Prescribed Burns in Forest Lands in Western USA

[dado potato]

University of California-Berkeley forestry professor Harold "Doc" Biswell was ridiculed over his experiments with controlled fires in the pine forests in the 1950s. Doc Biswell died in 1992 at the age of 86.

Now, "prescribed burns" are seen as essential to clear underbrush and consume surface fuels in the forests.

Do you want to burn in a planned, strategic way that has an element of control to it; or do you want it to burn in mega-fires, with all the costs - human, animal, environmental costs - which that entails?

Paul Doffing expresses the sense of loss caused by the Peshtigo fire in Wisconsin. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZ8C3Lfyg6g

[jp1]

From what I've read they make sense. I wish we did more of them here. Our house backs onto a very small wilderness park (maybe 30 acres) that is surrounded by suburban housing so we "should" be ok. Judging from the low cost of our homeowners insurance State Farm thinks we should be ok. But until a few years ago no one thought that a whole neighborhood of Santa Rosa (half hour north of here) including chunks of a shopping center surrounded by a massive parking lot were in danger either. But they were.

[iris lilies]

Isn’t prescribed and controlled burns the latest darling of how to solve the problem of horrific fires out west?

Good luck with it all.

[bae]

https://www.nfpa.org/Public-Education/Fire-causes-and-risks/Wildfire/Firewise-USA

[catherine]

If controlled burns can help protect lives and property, I'm for them. They make sense. But I do think a larger question remains.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/us-wildfire-statistics/ar-BB1gbIqb


Important wildfire statistics
4.5 million U.S. homes are at high or extreme risk from wildfires. (Verisk)
There were 58,950 wildfires in 2020, which affected 10,122,336 acres, compared to just 18,229 wildfires and 1,323,666 acres lost in 1983 when official record-keeping began. (NIFC)
There was a 17% increase from 2019 to 2020 in U.S. wildfires and a 223% increase since 1983. (NIFC)
Humans cause as many as 90% of wildfires. (U.S. Department of Interior)
Five of California’s top 20 biggest wildfires occurred in 2020. (iii)

Why the big uptick?
What impact is climate change having on the increased incidence of wildfires?
"Humans cause 90%"--what specifically? Climate change? Unattended camp fires? Arson?

How do we get to the "root" (no pun intended) of the problem and address that, rather than just burn up natural stuff to mitigate the "incendiary" (pun intended) human behavior?

[iris lilies]

If controlled burns can help protect lives and property, I'm for them. They make sense. But I do think a larger question remains.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/us-wildfire-statistics/ar-BB1gbIqbhttps://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/fireworks-blamed-in-fire-that-damaged-home-suspected-in-another-that-destroyed-deli/article_ff5c6178-b00b-5c72-86e6-0250c4b8b9e6.html


Important wildfire statistics
4.5 million U.S. homes are at high or extreme risk from wildfires. (Verisk)
There were 58,950 wildfires in 2020, which affected 10,122,336 acres, compared to just 18,229 wildfires and 1,323,666 acres lost in 1983 when official record-keeping began. (NIFC)
There was a 17% increase from 2019 to 2020 in U.S. wildfires and a 223% increase since 1983. (NIFC)
Humans cause as many as 90% of wildfires. (U.S. Department of Interior)
Five of California’s top 20 biggest wildfires occurred in 2020. (iii)


Why the big uptick?
What impact is climate change having on the increased incidence of wildfires?
"Humans cause 90%"--what specifically? Climate change? Unattended camp fires? Arson?

How do we get to the "root" (no pun intended) of the problem and address that, rather than just burn up natural stuff to mitigate the "incendiary" (pun intended) human behavior?

Humans spreading themselves all over hell in dryland country has rather a lot to do with the “terrible destruction “since much of that destruction is their structures.

It is all about the humans wanting to live in places where humans probably shouldn’t be living. See how neat and tidily I have wrapped that up? The drylands don’t support human human habitation in many ways. That is my theory and I’m sticking to it ha ha.

[Teacher Terry]

Here people going outside the city and doing target practice where it’s not allowed have started plenty of fires.

[razz]

Humans spreading themselves all over hell in dryland country has rather a lot to do with the “terrible destruction “since much of that destruction is their structures.

It is all about the humans wanting to live in places where humans probably shouldn’t be living. See how neat and tidily I have wrapped that up? The drylands don’t support human human habitation in many ways. That is my theory and I’m sticking to it ha ha.

