OT: 2024 Weather Thread

[bellagiobob]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1817275126036979763

 

[brentashton]

having family there, they are amazed my cousins apartment survived, but my uncles house went. My uncle thought aspects of it were related to trees and catchable things near by. He was in the zone in the map you see that is all red. But, he said his neighbors survived, and it may have been the two big trees in his lawn that helped fuel it.

Can you imagine? Next door neighbours could find themselves experiencing so much relief and yet so much sadness due to the selective nature of loss.

It was the same in Ft Mac - 3 places side by side and 2 burnt to the ground and yet one place standing and all grass around it was still green.

 

[OfCorsiDid]

why would NP be responsible for forest management? Shouldn’t that be handled by the Canadian forest services which is an arm of resources Canada?

The issue is that this federal government is beholden to eco nuts who scream bloody murder any time a tree is cut down and who don’t understand how critical programs like selective logging are.

Feds had been getting warned for years about this exact situation but they never acted because they knew if they did they’d have a bunch of their dwindling base of voters coalescing in Jasper chaining themselves to trees to protest logging in a national park.

Nope it's Parks Canada that's in charge.

The rest is a assumption. I think the Libs do have to kowtow to the greenies a bit but ultimately they're not getting those votes anyways since they're either voting green party or NDP.

The real answer is that Parks Canada doesn't have the funding and as a result, the staff, to adequately manage the forests of all national parks. On top of that, any tree being removed has to go through a review process. There's not enough time, political will or money for Parks Canada to do this.

 

[OfCorsiDid]

Banff and Jasper combined have more visitation and collect more revenue than the rest of the parks in the nation combined. However much of this revenue does not stay in the two most important parks its allocated to the rest of the Park System and one that has had a missive to basically overreach and try to make more parks and preserves than can be funded, that are even possible to fund and maintain.

Sure?

But even if Jasper NP and Banff NP provide 95% of the revenue for Parks Canada, the disparity of only 25% means that they're probably not making enough money to support themselves. This is pure speculation of course because Parks Canada does not track/publish individual park revenue.

Either way, if we're going to bite off this amount of protected land, we need to chew. The fact that the US Park Service has a comparable number of parks and protected areas and Parks Canada has not even a 1/3rd of their budget means that there's gonna be massive gaps in maintenance and preservation.

The answer is more money and more staff. Where that comes from? Who knows.

 

[OfCorsiDid]

Coincidence that people are mentioning the pine beetles and failure of government to respond, then I run into this. Pretty good video breaking the problem down.

I mean that video address SOME issues, but it has a pretty clear anti-Liberal spin to it.

The guy mentions El Nino but fails to mention how the last 2 El Ninos (2016, 2023) led to the highest yearly world temperatures ever recorded. Also doesn't mention the massive extended heat spells that occurred those years that broke records all over the place.

That's climate change.

The expansion of the pine beetle population is also due to a warming climate. They use to be contained to lower elevations in the rockies and cascades primarily attacking lodgepole and ponderosa pines. However, warmer and drier years has led to them being able to survive in areas where historically they wouldn't. The northern forests of Alberta (High Level, Fort Chip, etc.) and the NWT have had significant increases of pine beetle infestations. Drier years also mean less sap in trees which is the primary defensive mechanism trees have for the beetles. Heck BC is almost devoid of lodgepole pines in some areas because they haven't had cold enough winters to kill the beetles.

So could Parks Canada do a better job at getting rid of dead trees? Yes. But let's not pretend that that's the only reason why these disasters keep happening.

 

[Drivesaitl]

Sure?

But even if Jasper NP and Banff NP provide 95% of the revenue for Parks Canada, the disparity of only 25% means that they're probably not making enough money to support themselves. This is pure speculation of course because Parks Canada does not track/publish individual park revenue.

Either way, if we're going to bite off this amount of protected land, we need to chew. The fact that the US Park Service has a comparable number of parks and protected areas and Parks Canada has not even a 1/3rd of their budget means that there's gonna be massive gaps in maintenance and preservation.

The answer is more money and more staff. Where that comes from? Who knows.

Again much of the SQ footage of protected NP lands in Canada are in remote areas that barely get any visitors. They are just essentially preserves. No services, next to no visitation.

To wit this. Jasper in 10th in size of NP's in Canada. The first 9 in the list barely see any visitors and have negligible expenses.

Largest National Parks in Canada

Canada has 48 national parks and national park reserves, as well as one national urban park (see also National Parks of Canada). They protect important land a...

www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca

ALL of US parks are in areas contiguous to population and they get visitors, provide much more in services and are funded commensurate with that. The Vast majority of Canada's NP's are places that see not many visitors and require not much funding.

