Healthy Forests/Vibrant Communities Act

Here comes what at first appears to be another poorly designed and planned, rehashed group of legislative bills for the environment.

Gov. Bill Ritter and a group of bipartisan lawmakers but by no means a group of law makers with common sense. Announced on November 12TH the "Healthy Forests/Vibrant Communities Act of 2009," a legislative proposal that would protect Colorado's "prized" forest lands, assist local communities and stimulate economic activity.

The Act would include four pieces of questionable legislation, providing:

Resources and technical support to ensure that local communities can adequately assess wildfire risks and create effective response plans.

Additional support to reduce imminent threats through thinning projects focused on protecting lives, homes and community investments such as reservoirs, power lines and other infrastructure.

Increased focus on long-term restoration projects in community watersheds to protect public water supplies and create high-quality wildlife habitat.

A revolving loan fund to support businesses and create jobs by finding new ways to market timber and other wood products generated by community protection efforts.

The proposed cost of this will be funded with $5.5 million in FY09-10 with the Severance Tax Operational Account, which derives its revenues from the tax that oil and gas companies pay to "sever" or extract energy resources in Colorado.

"We've worked very hard the last two years to educate the public about the bark beetle scourge and to address the problem as best we can with our limited resources," Rep. Scanlan said. "We've been as creative as possible. But creativity and luck just aren't enough. We must overcome the threat of devastating wildfires that may jeopardize the region's infrastructure, wildlife, communities and economies."

Let us dissect these proposals just a little bit. Try to examine what is really being said here.

First the call for resources and technical support. There is no definition of what this will be. When saying they need more resources does this mean more man power? Does it call for money? Just what are these resources that is called for here? The question to the technical support is that of man power I would presume but who and how many. Are these to be state employees, or contracted out to a company that bids on a contract to work in the states forests.

An increase in long term impact on water sheds?The public, power lines etc. This sounds to me not as a way to move forward but more impact studies that will bog down any true action in solving the problem.

Additional support in the reduction of threats to homes, communities, and wild life areas. OK now we are making a little progress here. But when they ask for support does this mean reaching out and being slapped in the face by more of the tree huggers and their failed management of the forests? It is these EPA and conservation regulations that need to be examined and mostly repealed in order to go in and enact fire breaks and remove the pine beetle kill.

One can easily manage with common sense and a little effort the balance of wildlife, the forests and man. Unfortunately so far we haven't had any one with this common sense in office to do so.

The fourth issue of promoting businesses to use and market the wood I support. There are many businesses and charities that can use this wood. Local saw mills, local lumber yards, enterprising craftsman who make rugged furniture. There are lots of ways this can be marketed. The question is how much of a cut into the profits will the state want for someone else's work.

The taxing of oil and other energy companies is another way of trying to hurt the big bad oil companies. Especially since Coloradoans were smart enough to vote down the tax proposition to raise 300 plus million in taxes on these companies. There is other ways of funding these projects. As a matter of fact I am currently talking to my state Representative in these ways to make it profitable to do so. ( more on that possibly later)

Claims of being a decade into the pine-beetle epidemic, is false. We have good years and we have bad years. Currently 1.5 million acres of mature, high-country lodge pole pine forests have been effected. Some forest health experts say up to 2.2 million more acres of mixed conifer forests will be impacted in the coming years. Well to this DUUUUAH!

Unless we enact a smart effective way to remove the dead wood and infected beetle kill, spray other possible infected trees. We are looking at a lot more then 2.2 million acres in the future. Not to mention those areas that will be bystander innocent to fires brought on by dead, dry wood.



I AM WATCHING.