Post: #1

California dreamin' turned into a nightmare, now in a very physical sense.

Due to their refusal to build fire breaks--muh Environment!--Sonoma and Napa burned to the ground, without any exaggerations. On one hand 17 dead so far, a tragedy. On the other hand--the wound is self inflicted.



Upon hearing initial reports I thought this is just like any other year of CA fire season, where the mountains would burn out and we'll move on.

This time it is different. Daily Mail report shows scenes that are rather Apocalyptic.
I'm not looking forward to skyrocketing wine prices.

A boiling river of WINE flows through devastated California wine country as residents return to apocalyptic scenes after wildfires kill 17 - while 5,000 flee another inferno in the home of Disneyland

Some of the largest of more than a dozen blazes burning over a 200-mile region were in Napa and Sonoma counties. Wine making vats at Paradise Ridge Winery in Santa Rosa:


Paras Vinyards burns in the Mount Veeder area of Napa:


A rack of burned bottles of wine are seen at the Signorello Estate winery in Napa:


neighborhood that was destroyed by a wildfire in Santa Rosa:

Post: #2

I have family and friends in Santa Rosa and Napa. Thankfully, they haven't been hurt and have been able to stay in their homes. The air quality is just dreadful up there. One family member has an active fire burning less than ten minutes from her house. She and the whole neighborhood are on standby for evacuation in case the winds shift. Scary stuff!

On a related note, I just paid my home's fire insurance premium. That's a good feeling.

Post: #3

Good luck to them, may the danger pass them by.

Post: #4

Hm.... is Donald Trump still "not their president" and are they "resisting?"

Hard to feel much sympathy for so many of those ignorant, self absorbed asshats.

Post: #5

(10-11-2017 01:44 PM)SlickyBoy Wrote:  Hm.... is Donald Trump still "not their president" and are they "resisting?"

Hard to feel much sympathy for so many of those ignorant, self absorbed asshats.

'My heart goes out to the victims of this wildfire disaster...but clearly, we need more illegal immigrants on welfare!'

Be safe any rvfers out in that area.

Post: #6

(10-11-2017 01:44 PM)SlickyBoy Wrote:  Hm.... is Donald Trump still "not their president" and are they "resisting?"

Hard to feel much sympathy for so many of those ignorant, self absorbed asshats.

Why not both?

Gov. Brown Presses Federal Authorities For Resources, As Oregon Wildfires Grow

Quote:“I talked with the federal authorities two weeks ago, asking for additional federal assistance, I was told point-blank ‘no’,” said Brown.

It's a proven strategy:
Liberal California Governor Jerry Brown Now Begging For Trumps Help After Insulting Him All Year

Post: #7

Do you have evidence that Sonoma and Napa counties refused to build firebreaks because they are sentimental stupid environmentalists?

Accusations like this are suspicious. Do you really think that no one in either of those counties understands the concept of fire?

I used to hear specious criticisms like this of the people trying to save old growth forests in the Pacific Northwest all the time. Simple issue. Only 2% of the old growth forests exist, mostly in mountainous nearly unloggable locations, so why not preserve it?

But you would get these idiotic attacks on the activists all the time like:

Quote:Saw a protester trying to save forests today. HIS SIGN WAS MADE OF CARDBOARD.

I'm not saying you're wrong, only that criticisms like that sound like propaganda because they are so oversimplified and are so appealing to the common man who wants to have a laugh at educated idiots.

Don't know Napa that well, but Sonoma county is a sweet beautiful place, and it is a shame to see it destroyed like this. Yeah, it has become annoying recently because a lot of rich people are buying up land for weekend homes and driving up prices, and replacing downtown stores with upscale boutiques and artisan whatever.

No doubt. It's just a beautiful place, with a good community spirit, and it has the same niche as its more famous neighbor, supplying wine for the world.

Sad to see it go. Also, from what I remember, there is close to zero public land close to town, everything has been bought up and gated by rich people, so if MOVSM is right about the fire breaks, it might be the responsibility of private citizens and not the local government.

Lots of normal folk here, with a different mentality than Bay Area people, and it is sad to see.

