8-13-25 - 6am - Fines for Hiking in Canada & Forest Management

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Well, good morning, fellas. I'd like to propose an experiment.
How about we had mister Trump where a pair of
mismatch socks one day, just so we can see how
many days everybody will spend pooping themselves about that have
a groovy day.

Speaker 2 (00:17):
They would.

Speaker 3 (00:17):
My favorite still when he took a drink of water
with two hens rather than oh yes, as well as
holding the handrail while walking down a ramp. I mean
that was They spent weeks on both of those.

Speaker 4 (00:29):
I heard last night, and I don't have the story
in front of me, but the real I was busy
getting ready to leave the house to go have dinner
with a friend and Brett Bear's show. I think it
was Brett Barrett that was on at the time I
was getting ready to leave the house, something to the
effect that all these hearings they've been having trying to

(00:50):
get the Biden people to come in, you know and
talk about why'd you know him?

Speaker 2 (00:53):
Did you know it? Yeah?

Speaker 4 (00:56):
And again I may be totally off, so I'm just
repeating something I half asked heard.

Speaker 2 (01:01):
We just come to think of it, that's the model
of this show.

Speaker 3 (01:06):
That's not just this show, this is almost all the
other news networks.

Speaker 4 (01:09):
Roight. Yeah, that's just that's just pretty much life in general.
I kind of have ass heard something, and so I
just take it to be true that one of those
witnesses testified that they wanted Biden to go to some
event and they decided against it because based on it

(01:31):
was like a building, it was like a ship, like maybe.

Speaker 3 (01:34):
The number of steps heard that too.

Speaker 4 (01:37):
Yeah, the number of steps were too many and it
was too great a risk for him to take that
many steps.

Speaker 3 (01:43):
I think, if I recall correctly too, from that story,
it was something it was shortly after he fell at
the Air Force Academy where he could not get him
his own self up. He couldn't get up, he needed
help to get up. So I think it was shortly
after that. So it makes a little bit of sense.

Speaker 4 (01:58):
Yes, well truly makes sense. But it also shows that, yeah,
he wasn't as greaty shape as what we thought he was.
All right, let's get started. So this in the past
couple of weeks, this is one of these stories I've
been kind of wait, waiting to see how it develops.
But over the past couple of weeks, Canadians, Yeah, we're

(02:19):
gonna talk about Canadians. They have now learned that taking
a walk in the woods, like, you know, that's kind
of what you do in Colorado. You know, we we
we line up bumper to bumper, you know, with smog
and exhaust, and you know, truckers that don't have to
drive in the mountains, and you know, tourists that don't
know how to drive in the mountains, and we all

(02:39):
line up, you know, kind of at a starting gate
somewhere over in Golden to head up I twenty, you know,
head up I seventy.

Speaker 2 (02:46):
To go for a walk in the woods.

Speaker 4 (02:50):
Well, and in Canada that now could cost more than
a speeding ticket. Nova Scotia has bought card hiking. They've
barred biking, fishing, and even picnics on forested land, and
they've advertised fines up to twenty five thousand dollars for violators.

(03:13):
In fact, I'm looking at a I screenshot a couple
of newspapers where I found these stories, and one comes
from City News Everywhere, which is the Halifax City News,
and it's got a you know, their provincial flag in
front of a bunch of you know.

Speaker 2 (03:31):
A forest.

Speaker 4 (03:33):
Several twenty five thousand dollars fines issued for violating burn bands,
says Natural Resources. So let's think of this story in
the following terms. The pandemic COVID was the rehearsal climate

(03:53):
is now the show. New Brunswick shut the public out
of Canadian public lands for safety. Newfoundland and Labrador warned
of steep penalties and even possible jail time for fire
rule violations. Now, I, for example, we are at our

(04:15):
home in WayHome, Mexico. We are almost constantly under a
burn band because there's been somewhat of a drought down there,
and there are fines if you start an open fire
if you go you know, I don't. I'm not even
quite sure what the Scouts are doing over in the
Filmont Scout ranch, but they can't have fires, so they

(04:37):
must be using, you know, the stoves or something to
cook their food or maybe I don't know, maybe Philmont
has been exempt from it. But in South County, Colfax County,
More County, say, in that kind of general area of
northeastern New Mexico, it's generally under a burn ban because
it's just it's dry and quite frankly, I don't want

(04:59):
to play to burn down, but we don't have twenty
five thousand dollars fines. So I'm not opposed to the
burn ban, I'm opposed to the way they're enforcing it.
Another headline from CBC News, government asked New Brunswickers to

(05:20):
stay out of the woods across the province. Province says
a fire spanning approximately two hundred and forty hecta acres
near Miramachi, where the all that is is now out
of control. All right, we'll stay out of the woods.
There was a viral case that even showed a protest
that's being hit with a five figure fine for just

(05:41):
stepping into the woods. Now, these sweeping controls are being
sold as science science. Now, there are some practical reasons
to do some of these things, but when you then
try to justify it based.

