3 ms·

Fire-prone? Managing fire risk is a simple task; California refuses to engage in controlled burns.

dilyevsky 2y ago
That is not true. Annual number of prescribed burn acres had been stable since the 70s with a sharp increase in the last two-three years. The main issues are sprawl and aging, above the ground electrical infra
- blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
  > Annual number of prescribed burn acres had been stable since the 70s with a sharp increase in the last two-three years. The number of burns isn’t as important as much as how much ground is covered by burns and where. Has anyone studied it in greater detail? > The main issues are sprawl and aging, above the ground electrical infra I am not sure what sprawl matters, but I agree electrical infrastructure that is surrounded by fuel or can be affected by winds is problematic. But that still comes down to local and state leadership doing their job. It’s incredible that such large budgets and large numbers of public employees fail to produce outcomes that are any better than other states.
  - boroboro4 2y ago
    The parent says number of burn acres, not burns.
  - dilyevsky 2y ago
    > I am not sure what sprawl matters, but I agree electrical infrastructure that is surrounded by fuel or can be affected by winds is problematic. without sprawl forest fire is just forest fire. August Complex fire was 10x larger than Camp Fire which caused 80x deaths and 50x damages.
amluto 2y ago
Much of the damage was in areas where a controlled burn would have been impossible due to geography. And the kind of vegetation in the burn area isn’t suited to controlled burns anyway: https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/techne/why-shrubland-makes-southern-californias-wildfires-inevitable/ https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/techne/why-shrubland-make...
- bjterry 2y ago
  Controlled burns aren't impossible in chaparral, even based on the logic of that article the controlled burns just need to be less frequent and more intense than for forest. There's no reason they couldn't be done.
  - amluto 2y ago
    Some of the neighborhoods that burned consist of very steep hills, single family houses on stilts, narrow winding roads, retaining walls, and almost no clearance for anything. I can’t imagine a controlled burn being done safely.
chaboud 2y ago
You may be thinking of the US Forest Service’s suspension of prescribed burns. https://cepr.net/publications/us-forest-service-decision-to-halt-prescribed-burns-in-california-is-history-repeating/ https://cepr.net/publications/us-forest-service-decision-to-... However, state and local agencies undertake prescribed burns regularly. To be fair, clarity (read: honesty) from political figures on this topic (and others) is at an all time low.
nradov 2y ago
For most of the recent Los Angeles area fires there was never any possibility of conducting controlled burns. The terrain is too steep and there were too many structures nearby. A controlled burn could have turned uncontrolled in moments (which has happened before). Brush clearing can help to an extent. But that's tremendously labor intensive on steep hillsides where heavy equipment can't be used. Taken too far it can also destabilize the soil and cause mudslides during the rainy season. More realistic solutions are going to include tightening up the building code to make structures more fire resistant, prohibiting building at all in certain risky areas, and provisioning more water supplies so that the hydrants don't run dry.
- aeternum 2y ago
  >More realistic solutions are going to include tightening up the building code to make structures more fire resistant Problem is this makes building more expensive. A better path might be the Japan strategy. Houses are designed to last 30 years then be replaced. You often get more energy efficiency, ability to build density as-required, more efficient ability to build and recover quickly from any disaster.
  - octacat 2y ago
    A lot of stuff is simple, like cleaning brushes around the house, replacing wooden fences with metal/stone. More harder - changing ventilation for the attics. Except it is still not popular, so nobody would do it, if not mandated.
- wetpaws 2y ago
  "Nothing can be done" says the only place on the planet where this happens.
  - atombender 2y ago
    Forest fires in populated areas definitely happen all over the world. https://www.euronews.com/travel/2023/07/28/sicily-travel-warning-wildfires-force-evacuation-of-tourists-and-temporarily-close-palermo https://www.euronews.com/travel/2023/07/28/sicily-travel-war... https://www.euronews.com/video/2024/08/01/tourist-towns-evacuated-as-croatia-battles-122-wildfires https://www.euronews.com/video/2024/08/01/tourist-towns-evac... https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/8/17/thousands-forced-to-evacuate-as-wildfires-rage-in-western-turkey https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/8/17/thousands-forced-to... https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-58243066 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-58243066 https://www.euronews.com/2024/02/04/dozens-killed-in-chile-as-forest-fires-rage-in-densely-populated-central-areas https://www.euronews.com/2024/02/04/dozens-killed-in-chile-a...
delfinom 2y ago
California is a bit more nuanced to that. There's a whole chunk of Federal land owned by BLM that is poorly managed by the feds. And then there's a fuck-ton of private land as well that makes up forests and brush. And then finally there's state owned land. Of course california hurts itself with its own environmental regs for burns, but there's alot of legal complexity to pull it off across the various land ownerships.
SlightlyLeftPad 2y ago
This is a fairly ignorant take on the situation and unironically it’s the same comment I’ve been hearing news anchors constantly make.
bigfatkitten 2y ago
No, it's not a simple task at all. Firstly, burns are a short lived control. You can burn but when it rains, the vegetation regrows. Secondly, regular burns often promote the growth of even more flammable vegetation. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/brv.13041 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/brv.13041 And then there's the health impact on neighbouring communities. https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2020/213/6/exceedances-national-air-quality-standards-particulate-matter-western-australia https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2020/213/6/exceedances-nation... And then there's the ever diminishing opportunity to conduct burns, due mostly to climate change. Los Angeles had a ton of rain in Feb-Mar 2024 which resulted in massive fuel growth. That rain stopped in a hurry, plunging the region straight into drought. That fuel subsequently cured over summer and became available to fire. Once it ignited, it was driven by extreme winds and there was no stopping it. Not only was there no opportunity to conduct burns in that area, but it would've been dangerous to do so at any time due to steep terrain and risk to property.

