/r/titlegore

There's a similar thing with mice and rats where if you just keep putting one hand flat in front of the other, they'll run to the next hand and you can make a little hand-over-hand treadmill for them. It's a fun little game and keeps them from jumping down or climbing all over you.

I've occasionally had it work with lizards. Especially fast little guys like anoles and fence lizards.

I feel like I could get a beer with him

Eh, it doesn't really work that way. My dad worked for the BLM for almost 30 years and I was on a wildland crew for them for a few years too. There are definitely high-level decisions coming from Washington but most of the people making day-to-day decisions are locals who really love that land.

It made me a big believer in our public lands, and I just don't know that I trust most states to do much better. Here, probably and a few others, but state land where I worked was a mess.

Not to say that federal agencies are doing a good job, but change happens slower at that level so it's a lot harder for a few corrupt individuals to open up mining, allow ATV use, sell off parcels, etc. The last administration did a lot of damage but it could be so much worse.

But it's definitely an interesting thing to consider. I'm happy with whoever makes sure we have trees in 100 years.

Thanks for that link. I knew we'd restarted it, but hadn't seen that list of upcoming burns.

FYI that's for state-managed lands, federal is it's own program, and private is anyone's guess but the state assists usually.

The thing I've seen from CA and federal is that while there's a lot of good intentions at first, they often get canceled, cut short, underfunded, and/or underplanned. It ends up barely making a dent, and as soon as one gets out control - something we have to assume will happen sometimes, especially with poor planning and staffing - the next several get delayed indefinitely. It looks really bad for politicians to have a fire they "started" get out of control.

I don't want to badmouth WA's program because I don't know and it's still relatively young. It's a step in the right direction at least. But until I see some real successes I still hesitate to say we fixed anything. We're starting to try, but we probably need at least a decade of good successful prescribed burning to even come close to "fixed".

>Then we can get to that goal of 94% of fires under 10 acres,” Franz said.

I totally understand that goal from a resource perspective, smaller fires are much easier and cheaper than to contain. But I don't know how I feel about the implications of that long-term.

Without having an effective controlled burn and fuel reduction program, it seems like we're further compounding the problem by letting fire-adapted ecosystems continue to go without burning.

>we learned and fixed it.

No, we really didn't. We still don't do controlled burns, and we barely do any fuel reduction compared to what we should. You're absolutely right about those other factors, and climate change being the root of them. But we haven't fixed shit.