Speaker 2 (05:58):
On science, wait a minute.

Speaker 4 (06:01):
Long term wildfire data does not show a natural CO
two driven escalation. Canada's own databases show big swings year
to year, a record spike in twenty twenty three, in
them very quiet seasons, including at a very exceptionally low
twenty twenty. When I noticed that there had been a

(06:22):
dip in twenty twenty, I thought, well, maybe there weren't
as many fires in twenty twenty because nobody was in
the woods. Maybe it wasn't because of climate change. Well, anyway,
has those dips, that roller coaster of data is not
as what I would call a steady climate signal. It's

(06:42):
called variability. If you look at the number of fires
in the area burned in Canada by year, going back
all the way to nineteen seventy, you'll see for decades
almost In fact, the first decade that shows up, you
go from nineteen seventy to nineteen seventy nine, the annual
area burned to millions of acres is you know, two million,

(07:07):
below two million, barely a million, and then in nineteen
eighty it spikes up, and it spikes up to a
little over six million by nineteen eighty one, and then boom,
next year drops down to less than two million. So
you go from you know, say seven million on average
to less than than a million, and then you go

(07:28):
for another decade, and then it spikes up for just
one year in nineteen eighty nine, and then drops down
again to virtually nothing.

Speaker 2 (07:34):
So it's.

Speaker 4 (07:37):
It's true variability in the sense that it's if I
drew a trend line, which I love to draw, if
I draw a trend line, the acres burned in terms
of millions is will below two million per year on average.
But in nineteen eighty nineteen, nineteen teen eighty nine, nineteen

(08:02):
eighty four, nineteen eighty five, nineteen ninety eight, and then nothing,
and then in fact, in twenty twenty it was virtually
I mean you can on the graph you can barely
even see the number of acres burned. And then suddenly
in twenty twenty three it's skyrockets up to almost eighteen million,

(08:24):
and in fact the number of fires skyrockets to more
than twelve thousand fires. When the number of fires over
that trend line from nineteen seventy through twenty twenty four,
the trend line is well below I'd say.

Speaker 2 (08:39):
Five hundred fires annually.

Speaker 4 (08:43):
Now during COVID, if you recall, officials closed beaches and
they closed parks, and it was always for your safety.
You know, this playground is closed and there would be
some sign about you know your safety. Well, I think
the same reflex is now being applied to these forests.
Banning hiking and picnics doesn't thin the fuel source down. Uh,

(09:08):
it doesn't harden the town, It doesn't fix power lines,
it doesn't, you know, prevent power line ignitions. What you're
doing is you're managing people, You're not managing the risk.
And in fact, if you can have for example, let's
go back to New Mexico, the burned ban does not
prevent me from walking in the kit Carson National Forest.

(09:32):
I can still go hiking. I can still you know,
I could go to say like I could go to
Taos and go horseback riding down into the Rio Grand Canyon.
Or I could go to Red River and I could
probably rent a jeep and I could go up into
the some of the four wheel drive roads. I can
still go into the forest. I can still go into

(09:53):
kit Carson. I can still go into some of the
state forests. I can go into Let me rephrase that,
I can go into all the forests. It's just to
burn ban. But that's not what Canada's doing. They're shutting
down the playground, so to speak. Because again, you banning hiking,

(10:14):
Why banning a picnic? I mean if you if you
if you take your wicker basket and put the red
and right red and white checker tablecloth over it, and
you take your sandwiches, and you take your you know,
your sweet tea, and you hike in somewhere and find
a nice little meadow and you have a picnic. They're

(10:35):
not gonna start a fire. But no, they've banned that.
So what they've really done is the result. The result
of what they've done is months of restrictions on ordinary life,
justified by a storyline that collapses the complexity of wildfire
into a single variable, and that is atmospheric CEO.

