4 ms·

This suggestion is baffling. The nicest place to have a home is in an enclave of forest.

skmurphy 6y ago
It's OK to build there as long as you acknowledge that fire is a natural inhabitant of any forest and over a 20-30 year period is likely to come for a visit at least once.
- LeifCarrotson 6y ago
  Most of Michigan is forested. Less than 1% of Michigan has burned in the last 200 years of settlement: there's a ton more precipitation, plus it's under snow for four months a year, so fallen trees and leaves decompose in a couple years and don't increase the fire risk. My house in a Michigan forest has a very, very different risk profile from a home in a California forest. And California is a big state, I'm sure there are forests that have similarly low risk profiles.
  - danans 6y ago
    > And California is a big state, I'm sure there are forests that have similarly low risk profiles. Well, there used to be. For example the coastal quasi-rainforest in Big Basin near Santa Cruz. But climate change appears to have pushed places like that into the burn zone. Nowadays even Olympic National Park, an area full of temperate rainforest, is experiencing wildfire. it seems like pretty much any forest area of California is at wildfire risk these days.
0_____0 6y ago
Forests burn with regularity, and this is a normal and essential process for them. Stands to reason that if you want to build a house, it either be not in a place that burns, or be constructed in a way that it isn't significantly damaged by fire. People have been shown to be willing to rebuild repeatedly in fire zones, with massive economic and public safety impact. Makes sense to legislate to prevent this.
- bigbubba 6y ago
  > Forests burn with regularity Some do, some don't. California isn't the whole world. Edit: > Wildfires are among the most common forms of natural disaster in some regions, including Siberia, California, and Australia.[17][18][19] Areas with Mediterranean climates or in the taiga biome are particularly susceptible. California and Australia are outliers. Writing off forests in general just because particular sorts of forests are prone to burning doesn't make sense.
  - 0_____0 6y ago
    Sorry, yes, I meant specifically the California forest ecologies that require fire.
- FooHentai 6y ago
  Hmm, tell that to Methuselah.
scottlamb 6y ago
By choosing to live in a forest, you are creating problems for the society you are part of. Among them are the related risk you cause a fire that affects others, need to protect you from fires, and inability to set controlled fires near you that would protect others. It makes sense to have rules and/or fees to prevent or offset that. It's funny. In a recent discussion I was arguing against someone wanting to increase power costs on rural customers, because I think doing so carelessly would impact the food supply chain. But it doesn't take too much "living in forests is great" foolish selfishness in the middle of a discussion of wildfires to make me wonder if I was on the wrong side of that one.
egberts1 6y ago
Enclave. A nice clearing around your domicile free of fuelable trees and bushes.

It's OK to build there as long as you acknowledge that fire is a natural inhabitant of any forest and over a 20-30 year period is likely to come for a visit at least once.

LeifCarrotson 6y ago
Most of Michigan is forested. Less than 1% of Michigan has burned in the last 200 years of settlement: there's a ton more precipitation, plus it's under snow for four months a year, so fallen trees and leaves decompose in a couple years and don't increase the fire risk. My house in a Michigan forest has a very, very different risk profile from a home in a California forest. And California is a big state, I'm sure there are forests that have similarly low risk profiles.
- danans 6y ago
  > And California is a big state, I'm sure there are forests that have similarly low risk profiles. Well, there used to be. For example the coastal quasi-rainforest in Big Basin near Santa Cruz. But climate change appears to have pushed places like that into the burn zone. Nowadays even Olympic National Park, an area full of temperate rainforest, is experiencing wildfire. it seems like pretty much any forest area of California is at wildfire risk these days.

0_____0 6y ago

Forests burn with regularity, and this is a normal and essential process for them. Stands to reason that if you want to build a house, it either be not in a place that burns, or be constructed in a way that it isn't significantly damaged by fire. People have been shown to be willing to rebuild repeatedly in fire zones, with massive economic and public safety impact. Makes sense to legislate to prevent this.

bigbubba 6y ago
> Forests burn with regularity Some do, some don't. California isn't the whole world. Edit: > Wildfires are among the most common forms of natural disaster in some regions, including Siberia, California, and Australia.[17][18][19] Areas with Mediterranean climates or in the taiga biome are particularly susceptible. California and Australia are outliers. Writing off forests in general just because particular sorts of forests are prone to burning doesn't make sense.
- 0_____0 6y ago
  Sorry, yes, I meant specifically the California forest ecologies that require fire.
FooHentai 6y ago
Hmm, tell that to Methuselah.

scottlamb 6y ago

By choosing to live in a forest, you are creating problems for the society you are part of. Among them are the related risk you cause a fire that affects others, need to protect you from fires, and inability to set controlled fires near you that would protect others. It makes sense to have rules and/or fees to prevent or offset that. It's funny. In a recent discussion I was arguing against someone wanting to increase power costs on rural customers, because I think doing so carelessly would impact the food supply chain. But it doesn't take too much "living in forests is great" foolish selfishness in the middle of a discussion of wildfires to make me wonder if I was on the wrong side of that one.

egberts1 6y ago

Enclave. A nice clearing around your domicile free of fuelable trees and bushes.