Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We Know How to Prevent Megafires

propublica.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 110 posts

Re: We Know How to Prevent Megafires

#11

Post by themodelplumber »

perl4ever wrote: post #4
philips wrote: post #2

My big takeaway from the article is it will require a big culture shift in the general public, two quotes: > “I’ve talked to many prescribed fire managers, particularly in the Sierra Nevada over the years, who’ve told me, ‘Yeah, we’ve spent thousands and thousands of dollars to get all geared up to do a prescribed burn,’ and then they get shut down.” Maybe there’s too much smog that day from agricultural emissions in…

I don't understand how a private individual would deal with the liability.

People do this where I live in NorCal. They seem to do these burns on permissive burn days, for one. Conditions might even be wet.

They also tend to let law enforcement know, and law enforcement and fire people seem to understand the purpose. People from the city still call 911, but that's just because they are trained to think that distant fires are dangerous. To be expected.

Re: We Know How to Prevent Megafires

#13

Post by emn13 »

Heads up that propublica doesn't mind intentionally deceiving readers; I don't trust them anymore.

Just a few months ago I read this: https://www.propublica.org/article/taxpayers-paid-millions-t... - and my initial reaction was "bad, big company!" A little digging later; turns out the piece is deceptive to the point that I don't buy it's an accident.

So hey; maybe they're telling the truth this time. But liar, liar, pants on fire: I'm not believing a word they say without solid external sources anymore.

Edit: here, I found a comment by somebody (not me) that sums up the problems with this reporting here: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2020/04/trump-administration-an...

I get that this isn't terribly on topic for wildfires - but by linking to sources like this we also give them a position of authority, and they don't deserve it. Note that the ventilator article has not been retracted nor updated; they're not willing to admit - let alone correct! - their mistakes either, apparently.

Re: We Know How to Prevent Megafires

#14

Post by softwaredoug »

What's interesting is when colonists came to North America, they often described forests of trees that felt like great rooms or halls, teaming with wildlife and human-edible plants. But this itself was not a primordial state, but a heavily managed environment, intended to create favorable environment for flora/fauna through slash & burn forest management. Basically, burning out the undergrowth and allowing human selected plants to flourish. Much of the current problem is an excess of undergrowth, so you would think we could somehow recreate this kind of management for everyone's benefit...

Re: We Know How to Prevent Megafires

#15

Post by jeffbee »

There's a couple of misleading statements in here. It's true that CDF firefighters make a decent living, but it's also true that every other fire department pays better. They'd all take a position in a city fire department if they were after more money.

The other misleading thing is associating these current fires with bad forest management practices. It's true for Sierra Nevada forests generally, but that's not where these fires are. The Big Basin area near Santa Cruz isn't supposed to regularly burn. Historically it goes through intense fires rarely. "Preventing megafires" isn't what that coastal redwood forest wants. The other big fire in the San Antonio Valley and Del Puerto Canyon is virtually all privately-held land. There doesn't seem to be a mechanism for the state to require a prescribed burn through private lands, like you might do in a national forest or BLM holding.

Re: We Know How to Prevent Megafires

#16

Post by rascul »

text70 wrote: post #6
perl4ever wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand how a private individual would deal with the liability.

Call a public service like the fire department, if it gets out of control.

Probably best to notify the fire department in advance of the burn so that they can already be prepared if it gets out of control. I wouldn't be surprised if some jurisdictions require this.

Re: We Know How to Prevent Megafires

#17

Post by dragonwriter »

jeffbee wrote: post #15

There's a couple of misleading statements in here. It's true that CDF firefighters make a decent living, but it's also true that every other fire department pays better. They'd all take a position in a city fire department if they were after more money. The other misleading thing is associating these current fires with bad forest management practices. It's true for Sierra Nevada forests generally, but that's not wher…

> It's true that CDF firefighters make a decent living, but it's also true that every other fire department pays better.

Except CDCR, which pays notably worse, but that's not really competing for firefighters.

> There doesn't seem to be a mechanism for the state to require a prescribed burn through private lands, like you might do in a national forest or BLM holding.

There's not mechanism for the state to require a prescribed burn on national forest or BLM land, either (both of which are federally managed.)

Re: We Know How to Prevent Megafires

#18

Post by [deleted] »

jeffbee wrote: post #15

There's a couple of misleading statements in here. It's true that CDF firefighters make a decent living, but it's also true that every other fire department pays better. They'd all take a position in a city fire department if they were after more money. The other misleading thing is associating these current fires with bad forest management practices. It's true for Sierra Nevada forests generally, but that's not wher…

[deleted]

Re: We Know How to Prevent Megafires

#19

Post by fhub »

Certainly in large parts of Australia, the window to do controlled burns is shrinking due to climate change. Threading the needle on {not windy, not damp, not tinder box} is, on average, getting smaller each year. This checker box theory relies on that time window being bigger than it is in practice.
Post reply on HN