That is not true. Annual number of prescribed burn acres had been stable since the 70s with a sharp increase in the last two-three years. The main issues are sprawl and aging, above the ground electrical infra

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
> Annual number of prescribed burn acres had been stable since the 70s with a sharp increase in the last two-three years. The number of burns isn’t as important as much as how much ground is covered by burns and where. Has anyone studied it in greater detail? > The main issues are sprawl and aging, above the ground electrical infra I am not sure what sprawl matters, but I agree electrical infrastructure that is surrounded by fuel or can be affected by winds is problematic. But that still comes down to local and state leadership doing their job. It’s incredible that such large budgets and large numbers of public employees fail to produce outcomes that are any better than other states.
- boroboro4 2y ago
  The parent says number of burn acres, not burns.
- dilyevsky 2y ago
  > I am not sure what sprawl matters, but I agree electrical infrastructure that is surrounded by fuel or can be affected by winds is problematic. without sprawl forest fire is just forest fire. August Complex fire was 10x larger than Camp Fire which caused 80x deaths and 50x damages.

amluto 2y ago

Much of the damage was in areas where a controlled burn would have been impossible due to geography. And the kind of vegetation in the burn area isn’t suited to controlled burns anyway: https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/techne/why-shrubland-makes-southern-californias-wildfires-inevitable/ https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/techne/why-shrubland-make...

bjterry 2y ago
Controlled burns aren't impossible in chaparral, even based on the logic of that article the controlled burns just need to be less frequent and more intense than for forest. There's no reason they couldn't be done.
- amluto 2y ago
  Some of the neighborhoods that burned consist of very steep hills, single family houses on stilts, narrow winding roads, retaining walls, and almost no clearance for anything. I can’t imagine a controlled burn being done safely.

chaboud 2y ago

You may be thinking of the US Forest Service’s suspension of prescribed burns. https://cepr.net/publications/us-forest-service-decision-to-halt-prescribed-burns-in-california-is-history-repeating/ https://cepr.net/publications/us-forest-service-decision-to-... However, state and local agencies undertake prescribed burns regularly. To be fair, clarity (read: honesty) from political figures on this topic (and others) is at an all time low.

nradov 2y ago

For most of the recent Los Angeles area fires there was never any possibility of conducting controlled burns. The terrain is too steep and there were too many structures nearby. A controlled burn could have turned uncontrolled in moments (which has happened before). Brush clearing can help to an extent. But that's tremendously labor intensive on steep hillsides where heavy equipment can't be used. Taken too far it can also destabilize the soil and cause mudslides during the rainy season. More realistic solutions are going to include tightening up the building code to make structures more fire resistant, prohibiting building at all in certain risky areas, and provisioning more water supplies so that the hydrants don't run dry.

aeternum 2y ago
>More realistic solutions are going to include tightening up the building code to make structures more fire resistant Problem is this makes building more expensive. A better path might be the Japan strategy. Houses are designed to last 30 years then be replaced. You often get more energy efficiency, ability to build density as-required, more efficient ability to build and recover quickly from any disaster.
- octacat 2y ago
  A lot of stuff is simple, like cleaning brushes around the house, replacing wooden fences with metal/stone. More harder - changing ventilation for the attics. Except it is still not popular, so nobody would do it, if not mandated.
wetpaws 2y ago
"Nothing can be done" says the only place on the planet where this happens.
- atombender 2y ago
  Forest fires in populated areas definitely happen all over the world. https://www.euronews.com/travel/2023/07/28/sicily-travel-warning-wildfires-force-evacuation-of-tourists-and-temporarily-close-palermo https://www.euronews.com/travel/2023/07/28/sicily-travel-war... https://www.euronews.com/video/2024/08/01/tourist-towns-evacuated-as-croatia-battles-122-wildfires https://www.euronews.com/video/2024/08/01/tourist-towns-evac... https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/8/17/thousands-forced-to-evacuate-as-wildfires-rage-in-western-turkey https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/8/17/thousands-forced-to... https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-58243066 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-58243066 https://www.euronews.com/2024/02/04/dozens-killed-in-chile-as-forest-fires-rage-in-densely-populated-central-areas https://www.euronews.com/2024/02/04/dozens-killed-in-chile-a...

delfinom 2y ago

California is a bit more nuanced to that. There's a whole chunk of Federal land owned by BLM that is poorly managed by the feds. And then there's a fuck-ton of private land as well that makes up forests and brush. And then finally there's state owned land. Of course california hurts itself with its own environmental regs for burns, but there's alot of legal complexity to pull it off across the various land ownerships.

SlightlyLeftPad 2y ago

This is a fairly ignorant take on the situation and unironically it’s the same comment I’ve been hearing news anchors constantly make.

bigfatkitten 2y ago

No, it's not a simple task at all. Firstly, burns are a short lived control. You can burn but when it rains, the vegetation regrows. Secondly, regular burns often promote the growth of even more flammable vegetation. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/brv.13041 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/brv.13041 And then there's the health impact on neighbouring communities. https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2020/213/6/exceedances-national-air-quality-standards-particulate-matter-western-australia https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2020/213/6/exceedances-nation... And then there's the ever diminishing opportunity to conduct burns, due mostly to climate change. Los Angeles had a ton of rain in Feb-Mar 2024 which resulted in massive fuel growth. That rain stopped in a hurry, plunging the region straight into drought. That fuel subsequently cured over summer and became available to fire. Once it ignited, it was driven by extreme winds and there was no stopping it. Not only was there no opportunity to conduct burns in that area, but it would've been dangerous to do so at any time due to steep terrain and risk to property.