Posted on 11/18/2018 6:34:18 AM PST by Kaslin
Once again, faced with the failure of the “press” to educate us on an issue, we decided to go out and research the truth about what appears to be the significant increase in huge forest fires. Once we did the research, we found out major differences in facts from the random barkings in the MSM.
Let us start with this simple aspect. Forest fires are a normal thing. Often caused by lightning or other natural causes, they are God’s way of clearing forests. In those natural forest clearances, the wildlife that exists in them are threatened or their habitat is destroyed. What has changed is mankind’s intervention in the natural process. The question is, what other factors may be causing the change in the intensity of recent forest fires?
We also came armed with a thought. If you believe that global warming is making life more challenging for forest management, then you should support proper forest clearance. Otherwise we will be left with even more intense fires.
For this column, other than reading everything available, we went to two sources: our national Forest Service and the Union of Concerned Scientists to get different perspectives.
Speaking with Chris French, the Acting Deputy Chief of Forest Service (FS), we received a primer on what is really going on with forest fires today.
When asked what he believes is the primary cause of the intense forest fires, Mr. French’s immediate response was “Forests are overstocked. There are more trees than 100 years ago.” He went on to say that part of the problem was the Forest Service’s good work in the recent past stopping forest fires. This meant, however, that their focus was largely directed away from forest maintenance, which caused the elements that fuel a fire like underbrush, dead trees or more density to occur.
The changes French would like to see would be more active forest clearance and clearance of the underbrush. He also wants to do more controlled fires when the risks are minimized. If you are wondering why they are not doing that now it is because of budget restraints.
What government department does not advocate for additional money in their budget? In this case, there may truly be rationale. Because of the good work the FS was doing, they were spending 85% of the budget on forest maintenance and 15% on fire suppression.
Over the recent years as forest fires became more intense, they spent more money on suppression and less on clearance causing a vicious cycle of less money on clearance. At this point French stated that it was projected that 60% of their budget went toward suppression leaving fewer precious dollars for clearance. Recent Congressional budget bills have increased the Forest Service budget providing additional funding for clearance, thus hopefully stopping as many fires from happening and less money spent on suppression.
While doing the clearance the Forest Service does, French stated they were controlled by a myriad of federal laws which limit their actions. These laws include The Clean Air Act, Natural Forest Management Act, Endangered Species Act and National Environmental Policy Act to name a few. The Forest Service must put information out to the public before they do their clearance work. They are not always questioned, but quite often interest groups jump in armed with legal briefs to stop the planned work.
Currently there are groups trying to stop certain aspects of the Farm bill from being passed that would enhance the funding for forest clearance because they are against logging even though it is clear much of the land in question has three times the density that it should.
Just a thought: If you have a concern about destroying the natural habitat and thus limit the proper clearance of the areas in question, what do you say about what happens to the improperly-cleared forest during a major fire when the habitat is destroyed and the animals’ lives are put at risk?
One other point French made was about risks being higher today. He stated “People are living closer to where the fire dangers are, causing more damage and peril to human lives.” We asked if this is akin to all the people living in flood plains today. His response: “Exactly.”
This kind of fire has a catchy new name – urban interface fires. The Forest Service defines the wildland-urban interface as the place where "homes and wildlands meet or intermingle". As French described, it's where "humans and their development meet or intermix with wildland fuel". These used to be called fire areas. I live in one and we have to do special clearance each year to make sure that if a fire starts there will be little fuel to feed the fire. Where I live has built up for seventy years. This new situation describes the recent fires in California where people reached further in to these areas to homestead.
What is the government’s responsibility in these cases? Few would restrict people’s rights to build homes on private property. Fewer would suggest the authorities should not protect those people from danger if there is a fire, mud slide or their home is washed out in a flood. Many will question whether the government should have any financial risk to help the survivors rebuild in the areas in question. Others would say that just encourages questionable behavior.
While we can all feel sadness for those who have lost their homes in the fires, many have built homes in areas that are inherently dangerous to be “away from the hubbub.” Their choice; their risk. To build a home near a forest and not accept the uncertainty of fire verges on insanity.