I totally agree with you but the simple obvious answer is rarely accepted. The entire world might accept that certain boundaries will benefit all if followed but someone with an ego will attempt to cross that boundary with no respect for the consequences simply to prove it can be done. Why would anyone attempt a gender reveal resulting in an explosion in an area with dreadful drought conditions that have resulted in a long history of severe fires?

[iris lilies]

I totally agree with you but the simple obvious answer is rarely accepted. The entire world might accept that certain boundaries will benefit all if followed but someone with an ego will attempt to cross that boundary with no respect for the consequences simply to prove it can be done. Why would anyone attempt a gender reveal resulting in an explosion in an area with dreadful drought conditions that have resulted in a long history of severe fires?

gender reveal? I feel like i missed aomething here.

But the dry lands of the west are not the only places where fireworks starts fires. Each year here in St. Louis, buildings burn ground due to the fireworks and sometimes it’s multiples that bun in a year.

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/4th-of-july-fireworks-cause-dozens-of-injuries-in-st-louis-area-keeping-ems-busy/article_288a0b69-e35d-57eb-ab12-69b0584cb9d2.html


https://fox2now.com/news/missouri/st-louis-fire-chief-reminds-residents-fireworks-still-illegal-in-the-city/

18,500 fires are started annually by fireworks according to the national fire safety Council. Of those, 1300 are human built structures that burn.

But all the laws in the world against that doesn’t keep my compatriots in my urban core from running fireworks from the beginning of June until about July 10.

My Nextdoor newsfeed is raging about fireworks and race issues. No one is allowed to complain about fireworks. It’s a race issue, an equity issue, and black people get to run fireworks with impunity especially now since
Juneteenth comes so close to Independance Day. No one is allowed to politely ask our neighbors to cease and desist with the fireworks fire hazard. . That is considered a Karen act. Karens and Chads need to stand in front of their houses directing hose water up onto their roofs, I guess, e@ch nigh, for six weeks.

This Karen thinks that politely talking to your neighbors directly about this is a respectful way to approach it but apparently not. And calling law enforcement is beyond the pale. Not that the cops will come for that, because of course they will not.

I cannot get out if this ridiculous city environment soon enough. As it is,
i think I need to hang up my Nextdoor moderator hat.

[Rogar]

From my little bit of research the experts in Colorado seem to agree that prescribed burns are part of the solution. The state has accumulated one and a half million acres of beetle kill pine that has been lying on the ground over the last 15 years and is now prime tinder for fires. Most attribute the beetle kill to a warming climate. And that's not to mention accumulations of dry undergrowth. One article claimed there would have to be 80,000 acres of controlled burn for the next twenty years to return the state's forest to what they are called the normal healthy state.

Like a lot of climate change related damage, the solution seems to have some agreement, but paying for things is the issue. It's one of those market externalities involved with the cost of climate change. Unlike the national averages, some claim that most of our state's fires are caused by lightning. The human caused fires I looked up ranged from arson to odd things like sparks from a dragging chain. I'm not sure how far root cause analysis can go in eliminating fire sources here.

[boss mare]

Isn’t prescribed and controlled burns the latest darling of how to solve the problem of horrific fires out west?

Good luck with it all.

My husband has over 41 years as a firefighter and we have both lived in the PNW for all of our lives ( 60 years) Prescribed burns are real thing and are effective if done in a correct manner.

[bae]

If you have excessive fuel loads and ladder fuels piling up in your forests, you will have epic wildfires. The ignition cause will vary, but those areas *will* burn, sooner or later.

Now, you can rake your forest to reduce the fuel load, or allow natural processes to burn the fuel before it piles up to epic levels, and then the forest will be happy - it evolved to exist with frequent low-intensity burns.

But if you engage in decades of well-intentioned fire suppression efforts without reducing the fuel load, you are setting yourself up for disaster later.

My community is typically near the top of the state's list of fire-endangered neighborhoods. In centuries past, small fires swept through here every few years, and there was no major problem. The last big fire we had was in the 1910s.... You can see the burn marks on the old growth trees that are within easy walking distance of my house. Well, if you could walk through the forest, which is head-high with thickets of downed material, fuel....

I just spent about $15k "raking" the forest around my home to make the space more survivable.

