The U.S. Forest Service has released a video — the second in the Forest News: California National Forests series. In this episode the agency examines how fuel treatment areas on National Forest System lands changed the intensity of the Caldor Fire and provided opportunities for community defense. The blaze burned more than 221,000 acres near South Lake Tahoe in August and September.
The video was written, directed, and narrated by Joe Flannery, the Acting Regional Fire Communications Team Lead in the Forest Service’s California region.
I will say I 100 percent agree with the prescription efforts used for fuel reduction efforts and I’ve been preaching it for years. Unfortunately I disagree with the propaganda placed on the back burn efforts. I would say roughly 80% of structures burned on this fire we’re due to Back burns lit at the end of the day after a successful aerial assault. I can attest to this as I flew the fire basically from the start to finish it’s a shame and every morning I would hang my head low to the evacuees at the hotel saying thank you thank you thank you for your efforts and all I could say is I hope they didn’t burn your house down tonight. It all goes back to the fires aren’t a natural problem it’s the management that’s the problem sometimes I find myself so ashamed sucking out of the government well but what the hell…..
The work done by air resources during the day buys time for ground resources to prep and/or take advantage of more favorable night conditions for burning…yes sometimes burning is not the right call..
Article on AP news stirs the pot on this subject: https://apnews.com/article/wildfires-science-business-fires-environment-a5bc4932be70d28ee408ea8102e3398c
To build on your comments OLDGUY your points also show that throwing money at other peoples bad decisions will not fix those bad decisions. We dont need to have a massive fleet of over priced airtankers and we dont need 30k full time wildland firefighters to slap bad aids on all these previous bad decisions you noted. Most of the articles listing all these supposed “issues and needs” with equipment and personnel are reduced or eliminated entirely once fire has run thru an area due to local governments bad decisions. Why should every taxpayer in the country pay for those bad decisions at the more local level in a manner that has no exit strategy or worse……NO SUSTAINABILITY
Both Jerry and Old Captain are saying what has been said a thousand times for those of us with fire experience: “don’t build in the WUI.” And, what has it got over the decades of this outcry? Nothing at all!!
The real target should be County Supervisors and Planners who are and have been swayed by developers to push the boundaries of suburbia, after which, with their homes surrounded with trees and or brush, home owners want “someone” to clear the hazards around their property.
I can personally say we have been fighting this losing battle with Counties since the late 1960s to no avail.
The flat out truth of the matter is that Counties are influenced by developments that bring more revenues (taxes) to them. No judgement here about the good and bad of that notion; it’s just what is happening.
We need to stop the rhetoric and target the “real problem.”
Excellent!! This is the way our wild lands used to be managed. In the 1800’s and early 1900’s, the ranchers would be dropping matches on the way out of the grazing areas when they brought their cattle out in the fall of the year. The native Americans akso did the same in the fall since ancient times. They all realized that fire is not an enemy , but part of the whole natural system of management. We have allowed our wild lands to become choked with brush fields, dead fall, blow down, and ladder fuels. I think it’s also worth looking at something akin to the old Ponderosa Fuel Break which could be a very viable tool. We are also going to have to take a hard look at where people are going to be allowed to build in the urban/wild land interface and how they are building. In addition, we also need to continue to use overwhelming initial attack strategy to suppress a fire. I might add too that deciding to do a let-burn in the middle of July with the indexes in the toilet is probably not a real smart idea
Capt. I agree with what you said 110% and have seen it work saving more valuable lands, timber and communities than 1000s of firefighters and equipment .
Not allowing homes built in fire prone areas and constructed to burn. Keeping safety around communities that can be defended and lives saved. With your last statement having folks who understand fires and not trying to impress politicians!
Finally someone with common sense. Now if only we could get a government that is willing to listen and understand. If only……