- High-profile Pennsylvania attorney John P. Karoly Jr. pleads guilty to tax evasion, faces possible prison term [Allentown Morning Call, Legal Intelligencer, Lehigh Valley Live, WFMZ, his website; earlier]
- Tennessee congressman pushes to overturn NBA age limit [Fanhouse, Sports Law Blog]
- $262 million in bankruptcy fees to date for Lehman, ultimate figure could approach $1 billion [Hartley]
- Complaint by gay altar server to Ontario Human Rights Tribunal menaces church’s autonomy [National Post via Box Turtle Bulletin]
- Lawsuit seeks shutdown of Domelights.com, private message board for Philadelphia cops that has had “racially offensive” posts and comments [CNN, Post @ Volokh] 2002 Sotomayor decision in Pappas v. Giuliani may be on point [Popehat, Kennerly]
- New Jersey organ scandal should come as little surprise given our failed policies on kidney donation [Satel, WSJ]
- Deputy D.A. arrested for drunk driving lands on her feet, hired by local DWI Resource Center [KRQE, Albuquerque]
- “San Diego Judge Denies Class Action Motions in 2007 Wildfires” [California Civil Justice]
Posts tagged as:
wildfires
Controversy continues over the extent to which litigation has tended to obstruct brush and understory removal as well as post-blaze recovery efforts in the fire zones: Damien Schiff (Pacific Legal Foundation), “Misguided litigation magnifies wildfires”, San Francisco Chronicle, Nov. 5); John Berlau, “The Environmentalist Fires”, American Thinker, Oct. 29; BioStock blog, Oct. 5. The Sierra Club defends environmental litigation in this Oct. 23 statement. Last year the Society of American Foresters last year released a study entitled “Forest Service Land Management Litigation 1989-2002″, which is available at the Society site. Earlier: Oct. 24, etc.
No doubt the search for policy lessons from the catastrophic Southern California wildfires (N.Z. Bear, CBS8) is in its early stages, and no doubt multiple contributing factors will wind up being implicated. Many, though, recall the controversy that hit the front pages after disastrous 2002 wildfires in Arizona, when it was revealed that Forest Service attempts to reduce fire risk by clearing underbrush, installing firebreaks and permitting logging of excessive growth had been heavily litigated and delayed in court by environmental groups (Jul. 1-2 and Jul. 12-14, 2002). Just last month scientists testified that efforts to “step up tree removal efforts and prescribed fire programs” were needed to counter growing fire risk (Ben Goad, “Speed forest thinning to ease fire threat, experts say”, Riverside, Calif., Press-Enterprise, Sept. 24). Michelle Malkin and readers have a big discussion (Oct. 23; & welcome readers from there). More from CEI’s Hans Bader and Robert Nelson and again from Michelle Malkin (per L.A. Times report, brush clearance and forest thinning credited with saving homes around Lake Arrowhead).
{ 5 comments }
“Should the state and federal government encourage Californians to build houses in high-risk brush-fire zones? The brain says ‘no,’ but the policy means ‘yes.’” Matt Welch at Reason (Oct. 22; see our Oct. 31 post) further investigates the so-called FAIR insurance program, which (among its other flaws) tends to redistribute wealth to the residents of affluent Malibu and Topanga Canyon. Glenn Reynolds comments (Nov. 6).
“The first helicopter pilot to see the patch of flames that would become the catastrophic Cedar Fire radioed for aerial water drops, but state firefighters rejected his request because it came minutes after such flights had been grounded for the night. Within hours, the flames cascaded out of control and killed 13 residents between the mountains east of San Diego and the city. It eventually became the largest wildfire in California history. …
“The problem was that under state safety guidelines, no flights can go up into waning daylight. On Saturday, the cutoff was 5:36 p.m., said California Department of Forestry Capt. Ron Serabia, who coordinates the 12 tankers and 10 helicopters now battling the 272,000-acre blaze. The sun set that day at 6:05 p.m.” (Justin Pritchard, “State firefighters rejected air drop request for Cedar Fire because of night regulations”, San Francisco Chronicle, Oct. 30). (Via Arthur Silber). More: Matt Welch at Reason “Hit and Run” (Oct. 31) has a roundup of other instances in which bad policy decisions may have worsened damage from the wildfires: “near the top of my list is the 1968 state law that specifically orders insurance companies to pool together and offer homeowner policies to people who live in high-risk brush fire zones, a non-market last resort enjoyed by 20,000 people, most of whom live in the foothills of Southern California.” Yet more: Gregg Easterbrook (Oct. 31) on forest management and wildlands.
