- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/27543598
You must log in or register to comment.
Smokey is not a mascot of the National Park Service, but the Forest Service, which is under the Department of Agriculture (national forests are a “crop”).
National Park Service is under the Department of Interior.
Get your federal agencies straight!
nationalforests
It’s okay to leave the space in there.
Damn right!
You aren’t actually supposed to prevent forest fires though, hence why Canada switched the bear for this twink:
Congrats on the baby, smokey
That’s a risky congrats. Maybe she really likes beer and cake.
Have you seen the bulge on that bear?!
She’s carrying high.
Hot.
Are you talking about red shirt?
But really, who needs trees? They just provide oxygen, clean the air, enrich the soil, prevent soil erosion, help save energy, help prevent water pollution, provide places for animals to live, provide shelter from the sun, help with drought mediation, capture rain water, make areas cooler during the summer, and help with climate.
But other than that, what do we even need them for?
Sounds like sociannism to me
They didn’t actually, did they?
We sell it to Sears in 2025
I thought Sears got bought by Bob’s Bait Shack. Or was it Sally’s Dry Cleaning and Fried Chicken Emporium?
Everything is owned by four seasons
eats fly conspiratorially
As someone said above it’s not smokey’s division, but they did make cuts
Just rake the leaves /s
I can’t help but think they really are going to be severely defunded. Musky can only see value in police/military.
The house proposed $210m or so in cuts for them for 2025. So 6% of their budget. While inflation has clearly gone up. Staff is down 23% since 2010, before these cuts.
They’ll soon just be a collection of oil wells, shopping centers, and expensive apartments.
collection of oil wells, shopping centers, and expensive apartments
Soooooooo Houston?
Even if you love oil extortionists and their bribes, global warming denial includes not funding adaptation/protections from its effects. In the case of forest fires, it is also a major source of additional CO2 emissions. Trees/land globally are counted on to suck up 14 gt of CO2 per year, if they don’t burn, and have enough water to live. In 2023, net co2 absorbtion was only 0.5 gt. 1/10th usual amount with “usual fires”. 2024 had big fires in Amazon.
The cheapest non-energy-related global warming mitigation is forest management and fire containment.
Qu’est-ce que c’est que ce kebab derrière l’ours ?