Edit. Come to think of it though, you might be right. There are vast residential sections of Northern California that consist hills, trees, and quirky/elegant houses tucked in between. Hiking and biking those hills you do wonder sometimes why the whole thing hasn't burned up yet. Maybe it has been a house of cards all along based on trust and common sense. Maybe it has been a case of aesthetics making common sense run away with its tail between its legs. So beautiful though.

Post: #8

I wonder if the same people who stated that the various natural distasters which have struck the southern states this year was a punishment brought by God for voting Trump, apply the same logic to what's happening in California......
JMK and you other guys in California, stay safe.

Post: #9

I've paid my fire insurance and live on top of a hill with all the brush cleared away. Thankfully, I'm nowhere near where the fires are breaking out. That being said, I'd love it if Trump withheld funds from California, even for fire relief. This state needs some collective punishment until they stop pouring millions of dollars into defending illegal aliens, pedophiles, and HIV bug chasers. Never subsidize your enemy! The more incompetent that California is made to look, even if large portions of the state have to burn, is better in the long-run. Sounds harsh? You bet! But these leftists in Sacramento only understand when President Trump acts like a tough daddy and spanks their bottom. They need a leather belt of an ass whoppin'.

Post: #10

http://www.independent.org/pdf/briefings...g_2017.pdf

Quote:CAL FIRE’s priority has been fire suppression, rather than prevention, and the budget bears this out. The proposed allocation to the SRA Fire Prevention Fund (SRAFPF)—which pays for efforts to reduce hazardous fuels (like dead trees and vegetation), provide fire prevention education, and plan fire prevention—is 5 percent smaller than estimated for the previous year. Of the $76 million proposed to the SRAFPF, only about $16 million are being made available in grants for local fire-prevention efforts.

Why the neglect for fire prevention? Ryan Yonk, a research fellow at the Independent Institute, and Devin Stein, a research associate at Strata Policy, explain that fire managers “face an incentive to focus on suppression where the budgets are larger, the risks are lower, and the very act of suppressing wildfires is much more heroic than chopping dead trees and conducting prescribed burns.” This problem plagues CAL FIRE as well as the U.S. Forest Service. This incentive has taken a heavy toll on fire prevention, which has proven to be superior to fire suppression at containing costs and damage once a major fire begins. Just consider the destruction wreaked on California in 2016.

CAL FIRE reports that in 2016 there were 5,762 wildfires in the SRA and contracted Local Responsibility Area, about 600 fires more than in 2015 and about one thousand more fires than the five-year annual average. Collectively they burned nearly 150,000 acres. This follows the very destructive fires of 2015, which burned 307,598 acres and brought the third most damaging wildfire in the state’s recorded history, the Valley Fire, which burned more than 75,000 acres of land in Lake, Napa, and Sonoma Counties, destroyed nearly 2,000 structures, and took four lives.

It is troubling, given these outcomes, that CAL FIRE’s priority remains fire suppression rather than prevention. The costs associated with fighting fires are high and have varied greatly, especially over the past 10 fiscal years. The 2010–11 fiscal year, for example, saw $90 million in suppression expenditures, whereas expenditures in the 2007–08 fiscal year were nearly six times that amount ($524 million). Fire suppression remains a costly priority for the state, the lack of glamor associated with prevention notwithstanding.

And here is your "Muh Environment!" connection, which views firebreaks as a Republican evil fostered upon innocent CA by that stooopid cowboy Dubya:

Quote:The destructive lie of vegetation clearing on a mass scale is likely increasing susceptibility of fire. It is now normal–the gutting and killing California’s biodiversity to make us all “fire safe”–because the “Healthy Forest” Act offers agencies money–nearly limitless, un-trackable money–to kill our native ecosystemswith no monitoring to see if the clearing in fact reduced fire danger/benefited the public.

CA Association of State Foresters plans to combat forest fires by increasing amount of forest and fighting global warming:

Quote:Preserving working forest ecosystems and strengthening their local communities

The plan is also focused on the mitigation and adaptation to the effects on forest ecosystems from climate change. Climate change will exacerbate already critical concerns about future forest health. With projected major rises in temperatures and more uncertain precipitation, forest ecosystems will need to be managed to preserve their fundamental integrity as providers of ecosystem services, wildlife habitat and timber.

