Officials with the Lincoln National Forest were criticized Saturday evening for their initial handling of the Little Bear Fire. During an informal meeting, U.S. Rep. Steve Pearce contended Forest Service officials should have moved to completely snuff out the fire on Tuesday. "This is the second meeting exactly like I've sat here," Pearce told officials with the Lincoln National Forest. "How much did the Capitan Fire burn, 150,000 acres?" The 2004 Peppin Fire, in the Capitan Mountains, scorched about 64,000 acres, Pearce was told by Lincoln National Forest Supervisor Robert Trujillo. "It was sitting there at 12 acres for several days and we decided not to do anything about it," Pearce said of the 2004 fire. "Suddenly it blew out. I just came from the other side of the state where we've got a 300,000-acre fire more or less going right now. For two days, maybe three, it was sitting there in a very small area. And then it came loose. You yourselves are talking about the explosive nature of the forest - the fuels available. I just know that if you put enough water, 30, 50, 1,000 tankers, somewhere you're going to get enough penetration. What I have trouble doing is going to explain to a village why decisions were made that if that wind comes up wrong tomorrow, and that anchor point doesn't hold, you're looking at a catastrophe that a quarter of an acre doesn't justify." Pearce questioned the decision not to put water or retardant down at the onset. The forest's Smokey Bear District Ranger Dave Warnack said fire officials made the decision. "Those are the folks with the years of experience managing wildfires," Trujillo added. "And my job is to support those decisions and to give them the tools and techniques to take care of this fire. Right now, Mr. Congressman, we have an active fire out there and I don't see that this conversation is very productive, with all due respect." But Pearce pounded back. "If the decisions made at that point could have forced all this, it is productive to say 'Who made the decisions?' I think its extraordinarily important," Pearce said. "We're seeing this occur over and over and over again, and at some point, somebody has to make a decision that we get more active earlier." Pearce said his constituents expect him to ask the Forest Service such questions. "They're worried about their homes. They're worried about the economy of this town. They're worried about their futures. You're damn right they've got a right to ask those questions and I've got a responsibility to ask it here when I get the room."...
more
Lincoln National Forest Supervisor Robert Trujillo:
"Right now, Mr. Congressman, we have an active fire out there and I don't see that this conversation is very productive, with all due respect."
So there's your "public servant" from the Forest Service. The average citizen has been treated with this haughty, holier-than-thou attitude for years, and now that display of disrespect is even aimed at a Congressman. You see the Forest Service, not our elected representatives, determine whether or not a conversation is productive. Don't waste our time by asking questions or trying to hold us accountable and how dare you think we should have learned something from a previous fire in the same forest. Now you just run along Mr. Congressman, while we run our program and be "productive".
And they get away with it. Year after year, fire season after fire season, meeting after meeting, Congressional hearing after Congressional hearing, and nothing changes.
Pearce chose not to be on the Resources Committee and doesn't yet have the seniority to be on Appropriations. He is, however, Chairman of the Western Caucus in the House and is not without influence. I'd say the battle should be on with these Insufferably Arrogant Ones. It's past time to rein them in. The Urban Brand Is On The Land and we need a new Brand Inspector. Will Pearce be the guy?
.
8 comments:
You nailed it Frank. When I read that quote, I was appalled. Where is the contrition for the damage that has been done?
Sob, sob. Another example of the hypocrisy of Pearce and the sheep that follow him and his imbecilic arguments. "Get government out of our lives" they say. Then they are the first to criticize that very government when it doesn't immediately respond to every one of their whines and complaints. (Not to mention the fact that Pearce and these tea-baggers spend much of their time in DC working to take money away from these same agencies and get in the way of them doing their job).
Hat's off to Congressman Pearce for holding the federal agency's feet to the fire. We need more like him that are not afraid to ask direct questions and refuse to be "bought out".
We need someone to stick up for our rights and Steve Pearce is the one to do it. Yes, these fires need to be put out when they are spotted. Fires are getting way out of hand and destroying people's lives! Why cannot loggers log any more and cattle free to graze the lands to help cut down on these these horrible catastrophies! It would be only using common sense!
Thank you Steve Pearce for what you are doing!
Yes, we want government out of our lives! That means theses government lands need to be returned to the people so proper management can be achieved. The stupid greens are responsible to arcane laws that prohibit anything in wildernss areas except for them and then they poop in the streams and where they sleep. That is the reason air drops on the -10acre fire were prohibited. Dummies!! You don't know anything about land management. Pearce is right, throw the rest out!!
The truth of the matter is fire management is about prioritizing limited resources based on values at risk. The Forest Service has dozen of fires going at any given time this time of year. There are simply not enough resources to put 4 crews and a retardant drop on every one.
Each time a fire blows up, there are those like Pearce who want to second guess the situation and ask, "why didn't we throw all our resources at this one sooner?" Yet every time, when ALL of the facts are considered at the broader scale, it is found that the decision to manage the fires was very reasonable.
I think it's easy to place blame when you have absolutely no responsibility. Please try to consider the challenges if you were in the shoes of a fire manager.
The real problem is one of ideology. The environmentalists believe that the forests and natural resources are best "managed" by laws and policies which promote minimal or no intervention by man. The agencies assigned responsibility to "manage" the resources are are built to ensure and enforce that man does not intervene or influence nature. So from this view, fire is a natural occurance and should not be thwarted.
Those with the opposing view believe that forest resources should be managed, utilized, and harvested appropriately. Private property should be protected.
These two views are at opposite ends of the spectrum, and can't coexist.
Needless to say, the ones ultimately to blame are the "environmentalists" who have for years stopped intelligent management of our forests, which first and foremost includes regular timber harvests. "Environmentalism" has destroyed millions of acres of once healthy forests and the lives of tens of thousands of Americans. WAY past time to say, "NO MORE!"
Post a Comment