According to the Senate panel on Wildfire Threats and Impacts there is wildlife loss because of the loss of wildlife habitat.
The wildlife that is lost directly contributes to a contraction of the USA economy. Hunting of elk and deer alone has an economy of $11 million per year in the US. While that is not billions there are also losses of wildlife and it's habitat because of the lack of funding of the Land and Water Conservation Act.
These monies are not a matter of frivolous activities. This is not about tree hugging. This is about protecting land that is beautiful and contributes to the country's economy.
The fire fighting budget should be a separate consideration when they are megafires. The medgafires take funding away from other activities of the US Forest Service and the habit loss, hence, wildlife loss becomes common place resulting in an impact on the USA economy. Also in consideration are the States. They collect fees to act on their own lands that are not federal to protect the economy attached to those State lands. When the federal government does not act to protect habitat and wildlife it impacts the state lands as well.
I doubt seriously anyone in the USA cannot identify with the fact drought is a profound problem that complicates wildfires in the USA. Protecting US land and water is vital to the full spectrum of activities to stem the further danger of more land and habitat loss.
This is a far better reporting:
...Hunting in America (click here) is big business, generating more than $67 billion in economic output and more than one million jobs in the United States. The vast majority of Americans embrace hunting lock, stock and barrel for its social, cultural and conservation contributions...
There needs to be far better forest restoration in the USA. The lands and water being discussed today ie only a small percentage of the tragedy. The forests provide a great deal of value to those lands. Besides the hunting, fishing and economic benefits from the forests there are also aesthetic values.
Currently, the US Forest Service incorporates logging into the forest management plans. When the US Forest Service is not able to address the restoration of our national forests because the fire fighting removes most of their budget that means there will be far less to log year after year of fire losses.
For legislators not familiar with the VALUE of forests to our economy the issues are frivolous and make for excellent political fodder. It is wrong to consider our forests as nothing more than liberal expenditures in the federal budget. These forests provide for a great deal of value to our country and society than 'just a liberal, tree hugging thing.'
There needs to be a separate fund and organization within the US Forest Service to exclusively fight fires. There needs to be complete funding of the US Forest Service, including additional funding for the next three years to make up for losses in past budgets. The US Forest Service has to catch up on forest restoration. The USA Forest Service has many partners that can come on board to assist in more aggressive forest restoration.
This is an emergency. There is not enough funding to create a separate fire fighting agency within the US Forest Service. There is not enough funding to return forests to their prior standing. This is not an option. If funding does come forward there will be more and more adverse outcomes to these lands and the to the communities who enjoy these lands.
There were many homes and building lost this past fire season. That increases costs to insurance companies. The more healthy a forest is managed the far less possibility of fire. Forests with a moist forest floor will fight off any sparks that might occur out of lightning. Proper management will save our lands, increase moisture on the forest floors to end fires before they start and protect communities from housing loss.
Last but not least are watersheds. The watersheds to the country begin in places where there are forests. The watersheds require forests for soil conservation and an effective filter to the water that falls within the forests. Proper management and restoration of the forests protect our watersheds. Where there are parched and disappearing forests because of fire there is a watershed stressed to provide sufficient water to communities.
There are many reasons for forests to be returned to the lands of the country. The Congressional Acts that support these forests need to be fully funded without question and quickly.
While many wildfires (click here) cause little damage to the land and pose few threats to fish, wildlife and people downstream, some fires create situations that require special efforts to prevent further problems after the fire. Loss of vegetation exposes soil to erosion; runoff may increase and cause flooding, sediments may move downstream and damage houses or fill reservoirs, and put endangered species and community water supplies at risk. The Forest Service Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) program addresses these situations with the goal of protecting life, property, water quality, and deteriorated ecosystems from further damage after the fire is out....
What will it take to bring about the funding for organizational changes and restoration activities, the complete loss of wildlife and dead lands that add to the heat within the troposphere over the USA contributing to greater heating of the entire troposphere.. Yes, the decisions regarding restoration of forest systems are directly related to slowing and ending the climate crisis. How can the USA ask Brazil to do more to protect it's tropical rainforests if the USA doesn't even care for it's own forests?
