5 ms·
We need to apply Phos-Chek from ground based units Phos Chek is not great for the environment, especially to aquatic life. So ideally there'd be some solution
by Johnny555 5y ago
We need to apply Phos-Chek from ground based units
Phos Chek is not great for the environment, especially to aquatic life. So ideally there'd be some solution that doesn't use more of it.
agricultural level irrigation at the ready
The fires are exacerbated by California's long term drought, if there's large quanties of water laying around, then they probably wouldn't have such a bad fire season.
Inhabited locations in fire prone areas
I think there should be a re-evaluation of whether or not to let people build or rebuild in especially fire-prone areas.
- fasteddie31003 5y ago1. Phos Chek is probably better than the long term effects from a wildfire. I would recommend looking more into consiquentalists ethics. 2. The mountains have excesses of water in the spring which could easily be sequestered for wildfire season. 3. I own land and live in a wildfire prone area. I will not be moving out to live in a human shit ridden city. I am prefer nature over close human habitation.
- Johnny555 5y agoSo you're more of a "Let's sacrifice the fish before I'll sacrifice my lifestyle" person?
- fasteddie31003 5y agoYes, I would sacrifice the Sacramento River Smelt for more water for agriculture and humans. Again, I'm more of a consequentialist. I'm for forest management, which means cutting down some trees. Many modern environmentalist deontologists will call me a racist for suggesting we need to cut down some trees for the greater good.
- bronson 5y agoYour last sentence appears incoherent. Got links? Are you willing to move out of fire country for the greater good?
- cdiamand 5y agoIs there an argument to be made for just letting the fires burn? Don't the fires have a positive effect on the soil?
- animal_spirits 5y agoThey do. Many species of conifer seed don't even begin to germinate until exposed to the heat of a wildfire. Fire's are a part of the natural lifecycle of a west coast forest. Unfortunately the over suppression of fires over the last 120 years has over fueled these forests and we are witnessing the consequences now.
- nradov 5y agoIn some areas too much fuel has accumulated, causing fires to burn so hot that they kill the trees and destroy the seeds. After that it can take many years for the forest to recover. https://www.nationalforests.org/our-forests/your-national-forests-magazine/how-trees-survive-and-thrive-after-a-fire https://www.nationalforests.org/our-forests/your-national-fo...
- idiotsecant 5y agoYes, fire is an essential part of these ecosystems.
- zoltar 5y agoAnyone else enjoy the dissonance in this comment between the consequentialism reference and refusal to relocate?
- germinalphrase 5y agoYour nature may be (re)turning into a desert, unfortunately.
- code_duck 5y agoWildfires have many transformative and beneficial effects for an ecosystem when they happen naturally and haven’t been made unnaturally large by 100 years of eager suppression.
- kronin 5y agoWildfires burn up all the dead brush and make way for new growth, along with fertilizing the soil.
- jimt1234 5y ago> I think there should be a re-evaluation of whether or not to let people build or rebuild in especially fire-prone areas. This is already happening, not by government, but rather by the insurance markets. My friend has lived in a fire-prone area of Southern California for years. His home owners insurances rates have more than tripled in the last few years. He just recently moved (yep, Idaho).
- jayd16 5y agoDoes the government subsidize fire insurance? I'm always taken aback when I see people rebuilding from a hurricane with subsidized wind and flood insurance. I understand why its nice for those that need it but has perverse incentives.
- otterley 5y agoIt does, although indirectly, through municipal fire departments. It's not "insurance" in the strict sense of the word, but it is an abatement mechanism designed to help minimize losses that would otherwise be borne by private insurers.
- chrisplotz 5y agoIn California, if you can't get fire insurance through the private market, you generally have access to the FAIR Plan (https://www.cfpnet.com/about-fair-plan/ https://www.cfpnet.com/about-fair-plan/). As the about page points out, it's not taxpayer funded - instead, companies writing home insurance in the state are required to contribute towards a share of risk in the plan.
- rch 5y agoWhy not make it clear that people building structures in fire-prone areas are on their own, and should design appropriately?
- jdavis703 5y agoEntire towns are burning down. This isn’t just people out playing settler in the forest. South Lake Tahoe (currently under an evacuation order) has hotel towers.
- guyzero 5y agoYeah, suburbs of Santa Rosa burned down in the Tubbs Fire of 2017. It burned down suburban neighbourhoods. This isn't people out in the middle of nowhere.
- guyzero 5y agoI'm not sure there's an appropriate design for something to survive a major forest fire.
- guyzero 5y agoAlthough that said, this article goes into how they defended the Sierra-at-Tahoe resort buildings: https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Sierra-at-Tahoe-ski-resort-nearly-burned-in-the-16424019.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Sierra-at-Tahoe-... Spoiler: it turns out that if you have a multi-million dollar insurance policy, the insurance company sends over guys to spray everything with fire retardant gel.
- Johnny555 5y agoPlus, not everyone has a bunch of snowmaking machines laying around that they can use to blow water on their structures.
- klodolph 5y agoThat’s right. Most people have not ever seen large-scale fires and don’t know how powerful they are. As a fire grows larger, it grows in intensity and spreads faster. A campfire needs tending or it goes out. A bonfire will just burn until it runs out of fuel. A house fire will quickly turn into an inferno. Forest fires are hopefully like nothing you’ve ever seen—the sheer power of them is staggering.
- anonAndOn 5y ago>I think there should be a re-evaluation of whether or not to let people build or rebuild in especially fire-prone areas. I expect large swaths of the Sierras will soon be uninsurable for all practical purposes. Anybody with a mountain home with a mortgage will be SOL.