Speaker 5 (10:54):
Two.

Speaker 4 (10:58):
Let's look at some of the reality, and let's look
at Nova Scotia first. The count of fires has trended
downward since the early nineteen nineties. While the area burned
is almost always pretty modest, there are, as I said earlier,
some rare spikes. There's a big bar in twenty twenty

(11:19):
three that was an exception, not the rule, and it
is it's a giant spike. You look back through the record, though,
and you'll see so many quiet years where both the
number of fires and the acres burn stayed incredibly low.
In other words, one outlier season does not equal.

Speaker 2 (11:40):
A new normal.

Speaker 4 (11:42):
You can go to the National Forestry Database, you can
go to the Canadian National Fire Data Base, and you
can find all these charts and you will see that
actually in terms of forced area burned, the number of
area forest fires. If you were to draw a typical
polling trend lined going back all the way back to
nineteen ninety all the way through twenty.

Speaker 2 (12:03):
Twenty four, it's a downward trend line.

Speaker 4 (12:07):
That's for Nova Scotia. But yet Nova Scotia, you can't
even go into the forest New Brunswick. It's even starker
in New Brunswick. The number fires has fallen sharply since
the nineteen nineties, from several hundred per year to roughly
a third of that level in recent years. And the
area burned is always typically small. And again they're occasional bumped,

(12:31):
as we know from wildfires that we watch right here
in Colorado. That a wildfire that you know they're doing
everything they can to contain to keep it from exploding
and getting out of control, starts out, you know, with
a couple of hundred acres, and then you know, you
wake up the next day it's one thousand acres, and
then the next day you know it's twenty thousand acres.
And is that because the CO two or is that

(12:52):
because we don't manage the forest. Let us go back
to New Brunswick. The number of fires there really has
and sharply since the nineteen nineties several hundred per year
to roughly a third of that level in recent years.
And the area that's burned is typically small, and you
do have bumps, but the downward trend line in New

(13:14):
Brunswick is almost straight down from the nineteen nineties.

Speaker 2 (13:21):
So I want to so what does it mean?

Speaker 4 (13:24):
Those are not the signatures of a climate engine that
is somehow turning up the dial every year and starting
all these forest fires. They are the signatures of a
complex fire regime where weather windows the fuel that we
leave in the forest because we don't manage the forest ignitions,
whether it's a power line, a lightning strike, or a fire,

(13:47):
you know, a campfire. The suppression capacity that we have
and that we tend to always you know, we're kind
in this position where we should let some of these
fires burn in order to reduce the fuel because we
haven't managed the forest, and that would be a way

(14:08):
to kind of catch up. So going forward from a wildfire,
you could then manage it much more efficiently less costly
by letting it kind of burn. But we still have
the mindset that we have to stop every fire and
keep it from spreading anywhere. But when officials close, as

(14:29):
they're doing in Canada right now, when they chose, when
they close trails for months and they call it climate safety, again,
they're managing people. They're not managing the risk. And when
you look at the data from Nova Scotia and New Brunswick,

(14:49):
that's the proof. So you get a spike last year
and then so this year you don't have a spike,
but you have a fire breakout. So the response is,
let's just shut everything down. You can't even go in
the forest. It's also an overreaction, and this typically happens

(15:13):
after disasters that whenever there's a disaster, a particularly bad disaster,
then everybody tends to overreact. And if that overreaction leads
to some changes in policies, that's probably good. But when
the overreaction leads to an insane policy that says you
can't even go to the forest, that's not good because

(15:34):
that's not rational. That's again COVID based thinking. Oh, let's
take a virus that does Star's COVID two, that does
spread you know through droplets, and you know people you
know speaking and you know picking up the droplets as
you speak or breathe and say, well, you can't go

(15:56):
to the playground, you can't go to the beach, you
can't go hike, can't go anything. You can't go outside,
even though we know that the minute thought the virus
you know, travels even a short distance in the air,
is going to break apart from the wind and the
sun and everything else, all the environmental factors are going
to affect that virus. That one little tiny virus is
going to disintegrate, and that its ability to infect somebody

(16:20):
is going to diminish rapidly. As I you know, if
I had COVID right now and I'm speaking, by the
time it gets to you know, but by the time
my spible gets to one of these monitors, that's pretty
much dead, pretty much dead. Now, I want you to
think about this, and I want to go into this
little more, in a little deeper.

