Question to Arizona & Colorado Freepers about fires (vanity

I have a crazy question to ask which was prompted by my listening to today's Rush Limbaugh show.

Does anyone have any large machinery that could dig ditches, faster than the firemen, around these forest fires?

Rush brought up the point that large digging machines could make the areas fire-proof much faster, and a lot easier, than manually digging ditches.

I had never considered that before.

Is there a reason, other than possibly messing up the dirt in the forest, why some large construction company can't loan out their workers to get these fires under control?

If it is possible to do, might I suggest that if any of you have such equipment that you call every news agency possible to hold a press conference, saying that you have a solution to the problem, and then get them to air your offering of the equipment to put out the fire? With all of these people losing their homes and property, one would think that they couldn't turn the offer down.

Just a suggestion, but is there any reason this would not work, given more thought and strategy?

unfortunately Rush was opening his mouth with not enough knowledge (I like Rush, but like all talk show guys sometimes he seems to be just filling time). The prolem fire breaks usually have isn't meerely a matter of completion, it's size, and when a fire gets big it's simply not possible to dig a big enough break. The infamous Yellowstone fire shot cinders half a mile or more, you can't dig a trench that wide. Big fires creat micro-climates that do some wierd stuff. Of course you also face the terrain problem, these fires don't tend to be in nice comfy flat land that's good for driving heavy equipment on. When you get down to it there really isn't much you can do about these things when they get rolling.

Actually there is a reason your suggestion can't be done. It's ludicrous but true. The forest service doesn't want to harm the forest.

A gold mining company owner had brought equipment to the Hayman fire in Colorado about a week or so ago and was told his bulldozers and men were not wanted. He was trying to donate men and equipment to build a 35 foot wide, 20 mile long fire break.

So there is the answer. And another 50,000 acres burned due to stupidity.

But it seems to me that if the right news agencies were alerted of this, they would almost have to use the equipment. It makes me think that the PR wasn't handled properly.

Surley if Hannity, or Walter William, or even O'Reilly were alerted to this, then something would have to be done.?!

Makes sense, but what about even cutting down trees for a mile, or so, around the town? If you take away the fuel, there's no fire. Right?

Also, if railroads can be built through mountains, then I know that rough terrain can be overcome. I've seen snowcats get up and down areas I wouldn't want to go in a 4x4.

This is a matter of some controversy. See Betty Jane's post about the contractor's allegations.

I'm no expert, but as I understand it machinery is of little help in the mountains because of the remote, off-road, locations and the vertical terrain. The Forest Service does use some cats in more level terrain. This helps secure the shoulders of the burn.

The problem with using breaks to stop the advance is twofold. First, where do you put it? Fires change direction based on wind direction and fuels. Second, you have to build way out in front because fires send embers hundreds of yards in front of the fire and then because of the dynamics literally suck the outlier to the main fire. Not good for firefighters in between trying to cut line.

Rush should stick to politics.

That's the strategy of back burning, but the winds have to cooperate. The main method of fire spreading isn't the green trees, it's the dead leaves grass and other underbrush. When the fire takes in those and dries out the tree, if you've ever built a campfire with moist or green wood you've had to do the exact same thing just on a smaller scale. That's the big thing the ditching is accomplishing: clearing the area of everything that can burn, or at least getting it under some soil so the embers can't get to it. And, like so much else with fires, if the winds cooperate you're in good shape. Problem is those big fires (when the two here in AZ merged the fire front was almost a mile long) make those micro-climates that generally consist of lots of whipping winds often heading out from the core of the fire towards the leading edge, thus causing the embers to have nice tail winds (the heat on the leading edge also causes updrafts so the embers go up and out) useful for jumping breaks.

There's a reason many fire fighters using terminology more appropriate to living creatures when talking about fires. The things do sometimes seem to have a survival instinct.

I've wondered why they don't try dropping explosives. I've read about blasting fires out, but don't know if it's at all appropriate for this type of fire. The Air Force could get in plenty of practice run dropping HE on the fire, maybe.

Blowing fires up to put them out is for oil wells. Really freaky stuff, the best guy at that was Red Adaire, and was immortalized in the John Wayne classic Hellfighters. His company spent a long time in Kuwait after the war undoing Saddam's sabatoge. The idea of the explossive technique is that the explosion sucks all the air out of the immediate area of the fire just long enough for the fire to go out, it's basically the same thing as blowing out a Bic, you blow the fire off of the fuel supply. Forrest/ brush fires are both too big and have the wrong kind of fuel supply for that technique.

Betty Jane's post in #5 is correct. The Cripple Creek Mining Co. reportedly offered two Dozers with 18' blades that could travel side by side making a fire break 36' wide. It was reported the Forest Service turned them down because they would destroy too much of the Forest.

Mike Rosen 850 KOA in Denver tried for a couple of days to get a spokesperson on the the air but they were too busy. If he finally did, I missed it.

It would be hard to do out in the wild as the forest service roads have mostly been blocked and it would take up to a day to unblock some of them to get machines back there. But around the towns I personally know people who could put a machine(s) in that would clear a swath about 400-900 ft wide and take the trees away (whole) and do about five to ten miles like that a day. I'm one of those people. At least they'd have a fighting chance, but the spotting would be a problem. That could be taken care of with air planes and chopper I would guess. But like some have said here...the forest service do not want it done as it seems they like to sit on their butts and hem and haw about htese things. Houses be dammed as well as the people I guess.

So then what's the reason for people not telling the Forest Service, and the Federal Govt., to go screw themselves and protect their property anyway? I would like to think that if I was in the same predicament, I would use any equipment I could to protect my interests and family.

Do we have to get permission from Big Brother for everything? Surely there are attorneys who would be more than glad to fight these battles for anyone who was brought to litigation due to them protecting their own property. In fact, I would think that the insurance carriers would gladly help with the covering of the litigation, as it will have saved them money.

Call me crazy, but I just don't understand this. But, I grew up in the west part of Texas and am not too familiar with forest fires, either.

It's just a shame that our citizens are having to pay for the government's screw up and that if they want to protect their property, they run the risk of being arrested.

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.