California Wild fires

[tower912]

Now, THIS deserves thoughts and prayers.       Thoughts and prayers to those displaced.    And to those who have lost family and friends out there.    And prayers for some rain to help the overwhelmed firefighters.    Good luck, brothers. 

[MU82]

Nasty effen situation. Feel very badly for those folks, and I hope the firefighters and other emergency personnel get through their days of hard work unscathed.

[forgetful]

Now, THIS deserves thoughts and prayers.       Thoughts and prayers to those displaced.    And to those who have lost family and friends out there.    And prayers for some rain to help the overwhelmed firefighters.    Good luck, brothers.

Agreed on all counts. 

The people risking their lives fighting these fires are true heroes.

[Benny B]

Should we also withhold thoughts & prayers for victims of the fire who burnt only their upper extremities, i.e. those injured by fire-arms?

[tower912]

A reach, but well done.

[Benny B]

A reach, but well done.

Well done, yourself... x2.

[ZiggysFryBoy]

Should we also withhold thoughts & prayers for victims of the fire who burnt only their upper extremities, i.e. those injured by fire-arms?

Wacka, wacka, wacka!

[Cheeks]

It has been horrific.  I grew up in Thousand Oaks, tough two weeks.  Family evacuated , etc.  None of it surprising really, big rains last year meant vegetation growth.  Then it dries out, fire when Santa Ana winds hit.  Next part of cycle is mudslides when the rains start back.

Up north really bad.  May end up being 150 dead when all said and done.  Prayers for sure.

[jsglow]

It has been horrific.  I grew up in Thousand Oaks, tough two weeks.  Family evacuated , etc.  None of it surprising really, big rains last year meant vegetation growth.  Then it dries out, fire when Santa Ana winds hit.  Next part of cycle is mudslides when the rains start back.

Up north really bad.  May end up being 150 dead when all said and done.  Prayers for sure.

Prayers for your family.  I sensed that when Oroville dam became a problem that this would be the net result down the road.

[Cheeks]

Prayers for your family.  I sensed that when Oroville dam became a problem that this would be the net result down the road.

Thanks, and to be clear when I say family I don’t mean my immediate family.  We are fine.  However nephews, in-laws, etc have been evacuated.  Fortunately as of yesterday their homes were still standing,  but with smoke damage.

[Cheeks]

If you have 5 minutes, worth the read.  For the firemen here, this will not be surprising.  For the layperson, the speed at which this went from grass fire to apocalyptic event is staggering.

https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-camp-fire-tictoc-20181118-story.html

[tower912]

6 months without rain.  The whole area was nothing but kindling.

[forgetful]

6 months without rain.  The whole area was nothing but kindling.

I don't know why we don't just send in the national guard, or 15,000 troops with a bunch of rakes.

[ZiggysFryBoy]

Another interesting article:

https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2017/12/a-century-of-fire-suppression-is-why-california-is-in-flames/

[Archies Bat]

Another interesting article:

https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2017/12/a-century-of-fire-suppression-is-why-california-is-in-flames/

This issue really isn't new.  The major wildfires in Yellowstone about 10-15 years ago were attributed to essentially the same cause.  I think it is easier to suppress than prevent, but when prevention doesn't work the impact is far worse.

We are dealing with similar stuff in my area with sea level rise.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/rising-seas-threaten-norfolk-naval-shipyard-raising-fears-catastrophic-damage-n937396

[brewcity77]

If you have 5 minutes, worth the read.  For the firemen here, this will not be surprising.  For the layperson, the speed at which this went from grass fire to apocalyptic event is staggering.

https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-camp-fire-tictoc-20181118-story.html

Personally, I think wildland firefighters must have a bit of a crazy streak, and that comes from someone that works in a field full of people with crazy streaks. I'll go into just about any burning building that's viable, but those wildfires are a whole terrifyingly different animal.

[forgetful]

6 months without rain.  The whole area was nothing but kindling.

In a more serious note.  I wonder how much opportunity there is for more controlled burns to allow the natural growth, burn, rebirth process to occur out there. 

Fires are a natural part of those forest reproductive cycles.  They have evolved to take advantage of that for millennia.  We just need to find a way to introduce the fires in a way that does not impact populated areas.  Obviously way easier said than done.

[Benny B]

In a more serious note.  I wonder how much opportunity there is for more controlled burns to allow the natural growth, burn, rebirth process to occur out there. 

Fires are a natural part of those forest reproductive cycles.  They have evolved to take advantage of that for millennia.  We just need to find a way to introduce the fires in a way that does not impact populated areas.  Obviously way easier said than done.

For starters, how about moving the populated areas out of the forests? 

California is just one big crescent shaped middle finger to Mother Nature.  The very fact that LA exists is criminal, environmentally speaking.   

[buckchuckler]

For starters, how about moving the populated areas out of the forests? 

California is just one big crescent shaped middle finger to Mother Nature.  The very fact that LA exists is criminal, environmentally speaking.

Not as bad as Phoenix... 

[GooooMarquette]

Not as bad as Phoenix...

Lush green golf courses in places like Phoenix and Vegas are an appalling waste of water....

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

In a more serious note.  I wonder how much opportunity there is for more controlled burns to allow the natural growth, burn, rebirth process to occur out there. 

Fires are a natural part of those forest reproductive cycles.  They have evolved to take advantage of that for millennia.  We just need to find a way to introduce the fires in a way that does not impact populated areas.  Obviously way easier said than done.

What Benny B said.  I had read they want to do controlled burns but the problem with controlled burns is that it's too populated so it's too risky.