In anycase Banff and Jasper accrue the lionshare of revenues of all the NP's in the nation. Banff also alone generates 3.1B in tourism revenue. Banff and Jasper are essentially carrying the Parks system as it is and yet they are among the poorest maintained parks in the system. Alberta for decades has been insisting that more of the revenues gathered by these two NP cashcows REMAINS in those parks to service those specifically.

Also I'm suspicious of the NP beancounting and anybody should be. I'm going to cite this one example of increased revenues for Banff. That they are charging 37bucks/day to park at Lake Louise Lake parking lot and from their own accounting they say they average 1200 vehicles a day and charge people 22weeks of the year to park there.

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/parks-canada-traffic-congestion-banff-moraine-lake-louise

They claim that all the parking revenue and shuttle revenue only adds up to 5.2M. But even an elemental calculation I did has the revenue at 6.8M just for the Lake Louise parking alone. Not even counting all the shuttle fees to Lake Louise or Moraine Lake. The total revenue for the parking and shuttle should be close to 9M. Yet Parks Canada is claiming operational expenses exceeding 9M annually just to provide shuttles and have a parking lot. Are they transporting people on Hummers? lol. Any operator would cover this route for a lot less. Its just one example of no matter how much NP are pulling in somehow their alleged expenses are greater.

Now lets keep in mind that parking at Lake Louise used to be free. Then suddenly it was 11bucks, then increased to 21, now to 37bucks. One gets the impression they could charge a 100bucks and still bleed that money away. NP accounting and money management is a complete joke.

Its just another story of how bureaucratic entities can't make a buck no matter how much they make due to bloat/corruption and who knows what else.

 

[Drivesaitl]

Nope it's Parks Canada that's in charge.

The rest is a assumption. I think the Libs do have to kowtow to the greenies a bit but ultimately they're not getting those votes anyways since they're either voting green party or NDP.

The real answer is that Parks Canada doesn't have the funding and as a result, the staff, to adequately manage the forests of all national parks. On top of that, any tree being removed has to go through a review process. There's not enough time, political will or money for Parks Canada to do this.

lol the only reason removal of trees has to go through a review process is DUE to the National Park rules. The rules they create, the bureaucracy they create, so that even a homeowner in a National Park has to go through a process ordeal just to remove a tree in their backyard, on their own property that they pay handsomely for.

 

[brentashton]

Nope it's Parks Canada that's in charge.

The rest is a assumption. I think the Libs do have to kowtow to the greenies a bit but ultimately they're not getting those votes anyways since they're either voting green party or NDP.

The real answer is that Parks Canada doesn't have the funding and as a result, the staff, to adequately manage the forests of all national parks. On top of that, any tree being removed has to go through a review process. There's not enough time, political will or money for Parks Canada to do this.

Do you have a source to the bolded? All governments have priorities and limited means, but this government has found lots of funding for questionable programs. I won’t get into politics, but am curious as to a source to this statement you made.

 

[JustNapalmIt]

Do you have a source to the bolded? All governments have priorities and limited means, but this government has found lots of funding for questionable programs. I won’t get into politics, but am curious as to a source to this statement you made.

I don’t the problem is limited to “this government”. The Con governments were no different. As unpalatable as this is to some.
It’s funny that some pin the problem on only the most recent government.

 

[brentashton]

I don’t the problem is limited to “this government”. The Con governments were no different. As unpalatable as this is to some.
It’s funny that some pin the problem on only the most recent government.

Do you have a source to the bolded? All governments have priorities and limited means, but this government has found lots of funding for questionable programs. I won’t get into politics, but am curious as to a source to this statement you made.

You may be correct. Although current government isn’t new. They have lead government since 2015. Lots of time to make it a priority if they want to. Just curious as to the source of the statement.

 

[JustNapalmIt]

You may be correct. Although current government isn’t new. They have lead government since 2015. Lots of time to make it a priority if they want to. Just curious as to the source of the statement.

The source of the statement is the policy hasn't changed for years, if ever. The problem is not a new one that just popped up. Governments of all stripes dropped the ball on forest management for years. Particularly since the Pine Beetle infestation that actually started in the 80's.

 

[DaGap]

That's exactly what I'm getting at.

A big thing absolutely nobody is talking about (and I mean NOBODY) is the fact the Canadian economy is completely stagnant. Right now the biggest thing Canada creates is real estate investments and educated professionals. Neither of which contributes to long-term economic prosperity.

Canada's productivity has seen ZERO growth in the last 6 years and has fallen SIGNIFICANTLY compared to other G7 nations. We're only second to Italy when it comes to productivity decline. We're not making shit. Companies aren't coming here. New companies aren't being created. This isn't even new, our productivity decline began FOURTY YEARS AGO. Source

A government actually committed to turning the ship around would be pointing this out and deliberately making it easier to invest in Canada and reduce the barriers of entry by encouraging competition. But has the Liberals, Conservatives or NDP said anything about this? No. Because those who profit most off a unproductive and uncompetitive economy are the ones pouring money into their campaigns.





