|
The Environmentalist Fires
By John Berlau American Thinker
October 29, 2007
Last week, CNN delayed for a few hours the scheduled Tuesday
night broadcast debut of its much-hyped documentary series "Planet in Peril"
due to live coverage of the tragic wildfires that have displaced more than
500,000 people in Southern California. But that didn't keep CNN "golden boy"
reporter Anderson Cooper from using the tragedy to tout the program he starred
in as much as he could.
Cooper constantly claimed during the week that the fires
provided further confirmation of the documentary's prediction of an
eco-catastrophe. Cooper said that higher temperature due to global warming may
have been a factor. It was a "timely documentary," Cooper said last Tuesday on
CNN's "Larry King Live", because "California certainly seems to be in peril."
But ironically, much of the reason California is in peril is
due not to climate change, but to the very environmental policies championed by
Cooper's documentary and our new Nobel laureate, Al Gore. While, in its
statement
praising Gore, the Nobel Committee said that global warming may "threaten the
living conditions of much of mankind," the current wildfires show that the more
immediate threat to man comes from the champions of the gnatcatcher, kangaroo
rat, and the Delhi Sands Flower-Loving fly.
Environmental mandates have made fire safety for humans take
a back seat to the well-being of the aforementioned California creatures, as
well as that of every bug and rat lucky enough to be listed as an "endangered
species" under federal and state law. For over a decade, environmentalists have
hamstrung Californians in their efforts to clear the dry brush that is
providing the fuel for this massive fire. If any of these endangered or even
"threatened" species are found in shrubs or bushes on public or private
property, it becomes very difficult to give this vegetation even the slightest
haircut. This is true even if city codes require firebreaks to be built.
An example of the legal strait jacket that homewoners faced
in the areas hit by the fires is the "brush management
guide" on the City of San Diego web site. The confusing instructions state
that vegetation within 100 feet of homes in canyon areas "must be thinned and
pruned regularly." But then, the same sentence goes on to state that this must
be achieved "without harming native plants, soil or habitats."
Then in fine print at the bottom of the page, the real
kicker comes in: "Brush management is not allowed in coastal sage scrub during
the California gnatcatcher nesting season, from March 1st through August 15th.
This small bird only lives in coastal sage scrub and is listed as a threatened
species by the federal government. Any harm to this bird could result in fines
and penalties."
Coastal sage scrub is a low plant ubiquitous near coastal
California that grows like a weed under almost any condition. And since
gnatcatcher nesting season lasts almost six months, there could be much buildup
of sage scrub that becomes hard for homeowners to control. Especially since the
maintenance rules severely restrict the use of mechanical brush-clearing
devices even when gnat nesting season is over.
The tragedy is that this shows that not much has changed
even after previous warnings from experts that environmental rules were on a
collision course with fire safety in California and many other places, because
they prevented the removal of "excess fuel" for fires from dense stands of
trees and vegetation. Southern California homes were
lost in 1993 after the federal Fish and Wildlife Service told homeowners
that mechanical clearing of brush would likely violate the Endangered Species
Act. The reason: it could alter the habitat of a newly-listed endangered
species called the Stephens
kangaroo rat.
Some exemptions were made, and clarifications were issued,
but landowners still face the lingering risk that the simple act of building a
firebreak can send them down the river if an endangered species is anywhere
near their property. California's Blue Ribbon Fire Commission, which had been
created after wildfires in 2003 by then-Governor Gray Davis and whose members
included Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., as well as state legislators of both
parties,
concluded
that "habitat preservation and environmental protection have often
conflicted with sound fire safe planning."
But did this bipartisan finding or any of the documented
harms to fire safety from environmental rules make it into CNN's exploration of
possible causes of the current fires? Not a gnatcatcher's chance. Instead,
climate "expert" Cooper told viewers Wednesday night that the wildfires were
"symptoms of a planet in peril. Fire, drought, deforestation; it's all
connected."