Speaker 2 (16:39):
In just a second.

Speaker 4 (16:42):
If, as the Canadians are trying to claim that CO
two is the master switch, you would not see global
burned area falling while CO two is increasing. But ironically
that's exactly what the satellite era is showing us. The

(17:03):
burned areas are down on the order of at least
twenty five percent since the late nineteen nineties. And we've
got the data to show that. We found that global
burned area, This comes to us from science dot org.
We found that global burned area declined by twenty four

(17:23):
point three plus or minus down to eight point eight percent,
so anywhere from eight point eight to twenty four point
three percent over the past eighteen years. Well, wait a minute.
If the global burned area is declining and a singular
fire may be a spike, how do you draw any

(17:46):
sort of causal link between that and CO two. I
say that because this Canadian story has developed at the
same time that Jared Polus, Gavin Newsoen, and for that matter,
Kathy Hochele and Pritzker and all these Democrat governors are

(18:06):
hunkering down on their net zero goals.

Speaker 6 (18:10):
Nearly to classified documents show that James Tolmy instructed his
teams to leak classified information regarding Donald Trump during his
first term to The New York Times. I hope he
gets prosecuted.

Speaker 4 (18:32):
It's going to be a I think there's some things
he can be prosecuted for, but it's not going to
be as broad as I think because he is protected
by the speech and debate clause, so he is able
to go out and say pretty much anything that he
wants to. But if he violated the rules of classification
and disclosed you know, classified material, that's something you can

(18:57):
prosecute him for. But if he went out and just
you know, is as a senator claiming that Donald Trump
was a Russian agent, that's going to be hard to prosecute.
But it's a nuanced story and it's one that again
is in my pos. But I'm not really ready to
go down that rabbit hole yet. So let's go back

(19:18):
to Canada. They you know, they every year they have
fires and then every year either smoked from Canada or
smoke from out west.

Speaker 2 (19:32):
You know.

Speaker 4 (19:32):
In fact, I'm looking at the sunrise right now, and
you can tell that there's smoke in the air because
it's a you know.

Speaker 2 (19:37):
It's a Bronco sunrise.

Speaker 4 (19:39):
And as I noticed as I was driving in this
morning with what little dawn there was, that you could
see that there was a lot of smoke in the air, well,
a lot of fires. And we could also go down
the rabbit hole about whether or not these fires are
being started on purpose or you know, eco terrorism, or

(20:00):
is it because we have so mismanaged these forests and
allowed so much fuel to accumulate that now a singular
lightning strike is just enough in a really remote area
to start, you know, some kindling burning, and there's no
one's noticing the smoke, no one's noticing the heat image.
You know, you'd think by the satellites we would notice that,

(20:22):
oh there's an acre burning somewhere somewhere, but we we
immediately run to put them all out. And then, of
course then we blame CO two climate change for all
the fires. Yet the global area that's been burning over
the past eighteen years has been declining, even though you

(20:46):
might get a spike in the number of fires. Now
that's a function of obviously that we tend to, oh
my gosh, rush every asset that you can to put
these fires out. And the thing that really bugs me
about Canada is this idea that okay, you can impose

(21:07):
a burn band, but why are you imposing even going
into the forest.

Speaker 2 (21:14):
Are they so tender?

Speaker 4 (21:18):
Are they so you know, volatile that it's going on
a hike. You know, you're taking your golden retriever or
you're taking your Lienberger, and you're going for a hike
in the mountains and that's going to cause a fire,
highly highly unlikely. But that's kind of what we did
in COVID, and we're now learning, at least the Canadians

(21:42):
learn that, well, let's just keep people from going into
the forest at all.

Speaker 2 (21:48):
So this is a confluence of things.

Speaker 4 (21:51):
That we were trained to do as sheeple in COVID,
combined now with climate change. And then you add on
forest fires, and now the way we're going to control
that is, well, we're going to continue to allow the
fuel to accumulate because we'll put the fires out as
quickly as possible. And then we're never going to allow

(22:12):
the fires to start, even though we can't stop the lightning.
We could, you fix the power lines, but we won't
do that, so we'll just control the people. So you
have this confluence of one major objective of the Church

(22:32):
of the climate activists.

Speaker 2 (22:34):
Control human beings, control.