Protecting against wildfire, pests, development and other forest threats

Finally, we are working to increase urban forestry programs in communities that would strongly benefit from the increased canopy cover, cooling effects and air quality improvements that trees offer. Much opportunity exists for increasing urban forestry, particularly in interior and warmer cities and towns across the state. In addition to their cooling and shading benefits which improve quality of life, urban forests act as carbon sinks to reduce greenhouse gases.

Anecdotal evidence--in Los Angeles and Catalina island there are firebreaks in the mountains and associated fire roads, which are often used by bikers, hikers, etc. I saw none when I visited Napa.

Post: #11

Yeah, Sonoma is gorgeous. I feel bad for those whose homes were burnt, but for the rest of the vegetation you won't even notice there was a fire in a couple of years, it's part of the cycle in Mediterranean climates like the CA coastal region. It's like the lunar landscape on islands devastated by the recent hurricanes, the green cover will be back in a matter of months.

Here's something to chew on: broke-ass Greece maintains a fleet of a dozen Canadair water-bombers. Every other semi-functional Mediterranean country like Spain, Italy, France, Croatia or even Morocco has a fleet of Canadairs. Not California, the most important state in a country that spends nearly $1 trillion/yr on the military. For the price of one F-22, the Coast Guard or National Guard could have a whole squadron of CL-415s, which would have been highly effective in Northern California where you have a lot of lakes and reservoirs near the most fire-prone areas. A convoy of 6 or 7 CL-415 scooping up water from Lake Beryssa would have helped contain the fire.

Watch Croatian Cl-415s protect the airport of Split earlier this summer:

Post: #12

Pence: major disaster declaration approved for California wildfires

Quote:"This declaration will allow FEMA to identify, mobilize and provide additional equipment and resources to assist with the emergency," he said. "This includes debris removal, emergency protective measures, search and rescue operations."

Update:

Thousands flee as wildfires ravage California; at least 21 killed

Post: #13

(10-11-2017 03:06 PM)MOVSM Wrote:  http://www.independent.org/pdf/briefings...g_2017.pdf

And here is your "Muh Environment!" connection, which views firebreaks as a Republican evil fostered upon innocent CA by that stooopid cowboy Dubya:

Quote:The destructive lie of vegetation clearing on a mass scale is likely increasing susceptibility of fire. It is now normal–the gutting and killing California’s biodiversity to make us all “fire safe”–because the “Healthy Forest” Act offers agencies money–nearly limitless, un-trackable money–to kill our native ecosystemswith no monitoring to see if the clearing in fact reduced fire danger/benefited the public.

CA Association of State Foresters plans to combat forest fires by increasing amount of forest and fighting global warming:

Quote:Preserving working forest ecosystems and strengthening their local communities

The plan is also focused on the mitigation and adaptation to the effects on forest ecosystems from climate change. Climate change will exacerbate already critical concerns about future forest health. With projected major rises in temperatures and more uncertain precipitation, forest ecosystems will need to be managed to preserve their fundamental integrity as providers of ecosystem services, wildlife habitat and timber.

Protecting against wildfire, pests, development and other forest threats

Finally, we are working to increase urban forestry programs in communities that would strongly benefit from the increased canopy cover, cooling effects and air quality improvements that trees offer. Much opportunity exists for increasing urban forestry, particularly in interior and warmer cities and towns across the state. In addition to their cooling and shading benefits which improve quality of life, urban forests act as carbon sinks to reduce greenhouse gases.

Anecdotal evidence--in Los Angeles and Catalina island there are firebreaks in the mountains and associated fire roads, which are often used by bikers, hikers, etc. I saw none when I visited Napa.

The muh environment article looks to me to be a random small businesses perspective and not the States.

The last article you took completely out of context. Per the article, they specifically call out the mismanagement of forests:

" Many forests are at high risk of catastrophic fire, due to years of insufficient fuels management. "

Your position I think is still sketchy at best with what you have presented.

