Paradise?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an RV or an interest in RVing!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
That's in direct contrast to the tree-crowning wildfires in California caused by the uncontrolled fuel loads and excessive underbrush in their forests.
But many Colorado fires are of the tree-crowning variety, as well, Lou. Still, even a grass fire can be devastating.
 
About the deaths, yes at least two of the people were elderly and couldn't get out.  Even some of the able-bodied barely made it out and often driving through flames all around them.  SOOOO Scary!  From the interviews I've seen people grabbed some clothes to wear, pets and ran.  The fire was moving so fast they weren't able to do anything but run.  One person couldn't start his car and neighbors took him out.

We knew a couple who bought property and built a house up in the mountains above Santa Cruz, something like 15 miles up a small road.  I can't help but wonder what they think now about living among the redwoods.

ArdraF
 
Larry N. said:
Allowed? John, it wasn't allowed, it happened in spite of attempts to keep it away.

I had the same reaction to the use of "allowed" in John's post.  People who have not lived in these forest conditions when humidity is low and winds are fierce cannot even imagine how fast a fire ignites and spreads.  Recent reports have indicated that PG&E (CA power company) lines sparking may have caused this utterly devastating fire which was exacerbated by weather conditions at the time. Whatever the cause, whoever is "to blame", who cares?  So far 66 people (and counting) have lost their lives, 600+ are still missing and over 10,000 structures have been obliterated.  A whole town, which was a retirement dream location for many, is gone.  We should be concentrating on sending prayers and other support to these people.  IMHO criticism and stereotypical comments are inappropriate. 
 
Tom and Margi said:
I had the same reaction to the use of "allowed" in John's post.  People who have not lived in these forest conditions when humidity is low and winds are fierce cannot even imagine how fast a fire ignites and spreads.  Recent reports have indicated that PG&E (CA power company) lines sparking may have caused this utterly devastating fire which was exacerbated by weather conditions at the time. Whatever the cause, whoever is "to blame", who cares?  So far 66 people (and counting) have lost their lives, 600+ are still missing and over 10,000 structures have been obliterated.  A whole town, which was a retirement dream location for many, is gone.  We should be concentrating on sending prayers and other support to these people.  IMHO criticism and stereotypical comments are inappropriate.
:)) :)) :)) You tell him Margi.
 
Larry N. said:
Allowed? John, it wasn't allowed, it happened in spite of attempts to keep it away.

had the Military troops sent to the border  been sent to fight the fire.  I think it would have been stopped. so YES it was allowed.

Trump is also saying forest mis-management and failure to rake leaves are responsible. The fires started on Federal land. so he's the mis-manager.

edit: political content
 
John From Detroit said:
had the Military troops sent to the border  been sent to fight the fire.  I think it would have been stopped. so YES it was allowed.

Trump is also saying forest mis-management and failure to rake leaves are responsible. The fires started on Federal land. so he's the mis-manager.


I understand that that is what you think, but the reality is that they would not have made a difference. This is a tragedy that is really not about politics, although there are questions about how to best manage that particular environment that are germane.
 
Please remember that politics (including political commentary) is prohibited under Forum rules.  Thanks!
 
John From Detroit said:
had the Military troops sent to the border  been sent to fight the fire.  I think it would have been stopped. so YES it was allowed.

Trump is also saying forest mis-management and failure to rake leaves are responsible. The fires started on Federal land. so he's the mis-manager.

edit: political content

John, I think you are under a misapprehension about these fires with winds like that. They could not possibly have deployed the military in time to prevent what happened. This happens FAST, especially with strong winds. I'm talking hundreds, perhaps (certainly, in this case) thousands of acres in a matter of hours, depending on winds and other conditions.

If you've never seen these fires, it's difficult to understand how quickly they can move, and how widespread they can be in an extremely short time. I've known fires in Colorado (and other places, as well) to be thousands of acres by evening, even though they just started mid-morning. How long does it take to deploy firefighters and military? Firefighters one to many hours; military is a matter of days, and by then the Camp fire had already engulfed the town -- it moved quicker than some people could drive a few miles. That's FAST!

It WASN'T ALLOWED!
 
We live in an area surrounding a primitive lake that is hundreds of acres of timber.  When I first purchased this place the brush was all the way up to the foundation of the house.  After one really dry Summer I grubbed the brush away from the house and put in a lawn just for fire protection.  I try to keep our woods free of downed trees but I'm falling behind.  I'm getting old.

We have severe burning restrictions here for good reason.  If the woods with all the dry leaves and dead wood laying around catch fire, it really goes up fast.  Fire is one of my biggest fears so during the Winter I cut up the dead wood and burn it as long as there is snow on the ground.  I have seen neighbors foolishly start fires in the Summer and have them get away.  We have community bonfires all Winter.

I can surely understand how that fire spread with the dry underbrush, dead wood, and high winds.  The land is Federal but the Federal Govt. had given money to the state to maintain it.  They apparently didn't do it.  That along with the beliefs that nature should just take it's course caused this.  They should have learned from Yellowstone a few years ago.  At least they should have cleaned up the forest near cities.
 