> government employees are useless

> burn down the entirety of the river valley

...this is a joke right?

Yes the under brush needs to be cleaned. Fire cleans it. Whats so hard to understand?

 

[Tobias Kahun]

Why dont you ever hear about controlled burns.

I used to remember hearing about those yearly when growing up, and never had these forest fire issues.

 

[brentashton]

Why dont you ever hear about controlled burns.

I used to remember hearing about those yearly when growing up, and never had these forest fire issues.

Odd that you bring that up by I recall last year they were doing prescribed burns in the Jasper area. Probably just not doing enough of that type of work.

 

[5 Mins 4 Ftg]

To the rescue! This is awesome.

Edit - Mrs5 tells me this video is from a few years ago so apparently this YegWave is full of shit.

Pretty cool nonetheless

 

[OfCorsiDid]

Do you have a source to the bolded? All governments have priorities and limited means, but this government has found lots of funding for questionable programs. I won’t get into politics, but am curious as to a source to this statement you made.

it’s not really a source information it’s more of a conclusion made from looking at the protected parks in the US both in number and area and coming to the conclusion that Parks Canada having a fraction of that budget is likely leading to unsatisfactory forest management and firefighting.

 

[Drivesaitl]

Why dont you ever hear about controlled burns.

I used to remember hearing about those yearly when growing up, and never had these forest fire issues.

Because the crews they have now start a "controlled burn" and lose control of it. Have several times just in JNP. Take that how you will.

The current crews weren't even able to put out the very isolated Utopia treeline top fire. A fire that was surrounded by mountain.

Basically any fire is punching thru. Even ones they start. Unfortunately thats close to the truth.

 

[DaGap]

To the rescue! This is awesome.

Edit - Mrs5 tells me this video is from a few years ago so apparently this YegWave is full of shit.

Pretty cool nonetheless

We have reciprocal agreements with a lot of nations that are in the southern hemisphere. The reason being is our fire seasons are flipped

 

[TB12]

That's why they changed the name to "prescribed burns" as they cannot always be controlled.

 

[5 Mins 4 Ftg]

We have reciprocal agreements with a lot of nations that are in the southern hemisphere. The reason being is our fire seasons are flipped

Yes I understand that. There’s another video out of them singing waiting to clear customs. I’d pay to see them in concert.

 

[Stoneman89]

I mean that video address SOME issues, but it has a pretty clear anti-Liberal spin to it.

The guy mentions El Nino but fails to mention how the last 2 El Ninos (2016, 2023) led to the highest yearly world temperatures ever recorded. Also doesn't mention the massive extended heat spells that occurred those years that broke records all over the place.

That's climate change.

The expansion of the pine beetle population is also due to a warming climate. They use to be contained to lower elevations in the rockies and cascades primarily attacking lodgepole and ponderosa pines. However, warmer and drier years has led to them being able to survive in areas where historically they wouldn't. The northern forests of Alberta (High Level, Fort Chip, etc.) and the NWT have had significant increases of pine beetle infestations. Drier years also mean less sap in trees which is the primary defensive mechanism trees have for the beetles. Heck BC is almost devoid of lodgepole pines in some areas because they haven't had cold enough winters to kill the beetles.

So could Parks Canada do a better job at getting rid of dead trees? Yes. But let's not pretend that that's the only reason why these disasters keep happening.

Agree to the bolded, but it works both ways. Some shrill voices need to realize that climate change isn't the main and only thing causing this as well.

 

[Stoneman89]

Odd that you bring that up by I recall last year they were doing prescribed burns in the Jasper area. Probably just not doing enough of that type of work.

Even the controlled/prescibed burns may not be enough anymore to prevent future burning of Banff and Canmore. A lot of these actions are going to be a number of years before they really have much of an effect. I just read an article where it was stated at the time Jasper and Banff became designated as NP's, there was a lot of prairie grass in them and around them. When fires started they spread into the grass and then petered out. It was like a natural fire barrier. However, once humans came in they made sure the trees just grew out of control and filled in all the prairie grass, so any natural barriers disappeared. Fast forward 100 years and you have thick boreal forest of various conditions in the place of what was once grass.

 

[Stauf4Prez]

On another note - she gon' be warm again for the next 10 days.

 

[Skar]

100% of proceeds go to support Jasper

SUPPORT JASPER

Nation Gear Store

nationgear.ca

 

[JustNapalmIt]

Agree to the bolded, but it works both ways. Some shrill voices need to realize that climate change isn't the main and only thing causing this as well.

True dat. A whole bunch of causes. Anybody who puts their head in the sand going "nah nah nah" to any of them is a dolt.