Post: #14

(10-11-2017 03:32 PM)Repo Wrote:  The muh environment article looks to me to be a random small businesses perspective and not the States.

The last article you took completely out of context. Per the article, they specifically call out the mismanagement of forests:

" Many forests are at high risk of catastrophic fire, due to years of insufficient fuels management. "

Your position I think is still sketchy at best with what you have presented.

The "fuels" in this context is dead trees, they define it in the article. Clearing that, and building firebreaks in the forests to contain the fire is part of forest management. Not just putting out the fire, which is increasingly difficult due to abundant "fuels", and increasingly lethal.

Ecological Outreach Services (EOS) is a "consultant". They push policy.

Quote:Ecological Outreach Services was started by Virginia Moran
...
Virginia has over 20 years as a regulatory field biologist. She has implemented many different kinds of regulations including CEQA/NEPA, and those related to endangered species, mitigation, habitat, and water.
...
Virginia Moran is an “eco-entrepenuer” and EOS is a FOR profit company. She rejects the idea built into our financial system that in order to do good work for society, one has to become a “non-profit”/poor.

Post: #15

Quote:Do you have evidence that Sonoma and Napa counties refused to build firebreaks because they are sentimental stupid environmentalists?

I think it's partially this, as MOVSM mentions, but it's also moral hazard: it's nice to live in a pristine, wooded area if you know that someone else will bail you out in the event of a fire. These current fires notwithstanding, the huge taxpayer-funded firefighting complex (CalFire, US Forest Service, etc.) does a decent job meeting its priority of protecting people's homes when wildfire hits.

I am not sure if the gubmint defrays the cost of rebuilding if one's home is destroyed by wildfire, but, these days, I wouldn't be surprised.

Post: #16

What I hadn't realized until the Columbia Gorge fire is how much it wrecks the air quality, even miles away. I could barely get my contact lenses in for a week, and the air smelled like toasted shit.

Post: #17

I don't wish destruction or death by fire up on anybody.

What happened is terrible and tragic.

Here in SoCal on Monday we had a fast moving wind driven fire burned down over a dozen homes.

People understand (or should) the risks of living in woodland and on a hill.

Post: #18

Quote:“I talked with the federal authorities two weeks ago, asking for additional federal assistance, I was told point-blank ‘no’,” said Brown.

Is this just political bullshit, or is it the truth? Regardless of California's bullshit laws and liberalism and all that, they still pay fed taxes, and a lot of them.

I wonder a lot about this with Oahu's rail project. Its disgustingly mismanaged and just completely out of control. All kinds of federal funding has been pulled. Everything about Hawaii's representation in Washington is "Fuck Trump" before anything else. Hawaii is who caused all the travel ban shit.

Does partisan crap really cause the feds to overlook things like fires though? Or with the rail, would they really make things worse over politics? I hope not.

Aloha!

Post: #19

There are plenty of reasons to hate Californians, and we have the threads to prove it. The more I think about this though, the less I think it is a specifically Californian issue.

If it was, then why do people the world over build in floodplains? Or beneath sea level like our friends in New Orleans.

Even back in the day, people built all wood cities in seismic/tsunami zones.

Great Tokyo Earthquake of 1923




Without the "mu environment" argument, it seems human beings are very good at rolling the dice when it comes to where they live.

I am pretty sure the engineers at Fukushima thought they had taken care of all the seismic and tsunami issues.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_...r_disaster

And they even had the warnings of tsunami stones, high on the mountain, warning how high the water could rise, from 100 years ago, and thought they didn't need to listen.



Translation:
"High dwellings are the peace and harmony of our descendants, remember the calamity of the great tsunamis. Do not build any homes below this point."

I hate what California has become much as anyone, and yet I can't really hate on them for ignoring fire safety for beauty.

There are cities near active volcanoes, states long overdue for massive earthquakes that are riddled with unreinforced masonry buildings, many school buildings (Looking at you Oregon.) And what is the deal with mobile homes in tornado country?

It seems like people can only keep so many dangers in their minds, and a few slip through and rest deep in the denial holding pen.

