Here
and
Now

opinions

High stakes for Earth's climate future in U.S. election

5 Comments
By Kelly Macnamara and Amelie Bottollier-Depois

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2020 AFP

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.


5 Comments
Login to comment

For your children's sake, flush Trump.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

The rate of global warming is very alarming. Trump denies that it is happening, so the choice for President is obvious, if only on that issue.

A lot of condemnation is made over China's contribution to global warming, but they do admit that the problem is real, and they are making plans and taking steps to make things better, so the rest of the world should give them credit for that.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Democrats and their oppressive environmental policies put California in the predicament it’s in now. Expect more of this from the left should they gain power.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

All the Repubs who are fighting action should be sent to the front lines of the fires

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Democrats and their oppressive environmental policies put California in the predicament it’s in now. Expect more of this from the left should they gain power.

Tells us please how this is so? The Federal Government owns 57% of the forests in California. The state owns 3%. The remainder are private land. The state has no authority to regulate Federally owned lands. None whatsoever. In fact state laws do not apply on Federal land and Federal employees are not bound by state laws when working on Federal lands. The Federal government is not bound by California labor laws and ignores them entirely (examples are no overtime after 8 hours of work and use or lose vacation time). Most of the fires in California are burning on Federal lands so the problem is lack of brush reduction by USFS and BLM, the budgets for which have been heavily reduced in recent years. The state has some authority to require public utilities to clear land around power lines for example but they cannot come on to your property in, say, Big Bear and force you to cut down your trees or remove vegetation or take other fire reduction measures on your land. The state of California spent more money on brush reduction on lands it does have control over than the Federal government has spent on its much larger land holdings. The fires in Southern California are not burning in forests though the land is called a National Forest. They are burning in dry grass, sage and chaparral. No logging there, never was. The big trees need water and So Cal is too dry for that. Even where you do have trees they are small and spaced far apart compared to someplace like Oregon or Idaho. Nothing marketable. There was never a developed logging industry anywhere in So Cal but the orange Jesus and his parrots like you will flap their yaps about lack of forest management causing fires in a land of dry grass and sagebrush.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites