swajames

Yep, fair points, just one thing to add is there some pertinent "devil in the detail" here because most of the forestry here isn't under state control. More than half of our forestry is federally managed. The state only owns around 3% of our forest. The rest is owned privately, by companies or is Native American.

Wilson2000

It makes no sense to "de-fund" solar incentives at a time when most are on-board with doing something/anything to check global warming. PG&E makes plenty of profit already.

Too, rate payers should not be paying for PG&E's mistakes that have led to huge victim payouts. That money should come out of profits, stock values and management bonuses. These a-holes need motivation to run the utility safely. They break every rule in the book, skipping safety tests and inspections, then cry poor when it (literally) blows up their faces!

Yes, CA's forests need management, but up until now, management was simply focused on how many trees could be harvested. And, it's true that the majority of CA's public lands are owned/managed by the Feds. Drought and tree disease are major contributors to the forest fire crisis in CA. Curbing global warming will help (long term) in this regard.