Trump's Plan to Save the Forests

originally posted by: quintessentone
POST REMOVED BY STAFF

Whose trade is it to ignore the dry forests and let half of everyone's houses burn down already in California? Hint: It isn't Donald Trump's. You don't have to like him to acknowledge that BTW.

Whose order was it that said "don't let anyone escape the burn zone in Hawaii? Not Trump's.

Perhaps you should reevaluate things.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Your mention of renaturing was something I had not heard of however I did not intend to suggest that you were lying.

But you just did, word for word. You know if you had the spine to just say sorry (what I not expect, neither of it) I could respect that but you had to go that way, for reasons only you really know.

This quick summerization along with the pictures in your link suggest a much more localized program of water distribution than this idea of Trumps which would dwarf in scale and cost the programs that you have suggested as being proof of validity of Trump's proposal.

This is why, with every such endeavor, studies are made beforehand. Not everyone is knee-jerky like the article or those that just gobble it up and run with it.

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: TDDAgain
a reply to: TerryMcGuire
If this plan is feasable would have to be determined by a study or two. You and I are certainly not in the position to judge this. If it isn't then it isn't.

But of course the reactionary hate crowd can not think that far or knows these scientific processes.

Orange Man Bad

Orange Man simplistic? Is this water coming from rain in Northern Cali? Is there enough rain to dampen what forests are left in all the state? Entertainment is Donald's trade.

Whose trade is it to ignore the dry forests and let half of everyone's houses burn down already in California? Hint: It isn't Donald Trump's. You don't have to like him to acknowledge that BTW.

Whose order was it that said "don't let anyone escape the burn zone in Hawaii? Not Trump's.

Perhaps you should reevaluate things.

Whose trade is it to actually put forth workable plans to prevent forest fires? It would be those people who are in the trade not a wanna be president who puts out these sensationalized statements without any backup science or feasibility studies to appeal to the younger generations or the younger environmentalists who may not know the actual science involved.

Again, where is this water coming from? Donald suggests it will come from rain and that's all folks!

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

I want to have the overflow areas go into your forests and dampen your forests, because if you dampen your forests you're not gonna have these forest fires that are burning at levels that nobody's ever seen," Trump said to a cheering crowd.

Genius idea but does he wants to flood the forests with water or does he have a genius way to distribute said water evenly around them ?

Question 5. How many other questions could we come up with to ask him, or anyone who would think that this idea is realistic. AT ALL.

I have a question , how does he plan to deal with all the extra mosquitoes created in these soggy forests ?

a reply to: RazorV66

You would lose that bet. I have no concern about his eating habits and have no idea of his feeding of fish.

As for major projects such as Trump is proposing I do not find reference. TDD offered a glimpse at small projects that are taking place that I think are most likely distribution projects of reestablishing small degraded water ways and not a large project to transfer hugeeeeeeeee amounts of water from one place to another hundreds and hundreds of miles apart.

Do you have any sources suggesting the viability of a project such as this, especially one that would be fast to administer and would be free?

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: TDDAgain
a reply to: TerryMcGuire
If this plan is feasable would have to be determined by a study or two. You and I are certainly not in the position to judge this. If it isn't then it isn't.

But of course the reactionary hate crowd can not think that far or knows these scientific processes.

Orange Man Bad

Orange Man simplistic? Is this water coming from rain in Northern Cali? Is there enough rain to dampen what forests are left in all the state? Entertainment is Donald's trade.

Whose trade is it to ignore the dry forests and let half of everyone's houses burn down already in California? Hint: It isn't Donald Trump's. You don't have to like him to acknowledge that BTW.

Whose order was it that said "don't let anyone escape the burn zone in Hawaii? Not Trump's.

Perhaps you should reevaluate things.

Whose trade is it to actually put forth workable plans to prevent forest fires? It would be those people who are in the trade not a wanna be president who puts out these sensationalized statements without any backup science or feasibility studies to appeal to the younger generations or the younger environmentalists who may not know the actual science involved.

Again, where is this water coming from? Donald suggests it will come from rain and that's all folks!

Whatever Trump's plan is, it will be a thousand times better than the current admin, plus current state governors ignoring these issues, even adding to the danger instead of helping stop it. letting everyone's houses burn down, (with people still in them unfortunately).

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

TDD offered a glimpse at small projects that are taking place

You keep saying small projects for the third time now. If you had bothered to translate the article I provided to you, you would see how wrong you are.

But keep running with it. Embrace the illusion. It's all you got.

I was reporting from my personal observations around my hometown but it was done on a much larger scale. I just put that here as a disclaimer before you quote me saying "hometown" and try keep running with it.

a reply to: TDDAgain

I did not call you a liar. I stated that ''if what you said was true''. That means that I had no idea whether what you were saying was true or not as I had not heard of this sort of project and hence had no way of determining it's validity. You offered this example as an example of a project that would give a viable example of how Trump's project might be practical.
What I have learned from this conversation is it is not.

a reply to: TDDAgain

If you had bothered to translate the article

Oh? Never mind,

a reply to: quintessentone

Right, from rain. Rain ''up north''. Brilliant.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

That means that I had no idea whether what you were saying was true or not

Yes, implied I am lying, just like I worded it. Normally people do not have the prejudice that someone is lying, except they project or have a reason to. Your only reason here would be disbelief to further your own bias.

You can not weasel out of this with semantics. And this was my last reply here, enough of the side banter on this sinking ship that this thread is.

I am setting sail, arrrrr

originally posted by: TDDAgain
a reply to: TerryMcGuire
It's not a "great little idea" and my claim is true.

Funny that you have to clutch so hard to your "gotcha Trump" moment you need to imply I am lying about this being a thing.

