“A century of mismanaging Sierra Nevada forests has brought an unprecedented environmental catastrophe that impacts all Californians.” That’s not a tweet from President Trump, but the opening line of a February report by California’s Little Hoover Commission investigating fire danger in the state.

“The immediate crisis is visible to anyone who has traveled recently in the Sierra Nevada, especially in its southern range where mountainsides are brown with dying and dead forests,” Commission Chairman Pedro Nava wrote in the cover letter for “Fire on the Mountain,” an 82-page report on the tinderbox nature of the state’s forests.

The report outlines factors that have led to the current forest crisis, including years of poor or nonexistent management policies, and the recent drought and a beetle infestation that killed an estimated 129 million trees across the state — trees that could go up in flames.

“The obstacles to progress are daunting and tremendously complex,” the report said.

Still, Nava was a bit taken aback by Trump’s Nov. 10 tweet blaming the state’s “gross mismanagement” for the fires.

“My first reaction is that he really needs better advisers — obviously they left a lot of things out,” Nava told us.

For example, the U.S. government owns nearly 60 percent of the forests that cover one-third of California and for the past 100 years federal policy has been to put out forest fires as quickly as possible rather than let nature take its course.

The result is thicker forests that are just waiting to go up in flames.

Still, it’s not just the federal policies that have created the danger. The report concludes that areas under state, local or private control carry their own set of conflicts as well.

For example, “plans for prescribed burning to rid the forests of dense ground cover often clash with regional air quality regulations, even as emissions from catastrophic wildfires nullify hard-fought carbon reduction accomplishments,” it states.

Plus, there are the “familiar and old divisions between the lumber industry and environmentalists.”

The state has begun drawing up plans for better forest management. Lawmakers have also set aside $1 billion over the next five years for forest management programs.

All of which will take time, and continued political will, to make any real changes.

“It took us 100 years to get to here,” Nava said. “It won’t change overnight, but hopefully it won’t take us 100 years to make it better either.”

For whom the bridge tolls: Saving money and saving drivers time are the two biggest arguments being put forth in the Bay Area Toll Authority’s plan to eliminate cash tolls on its seven bridges.

But just how much money the changeover will actually save — and just how much time drivers will save as a result of the bridges getting rid of toll takers — is a bit hard to pin down at this point.

For example, not having drivers stop and hand over money to toll takers is expected to pretty much eliminate the backups on the Antioch, Carquinez and Benicia-Martinez bridges. But, then again, none of them have significant backups.

Planners estimate that getting rid of cash lanes could save drivers up to seven minutes on a westbound crossing of the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge — and three to four minutes when crossing the Dumbarton and San Mateo bridges.

The time savings for drivers battling rush-hour traffic on the Bay Bridge, where stopping to pay tolls is only part of the problem, remains to be seen.

“You are still going to have to deal with 20 lanes of traffic funneling down to five lanes and the backup from people getting off on the San Francisco side,” Metropolitan Transportation Commission spokesman Randy Rentschler said. “So on one side or another you will still be sitting in traffic.”

Eliminating the need to run both cash and automatic payment systems will save the toll authority about $5 million a year.

And the technology is available. Plus, going cashless has worked at other bridges — including at the Golden Gate Bridge, which saw its backup disappear and saved $900,000 annually.

“When you look at the benefits going forward — the time people will save waiting in line, the safety benefits from eliminating toll booth robberies and accidents leading up to the toll plaza and the backup those create — it’s worth it,” said toll authority member and Napa County Supervisor Alfredo Pedroza.

With a price tag of $55 million for the new system, we certainly hope so.

And finally: Police Chief Bill Scott appears to be taking to heart the mayor’s call to keep large homeless camps from sprouting back up on the streets of San Francisco.

On Wednesday, Scott and Lt. Tad Yamaguchi were returning to police headquarters from a meeting at City Hall when they noticed six men setting up an encampment at the corner of Alameda and San Bruno at Showplace Square, an area that until recently was overrun by dozens of tents.

Scott and Yamaguchi pulled over, searched the bicycles for any registration (none of the bikes was registered) and asked the group of men if they wanted to go to a Navigation Center or other shelter or meet with a social worker.

The men refused the offer of help — they didn’t like the police attention either — and eventually picked up and left. Whatever they left behind was soon gone, because we’re told Public Works came out and cleaned up the area.

San Francisco Chronicle columnists Phillip Matier and Andrew Ross appear Sundays, Mondays and Wednesdays. Matier can be seen on the KPIX-TV morning and evening news. He can also be heard on KCBS radio Monday through Friday at 7:50 a.m. and 5:50 p.m. Got a tip? Call 415-777-8815, or email matierandross@sfchronicle.com. Twitter: @matierandross