There may be no immediate solutions
in sight for the droughts but there may be something that can be done to reduce
the fire danger. Fire is an important
part of many ecosystems. Years of fire suppression
have been a significant factor in the decline of the health of the forests. We now have forests that will go up in flames
with just the slightest spark. The
situation has placed many communities in danger. I don’t believe there’s any relief in the near future.
If done carefully, a mixture of
logging and prescribed burns near all communities that are in danger could go a
long ways. Logging would have to be done in a way to encourage forest health. Logging does not replace fire. There are some plant and tree species that
require fire in order to germinate. Maybe
it’s about time to put together
controlled burn teams. That will cost
some money but maybe it can be done for less than many people think. Here’s my idea. Free courses in controlled burn certification
could be offered by the land management agencies. There could be an incentive offered as well
to those who complete the courses. Upon
receipt of this certification, they are available to be part of controlled burn
teams. They could then be part of a controlled burn team that operates near
their home or an area of their choosing. These teams would initially be supervised by
paid management personnel who know about fire. Further certification would be
based on experience and performance.
Eventually it could turn into a paid supervision position with a land
management agency. They could even be
allowed to do controlled burns on their own land if they own a large tract of land
with wildfire potential. This could take some of the pressure
off of the land management agencies and the smoke jumpers along with reducing
the threat fires that destroy communities.
It could even put some people back to work who are unemployed. The federal government often moves very
slowly so this may need to be started on a local level.
Thanks for sharing your ideas! The League is a strong supporter of healthy forest fuel reduction projects throughout the Lake Tahoe Basin as well as defensible space practices for residential lots.
ReplyDeleteYour idea regarding training and certifying property owners is interesting, but you may want to further investigate the legal capacities and liabilities (i.e. insurance coverage) associated with such activities. Also, what characteristics does a property have to meet in order to safely facilitate a controlled burn?
The Lake Tahoe Basin is unique in the fact that around 75% percent of the land is publically owned, so the best line of defensive against catastrophic wildfire, in addition to improving forest health, is to work with the land and resource agencies to implement healthy forest and fuel reduction projects. These projects also include long-term forest management by including prescribed and controlled burns as a tool, but as you already know we need to first get the hazardous fuel load out of the forests before controlled burns can be safely implemented.
Also, residential lots in the Basin are small in comparison to the large acreage that would be needed to safely implement a controlled burn (only after large sources of fuel have been removed) at the required safe distance from urban areas. Both Calfire and the local fire districts are working in their Lake Tahoe communities to enforce and implement defensible space BMPs in the urban areas.
Thank you,
Flavia Sordelet
Community Engagement Manager
League to Save Lake Tahoe - Keep Tahoe Blue
Flavia Sordelet:
ReplyDeleteThanks for getting back to me. I appreciate hearing your ideas. I do have a few concerns about the defensible space program but that's a subject for another time.
I was suggesting certifying more than just property owners. I was just thinking that the more people who volunteered the more that could be accomplished. I believe that the more people involved with this, the more that could be accomplished. It’s my understanding that the land management agencies tend to be severely understaffed. My reasoning here is that it would make more people available to help for minimal cost. I'm not suggesting that it would be cost free, but consider the cost of losing homes and lives to wildfire as compared to the cost of a program like this. I’m not even suggesting that there are no risks involved, but consider the risk of doing nothing or even continuing at the pace we are now.
As for what kind of characteristics a property has to have in order to safely facilitate a controlled burn, it would have to be a fairly large piece of property for one thing. I suppose there aren't very many of those in the Tahoe Basin. This suggestion was for the Intermountain West in general and not just for the Tahoe Basin. It is very likely that there may need to be some differences based on the different localities and their needs.
The fact that 75% of the land in the basin is publicly owned should make a controlled burn program more feasible.
Unless I misread your response, you don’t believe that controlled burns are good ways to remove the hazardous fuel. I’m not necessarily disagreeing with that maybe that isn’t a good way. If it is not, what methods are being used and could teams of volunteers help with any of it? What if there was a perimeter area around the communities where all hazardous fuels were removed in order to protect homes from catastrophic fires before the controlled burns were started?
If you’re short on volunteers for projects such as these, I would suggest reaching out to churches and scout troops.
Thanks for getting back to me and I look forward to your response.
Doug Goodall
PS: I don’t live in the Tahoe Basin now but it is one of the places I’m seriously considering to make my home within the next 4 years so I feel that I have a big time stake in the condition of the Basin. I believe that the closer we come to mimicking nature, the better for everyone.