Yet the data show that temperature for areas hit by the fire
was well within average ranges, and came nowhere near the record highs. On
Monday the 23rd, for instance the high temperature in
Escondido
was 84 degrees, and the high in
Santa
Ana was 87 degrees. According to temperature statistics from the
National
Weather Service, the mean high in both cities for that date is 79 degrees.
What's more, the record high for that date is 102 degrees in Escondido (in
1929) and 103 degrees in Santa Ana (in 1965). So tell us again, Anderson, how
global warming is to blame, when the weather where the fires struck was not
nearly as hot as it was more than 40 years ago and almost 80 years ago!
What about those harsh Santa Ana winds? Well, they are
pretty strong. Here's
one
writer's description: "It was one of those hot dry Santa Anas that come
down through the mountain passes and curl your hair and make your nerves jump
and your skin itch."
Woooo! What a great description of the winds last week.
Except that this passage wasn't written last week, last month, or last year. It
was written by detective fiction master Raymond Chandler to describe the Santa
Ana winds of about 70 years ago. It's in the opening paragraph of his famous
short story "Red Wind," first published in 1938. So rough winds are nothing new
under the California sun!
What's really changing the "climate" in Southern California
is that there is more fuel for fires, since much less of the brush, as well as
disease-infested trees, can be cleared, thanks to environmental mandates.
The problem is even worse on land owned by the federal and
state governments. To satisfy the feds, San Diego has placed more than 170,000
acres off limit to development for the exclusive purpose, in the city's words,
of "protect[ing] habitat for over 1,000 native and non-native plant species and
more than 380 species of fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals." Hugh
Hewitt, the California radio talk show host and author who is also a real
estate attorney, has
noted
in the Weekly Standard:
"The land that has passed into 'conserved' status is at even
greater risk of fire than private land that is home to a protected species
because absolutely no one cares for its fire management policy. The scrum of
planners, consultants and G-11s that put together these plans should be
monitoring these areas closely. Instead, they regulate and move on to savage
the property rights of the next region."
And enviro groups also get more and more land locked up by
conveniently finding more species to petition the government to protect. In
California, as in other places, it's often a case of creative subdividing of
essentially the same species. First it was the Stephens kangaroo rat whose
designation as endangered put much brush clearance off limits. Then, in 1998,
the San
Bernardino kangaroo rat got listed. Also under federal protection is the
Fresno kangaroo rat. And
so on and so on.
Across the country, fires have become more destructive as
trees and shrubs gain "protected" status preventing them form being cleared. As
Bill Croke
noted
last week in American Thinker, In the last two decades annual timber production
on the national forests in the West has decreased from roughly 12 billion board
feet to less than 3 billion today. This has resulted in brush-choked forests
with large "fuel loads."
The ironic thing is that all this "protection" at the
expense of humans doesn't necessarily work out for the gnatcatchers -- not to
mention more majestic creatures -- anyway. According to the Associated Press,
the fires struck close to the San Diego Wild Animal Park, threatening condors,
a cheetah, and many other animals. The Blue Ribbon Fire Commission found that
the 2003 wildfires resulted in "the loss of valuable watershed, wildlife, and
critical environmental habitats."
Of course, saving species never really was the objective of
many enviros. It's just a subterfuge for their main interest of controlling the
human species.
Endangered Species Act abuses, including those that
prevented fire breaks in Southern California, were an issue
that helped get the GOP in
power in 1994. But with some exceptions like former Rep. Richard Pombo of
California, Republicans began to abandon this issue, lest they be branded as
anti-green. It's time for the GOP, as well as truly moderate Democrats, to
befriend again the threatened species known as the beleaguered property
owner.
And if the Nobel Committee really wanted to give an award to
folks preventing a hazard threatening mankind, they should rescind Al Gore's
prize and hand it to the brave California firefighters whose jobs have been
made so much harder by the nonsensical practices of the environmental
movement.
John Berlau is the author of the Amazon best-selling book
Eco-Freaks.
He is director of the Center for Entrepreneurship at the
Competitive Enterprise Institute.
|