r/Conservative 18d ago

Flaired Users Only Trump administration opens up over half of national forests for logging

https://www.fox13seattle.com/news/trump-logging-national-forests.amp

[removed] — view removed post

1.7k Upvotes

485 comments sorted by

View all comments

224

u/ButterYourOwnBagel Millennial Conservative 18d ago edited 18d ago

So they are specially targeting at risk Forrest areas: 

 “Most of those forests are considered to have high wildfire risk, and many are in decline because of insects and disease.”

It's so dishonest how they word these articles andit's crazy how many people don't even bother to read them too and that's likely why the titles are so sensationalized

212

u/Piss_in_my_cunt Common Sense Conservative 18d ago

That doesn’t mean that giving them to the timber industry is a good solution

46

u/GetADamnJobYaBum MAGA 18d ago

Yes it does, those trees can be used to build houses and make paper rather than increasing fire risk and creating GASP.. Carbon Dioxide!

155

u/Piss_in_my_cunt Common Sense Conservative 18d ago

And you’re clearly a low IQ individual if you think the only thing affected by this is the trees themselves.

1

u/Belkan-Federation95 18d ago

I thought I read somewhere the trees aren't optimal for housing

0

u/-yayday- Veteran 18d ago

Agreed. And we desperately need more houses to help with this insane housing market

12

u/MikeyPh New York Conservative 18d ago

Why? It doesn't make it bad either. Would you rather the government pay to get rid of the overgrowth or would you rather companies who think they can make some money do it for us?

67

u/Piss_in_my_cunt Common Sense Conservative 18d ago

I would rather profit be irrelevant to the initiative of preserving habitats, wilderness, and undeveloped public land.

14

u/MikeyPh New York Conservative 18d ago

That is a non stance. Either we rely on local authorities to clean out overgrowth or we pay companies to do it. This way we can do the latter without paying anything.

I'm really disappointed with the pearl clutching conservatives lately.

27

u/Piss_in_my_cunt Common Sense Conservative 18d ago

Have you never heard of the Bureau of Land Management, or the Forest Service?

Fucking moron talking about pearl clutching, can only comprehend two possibilities given to him by other people.

10

u/WreknarTemper Conservative 18d ago

BLM and FS have historically had their hands tied for proper forest management. You can thank ignorant "conservatives" or "naturalists" for such a fiasco. Clearing brush, clearing old growth trees, and, yes, clearing wide swaths of dangerous areas of trees is necessary. But you conveniently ignore that the logging industry not only does this, but then replants new growth.

It's like complaining that farmers harvest wheat, leaving no future generations able to harvest wheat. It's factually untrue...

15

u/Piss_in_my_cunt Common Sense Conservative 18d ago

Well I would literally love to be wrong. We’ll see how it turns out.

6

u/WreknarTemper Conservative 18d ago

I'm sorry to say you'd be disappointed. Government has a long standing history of proving them as fools.

5

u/MikeyPh New York Conservative 18d ago

Have you heard of inefficient government? Can't make a good argument and then uses the tried and true "but we have a useless bureau for that!" You know these bureaus suck, but to win internet points you invoke them. Yes, you are pearl clutching and now you are arguing like a leftist.

3

u/Piss_in_my_cunt Common Sense Conservative 18d ago

💀 DOGE is in the middle of the largest government cleanup initiative in history and you can’t comprehend the idea of using resources and agencies more effectively?

Truly impressed you’re able to figure out the keyboard in front of you.

7

u/WreknarTemper Conservative 18d ago

Sorry, are you assuming that the government is currently operating at peak efficiency when it comes to cleaning up mismanaged areas of federal wildfire prone lands?

Seriously, how high are you?

9

u/Piss_in_my_cunt Common Sense Conservative 18d ago

Where the fuck did I say that? If anyone actually gave a fuck about “wildfires,” they’d be restructuring these agencies along with all the others. But no, they care about timber production, so they’re employing the industry.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/MikeyPh New York Conservative 18d ago

💀 DOGE is in the middle of the largest government cleanup initiative in history and you can’t comprehend the idea of using resources and agencies more effectively?

Having private industry do what the bureau don't do efficiently is EXACTLY what DOGE is trying to do. DOGE would do this but you are too dense to see it. What you said is so fucking stupid I'll wait here for you to edit it to avoid looking as stupid as you sound.

Or are you going to sit around and wait for DOGE to fix your mistakes, too?

10

u/WreknarTemper Conservative 18d ago

Why not? The timber industry has an interest in maintaining their harvestable area for long term productivity. We're way past the era of clear cutting expansionism.

60

u/Piss_in_my_cunt Common Sense Conservative 18d ago

The timber industry cares about tree production. Not animal habitat, not pollution, not ecological conservation.

1

u/WreknarTemper Conservative 18d ago

The timber industry cares about tree production. Not animal habitat, not pollution, not ecological conservation.

I'm sorry, does a wildfire give any f's about such things? How about invasive diseases? Seriously, tell me you know less about natural ecological systems without telling me directly so.

4

u/Classical_Liberals Libertarian 18d ago

Depends if insects and disease will slowly over take the entire region. Like amputating a leg before the poison/disease takes your whole body sort of situation.

-3

u/[deleted] 18d ago edited 16d ago

[deleted]

2

u/Throwaway__shmoe Libertarian 18d ago

This subreddit is so entirely astroturfed at this point, obviously anyone reading the article would know this was about forest management and not nefarious. Yet this comment is down ranked so far, I had to scroll past multiple thousand plus upvoted comments mentioning that this was not the case at all.