In response to:

Federal Forest Fire Policy: Powerful Environmentalists, Hurting the Environment

Stan306 Wrote: May 13, 2012 11:57 AM
If we don't manage the forests that's fine, but don't be naive enough to think there aren't consequences. The fire of 1910 is a prime example of what happens when the forest is loaded with dead and downed fuel. Today we would spend 100'ds of millions fighting a fire like that (and I might add that it's money we don't have) and in the end you don't have the resource to even argue about how to use - except for Kingsford and Royal Oak...

My problem with 'environmentalists' isn't that they want to protect the planet -- it's a very admirable goal, and as an avid outdoorswoman myself, you'd be hard-pressed to find someone more interested in preserving America's pristine landscapes than myself. My problem with environmentalists is that they are usually woefully misguided on the best methods of accomplishing that goal. Environmentalists are almost unfailingly liberal urbanites and suburbanites who follow the in-vogue eco-trends as dogma, fancying that the marketing campaigns telling them that carrying a reusable shopping bag does something at all meaningful to help the environment without doing any of their...