[bae]

My husband has over 41 years as a firefighter and we have both lived in the PNW for all of our lives ( 60 years) Prescribed burns are real thing and are effective if done in a correct manner.

I agree. And portraying controlled burns as "the latest darling" is a bit misinformed.

[iris lilies]

I agree. And portraying controlled burns as "the latest darling" is a bit misinformed.

I’m sure it’s always been an option for those who are very knowledgeable in the field. That is not the general populace, especially those here in flyover land where we get decent (tho that is changing) rainfall. In other words, me! And the originator of this thread.but importantly, mainstream media.

I first heard about it several years ago on NPR and they presented it as gee whiz look what is new in the world of major fire control.

I don’t see how you can argue that all of a sudden (recent years) Smokey Bear’s “prevent forest fires” could be seen as outdated.

[bae]

I don’t see how you can argue that all of a sudden (recent years) Smokey Bear’s “prevent forest fires” could be seen as outdated.

Well, it's been outdated since the 1980s really. At least in the field.

[boss mare]

If you have excessive fuel loads and ladder fuels piling up in your forests, you will have epic wildfires. The ignition cause will vary, but those areas *will* burn, sooner or later.

Now, you can rake your forest to reduce the fuel load, or allow natural processes to burn the fuel before it piles up to epic levels, and then the forest will be happy - it evolved to exist with frequent low-intensity burns.

But if you engage in decades of well-intentioned fire suppression efforts without reducing the fuel load, you are setting yourself up for disaster later.

My community is typically near the top of the state's list of fire-endangered neighborhoods. In centuries past, small fires swept through here every few years, and there was no major problem. The last big fire we had was in the 1910s.... You can see the burn marks on the old growth trees that are within easy walking distance of my house. Well, if you could walk through the forest, which is head-high with thickets of downed material, fuel....

I just spent about $15k "raking" the forest around my home to make the space more survivable.

I worked for a Dentist who sold his practice here in SW Washington . He and his family moved to Paradise CA Two weeks later. they lost everything except the clothes on their back, the dog and the one car that they evacuated in. This was their house, their belongings , his new dental practice, their other car .... Everything.

Our property had alot of Douglas firs. huge huge ones. We ended up logging them due to a disease that was making them die from the top down. I am glad that we did that. In 2019 and in 2020 there was a huge fire in the Capital Forest area. There are alot of horse and livestock in that area. I ended up taking in some of the horses while several of my friends where helping trailer out the animals One place in particular is a horse show barn with over 40 horses in it

[jp1]

Regarding human activities causing wildfires, in California that also includes not maintaining vegetation near electric lines. Almost every year PG&E is found responsible for causing at least one or two significant fires when their electric lines spark fires in trees that have grown up onto them. Their solution, shut down power all over the place every time it's hot and windy. Which means we either need to live without power, potentially for days on end, or we need a backup plan. I'm currently in the process of putting together a combination of a modest sized generator and some amount of batteries, and the accompanying battery charger, power inverter, long extension cords, etc. Woohoo, what fun.

And apparently raking forests really IS a thing, at least on a small scale. The wilderness park behind our complex has big old growth oak trees further up the hill, but the first 50 feet or so, which the HOA owns, is just wild grass. Once rain season ended and it stopped growing the HOA gardners cut it down. At the last HOA board meeting a couple weeks ago it was discussed that the dead, mowed wildgrass is a major fire hazard. Now the gardeners will be coming back to rake and remove it.

We're not in remote wilderness, but the HOA still spent 2/3 of the meeting discussing fire prep, literally down to the nitty gritty of 'there are still 3 juniper trees in the complex and they need to be removed due to extreme flammability'

[LDAHL]

Don’t some tree and plant species require the occasional fire for their reproductive cycle?

[jp1]

Don’t some tree and plant species require the occasional fire for their reproductive cycle?

Yes. I recall after the big yellowstone fire back in the 80's the scientists being super excited that certain species of tree were being found there afterwards which had not been around for a long time because there hadn't been any fires in decades.

[happystuff]

Don’t some tree and plant species require the occasional fire for their reproductive cycle?

Have a sibling who is a long-time resident in CA and said there are also plants that are sort of "fire resistant"? Some sort of ground cover type plants, I think, that they put in some areas of their property. Sorry, don't know any details beyond that, but found it fascinating to think there were such things.