18 pm on Tue, Jul 5, 2011.
Mr. Goser comments remind me of Mr. Fife Symington's comments in 90's..."the states can do a better job of managing federal land than the federal government."....HMMM Mr. Symington..how did your business fare..not so great...fact is state CAN"T do a better job..they don't have the resources..National Forests are for all the people in the country..not just special interest groups...the best idea this nation ever had..and by the way Mr. Goser..there are many things not in the Constitution..I have a Constitution also...we can compare them!!
Leon Ceniceros posted at 11:27 pm on Tue, Jul 5, 2011.
"SAVE THE OLD GROWTH FORESTS"
Excuse me....would one of these ....ECO-TERRORISTS....tell me how a 500,000 acre fire knows what trees are "old growth" and what trees are "new growth" ???
Well no one has to worry about saving the ..."OLD GROWTH FORESTS" ..NOW...ALONG WITH THE.....ENDANGERED FROGS, FISH AND OWLS....THEY AREN'T ENDANGERED ANY MORE............THEY'RE ALL ....D.E.A.D.
THERE AREN'T ANY FORESTS FOR 100 SQUARE MILES OF NORTHERN ARIZONA FOR THE ...........LIBERALS....PROGRESSIVES...AND THE ....DEMOCRATS............TO SAVE ANYMORE......THEY ARE ALL INCINERATED........BECAUSE THESE ....ECO-CRAZIES....DIDN'T WANT ANY CATTLE GRAZING PERMITS TO KEEP THE BRUSH AND GRASSES DOWN...........DIDN'T WANT ANY LOGGING TO THIN OUT THE TREES....DIDN'T WANT ANY FOREST SERVICE BRUSH BURNING.....DIDN'T WANT TO DO ....ANYTHING TO PREVEN THIS CATASTROPHE.
AND WHAT DO THESE TWO....ARIZONA..."DEMOCRAT"...CONGRESS MEN HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THE .....WALLOW FIRE.
One talked about....."hearing from both sides of the issue"...and the other said..."to say that extremist environmental groups, excuse me, but I have no idea of what you are talking about"..........BOY, TRUER WORDS NEVER CAME FROM THE MOUTH OF AN ARIZONA DEMOCRAT POLITICIAN............"I HAVE NO IDEA OF WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT" = AKA = CLUELESS (just like their President = BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA)
wdgnas posted at 4:49 am on Wed, Jul 6, 2011.
i remember before the rodeo chedeski, fire the forest service wanted to some controlled burns, but people didn't want their wilderness experience ruined. how's your wilderness experience now?
NothingButTheTruth posted at 8:31 am on Wed, Jul 6, 2011.
LIBERALISM_ROCKS thank you for sharing. You proved my point that Liberalism is a mental disease.
what-we-want posted at 10:32 am on Wed, Jul 6, 2011.
why do we let people 30- 300- or even 3000 miles away tell us whats best for our forest? they wanted owl habitat and now 80% of thier habitat is gone! good choice! our forests need to be better taken care of! now we cant enter the places where sooo many of us were raised and that soo many more love to visit and one of the things sooo heart breaking to me is that my son will never see the beautiful forest that sooo many came to love!
Whatever posted at 2:54 pm on Wed, Jul 6, 2011.
LIBERISM-ROCKS did not read the article thuroughly enough. Mr. Goser did not say cattle should graze the land now, but should have been allowed in the past to prevent what happened. It is obviously too late for cattle to graze the land now.
seigell posted at 5:12 pm on Wed, Jul 6, 2011.
Mainstream environmental groups have long held to overly romanticized ideas of what is "An Old Growth Forest". Their target seems to have been the Pacific Northwest Rainforests, where due to both the amount of rain and the the subsequent infrequency of wildfires that there were grove after grove of massive and ancient trees. They pushed for a policy of nearly complete fire suppression, even though ecologists and forestry experts and even historians told them that such was not "natural" for the majority of our National Forests. And they pushed for a mode of whole landscape preservation - Wilderness Areas - which only allows access on terms last applicable at the time of Lewis and Clark.
This has resulted in their using their considerable political and financial might to "enforce" policies on publicly owned forest lands which allowed - forced - our forests to become terribly overgrown and wildfire-prone. And its an irony that the relative prosperity and growing population able to access the natural environments of our National Forests and Parks during the 40s-60s spawned and bolstered the Environmental Movement is now the very bane of their and the forests existence - growing population and usage pressure and the inevitable human-caused forest fires.
Ricinro posted at 9:30 pm on Wed, Jul 6, 2011.
Before logging or grazing the forest maintained itself. Old growth regulates undergrowth and is resilient to fire. Logging isn't interested in underbrush or small trees, they want the old growth because it makes the better product. Environmentalist never mandated undergrowth but rather long term forest management practices that will ultimately work for everyone. The politicians are grossly misinformed.
AmericanPatriot posted at 4:45 am on Thu, Jul 7, 2011.
Cut the bull Ricinro. Tree huggers don't want anyone to harvest this natural resource so they can walk around in it and go oooh and awww and watch the owls and deer frolic together is some make believe land that doesn't exist except maybe in the Bambi movies. Thin the trees and fires wont spread as fast and far. Before logging and grazing and tree huggers stopping proper forest management we had regular fires that burnt out parts of the forest to create meadows with flora for fauna to feed on and those periodic fires prevented the accumulation of ground debris and thinned the trees naturally. It's real simple just allow the timber industry to do their freaking jobs and quit your tree hugging whining.
lthornto posted at 8:51 am on Fri, Jul 8, 2011.
It amazes me to read what uninformed people have to say about this. Go study forestry for or ecology for 4 years then comment on this piece.
These forests existed for millions of years without cattle or logging and remained healthy. The only reason they are "Unhealthy" now is because of a a lack of fire. The reason there has been a lack of fire is to protect human property. Scientific evidence doesn't support that cattle grazing or logging will decrease the risk of fires. Many studies have shown an increase in fires after logging because of logging slash left behind.
The ecology of the pine forests in AZ areas is based on high frequency low intensity fires. This doesn't mean high intensity fires didn't happen in the past, they did. This problem began with white settlement 100+ years ago. We have have done too good of a job at suppresing fires. Now we have 100+ years of fuels to deal with.
The ideal solution is to return fire to it's historic frequency, but there are risks involved, houses will burn, but every person that lives in these areas knows that this is a risk you take when you have a home there.
Is there a place for logging and thinning, yes, but it is not the solution to this problem. Much of the area of the Rodeo fire had been heavily logged by the Apache, but it did not slow the fire down.
LIBERALISM_ROCKS posted at 6:24 am on Thu, Jul 14, 2011.
Your welcome...Mr. Nothingbut the Truth!! Yes, in fact I did read the whole article and I never said that Mr. Goser said we should allow cattle to graze now..Mr. Groseta of the cattle industry said that..anyway.
How many of you right wingers looked at the Burn Severity map..I did...only 16% (86,000 acres) burned at high severity and the vast the majority of that was land over 35% slopes (places cows don't like to go and generally the Forest Service doesn't harvest). Forest Service management prevented a much more catastrophic fire by actively managing the forest through thinning and burning...
How many of you drove the road between springerville and pinetop..I did..did you notice all the Cattle and Elk grazing. I don't know what Mr. Groseta is talking about..nobody is stopping grazing..
and I challenge Mr. Goser to speak intelligently ...he certainly isn't right now..
LIBERALISM_ROCKS posted at 6:31 am on Thu, Jul 14, 2011.
Ms. Barton was suppose to have a house panel with environmentalists on the panel..what happen to that discussion?? Let's get some balance in this discussion.