Roadless Rule Rescinded

Generally, you have to know you can do something before you assign money to it.

Man, sometimes I really appreciate how stubbornly you cling to an idea. "Lookit, they're only doing this for fire mitigation and everything will be a-ok." or "The SEC is still the most dominant conference in college football." I jest, but you kind of ruined your credibility with all the SEC commentary in the past. ;)
 
Man, sometimes I really appreciate how stubbornly you cling to an idea.
You make assumptions and then apply your traits to me. ;).

I'm not the one who's convinced they know what rescinding the roadless rule will do. I'm just pointing out what the proponents think it is going to do.

As far as the SEC goes, it's an unknown too. Some are sure it's the end of the SEC. That's possible but considering how much more the SEC focuses on Football, and how much they have in donations, I think we have to see how this plays out. NIL has the conferences in a transition.
 
Here’s a link everyone to submit a comment:

Thanks for the link, comment made in vehement opposition.
 
For those looking for specific studies, etc to cite in your comments, BHA pulled together a solid literature review on the impacts of road on elk:

 
I don’t know enough about this to know if I should be outraged or hopeful that some of the 12’ tall matrix blowdown hell that I often find myself in while out west might be cleared out/used for something beneficial thus opening the forest back to up animals who have largely abandoned large chunks of it.
 
I don’t know enough about this to know if I should be outraged or hopeful that some of the 12’ tall matrix blowdown hell that I often find myself in while out west might be cleared out/used for something beneficial thus opening the forest back to up animals who have largely abandoned large chunks of it.

Two quick ones.

One, the largest area affected by this will be the Tongass in AK. It is a rainforest that gets between 100 and 200 inches of rain a year. There is no fire danger there. Rescinding the roadless rule simply opens it up to commercial logging.

Two, the risk of a wildfire starting in an area quadruples when it gets a road, for obvious reasons. Some management is necessary. The clear cut logging this is intended to facilitate is not.

Just like the invasion of Venezuela... definitely all about helping the Venezuelan people and has NOTHING at all to do with the fact that they have the largest petroleum reserves of any country in the hemisphere...
 
I don’t know enough about this to know if I should be outraged or hopeful that some of the 12’ tall matrix blowdown hell that I often find myself in while out west might be cleared out/used for something beneficial thus opening the forest back to up animals who have largely abandoned large chunks of it.


In every direction from my house are hundreds of thousands of acres of beetle-killed hellscape that deer and elk basically don't use. Most if it ain't in roadless areas, and nothing is really being done about those places as is, and so nothing will be done about it in what are currently-roadless areas if roadless areas are removed as a management distinction.

It ain't merchantable, and the roadless distinction isn't preventing fuels treatments. That said, a fair amount of elk have made it to my freezer from roadless areas that don't look like that.


This whole effort is about something else having nothing to do with timber extraction, local control, and fire suppression. Those are just shiny objects in front of the hook.

1787254030689.png
 
Back
Top