View Single Post
      10-27-2020, 10:28 AM   #77
BayMoWe335
Colonel
1062
Rep
2,101
Posts

Drives: 2010 E92 335i 6MT
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: US

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmg View Post
It's literally illegal for the state to have control over federal land without approval. What are you saying? We should violate federal law?

Not sure if you know this but there are already talks for more coordination between state and federal agencies for wildfire prevention in CA.

I'm comparing apples to apples. Hawaii isn't going to burn not because they have good wildfire management. It's a wet climate. Just as CA doesn't have world class Polar Bear management- there's no polar bears here. So again, what are you comparing CA to? The weather is dry and hot with lots of forestry. There are going to be much more fires here than a state like Florida. Comparing "states that burn to states that don't burn" is counterproductive. That makes no sense.

You choosing to ignore infection rates doesn't make them invalid. You accuse CA for letting it burn, yet infection rates which have killed more people than wildfires are not important enough to be considered? Seems like cherry picking.
Again, youíre asking me for solutions. If your state is burning, federal or not, your leaders need to work that out, right? If my neighbor sets his lawn on fire...itís not my land, but I have an interest in making sure he stops.

Plus, the land you do control continues to burn, which demonstrates you couldnít handle it either way
Appreciate 2