-
-
It's hard to even think about prescribed burns when disease and drought cause high fuel loads. The liability issues loom too large. Where there is room for discussion is whether to let naturally occurring fires to burn out bigger areas, but even that is a resource & liability question as larger fires with larger perimeters carry a greater risk to suddenly changing conditions. Red assumes that the problem is easy and the people are stupid.Last edited by togor; 12-01-2018, 06:38. -
More lies... The environmentalists stopped clear cutting and other forestry programs that could and would make forest fires less likely. Nobody said it it is easy! Doing nothing is easy and that why whacko leftists like you are to blame for the death and destruction that their "do nothing," policies promote.
My step Dad was a U.S. Forest Service member that fought fires not only in the Ozark National Forest but he was also sent to California to teach their guys how to better fight fires and to lessen the dangers through proper management, of which "controlled burns," was just one of many techniques. He was the Ranger in charge of the Ozark National Forest for 2 years.
Have you ever been right about anything?
You are the one that pronounced that all poor people are stupid.Red assumes that the problem is easy and the people are stupid.Last edited by RED; 12-01-2018, 07:13.Comment
-
I was right about you being an unstable, blowhard POS. But it hardly takes an Einstein for that, huh pal? Lots of guys successfully made that call.
Regarding your graphics...yes the high fuel loads was known to be a worry. Trump's cheap shot or yours aside, how would you handle it, genius? Put up or crawl back in your hole.Comment
-
tirades aside,
if the Jan article is true, would not the State of Cali be responsible for some of the issues?
as in they knew there was a problem, or potential for one, and did what?
(asking, not pointing fingers)Comment
-
Red wants to point fingers. When disease and drought contribute to high fuel loads and explosive fire conditions, prescribed fire is off the table. This is not to say that risk-averse thinking in agencies doesn't add to long term problems, because it does. Most land agencies are short staffed by design. Who wants a nanny state of land managers on the taxpayer dime, goes the thinking. Fire conditions in Cali are also very different than Arkansas, and anyone who knows anything about wildland fires knows that conditions are 80% of the game. If an agency puts the match to fuel and it escapes, then they can kiss their fire authority goodbye in the future. So it's easy and bureaucratically safe to decide not to burn.
IMO the fire codes need to be augmented to include grounds mgmt. Subdivisions need to be built with fire breaks. Even then the right conditions can spot fires over the breaks. But some houses survived the Camp Fire, and proactive, strategic fuel removal was a big part of the reason why.Comment
-
Controlled burning isn't the only fire-management technique, but the point of this post wasn't "how to do it," it was to expose the monstrous hypocrisy of the Trump-hating NY Times, & THAT it did! What an opportunity was lost to shame the Trump-hating Gov of Cal because no one provided Trump with a copy of that issue to distribute to the press when he made his trip out there!Comment
-
Maybe the prescribed burns should have been done prior to disease and possibly drought being such an issue?Comment
-
Forest fires are good...until they burn your town down. Trump is essentially correct, but he made his point with the finesse of a water buffalo.Comment
-
BTW, had some personal experience with this. Went to burn a pile of brush in my background, which is about 300 yards from a National Forest. The thing exploded. Had fire going up trees, massive smoke plume, etc. A little mini California. It burned about two acres. I contained it with a rake building a fire lines. Just me, No help. Two things helped me. One, no wind. Two, I had already cleared a lot of brush. Going through a pro level fire academy helped, but I was a structural fire guy. My point is you have to get rid of the fire load on your terms. A side benefit? Didn't see many ticks that summer.Comment
-
Jim:. Get one of these for next time:
There are some useful mods one can do to them that I learned from the local Nature Conservancy folks. One is to replace the back plate with some camping foam pad. Duct tape sticks to the galvanized can. The second is to replace the web straps with a padded belly belt and shoulder straps. Makes carrying it a lot easier. A little water goes a long way.Comment
-
Actually Togor what I may experiment with is that flex hose you see advertised on tv. I bought a 50 ft length of it, happened to have a shutoff valve I could put on the inlet end. Once I turned off the water supply I noticed I got a pretty darn good stream for a couple of minutes as the hose contracts. That is often all you need to control a brush fire. I figure two lengths stuffed in any type of backpack maybe a pretty effective firefighting tool. The Indian pumps are great but they are heavy and take a lot of energy to use. Their advantage is they can be filled easily.
- - - Updated - - -
And the Indian pumps are expensive.Comment
-
Yes Jim, not cheap. For occasional use, not worth the expense. But if you have a public land boundary and regular brush to burn, they are cheap insurance. We burn around here every year and the cans we've accumulated last a long time with proper maintenance and storage. Up here we burn brush piles when there is snow cover. No danger of escapes then. Not so easy to do that in VA of course.Comment
Tweet
Comment