The following is my musings on policy changes.
In response to a video concerned about removing the Roadless Rule and how it would affect forests: https://www.facebook.com/reel/631822482647915
My response: I generally agree with leaving nature untouched. Especially if it remote and not going to affect anyone. However, it really depends where these forests are.
For those that don’t know, wildfires keep getting out of control because we keep suppressing fires and this just builds up fuel for a catastrophic wildfire later. You kick the can down the road enough and it comes back as an angry celestial phoenix, wiping out houses and killing people. Modern forest management would allow logging companies to remove excess, and firefighters to do controlled burns.
Thinking of it from the admin’s perspective: You have all this lumber sitting there and industry wants it, and if you don’t go and get it, its going to catch fire and burn up anyway, possibly doing harm in areas near housing, so why not make an economically sustainable modern forest management system? Trees are a renewable resource after all.
An ideal world scenario: Imagine if we aren’t clear cutting and also steps are being taken to make sure this is sustainable. We have GPS now, satellites, and AI to count trees. We could rule out heavy equipment that damages soil. You allow chainsaws and to take out a certain percentage of trees but you can’t do ugly mountain top removal. Limit it to the outside edge where it could affect housing. It is doable and responsible.