4 ms·

To be fair, blaming these wildfires on global warming when proper forest management techniques aren't being used and resources are being cut sort of contributes

To be fair, blaming these wildfires on global warming when proper forest management techniques aren't being used and resources are being cut sort of contributes to this phenomenon...doesn't it?

mistrial9 3y ago
"things people got away with before" are now no longer optional.. as if the extra-safety cushions have been used up and are gone.. seems very predictable, and not either-or at all..
seanmcdirmid 3y ago
There is aloooot of forest in Canada. You can properly manage some of it near populated places, but it is simply infeasible to directly or indirectly manage even most of it.
- tadfisher 3y ago
  The Cascades didn't always consist of endless acres of Douglas Fir and sword ferns. As the glaciers receded, the indigenous tribes and the natural fire ecology maintained oak savanna where there is now dense forest and fuel buildup. I agree with your point, but just wanted to point out that the land was manageable before we allowed most of it to turn into forest.
beej71 3y ago
This is fair, where there are historically poorly managed forests. But a lot of socal that burns isn't forest at all, for example. Same in Eastern Oregon. Or Santa Rosa.
anigbrowl 3y ago
Orchards and the like need to be managed. Forests shouldn't really. It's a mistake to think the entire planet needs to be treated like a private garden/agricultural resource. While forest management can help by reducing the amount of bush etc., it can't mitigate the large scale effect of vegetation simply drying out. This 'forest management' concept doesn't include watering the trees, after all. I'm a little sour on this term because it acts (consciously or unconsciously) to deflect from the actual problem of large-scale desiccation. Every time I hear it makes me think of someone saying 'Mars never has forest fires, because the vegetation has been cleared properly.'
- pfannkuchen 3y ago
  > Forests shouldn't really Forests naturally burn. In California (at least) trees have features specifically evolved to fit into an environment with periodic natural fires. There are written reports of fires in North America going back many hundreds of years, and I believe the natives experienced fires before that as well, as evidenced by cultural practices and oral history. So you can either not manage the forests and avoid building into areas that would be affected by natural fires, or you can build into those areas but you do need to manage the forests. Where do you get the idea that forests don’t need to be managed if we are to live in and around them? It seems like magical thinking to me. Note that this is orthogonal to the effect a warming earth has on severity. Qualitatively, you needed to manage forests in North America 1,000 years ago, and you still need to manage them today.
  - anigbrowl 3y ago
    So you can either not manage the forests and avoid building into areas that would be affected by natural fires Yes, this is what I have in mind. If you want to live in a forest you need to assume you'll be on your own in the case of natural disasters and have some survival/escape plan. Building into/exploiting all available primeval land seems like a Bad Thing to me.
- lamontcg 3y ago
  > it can't mitigate the large scale effect of vegetation simply drying out. it goes well beyond that, the bark beetles have killed a lot of pine trees, which is just standing dead timber. now dry that out and you have dead forests full of kindling.
teunispeters 3y ago
A large portion of BC is completely inaccessible by any means - which doesn't help. Lots of huge mountain ranges! But the problem turns out to be climate change, oil usage and the BC Conservatives deciding that the pine beetle could be stopped by normal winters (after "normal" winters were already fading ... but this is hindsight ...). Ok they were called the "BC liberal party" but they were a hard-right conservative party and still are ... but I'm not sure if the large-scale pine beetle caused dead forests are still a factor... my last trip through one of the areas currently on fire (a couple of weeks ago) - I didn't see the characteristic red/dead pine trees that time and while I'm just an inhabitant, I was looking. (Banff through Kelowna area to Vancouver, as my usual Kamloops route was already being evacuated in parts then).

To be fair, blaming these wildfires on global warming when proper forest management techniques aren't being used and resources are being cut sort of contributes to this phenomenon...doesn't it?

mistrial9 3y ago

"things people got away with before" are now no longer optional.. as if the extra-safety cushions have been used up and are gone.. seems very predictable, and not either-or at all..

seanmcdirmid 3y ago

There is aloooot of forest in Canada. You can properly manage some of it near populated places, but it is simply infeasible to directly or indirectly manage even most of it.

tadfisher 3y ago
The Cascades didn't always consist of endless acres of Douglas Fir and sword ferns. As the glaciers receded, the indigenous tribes and the natural fire ecology maintained oak savanna where there is now dense forest and fuel buildup. I agree with your point, but just wanted to point out that the land was manageable before we allowed most of it to turn into forest.

beej71 3y ago

This is fair, where there are historically poorly managed forests. But a lot of socal that burns isn't forest at all, for example. Same in Eastern Oregon. Or Santa Rosa.

anigbrowl 3y ago

Orchards and the like need to be managed. Forests shouldn't really. It's a mistake to think the entire planet needs to be treated like a private garden/agricultural resource. While forest management can help by reducing the amount of bush etc., it can't mitigate the large scale effect of vegetation simply drying out. This 'forest management' concept doesn't include watering the trees, after all. I'm a little sour on this term because it acts (consciously or unconsciously) to deflect from the actual problem of large-scale desiccation. Every time I hear it makes me think of someone saying 'Mars never has forest fires, because the vegetation has been cleared properly.'

pfannkuchen 3y ago
> Forests shouldn't really Forests naturally burn. In California (at least) trees have features specifically evolved to fit into an environment with periodic natural fires. There are written reports of fires in North America going back many hundreds of years, and I believe the natives experienced fires before that as well, as evidenced by cultural practices and oral history. So you can either not manage the forests and avoid building into areas that would be affected by natural fires, or you can build into those areas but you do need to manage the forests. Where do you get the idea that forests don’t need to be managed if we are to live in and around them? It seems like magical thinking to me. Note that this is orthogonal to the effect a warming earth has on severity. Qualitatively, you needed to manage forests in North America 1,000 years ago, and you still need to manage them today.
- anigbrowl 3y ago
  So you can either not manage the forests and avoid building into areas that would be affected by natural fires Yes, this is what I have in mind. If you want to live in a forest you need to assume you'll be on your own in the case of natural disasters and have some survival/escape plan. Building into/exploiting all available primeval land seems like a Bad Thing to me.
lamontcg 3y ago
> it can't mitigate the large scale effect of vegetation simply drying out. it goes well beyond that, the bark beetles have killed a lot of pine trees, which is just standing dead timber. now dry that out and you have dead forests full of kindling.

teunispeters 3y ago

A large portion of BC is completely inaccessible by any means - which doesn't help. Lots of huge mountain ranges! But the problem turns out to be climate change, oil usage and the BC Conservatives deciding that the pine beetle could be stopped by normal winters (after "normal" winters were already fading ... but this is hindsight ...). Ok they were called the "BC liberal party" but they were a hard-right conservative party and still are ... but I'm not sure if the large-scale pine beetle caused dead forests are still a factor... my last trip through one of the areas currently on fire (a couple of weeks ago) - I didn't see the characteristic red/dead pine trees that time and while I'm just an inhabitant, I was looking. (Banff through Kelowna area to Vancouver, as my usual Kamloops route was already being evacuated in parts then).