Speaker 4 (22:37):
Where they go, what they do, how they recreate, everything,
all in the name of safety, all the name of protection.
You could have taken everything I just said and inserted
COVID and we applied the same way. Now it's not
just Canada either Two more pictures tell the same story.

(22:58):
In a regional series. Over at Our World and Data, Africa,
the engine of global burned area eases from about eight
to nine percent of land burned each year to near
seven since twenty twelve. Asia, Europe, North America sit well
below one percent with no upward march. South America kind
of wabbles around a little bit a few percent without

(23:19):
a climb. Oceana is noisy with occasional spikes but no
clear trend. And you can when you look at that,
you know, I sit back and I've got this Our
World and Data chart in front of me. It shows Africa, Oceanica,
South America, Asia, Europe, North America total area consumed by
wildfare wildfires recorded for each event. When you when you look,

(23:46):
when you look at the numbers, you recognize that, well,
what's what's the BFD?

Speaker 2 (23:55):
Really? What is the BFD? Here?

Speaker 4 (23:58):
By land cover, the client is concentrated in shrub lands
and grasslands and the savannahs, and that's both that's all
markedly down since the early two thousands. While force and
crop lands are flat at low levels. The pattern is
exactly what you would expect when grazing cropping, roads, settlements,

(24:19):
targeted suppressions, break up fuels, and shape when and where
fire runs. The translation is ignition sources, fuels, land use management,
dominated fire outcomes, not.

Speaker 2 (24:32):
A single atmospheric variable. Nothing.

Speaker 4 (24:38):
It really is about ignition, sources, fuels, land use management,
dominant fire outcomes. None of that's atmospheric. The shrub lands
and grasslands, actually, I mean I had literally pushed my

(25:00):
computer away and look at the chart again. From our
world and data, the shrub lands and grasslands is a
downward trend, savannahs a downward trend.

Speaker 2 (25:13):
For uts.

Speaker 4 (25:14):
Oh, they're just flat. There's not The trend line is
just a straight line from two thousand and two all
the way to twenty twenty two. And the same is
true for the crop lands, which is kind of what
you'd expect. There's not a lot of activity in the
forest of the crop lands. The point is this is

(25:39):
kind of where the climate crisis is in a nutshell.
What we do with what they do not. What we
do is take advantage of every natural disaster to advance
an agenda, regardless of all the observable data that says otherwise.
That's the pattern. Now, think about during COVID temporary controls

(26:02):
became our muscle memory. Now climate provides the permanent justification.
There's no vaccine, declare the emergency over. There's only a
rolling mandate to sacrifice convenience, and then you sacrifice your
freedoms all to this amorphous planetary good, all to you know,
the god that they worship of, you know, the god

(26:23):
of climate change. Well, I just refuse that trade. If
we truly cared about forest towns, then we ought to
be doing the practical work that actually lowers the risk
forest management. Likewise, if we really cared about freedom, then

(26:43):
we would say no to open ended climate lockdowns or
however they want to brand.

Speaker 2 (26:50):
It and wherever it occurs.

Speaker 4 (26:54):
Again, just because I use Canada and Africa as examples,
you don't think that the activists and the congregants and
the Church of the climate activists aren't watching what Canada
is doing in particular because it's just right there to
our north. Of course they are, and the same is
true in Africa. It's just this whole idea that somehow

(27:19):
you and I and my breathing as I sit here
and talk and exhaling CO two is the cause of
all of this. But when you strip away whatever you
want to, whether it's lightning strikes or it's you know,
power lines, or it's campfires, or it's accidents, or its terrorism,

(27:41):
whatever it is. When you step away, none of that's
CO two. You can't find any causal link between CO
two and the fires that are currently occurring. And then
when you overlay the fires that are occurring with the
graphs that show, you know, a data line from you know,
a couple of decades, you realize that well, in Canada,

(28:04):
some of it's flatlined. But in Canada and both in Africa,
the number of fires and the acreage burned is on
a downward trend line. Yet if you were to look
at say patterns of control or different aspects of control,
like okay, you know a no burn band, which again

(28:27):
I don't object to a no burnband, but you take
a no burn band, and then you extenuate that to
a oh now you can't go hike, or you can't
go drive, or you can't go walk, or you can't
even go anywhere near the forest. That trend lines an
upward trend line. And what is it? It's a trend
line from down here where oh yeah, you know, it's

(28:47):
there's a drought, so we don't want you to, you know,
start a campfire. Well, I don't think that's really an
infringement on freedom. But when the trend line goes all
the way up and says you can't even go into
the forest, that trend line toward tyranny.

