Fire

[IDVortex]

The 1910 fire in northwest mt sterilized the ground for 100 years. The FS napalm sterilized the ground at the fire near my house it won't grow another tree till long after I am gone by at least 50 years. Trying to clean up beattle kill with fire is a gamble I 'm not willing to play.

I think goverment agency and people in general forget about major fires like the 1910, or evening the Tillamook fire in OR. Just how damaging those are. If we allowed smaller fires, that's one thing. But we also can't allow a fire to get so big it turns into a mega fire, they're more devastating due to the heat, and the chemicals put on them to try to take them out.

 

[TaperPin]

Everyone bitched about Yellowstone burning, now it’s not even brought up since the regrowth looks like a forest. Fire is going to burn - 100 years of putting out too many fires has taught us to let a lot of fires burn when possible, or large fires are the natural result.

In the towns I’ve lived in the FS does a great job and the career employees could easily make more money doing something else. What pisses me off the most is how budgets have been cut so trails aren’t maintained and roads look like hell. The ones bitching the most are the ones wanting budgets cut every year - you can’t have everything for nothing - no rocket science.

I’ll be glad when this political bs fades and we start managing natural resources instead of crying about mismanagement and cutting budgets so nothing can be done. The explosion of private fire fighters is a direct result of cutting fire budgets for government firefighters - and yes it costs twice as much. Makes no sense to anyone who actually has experience with firefighting budgets, and the politics of cutting budgets in idiotic ways and forcing the use of private crews has screwed us.

 

[Customweld]

As much as dislike the thought of the state ( Idaho in this case), these giant fires are one of the reasons people get on board with the idea. There was a big meeting this last week at the Idaho state house over this.
If you look at the West Mtn complex the fire stopped at the Wilks Bros property line. They are under a timber land fire fighting ( not managing) cooperative. Not only is their timber managed, their hired guns get the job done and the fire put out.
The folks bitching about the budgets being cut, if the FS would put that timber up for sale, instead of watching hundreds of millions of dollars in marketable timber go up in smoke, they wouldn't have to worry about cut budgets.
The bs litigation and judge shopping to stop every sale over an i not being dotted has to stop.

 

[TaperPin]

As much as dislike the thought of the state ( Idaho in this case), these giant fires are one of the reasons people get on board with the idea. There was a big meeting this last week at the Idaho state house over this.
If you look at the West Mtn complex the fire stopped at the Wilks Bros property line. They are under a timber land fire fighting ( not managing) cooperative. Not only is their timber managed, their hired guns get the job done and the fire put out.
The folks bitching about the budgets being cut, if the FS would put that timber up for sale, instead of watching hundreds of millions of dollars in marketable timber go up in smoke, they wouldn't have to worry about cut budgets.
The bs litigation and judge shopping to stop every sale over an i not being dotted has to stop.

You want to privatize it all? Cut it all? Wft

 

[Customweld]

You want to privatize it all? Cut it all? Wft

Don't want to privatize any of it and I don't want it all cut either. There is room for local collaboration between federal land management and local communities. Unless it is designated wilderness, it's a working forest and needs to be managed as such. The days of clear cutting are long gone and that's a good thing. Targeting different parts of a forest with different types of treatment can and needs to be done. Pre-commercial thinning, mechanical thinning, timber sales, prescribed burns all need to be utilized.

 

[TaperPin]

Don't want to privatize any of it and I don't want it all cut either. There is room for local collaboration between federal land management and local communities. Unless it is designated wilderness, it's a working forest and needs to be managed as such. The days of clear cutting are long gone and that's a good thing. Targeting different parts of a forest with different types of treatment can and needs to be done. Pre-commercial thinning, mechanical thinning, timber sales, prescribed burns all need to be utilized.

Who pays for thinning? Who pays for mechanical thinning? Who should pay for prescribed fires? There are management plans all over the west that have not and probably will never be implemented because it’s too expensive. Everyone wants something for nothing. I’ve had fire crews on standby that were used on thinning projects - talking with the dude in charge of implementing the plan explained he had 100x more acres than money.

 

[Customweld]

Who pays for thinning? Who pays for mechanical thinning? Who should pay for prescribed fires? There are management plans all over the west that have not and probably will never be implemented because it’s too expensive. Everyone wants something for nothing. I’ve had fire crews on standby that were used on thinning projects - talking with the dude in charge of implementing the plan explained he had 100x more acres than money.

How do they pay to fight 100k acre fires? They sure as hell don't pay for theirselves. Seems like that money could be spent proactive rather than reactive.

