Wildfire ‘24

[neufox47]

I’m not a legal expert but the provisions seem pretty reasonable. We need action. Limiting lawsuits and pushback against thinning, creation of firebreaks, etc. seems reasonable.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[J. Barron DeJong]

Banding, settle down, he’s got it under control.Trump: "I'm signing an executive order to open up the pumps and valves in the north. We want to get that water pouring down here as quickly as possible ... you're talking about unlimited water coming up from the Pacific Northwest, even coming from parts of Canada."https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lgjpfnwaqr26

[J. Barron DeJong]

*Bandini (fucking auto correct…and no edit… and no quoting…and no pics..)

[old goat]

Baron DeJong, that sounds like something god would do on the eighth day, 'cause I'm pretty sure man can't do it.

[bodywhomper]

I haven’t looked at the bill, yet. I’m curious if it’s a different name and variation to the Embers Act, which was circulating last summer. There have been many attempts at wildfire mitigation legislation which would include streamlining the federal environmental compliance process. Feinstein and Rep LaMalfa were champions of one version a few years ago. I hope they get it right and I hope it moves forward and is well funded.

One interesting and long term corollary is the concept coming out of the more wildfire-influential Native American orgs: make the default/no action (in enviro reg concept) as the fuels reduction and maintenance paradigm and the “action/project” is the act of doing nothing. Another way to think about it is that the “baseline” is a restored fire tolerant and fire dependent “wildland” that is maintained. Getting to the re-establishment of that baseline is not an “action/project” and does not require environmental compliance. Any deviation from that baseline, including doing nothing, is an “action/project” as defined in the enviro regs.

[neufox47]

Assuming we aren’t going to do nothing to prevent houses and infrastructure from burning, that would still require significant fuel breaks and other efforts to protect property.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[bodywhomper]

Yes. Currently, we are mostly doing nothing in terms of mitigation of existing hazard. “Pace and scale” are not being achieved. There are plenty of concepts and plans attempting to be implemented, but many are not getting past the planning/compliance stage and some project footprints are burning down before there is opportunity to implement the fuels reduction and the adjacent communities are burning with them. The cost of suppression, response, and recovery versus the cost of mitigation is always off.

The Karuk, Dr Hankins, et al, are referring to a “baseline” of fuel loads/biomass per European settlers, which is substantially less fuel/biomass in undeveloped areas than we have now. Their concept would allow for substantial reduction in fuel and biomass (and maintenance of those densities) without the burdens of NEPA, ESA, NHPA, CEQA, CAA, etc. compliance. They focus specifically on use of “beneficial fire,” but the concept can be applied more widely https://fireecology.springeropen.com...08-024-00301-y

It would make a huge dent in the problem, but does not mean that other measures and actions should not be taken. There should be more streamlined enviro compliance (or exclusions/exemptions) and a ton more money thrown at this. It costs a lot to retrofit structures, create and maintain fuel breaks, “rake the forest,” enforce codes, etc.

[ghosthop]

Raining hard in West Hollywood/Beverly Hills right now. Hoping we can go for a ride out Dirt Mulholland this week once everything settles.

[ticketchecker]

Phew, looks like dear leader sent the military into CA to turn on the water from the PNW and beyond.

Where has that magical faucet been hiding?

[J. Barron DeJong]

Federal water pumps were down for maintenance for three days and just restarted. Not coming from PNW or Canada. https://x.com/CA_DWR/status/1884122000232444407

[Cisco Kid]

I have a picture of the faucet in Washington North Cascades but I'm sworn to secrecy and cant post it.

[AK47bp]

[emoji638]][emoji640][emoji639]][emoji637][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]][emoji637][emoji640][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]]]]I have a picture of the faucet in Washington North Cascades but I'm sworn to secrecy and cant post it.

You’d shut your mouth if you knew what was good for you.

[I Skied Bandini Mountain]

and the federal water doesn't go to LA, either.

[mcski]

I’ve been curious when fireroads kind of stopped being a thing that was maintained regularly? Maybe the benefit didn’t justify the cost, but when I was a kid they seemed fairly pervasive in the foothills but now most seem to be left to a natural state or converted to MTB trails. Was there a conscious fire policy behind the shift or was it a factor of money just being spent elsewhere?

[Conundrum]

Around where I grew up, "fire" roads were actually logging roads that created a small break but also the thinning through selective logging helped reduced fuel load. There was also clear cutting that was ugly but that practice seemed to stop in the 80s. Selective logging was slowed down and basically ceased in the 90s on fed land. My knowledge is based on an isolated area in Idaho so can't comment for everywhere. I do think that what a lot of people refer to as fire roads are either FS maintained roads or roads that were developed and maintained for some type of resource extraction. Around 2000, roadless initiatives began and many of these roads were shut down.

[mcski]

I was thinking more of the SoCal ones I grew up that were mainly in the brush with no loggable trees but I’ve seen many fireroads in Tahoe decommissioned

Extraction access sort of makes sense although many were in areas that were clear cut last plus years ago

[Dantheman]

and the federal water doesn't go to LA, either.

LA does get some water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin basin via the California aqueduct, but not much relative to the Owens River and the Colorado River. The irony of course is that Trump is demanding that water be diverted from the Central Valley, where he is largely popular, to LA, where people mostly hate him.

I’ve been curious when fireroads kind of stopped being a thing that was maintained regularly? Maybe the benefit didn’t justify the cost, but when I was a kid they seemed fairly pervasive in the foothills but now most seem to be left to a natural state or converted to MTB trails. Was there a conscious fire policy behind the shift or was it a factor of money just being spent elsewhere?

I don't think most of them were ever that actively maintained. The entire CA coast south of SF is arid. When you doze a ridgeline deep into the subsoil it takes long ass time for anything to regrow in that environment.

I do think that what a lot of people refer to as fire roads are either FS maintained roads or roads that were developed and maintained for some type of resource extraction.

Yeah, "fire road" seems to be Cali lingo that followed the spread of MTB out of coastal CA and became a catchall term for any steep shitty dirt road.

[I Skied Bandini Mountain]

Right - but the California aqueduct is a state project, not the federal project (CVP) that Trump claimed the military invaded and took over.

[ticketchecker]

^^not to mention the military doesn't really have to 'enter CA', how many bases do they have in the whole state?

[Cisco Kid]

So what does that truth have to do with anything out of that guys pie hole?

[bodywhomper]

mcski, I’m not sure when the firebreaks above Altadena, Monrovia, Pasadena, Bradbury, etc. started having deferred maintenance, but I know there was a desire by the county for improving and re-establishing them, and there was a struggle for funding.

[bodywhomper]

Re: order about water: https://www.ppic.org/blog/unpacking-...rn-california/


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[J. Barron DeJong]

ticketchecker, you’ve forgotten that we’ve GONE WOKE here in Cali. We forced the military out during the Biden admin which is why Trump had to send them back in.

[Meadow Skipper]

Around where I grew up, "fire" roads were actually logging roads that created a small break but also the thinning through selective logging helped reduced fuel load. There was also clear cutting that was ugly but that practice seemed to stop in the 80s. Selective logging was slowed down and basically ceased in the 90s on fed land. My knowledge is based on an isolated area in Idaho so can't comment for everywhere. I do think that what a lot of people refer to as fire roads are either FS maintained roads or roads that were developed and maintained for some type of resource extraction. Around 2000, roadless initiatives began and many of these roads were shut down.

This is a good explanation/description.

[Meadow Skipper]

And this.

Yeah, "fire road" seems to be Cali lingo that followed the spread of MTB out of coastal CA and became a catchall term for any steep shitty dirt road.