Speaker 5 (29:01):
Morning, Michael. The b FD regarding the fires is they
have to keep pushing their green narrative to get people
afraid so that they will comply, just like what they
did with the BS plandemic. End of story, and people,
especially Americans and probably Canadians, are so stink and gullible

(29:24):
they will buy it, hook line and sinker.

Speaker 2 (29:26):
I am disgusted, and we should be disgusted.

Speaker 4 (29:29):
And sometimes I feel like I'm tilting at windmills on
this because I mean, I do I know, I talk
about climate I and I talk about COVID a lot,
but I really do believe that they are threats to
our freedom.

Speaker 2 (29:42):
They're truly threats to our freedom, all in the name
of science.

Speaker 4 (29:45):
I mean, we're supposed to be the ones that, you know,
we don't trust the science. Of course, I don't trust
the science because the signs is a bunch of BS.
Because they think about it this way. If CO two
was the master's you know that you got your electrical pani,
you got that big master switch that turns everything off.

(30:06):
If COE two were that switch, then you would not
see the global burned area falling while COE two was increasing.
But that's exactly what the current satellite data shows. The
burned areas is down on the order of a quarter
since the late nineteen nineties. And yet no, we want

(30:29):
to claim that somehow that's the master switch that's increasing
all of it. And then when I when I started
reading these stories at the beginning of the week about
what was going on in New Brunswick, going on in
Nova Scotia, and of course the Canadian government is a
liberal government, it's a liberal progressive government, and they had

(30:53):
horrific COVID lockdown policies. Not to say that we didn't
have horrible ones, but they were an nth degree worse
than what we were. And now when I you know,
because when I first started reading these stories about what
was going on in Canada, I thought, well, it's just

(31:13):
kind of an overreaction until I read the one story
about they had banned all activity in the forest, and
I thought, that makes no sense to me whatsoever. That
makes as much sense to me as saying during COVID

(31:34):
that you couldn't go hiking. You remember, remember the photographs
of the cops on the beaches in Malibu or wherever
it was, and they were arresting people that were out
on the beach where the breeze is blowing, the saltwater
breeze is blowing.

Speaker 3 (31:49):
Some of those people even out on the watery cat
them forbid, they were out there on a surfboarder.

Speaker 4 (31:54):
They're out there swimming in the water. Oh my gosh,
Because you know what, that little tiny iris, that tiny
little fragile virus just loves salt water mist.

Speaker 2 (32:05):
It thrives on that.

Speaker 4 (32:07):
Now we're doing the same thing in forests, and this
is how it starts. A little spark up in Canada,
all in the name of climate change, and then pretty
soon a bunch of numb nuts down here that are pushing.

Speaker 2 (32:19):
All the net zero bull crap will.

Speaker 4 (32:23):
Latch onto it, and pretty soon, you know, I have
no evidence of this, I hope it doesn't happen, but
can you not believe that at some point you could
hear Jared Polus issuing some sort of you know, statewide
disaster declaration or emergency order and banning. You know now

(32:44):
probably can't do it in Rocky Mountain National Park or
you know, black can you know, the gunison, but he
might be able to do it in state parks and say,
you know what, just no more activity. You can't even
go out to say Chatfield and you know, pull your
your fifth wheeler up or your camping trailer up, or
you can't go out on your boat on Chatfield because

(33:07):
well there's a lot of dry grass around Chatfield and
it might start a fire and that might you know,
move into King Carroll or something. I mean, I can
see that happening because there's zero risk tolerance added to
the political agenda of two things climate change or somebody

(33:28):
said on the text line, which is kind of brilliant,
but it'll never happen, to quit using climate change and
talking about climate variability.

Speaker 2 (33:35):
Well, if I thought I could make that happen, I would.
But I can.

Speaker 4 (33:40):
See California or Colorado, or for that matter, you know
Ruhn lua on the governor of New Mexico doing the
same thing. Okay, look, we're in a drought, we've got
high fire danger, so everybody just stay away. And then
they'll wake up and realize, oh crap, we just lost
all those tourist dollars. What are we going to do now.

(34:01):
Compunity of public policy just looked to the lower