I remember years ago when long-time locals around the Santa Cruz mountains discussed that drug cartels were moving in and setting up huge operations in the parks as the state enforced stronger border controls and reduced spending on park rangers and enforcement.

It made sense. With the cost and risk of importing drugs increased by a closing border the cartels arranged for low-risk domestic operations. Apparently one of the side-effects of this trend has been a rash of forest fires. Law enforcement blames these fires on accidents by those tending the drug farms:

“No pun intended, it’s a growing problem,” U.S. Forest Service Special Agent Russ Arthur said.

Arthur said an unspecified “cooking device” left at an encampment by suspected drug traffickers sparked the blaze on Aug. 8 that has scorched more than 137 square miles of brush and timber and briefly threatened two dozen ranches and homes.

That’s the worst pun on an incident since the a DEA Special Agent said world-champion downhill mountain bike racer Missy Giove had gone “downhill fast” into drug trafficking.

Anyway, it also seems plausible to me that fires are intentional and meant as a cheap way to smoke out defenders or destroy operations. Anti-drug agents? Warring drug cartels? They both have motive that fits. The article says in this case the drug plants didn’t burn and were instead pulled out by hand, so apparently the massive fires somehow avoided the crops.

Arthur said an unspecified “cooking device” left at an encampment by suspected drug traffickers sparked the blaze on Aug. 8 that has scorched more than 137 square miles of brush and timber and briefly threatened two dozen ranches and homes.

About 30,000 marijuana plants and an AK-47 assault rifle were found near the origin of the blaze in a remote canyon in Los Padres National Forest, authorities said at a news conference. Arthur said the plants’ quality is similar to marijuana linked to Mexican drug cartels, though he acknowledged the investigation into the link was ongoing.

Why would that rifle be left behind? The article even mentions that someone returned to the origin spot of the fire several days later. 30K plants is small, in terms of California farms, but not so small that it would avoid a giant fire. Strange story.

In Santa Barbara County alone, sheriff’s investigators have recovered more than 225,000 pot plants in the past five months, Brown said. The plants have an estimated street value of about $675 million.

In the Sierra Nevada, an ongoing search has resulted in dozens of prosecutions and the destruction of more than 400,000 marijuana plants.

$675K divided by 225K is 3, so that gives each plant a street value of just $3. The Sierra Nevada operations have thus destroyed $1.2 million in drug value, but there is no estimate given for the percentage of total operations or impact.

Meanwhile, at the other end of the political spectrum in California, Oakland has passed a 1.8 percent tax on medical marijuana sales.

“It is important because the city of Oakland is facing a massive deficit like many jurisdictions in California,” said Steve DeAngelo, a leader of one of the city’s cannabis clubs. “And we decided to step up to the plate and make a contribution to the city in a time of need.”

DeAngelo, one of the people who led the effort to get the tax approved, said his business will now have to pay more than $350,000 from the new tax next year.

Would this tax revenue cover the cost of destroying illegal farms? Perhaps even more interesting would be to try and figure out if the rate of forest fires would decrease if parks were policed more carefully for drug farms and farming was regulated instead of banned. It all makes for interesting risk versus rewards calculations.

The money spent closing the border to drug traffic did not reduce the flow of drugs but instead created many more complicated and dangerous headaches for law enforcement. Let this be a reminder that a firewall is only the first step in security controls. There are many more elements of prevention as well as detection that should be in budget.

The Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies points out that Fake Letters to Congress Part of Campaign Against Climate Bill

A lobbying firm hired by a major coal industry group has mailed at least 13 fake letters to congressmen falsely claiming that the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, senior citizens groups, and a Hispanic advocacy organization opposed a bill placing a cap on carbon emissions. Congressional investigators say that the firm working for the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCE) sent out a total of 58 letters to congressmen, and that others may have been fraudulent as well. The lobbying firm, Bonner and Associates, says the letters were sent by a temporary employee, who has since been fired.

The impression I get from the story is that an industry can hire a lobby firm to hire interns to send fake letters of outrage. When caught, the interns are released and a new set hired to begin the process again.

Unless I’m missing something the lobby firms face few disincentives and no criminal charges will be filed. The good news is that while Congress has no efficient or reliable way to verify the authenticity of the letters, somehow the 13 were caught. Perhaps it came from a system of credibility, even an informal one. Why would the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, senior citizens groups and Creciendo Juntos, a Hispanic advocacy organization be siding with coal? The subject begs the question of authenticity and accountability.

Bonner and Associates, a firm that specializes in grassroots lobbying, was hired by the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity and by the Hawthorn Group, an Alexandria-based public affairs firm, as a subcontractor. Both companies have since denounced the company for the fake letters.

Denounced? For some strange reason I expected to see words like fired or terminated or pressed charges. A soft denouncement after serious misrepresentations of citizen identities? Is it just me or is this a good example of where the identity verification intentions of the Patriot Act should be applied?

This reenactment of a black bear by FOX news is priceless. Actually it could probably be redone better with about $20 in materials and a couple high school drama students:

Beware cardboard cutouts like these that might be roaming in your neighborhood “except real”. What was the warning about again? Bad actors?

Speaking of FOX news threat warnings, this clear-headed review by John Stewart really is priceless:

Beware protesters that you disagree with. In fact, be very afraid. If you agree with them, then don’t worry at all.