When dealing with an environmental group today, one anticipates that a focal point will be global warming/climate change. In fact, the article I pulled from the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) website is titled "Is Global Warming Fueling Increases Fire Risks?" The column is a mix of warnings about how global warming is increasing wildfires and encouragement to do more forest clearance. I spoke with Rachel Cleetus, lead economist and policy director with the climate and energy program for the UCS.
Ms. Cleetus painted a somewhat different picture. She also forwarded a 64-page report she personally authored for the UCS on the matter. She was very aware of the many factors that are involved and echoed many of the same themes that the FS had stated, including the need for a greater budget especially with the extra monies being spent on forest clearance.
Cleetus was unclear whether the organization just supported the procedures that the FS argued for or advocated for them. She stated that they were not involved in stopping the FS from doing their work like some other interests often do.
But she did state the primary reasons for the increased risk of major fires was because of more people living in the areas and the forest management (or lack thereof) being done.
Whether you believe in global warming/climate change or not, it is quite clear that the forest service needs to get a handle on proper forest management to lessen the risks of major forest fires. The only way they can do that right now is to throw more resources at the problem to stop the downward spiral of clearance necessary to halt/minimize the risk of major fires.
Certainly, the federal/state governments need to make clear that they will not assume any liability for financial loss if anyone lives is in a fire zone. Citizens need to evaluate whether the joy of being in these areas is worth the exposure to their belongings and possibly their lives.
One thing we know for sure is that the wild charges made by some that this is all due to change in environmental factors is wrong. Though the UCS is vested in the issue of climate change, they support that there are other factors as proposed by the FS.
Climate change/global warming is not the answer to everything on our planet.
Footnote: We would be remiss if we did not thank the brave people who fight these wildfires for all of us. God bless them.
Who or What Is Really Responsible for the Huge Forest Fires in California?
That’s easy...MATCHES. Need to have stronger match control laws. More extensive background check for matches purchases. /S
It did and it does work. But nature needs a helping hand starting the necessary fires. Otherwise there will be bad luck (no lightning) and fuel will build up too much. Also logging has its place including private ownership and supervised leasing of federal lands. Nearer to the towns they need to do more grazing. If they clearcut they will have to replant and manage (e.g. mow) that area for a decade or so until the trees are tall enough to withstand low intensity fire.
There are a lot of reasonble ideas for managing forests that will work. But California used none of them. Instead they neglected their forests. Furthermore they tied the hands of federal land managers with air quality laws forcing federal land managers to extinguish natural fires that should have been left alone. CARB iand the Butte county AQ board have blood on their hands. Everything they say now is just a distraction. In their zeal to limit PM 2.5 for "health" reasons, they killed 100 people or more.
I’ve lived in California 70 years.
Fires are a part of California. Ever since I was a child, the fires come every year in varying intensity. The Bel Air fire was a shock as it came over the hill in LA and took people’s homes in the city. everyone’s been happy that there have been no recurrences,
The fire department is around all of the time giving citations and demanding you clear areas around your home.
But these were fires outside of LA. for the most part ... well maybe not Ma;libu.
There should be a forest management stewardship guideline that’s used and applied ‘by landowners’... Who need to be responsible for their own lands and property.
It’s simple
No rain for 7-8 months
At the top, the Left knows full well how evil they are. But they brainwash almost all of the true believers into pursuing the agenda.
This battle is about:
Good vs Evil
Truth vs Lies
Light vs Darkness
Freedom vs Slavery
Life vs Death
We are in this to the end.
“”Going to take a lot of lumber to rebuild all of the structures that burned down in California due to lack of proper logging and forest management. Paradox ?””
They won’t be able to get it from CA, will they? Perhaps Oregon where I understand they’ve done a better job of managing their forests.
I don’t think it’s even possible for any of us to imagine the insurance claims that will be filed and the backlog of those not to mention lack of building materials to even start rebuilding.
ALL the insurance companies should merge their resources and hire the necessary contractors together to go into Paradise and Malibu and do all the cleanup work at the same time. It wouldn’t make sense for each to send the workers in whenever they get around to it. It needs to be done now and all at once.
I can’t imagine what those homeless people are going to do for lodging. Available homes/apartments have to be MILES away from their jobs..Sacramento is what(?) 80 miles away from Paradise? It will be easier for those in the Malibu area as there are miles and miles of possibilities for them.
