Tree huggers - A Forests Worst Enemy
The US House of Representatives recently approved a bill that would allow the thinning of federal forest areas. The idea is that it will ease the threat of forest fires and encourage healthy growth of new trees.
Opponents (tree huggers) of this bill claim that it will open the door to widespread thinning of forests. In fact, most of this bill's opponents are against any kind of logging at all, regardless of any possible benefits that it might have to the forests, themselves.
Now, we recently had a wildfire go through Colorado like a hot knife through butter. And there are fairly frequent forest fires that burn through Arizona and California and Florida that destroy thousands of acres of forest area, devastating the entire ecology of the area.
Now, what I want to know is why these people have such blinders on. It should be obvious to anyone with a brain that the reason that we have so many terrible forest fires is that we have so many dead trees and trees that cast dead leaves and needles on the forest floor. As a consequence when a fire starts it burns and burns.
Now, part of the reason for such a build up of dead trees, leaves and needles is the fact that we put out forest fires. You see, forest fires are a part of nature. So, by not allowing forest fires to burn we are allowing old dying and dead trees to build up in forests and add to the fuel. So, ironically, the preservation of the forests is what causes the severe devastation of them by fire.
What's more, many trees produce seeds that cannot germinate without fire. So, not only do we help create the fuel that makes forest fires so devastating but, also, we prevent new trees from growing. All of this in the name of saving the forests - Ironic, huh?
If you add all of this up you find that culling trees isn't such a bad plan. In fact, burning portions of the forest wouldn't be such a bad plan either. It would cut down on the buildup of fire fuels and encourage the growth of new trees.
Of course, the tree huggers are fighting this notion with their every breath. They are adamantly against any sort of controlled clearing of trees that would promote healthy forests, regardless of any facts.
In fact, they even make up facts to suit their purpose. When the error of their "facts" are exposed they tell us that the intent was good and it should be excused. So, essentially, what they are saying is, even though their "facts" hurt the forest it is okay because the intent was good.
Tell that to the family who just had their home burnt down because of your "facts".
The truth is that they don't care. They just want their way - whatever way is against the corporations. Otherwise how could you explain the irony that those who claim to want to preserve the forests are the same people who will do anything that they can to make certain that the forest will burn itself out?
Tree huggers are such hypocritical assholes!