Cooperhawk said:
I can surely understand how that fire spread with the dry underbrush, dead wood, and high winds.  The land is Federal but the Federal Govt. had given money to the state to maintain it.  They apparently didn't do it.  That along with the beliefs that nature should just take it's course caused this.  They should have learned from Yellowstone a few years ago.  At least they should have cleaned up the forest near cities.

Nature did take it's course and fires are part of it's course if allowed.  California is in a real bad fix with it's forest lands and recent lack  of rains. We lived east of LA for two years and in that time span huge patches of brush burned off.  So it is not just the forests but the wide open patches of brush that burn like greasewood.  RIP to those who have lost their lives and regrets to those who have lost their homes.  We have lived in three places with major natural disasters.  In all cases, FEMA had to come in and set up smaller mobile homes for displaced residents to live in for a period of time.  Not long ago I read an article that said they still have thousands of these trailers stored in several locations around the country.  Two years ago they sold off about 50 or so right in our town.  With the housing costs and availabililty in the area of the fires FEMA may be required to resort to more temporary trailer towns.

Bill
 
John From Detroit said:
had the Military troops sent to the border  been sent to fight the fire.  I think it would have been stopped. so YES it was allowed.

Trump is also saying forest mis-management and failure to rake leaves are responsible. The fires started on Federal land. so he's the mis-manager.

edit: political content
The lands are federal but managed by the state.  Military troops are not trained forest fire fighters.  The border troops are in support roles letting the Border Patrol agents take the prime responsibility in contact with the illegals.  But they can offer a lot of behind the scenes support with maintenance, administration, and providing flying assets.  Sorry you are trying so hard to politicize this thread but I hope it can remain in neutral territory.

Now I would like to ask a question and request to stay away from the politics.  I read on another source that the California legislature had both houses pass by unanimous vote something called the Wildfire Prevention Act under which forest management would have included clearing of undergrowth for fire prevention purposes.  However, the Governor had vetoed the bill.  There must have been nonpolitical reasons for doing that.  Can anybody enlighten us if there even if there was such a bill passed and what the reasons were?  Thanks.

Bill
 
John From Detroit said:
Trump is also saying forest mis-management and failure to rake leaves are responsible. The fires started on Federal land. so he's the mis-manager.

Unfortunately, the the Federal government has had its hands tied for quite some time when it comes to forest management. In the past fifteen years, there have been over 1,000 lawsuits filed by "environmental" groups to block timber harvesting and other measures required to keep forest land healthy.

Dire predictions about devastating fires have been ignored for years. The current occupant of the White House is no more responsible than the previous one.
 
The problem is all the conflicting forces and ideas that interfere with good management and relief.  FEMA always does a good job if they are left alone.  Now they will be reacting to two major hurricanes along with the wild fires.  I would bet they are stretched very thin.

BTW, The Army or Air Force cannot be deployed into any state until the Governor requests their assistance.  Posse Comitatus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act

When Katrina hit New Orleans there was lots of criticizism that the military waited so long to deploy.  The Governor in that case had not asked for them.
 
Let's take this Natural Management to another level.  Why do we use medicine to prevent deadly disease?  Why not let Nature take it's course?  Isn't that about the same argument that environmentalists take?

 
Cooperhawk said:
Let's take this Natural Management to another level.  Why do we use medicine to prevent deadly disease?  Why not let Nature take it's course?  Isn't that about the same argument that environmentalists take?
:)) :)) :))
 
Bill N said:
Now I would like to ask a question and request to stay away from the politics.  I read on another source that the California legislature had both houses pass by unanimous vote something called the Wildfire Prevention Act under which forest management would have included clearing of undergrowth for fire prevention purposes.  However, the Governor had vetoed the bill.  There must have been nonpolitical reasons for doing that.  Can anybody enlighten us if there even if there was such a bill passed and what the reasons were?  Thanks.

Bill

"In September 2016, Brown vetoed Senate Bill 1463, which aimed to reduce the risk of power lines sparking fires in brush-covered and wooded areas, saying in his veto letter that the bill duplicated existing efforts. SB 1463 had been unanimously approved by the state Legislature."

https://www.politifact.com/california/article/2018/nov/16/examining-jerry-browns-veto-2016-wildfire-legislat/
 
Thanks Lou.  The article did partially explain the reasoning but the legislature must have been grossly misinformed if they passed that bill with no nay votes.  Whatever, the fires are raging now and it will be interesting to see if any legislation comes about as a result of the devastation.

Bill
 
The old saying in the FAA was, "Regulations are written in blood!".  I would hope that with this tragedy something comes out correcting the neglect of the forests.  A lot of that dead timber could have been harvested but was not due to Environmental questions.  Now it will be a blame game of who's most at fault which gains nothing.  What is needed are common sense practices on forestry.

But what we'll probably get is more of one side blaming the other and special interest groups stirring the pot with money and threats.
 
Back
Top Bottom