Please explain if you want just how the project in your area could be accomplished on such a major scale as Trump has proposed.

IDK if you seen them before but there are those things called excavators. They are also not realy shoveling out the earth but drag a spoon like shovel through it. It goes so fast that they do not stop driving while they do that, with the tracks on both sides of the little river. Obviously the bigger ones could not be done with that. And Trump is talking about dry canals, so they are there already.

People built the Panama Channel and the one in Egypt, too and that was decades ago.

That's awesome! It makes a lot more sense than the devastation current policies are causing with the green agenda, going electric without the infrastructure to support it.

Trump seems to explain things coming from a layman's viewpoint, but it translates to what you've shown actually works. He may not be able to wow us with fancy words 99% of the people can't understand a9as they sell us bad policy) but ideas like this actually have the potential to improve living standards for the average person.

a reply to: nugget1
Turned around the ship cause I saw you waiving in the distance from some constructive chatter over the reel.

Yes that was the idea and really it did so much! What before was just a place with a dead straight laughable river, is now a zone where some many animals found a new home. There are ducks and geese, the darn beaver, herons.. so there must be fish or frogs and other amphibious animals too.

We went to some of these places as kids, as we had nothing real to do so compared to back then, it is real paradise for animals now. These areas also act as flodd buffers even without the dam regulation because of the meandering in snake like motion of the new set rivers. So when there is too much water, instead of making the river flow faster, they have a chance to rise since the snake like motion slows down the water.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

The idea is realistic and simple, been done many times, on very large scales
My issue is the extra growth caused by water, extra fuel for fire

Clearly you have no idea about transporting water in pipelines from great distances
Go do some research, it’s not hard to find information

a reply to: TerryMcGuire



Tuesday afternoon
I'm just beginning to see
Now I'm on my way
It doesn't matter to me
Chasing the clouds away
Something calls to me
The trees are drawing me near
I've got to find out why
Those gentle voices I hear
Explain it all with a sigh
I'm looking at myself reflections of my mind
It's just the kind of day to leave myself behind
So gently swaying through the fairyland of love
If you'll just come with me you'll see the beauty of
Tuesday afternoon
Tuesday afternoon
Tuesday afternoon
I'm just beginning to see
Now I'm on my way
It doesn't matter to me
Chasing the clouds away
Something calls to me
The trees are drawing me near
I've got to find out why
Those gentle voices I hear
Explain it all with a sigh

a reply to: TerryMcGuire
Sorry.
That extra Northern California water is already delivered via aqueducts to the Los Angeles Basin.
Los_Angeles_Aqueduct
California_Aqueduct
I know because I lived close to one of those aqueducts very far North of LA.


So force evacuate L.A. Basin and shut down all farming in San Joaquin Valley.

a reply to: TDDAgain

It makes aa lot of sense to find a way to work with nature to find solutions than to create even more problems that require further destruction of the environment for temporary, very expensive measures-like strip mining lithium and further taxing the failing power grid in disrepair nationwide.

It's the horrible shape the power grid is in that has been named as the cause of many recent California fires, and all the dry tender doesn't help.
Green things up, upgrade the power grid and it stands to reason there would be fewer fires.
When Trump was POTUS he also addressed the mismanagement of our national forests going back decades. Decaying underbrush on the forest floor and refusing to allow controlled burns isn't a recent problem; it's been discussed and fought over for decades, and now that the devastation predicted is happening it's being blamed on 'climate change.

Large swathes of forests are dying all around us in Idaho because of a beetle infestation; we've watched it get worse by the year as campers. Dead tender as far as the eye can see, and the Bureau of Land Management/Feds won't allow any of the it to be cut out and logged off; they're just going to wait until it all goes up in smoke.

a reply to: Raggedyman

I was raised in a town that got it's water from the mountains two hundred miles away. It took twenty years to build that system. I studied that project in high school. This was not the same thing as Trump put forth.

What Trump put forth is not a mere two hundred miles but over a thousand, or more depending on where he is going to find this abundance of water ''up north'' . What state could that be and how do you think the people and governments of Washington, Oregon or Idaho are going to think about that? It would piss them off if the Feds came in and took their water. The amount of push back that Idaho would make against Trump's idea would lose him the state. How would the people of any of those states think about California watering their forests with their water.

As well, the water that my town received was down a mountain from the High Sierras. Lots of gravity propulsion there. Not so from Idaho or Washington or Canada. Lot's of flat land between even Seattle and Anaheim where his supporters were promised the water.

And fast? I"ve dealt with that fantasy already in this thread.

We have had numerous projections over that last thirty years about the severity of water issues that are growing and growing. Water wars has been a topic for half my life, yet, here you are thinking that Trumps Idea to take water from some far away place is going to happen? That sounds fanciful to me and nothing to build a campaign promise on other than it is being fed to fools.

a reply to: pthena

As did I. We got our water from Hetch Hetchy. Those aquaducts were built overv half a century ago when water was much more plentiful and the population was at best a quarter of what it is now. And even as I do not live in that state now I don't know as there is all that much of a over abundance of water in Northern California. North of 'Redding'' the lakes are now full from this last winter but that is the exception now and not the rule. Shasta lake for instance had been shrinking and shrinking for a decade until this last huge storm blew through. This is not enough of a basis for big time planning to move water from the North to the South.

a reply to: TDDAgain

You say this was done in your hometown region. I'm not sure where you live, but I'm reasonably confident assuming that the entirety of the forested regions of California cover more area than your hometown region. Is that accurate?

Furthermore, to keep the forested areas consistently and significantly damp during the fire seasons would be a horrible waste of much needed agricultural resources.

As WatichItBurn stated, they'd have far more luck with controlled burns, the way the natives did it for thousands of years.