The only real fire I remember in the SF Bay Area is the Oakland firestorm of 1991.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oakland_firestorm_of_1991

I remember growing up, fires every year in SoCal threatening neighborhoods, but nothing like that in the Bay Area.

If it never happens, it just doesn't seem real, and the fixes are costly, and no one wants to think about them.

So we build where we know there will be hurricanes and quakes and predictable flooding and just try not to think about it.

That's my take away from all this.

There is some area in everyone's life where they are just another idiot raw dogging and letting their load fly.

Many get lucky, and the ones that don't get ridiculed, and fate decides which is which.

Post: #20

(10-11-2017 05:06 PM)Kona Wrote:  

Quote:“I talked with the federal authorities two weeks ago, asking for additional federal assistance, I was told point-blank ‘no’,” said Brown.

Is this just political bullshit, or is it the truth? Regardless of California's bullshit laws and liberalism and all that, they still pay fed taxes, and a lot of them.

More political BS probably.

Brown talked to Trump, said that Trump will help CA anyway and anywhere possible.

Quote:Governor Jerry Brown declared a state of emergency for Napa, Sonoma, Solano, Yuba, Butte, Lake, Mendocino, Nevada and Orange counties due to the effects of fires.

Brown also requested a Presidential Major Disaster Declaration to support the state and local response to the Northern California fires, which was approved Tuesday.

I literally heard his interview on the radio at noon - some fucktard reporter started asking "how this will affect wineries"

I mean how dense do you have to be when 20+ people having been killed, 300+ missing, no cell service, thousands of homes destroyed.

But muh wineries !

Post: #21

Quote:But muh wineries

Limousine liberals have so much empathy...behind their 12 high gates with armed guards. They lack any sort of empathy for the common man, because they are narcissists and sociopaths.

Post: #22

(10-11-2017 05:14 PM)kaotic Wrote:  I literally heard his interview on the radio at noon - some fucktard reporter started asking "how this will affect wineries"

I mean how dense do you have to be when 20+ people having been killed, 300+ missing, no cell service, thousands of homes destroyed.

But muh wineries !

Kaotic,
I fully blame the Dem policies for this. Bad fires started 30 years ago, two years ago there were 4 deaths, this year 20+. Sonoma, Napa voted for the leftist government that's responsible for this insanity. It is their own doing.
As we say in Russia, they stepped on the same rakes, again and again--see the cartoon up top.
It is hard to feel sorry for people like that.

At this point, I miss two things about California--the countryside that is some of the most beautiful in the Union, and the wine for my steak.

Before any of you are outraged--

Post: #23

Unfortunate all that good land had to be destroyed

Post: #24

I think major wildfires are inevitable* no matter how much you "manage" forests. In fact, meticulously putting out thousands of small fires before they can burn out naturally probably increases the fuel load available for the next one - and it's a pipe dream to go around the area the size of California removing underbrush and dead trees. Sooner or later, you will have to deal with that once-in-a-decade fire.

That said, fuck whomever decided that firebreaks and firefighting planes weren't necessary.

* = ignore the fact that it's #veryfakenews BBC, it's still a fantastic article

Post: #25

(10-11-2017 03:06 PM)MOVSM Wrote:  http://www.independent.org/pdf/briefings...17.pdproof

So really, I know that sometimes people get upset, but really. If you're gonna call someone out for not proving their point or whatnot, why not just look for the evidence that said person was wrong and post it? At most it would have taken about 5 minutes to google search it and save yourself the time, and trouble of making the thread, and the embarassment for being wrong.

There was no need to call people out like that when the info is just fingertips away. It's not like the claim was 'I took on 50 white knights at a bar, all at the same time." C'mon you guys.

(10-11-2017 05:06 PM)Kona Wrote:  

Quote:“I talked with the federal authorities two weeks ago, asking for additional federal assistance, I was told point-blank ‘no’,” said Brown.

Does partisan crap really cause the feds to overlook things like fires though? Or with the rail, would they really make things worse over politics? I hope not.

Aloha!

Probably not, it's more like "oh shit we're about too be caught being corrupt, let's focus all our efforts on bashing trump/conservatives/steal even more before Trump comes down on us and our illegals. While just not paying attention to the things they should be paying attention to.