On Congress and salvage
The Bureau of Land Management is considering salvage. It won’t. Even if it wanted to, it can’t. Congress insists upon a drawn-out legal (not environmental) process, which insures the snags will deteriorate to the point where they can’t be economically removed.
I think Congress believes salvage is bad for the environment. Its members know snags are one of the top three cripplers and killers of firefighters every year. When firefighters are killed, they quit breathing and when they quit breathing, they quit producing carbon dioxide (except for the decomposition process) and that reduces global warming. It’s the only logical explanation for leaving hundreds of thousands of snags across the landscape. Between the snags, ObamaCare and our highly successful Middle East policy, our government must believe producing dead people is good for the environment.
Snags are often the tallest objects left on the landscape after a fire, so they get hit by lightning. The snags ignite easily and burn hot. It’s a simple enough concept that even Congressmen understand, occasionally. If a snag is still standing as it burns, it can produce embers that can start more fires. When snags burn through, they fall and roll, which spreads fire, and even kills firefighters, which must be why the snags were left.
We should be thankful because it leaves more oxygen for the rest of us. You see, if it weren’t for Congressional requirements, we might all find ourselves short of breath and neck-deep in firefighters.
If the Canyonville/Glendale fire only created 10 snags per acre and it burned 20,000 acres, that’s 200,000 opportunities to reduce the number of firefighters and increase our oxygen supply. Why Congress even allows BLM to consider salvage is beyond me.