What the ecowhackos don't get is that even a tree has a use-by date. You either utilize that 'renewable resource' or it goes to waste. Funny how they want "efficiency" in the use of refined resources, but don't get that there is efficient use of sustainable (pardon the obligatory buzzword) natural resources.
Fact. I have walked through what they want... There are pockets of forest where no loggers go because it is too rugged, and where no fire can go because the trees are mature. Nothing grows under them.
But it is a fantasy to think that is the norm. Fire is part of the natural ecology. Nine times out of ten, if you leave that forest be, it will burn down in the next 20 years. That's just how it works. And I can prove it to you on millions of acres where logging has never been. Those ain't ancient trees so big around you;ll only get one butt on a logging truck. Most of em ain't 100 years old, heck most ain't 50. Even though Man ain't there, the cycle is always the same. It grows, becomes too dense, and a lightning strike sets a fire and burns it all down. Over and over, same ol song.
The problem comes where rural meets wilderness. Where forest meets town. Now you have investments on the land. you can't just let the thing burn though or a whole lot of damage will be done. Thankfully, you also have the logging industry that can mimic those fires in a more controlled fashion. Either parking vast tracts through selective cutting to produce larger more valuable trees, or by clear cutting and replanting whole tracts. This is what has kept those bad fires far away from human habitation.
The environmental whack jobs fail to see that reality, and now want natural forest right at the towns door. What they fail to understand is what happens, like what is happening to CA. You are inviting that fire to burn down everything. You are creating conditions that cannot be controlled. and suffering ensues.