The wildlife that is lost directly contributes to a contraction of the USA economy. Hunting of elk and deer alone has an economy of $11 million per year in the US. While that is not billions there are also losses of wildlife and it's habitat because of the lack of funding of the Land and Water Conservation Act.
These monies are not a matter of frivolous activities. This is not about tree hugging. This is about protecting land that is beautiful and contributes to the country's economy.
The fire fighting budget should be a separate consideration when they are megafires. The medgafires take funding away from other activities of the US Forest Service and the habit loss, hence, wildlife loss becomes common place resulting in an impact on the USA economy. Also in consideration are the States. They collect fees to act on their own lands that are not federal to protect the economy attached to those State lands. When the federal government does not act to protect habitat and wildlife it impacts the state lands as well.
This is a far better reporting:
...Hunting in America (click here) is big business, generating more than $67 billion in economic output and more than one million jobs in the United States. The vast majority of Americans embrace hunting lock, stock and barrel for its social, cultural and conservation contributions...
There needs to be far better forest restoration in the USA. The lands and water being discussed today ie only a small percentage of the tragedy. The forests provide a great deal of value to those lands. Besides the hunting, fishing and economic benefits from the forests there are also aesthetic values.Currently, the US Forest Service incorporates logging into the forest management plans. When the US Forest Service is not able to address the restoration of our national forests because the fire fighting removes most of their budget that means there will be far less to log year after year of fire losses.
For legislators not familiar with the VALUE of forests to our economy the issues are frivolous and make for excellent political fodder. It is wrong to consider our forests as nothing more than liberal expenditures in the federal budget. These forests provide for a great deal of value to our country and society than 'just a liberal, tree hugging thing.'
There needs to be a separate fund and organization within the US Forest Service to exclusively fight fires. There needs to be complete funding of the US Forest Service, including additional funding for the next three years to make up for losses in past budgets. The US Forest Service has to catch up on forest restoration. The USA Forest Service has many partners that can come on board to assist in more aggressive forest restoration.
This is an emergency. There is not enough funding to create a separate fire fighting agency within the US Forest Service. There is not enough funding to return forests to their prior standing. This is not an option. If funding does come forward there will be more and more adverse outcomes to these lands and the to the communities who enjoy these lands.
There were many homes and building lost this past fire season. That increases costs to insurance companies. The more healthy a forest is managed the far less possibility of fire. Forests with a moist forest floor will fight off any sparks that might occur out of lightning. Proper management will save our lands, increase moisture on the forest floors to end fires before they start and protect communities from housing loss.
Last but not least are watersheds. The watersheds to the country begin in places where there are forests. The watersheds require forests for soil conservation and an effective filter to the water that falls within the forests. Proper management and restoration of the forests protect our watersheds. Where there are parched and disappearing forests because of fire there is a watershed stressed to provide sufficient water to communities.
There are many reasons for forests to be returned to the lands of the country. The Congressional Acts that support these forests need to be fully funded without question and quickly.
While many wildfires (click here) cause little damage to the land and pose few threats to fish, wildlife and people downstream, some fires create situations that require special efforts to prevent further problems after the fire. Loss of vegetation exposes soil to erosion; runoff may increase and cause flooding, sediments may move downstream and damage houses or fill reservoirs, and put endangered species and community water supplies at risk. The Forest Service Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) program addresses these situations with the goal of protecting life, property, water quality, and deteriorated ecosystems from further damage after the fire is out....
What will it take to bring about the funding for organizational changes and restoration activities, the complete loss of wildlife and dead lands that add to the heat within the troposphere over the USA contributing to greater heating of the entire troposphere.. Yes, the decisions regarding restoration of forest systems are directly related to slowing and ending the climate crisis. How can the USA ask Brazil to do more to protect it's tropical rainforests if the USA doesn't even care for it's own forests?
