Fire plan goes too far |

Fire plan goes too far

I was glad to see an Other Voices article that addresses the “Fire Safe” plan intelligently. The idea that owners of all parcels 10 acres or less should be forced to “groom” their properties of under story brush is outrageous. How dare anyone tell me to do that to my rural property? One reason we have five-acre parcel minimums in most of the rural county is to protect some tiny bit of habitat for our animals and birds. Was an environmental impact report completed on this proposal?

It’s amazing that people move here and then decide the fire danger presented by their neighbors’ natural property is unacceptable, so they try forcing us to make our land parklike. If that is how they feel, they need to go back to the city. With fewer trees and bushes, they can feel safer there. I built here fully understanding and accepting the risks of fire. I took prudent steps to protect my house and bought insurance. I don’t want my natural “privacy fence” destroyed, nor do I want any more “help” from the CDF or Fire Safe Council. This has gone too far already.

Gerald DeRego

Penn Valley

Support Local Journalism

Support Local Journalism

Readers around Grass Valley and Nevada County make The Union’s work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.

Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.

Your donation will help us continue to cover COVID-19 and our other vital local news.


Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.

User Legend: iconModerator iconTrusted User