Thursday, September 3, 2009


A deer surveys the aftermath of the Station Fire.

I could hardly believe what I was reading this morning:

(on a discussion board of San Gabriel Mountain hikers)

From Greg Sweet. Chantry Flats pack station:

I have just received word from a Forest Service briefing that they are going to let Chantry Flat and Big Santa Anita Canyon burn. The Station fire is to the west and they have cut a fire break to the east. This canyon is home to 80 historic cabins, 113-year-old Sturtevant's Camp, and the last pack station in Southern California. It would be a shame to loose this piece of history, but to have no intention to defend it is disgraceful. This canyon is a living museum and as much a part of LA history as the Observatory.

Here's what they plan to let burn--like it's inconsequential:

You can bet if there were multi-million dollar homes or a judge living there, they'd be all over it. How they can let this valuable piece of history, not to mention a popular recreation area, burn to the ground without lifting a finger to try and save it is unconscionable. They could have done something to lay down protection earlier in the fire before it started moving in that direction. But hey, guess what? They were too busy trying to save the houses that were allowed to be built up in the canyons. I wish every one of those had burned instead.

I am sick to death of hearing people say, "Oh, that's what forests do--for millions of years forest burn and regenerate. It will grow back"

Well listen up idiots! Not in my lifetime they won't! It will take decades to regenerate--and I don't have that much time left. I was reading this sort of crap on a discussion board for hikers of the San Gabriel Mountains. Well, the joke will be on them soon, as the forest burns leaving no where left for them to hike. Discuss that, you morons!


Tabor said...

I cannot imagine that they are making these decisions without great regard for allocation of resources and prevention of loss of life. It is a tragedy... but not necessarily of the bureaucrats making.

Linda Navroth said...

I totally disagree with you. This is all bureaucratic. They have a mandate from high-ranking officials to put the manpower wherever there are homes in danger. My point is that these homes should never have been built in those foothills. There's been a debate about it for decades, yet they keep allowing the building to continue. So if they insist on building in those areas, the homeonwers should have to sign a waiver of their rights to protection from wildfires. If you move there, you know the risks and dangers--and you should have to deal with it yourself. I am sick of haivng my tax dollars used to fight a fire that's encroaching on some rich schmoe's house.