 

[Pony Soldier]

How about a wish list?
1. Northwest has lots of trails- I would like to see maintenance.
2. Go back to selective logging in most stands except lodgepole.
3. Lodgepole stands can be clearcut but not larger than 20 acres. The cutting blocks need to be designed in a mosaic to maximize boundary habitat of trees until the cutting units reveg.
4. Serious efforts need to be made to keep burns under 100 acres. The let it burn policy needs to go away. There is too much fuel to control them.
5. Go back to sustainable yields. They shouldn't be allowed to cut more than what will grow back within a reasonable length of time. This existed in the 60s.
6. Each district should be managed under this- not the region like it changed to in the 70s.

7. Fires shouldn't be prolonged with drip torches. Send them back to California. Our fires rarely got out of control until the California crews showed up

Just some ideas from an old FS employee. Oh and stop the one size fits all planning. Match planning to the habitat.

 

[NCTrees]

Who pays for thinning? Who pays for mechanical thinning?

Logs have value. In a functional economy, secondary wood products (chips, etc) would have value and would provide power to our communities. Plans don’t get implemented because antis sue the FS. Cottage industry using the EAJA to get paid to file lawsuits. If the FS would just cut, say, 75% of growth, outside of wilderness, LSRs, etc and do it reliably private markets would do the rest and we wouldn’t have to rely upon Canada to make studs for our houses. It’s not a hard problem to solve.

 

[Axlrod]

Don't want to privatize any of it and I don't want it all cut either. There is room for local collaboration between federal land management and local communities. Unless it is designated wilderness, it's a working forest and needs to be managed as such. The days of clear cutting are long gone and that's a good thing. Targeting different parts of a forest with different types of treatment can and needs to be done. Pre-commercial thinning, mechanical thinning, timber sales, prescribed burns all need to be utilized.

The days of clear cutting are long gone? There are new, very large clear cuts on FS just a few miles west of the fire this thread is about.

Putting out every small fire is kicking the can down the road, eventually there will be much larger fires. The FS is doing exactly what they should be doing with this small fire at the tail end of fire season.

There have been fires for tens of thousands of years, if fire "sterilized" the ground, why are there so many trees here now??

 

[Rotnguns]

Well. I bet the FS gets decent amount of money to fight fires. So instead of doing managed burns or thinning. It's better to allow everything burn due to more money. Because, at the end of the day. Green is only thing that matters.

I don't understand how some of the primary FS gravel roads aren't graded and sprayed with magnesium chloride to help lock the road surface together and for dust control.

Runoff is harmful to many native plants and accumulates in the soil, reducing the ability of the soil to hold moisture.

 

[NCTrees]

The days of clear cutting are long gone? There are new, very large clear cuts on FS just a few miles west of the fire this thread is about.

Putting out every small fire is kicking the can down the road, eventually there will be much larger fires. The FS is doing exactly what they should be doing with this small fire at the tail end of fire season.

There have been fires for tens of thousands of years, if fire "sterilized" the ground, why are there so many trees here now??

Axlrod - I must have missed it or am out of the loop on the specifics but what area are you specifically talking about with FS clearcuts? Regarding sterilized soils and whatnot, the issue is not so much fire itself. Much larger issue is regarding a hundred (plus) years of fire suppression and harvest curtailment allowing stand densities to get significantly higher than “natural” background levels under pre- European conditions and the effects of that excessive amount of fuel burning in an uncontrolled manner. Fire is not good or bad intrinsically, but to get back to baseline conditions it’s a heavy lift without some density reduction on our part first. Saying just let it burn to return to natural conditions at this point is really a disingenuous and probably dangerous (Greenville, Ca) approach given the fuel buildup allowed under the last hundred years of fire suppression. I’m all for prescribed fire, but done in the fall after humidity is somewhat up, lines are installed and staff are on hand. Let burn / big box / managed fire, etc is a scary proposition.

 

[Axlrod]

Axlrod - I must have missed it or am out of the loop on the specifics but what area are you specifically talking about with FS clearcuts? Regarding sterilized soils and whatnot, the issue is not so much fire itself. Much larger issue is regarding a hundred (plus) years of fire suppression and harvest curtailment allowing stand densities to get significantly higher than “natural” background levels under pre- European conditions and the effects of that excessive amount of fuel burning in an uncontrolled manner. Fire is not good or bad intrinsically, but to get back to baseline conditions it’s a heavy lift without some density reduction on our part first. Saying just let it burn to return to natural conditions at this point is really a disingenuous and probably dangerous (Greenville, Ca) approach given the fuel buildup allowed under the last hundred years of fire suppression. I’m all for prescribed fire, but done in the fall after humidity is somewhat up, lines are installed and staff are on hand. Let burn / big box / managed fire, etc is a scary proposition.

It is all in this thread. You need to read my posts in the context I put them in. The clear cut response was to the poster that I quoted. The OP stated the soil gets sterilized from fire and nothing grows.

I get WHY we have a problem and I didn't say let it burn in July when the conditions are not appropriate. This thread is about a tiny fire at the END of September, so we ARE in the fall, and the conditions warrant the response the FS is giving.