But so much will depend on insurance companies getting to work immediately! Homeowners will have to prove they had coverage, wait for adjusters to do their work(wouldn’t want that job) and the problems will be endless!
So many will need all our prayers.
The possibility of a terrorist set forest fire should be checked because the Muslim Jihadists threaten to set forest fires, by wat of their websites and on captured bin Laden documents.
These forest fires seem to have been started by faulty electrical equipment, but terrorism should not be off the table. - Tom
Nice article, however as to the “who” part, there was no mention of alleged governor Jerry Brown and his 2016 veto of SB 1463 which would have facilitated prudent forest prudent management decisions.
You would make news if Michigan was located in a Coastal Desert as is California.
Good on you and Michigan for understanding that preventive management is the answer.
Indeed, the Californians are too stupid.
“That’s easy...MATCHES. Need to have stronger match control laws. More extensive background check for matches purchases. /S”
I think that you are on to something there...stay on it, it is another area to be heavily regulated if we are to survive.
“CMP,” Concealed Matches Permit!
You have a firm grasp of the obvious!
Akin to trying to teach a pig to sing: it wastes your time and annoys the pig!
Some years ago, a San Diego homeowner was jailed for using a CAT to clear a fire break on his own land! His backyard backed up to Jack Murphy canyon; the canyon was on fire, so the homeowner did the prudent thing to save his house.
His neighbor’s houses burned; his did not. He went to jail for a short while. I don’t recall the final outcome, but you can get the gist of how much control CA environmentalist whackos have!
My guess: Pot farms.
Arguing with liberals is a futile waste of time. Instead of trying to convince them of your logic (which will never be accepted) convince them of your steadfast determination to push for what you believe in. Give them no quarter.
Roger the “No Quarter.”
I cannot abide LIEberals!
Gave up trying to reason with them many years ago!
...lecture we mere citizens that this was all just something we’d have to get used to, and that we needed to direct more money to firefighting.
Not sure how those statements work together.
Vigor costs bigly.
You keep saying this but I have yet to see one affected landowner blame this on their inability to burn based on air quality.
The Butte County restrictions are really prompted by agricultural burning and absolutely necessary.
There are even explicit exemptions for burning to manage fire danger.
The Sierra Club is the most evil organization in the country.
That ordinance requires clearing 100 feet around your home: https://www.buttecounty.net/Portals/26/Education/ButteFireFlood.pdf which can be done by burning or chipping. Obviously the fire hazard ordinances were utterly irrelevant in Paradise. There are lots of pictures online showing trees within 10 feet of each other. That didn't matter at all since the trees were relatively fireproof. In stark contrast to that, most houses in Paradise were not ember proof.
Thus the 100 foot exemption from AQ regulations made no difference, utterly useless. What would have made a difference and saved lives is a blanket exmption to the AQ regulations last spring, before it was too late.
....but I have yet to see one affected landowner blame this on their inability to burn based on air quality.
Article about how more burning is needed: https://www.kqed.org/science/1927354/controlled-burns-can-help-solve-californias-fire-problem-so-why-arent-there-more-of-them where they mention that it's hard to get a permit. That article was written in July, obviously too late in the season to prevent tragedy this year.
Governor Brown signed an executive order last spring that would have allowed more burning. https://www.gov.ca.gov/2018/05/10/governor-brown-issues-executive-order-to-protect-communities-from-wildfire-climate-impacts/ "“Devastating forest fires are a profound challenge to California,” said Governor Brown. “I intend to mobilize the resources of the state to protect our forests and ensure they absorb carbon to the maximum degree.”" Doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement of prescribed burning.
Also last spring there was a report https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/3798 that soft-peddled the problem. They put it this way: The VMP treated 17,500 acres with prescribed burns in 2017, somewhat more than the average of approximately 13,000 acres treated per year since 1999. This represents a decrease from about 30,000 acres treated per year from 1982 through 1998. This decrease is due to several factors, including (1) an increase in the amount of planning and documentation required for prescribed burns due to stricter air quality regulations,...
It's still too early for a scientific report on this year's fires. I didn't see notices for prescribed burning on https://ssl.arb.ca.gov/pfirs/index.php in Butte county from last April and May other than some trivial burns.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.