
Originally Posted by
old goat
The problem is that in the past most (not all--see below) fires were relatively low intensity and spared the big trees. The ecology of our forests in fact depended on periodic fire. After over 100 years of fire suppression fuels have built up to the point that fires are much higher intensity, the big trees die, and there is severe erosion within the watersheds. So letting a fire burn after decades of suppression is not really a natural phenomenon. There certainly has been in the recent past more of a philosphy of letting some fires burn--the Yellowstone fire a few years ago was an example, and a very controversial one. I don't know what the current Forest Service thinking is (but whatever it is it will be different next year.)
Former Wildland Firefighter here, well aware of the history of fire suppression and I've spent my fair share of time putting out fires that could have been let burn. Sorry I didn't make that clear. I was never a big wig like Meadow Skipper, but I know at his level things get very political.
I think the larger point is that even if you had put out every fire in Yellowstone in 1988 or only one had gotten big, it is all going to burn. It's just a matter of time. We naively think that we can continue to suppress fires and some how get to a place where the watersheds aren't going to burn?
Newsflash: they are going to burn.
This summer a 60,000 acre fire burned over half a dozen fires I had a hand in putting out over the past decade. And it did it with a pretty high intensity. The days I was successful? Low intensity, easy living, low mortality, etc.
The fires that are nuking out watersheds are unstoppable. Period. They burn on days where no amount of manpower, airpower or money is going to stop them. It's pissing in the wind. The King fire was IA'd at 2 acres and burned 4k the first day, then in the next 3 it burned 67,000. This with a "world record amount of retardant" thrown at it and a HUGE response from the machine that is the California Wildland Firefighter force. The difference is that the King fire was directly threatening communities.
Yet the same thing happens in the wilderness, where there are no houses and the access is crap. Yet we continue to drop dudes out of the sky on silk so we can just continue the cycle.
I still don't understand the current strategy. Until there is a strategy, we will see more high intensity fires like the King fire burning shit up. Like James noted, it will take money and political will to make it happen.
Last edited by char; 09-24-2014 at 08:12 PM.
"These are crazy times Mr Hatter, crazy times. Crazy like Buddha! Muwahaha!"
Bookmarks