[D'Lo Brown]

How about we let the experts (scientists, firefighters, forest service, etc) do their jobs, do their research, and then provide the funding and support they need for the next steps? The politicization of the environment is just sick. The story does not need to be shifted around so that the end result goes in the politically preferred direction. Too many brainless fools gumming up the whole process, focusing on coming out ahead today and plundering the future of the planet in the process.

Note: I both live in California and am also completely clueless on the solutions. We need to support the real experts, and not just the windbags.

[tower912]

Both/and, not either/or.

[Benny B]

How about we let the experts (scientists, firefighters, forest service, etc) do their jobs, do their research, and then provide the funding and support they need for the next steps? The politicization of the environment is just sick. The story does not need to be shifted around so that the end result goes in the politically preferred direction. Too many brainless fools gumming up the whole process, focusing on coming out ahead today and plundering the future of the planet in the process.

Note: I both live in California and am also completely clueless on the solutions. We need to support the real experts, and not just the windbags.

Is it really politicized?  Pro-environmental issues are usually associated with left-leaning politics, yet one of our most left-leaning states, if not the most, is perhaps the greatest environmental offender in North America.  California is more than eager to tell you they're the 2nd lowest state in CO2 emissions per capita, but when it comes to CO2 emissions per square mile, they rank 28th, just behind Michigan and Missouri (for reference, Wisconsin is 23rd, Illinois 41st, Minnesota 18th).  Apparently, their answer to being a carbon rock star is to cram more people into smaller areas; probably not a coincidence then that all the environmentalist posers out west will tell you that a dense population is actually good for the environment, all the while ignoring the data on heat islands and urban sprawl which speak otherwise.

And hypocrisy knows not the boundaries of political divides... Texas is an even worse offender than California by just about every measure.  Moreover, what does it say when the primary adversary to conservation call themselves conservatives?!?  I'm no etymologist, but pretty sure the old Roman explanation is bvllvs shiitvs (or ano intra cranium for the Latin scholars).

Then again, politics is all about hypocrisy, so maybe you are correct.  Environment is politicized.


Moral of Story: Mother Nature is getting raped by both sides of the aisle... the only difference is one side has no regard for the victim and the other side simply forgets there was ever a victim at all.

[Jockey]

Is it really politicized?  Pro-environmental issues are usually associated with left-leaning politics, yet one of our most left-leaning states, if not the most, is perhaps the greatest environmental offender in North America.  California is more than eager to tell you they're the 2nd lowest state in CO2 emissions per capita, but when it comes to CO2 emissions per square mile, they rank 28th, just behind Michigan and Missouri (for reference, Wisconsin is 23rd, Illinois 41st, Minnesota 18th).  Apparently, their answer to being a carbon rock star is to cram more people into smaller areas; probably not a coincidence then that all the environmentalist posers out west will tell you that a dense population is actually good for the environment, all the while ignoring the data on heat islands and urban sprawl which speak otherwise.

This post is utter nonsense.

Whoopie - California - with 40 MILLION people - does more damage to the environment than Wyoming - which has as many people as Milwaukee.

Must've been a real learned genius to figure that one out.

[D'Lo Brown]

Is it really politicized?  Pro-environmental issues are usually associated with left-leaning politics, yet one of our most left-leaning states, if not the most, is perhaps the greatest environmental offender in North America.  California is more than eager to tell you they're the 2nd lowest state in CO2 emissions per capita, but when it comes to CO2 emissions per square mile, they rank 28th, just behind Michigan and Missouri (for reference, Wisconsin is 23rd, Illinois 41st, Minnesota 18th).  Apparently, their answer to being a carbon rock star is to cram more people into smaller areas; probably not a coincidence then that all the environmentalist posers out west will tell you that a dense population is actually good for the environment, all the while ignoring the data on heat islands and urban sprawl which speak otherwise.

And hypocrisy knows not the boundaries of political divides... Texas is an even worse offender than California by just about every measure.  Moreover, what does it say when the primary adversary to conservation call themselves conservatives?!?  I'm no etymologist, but pretty sure the old Roman explanation is bvllvs shiitvs (or ano intra cranium for the Latin scholars).

Then again, politics is all about hypocrisy, so maybe you are correct.  Environment is politicized.


Moral of Story: Mother Nature is getting raped by both sides of the aisle... the only difference is one side has no regard for the victim and the other side simply forgets there was ever a victim at all.

Thanks for proving my point for me. I was saying that it is overly politicized, and you disagreed by trying to place blame on one political party over another.

That's all this really is, right? A blame game that goes around and around, but in the end goes nowhere. Some fall for it easier than others I guess. Problem is, even though some people think they are "winning", nobody wins in the end.

[WarriorDad]

I don't know why we don't just send in the national guard, or 15,000 troops with a bunch of rakes.

Appears they will be trying something new out there.  Saw on CNN that Governor and President both agreed (that's saying something) that current policies need to change.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/facing-deadlier-fires-california-tries-something-new-more-logging-1542390642?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=12

[#UnleashSean]

A story on fires turns into a political thread. Oh scoop 

[Benny B]

Thanks for proving my point for me. I was saying that it is overly politicized, and you disagreed by trying to place blame on one political party over another.

A story on fires turns into a political thread. Oh scoop 

Apparently some of us won't be giving thanks for our reading comprehension skillz this year.

I thought I made it quite clear that there is no divide between parties when it comes to environmental issues, i.e. the blame falls to everyone, not just one party.  How is that political?

[tower912]

And like every other trade off.... rains are coming that will help extinguish the fire.     And cause mud slides.    And further help the undergrowth in areas that didn't burn to grow.... before it, too becomes kindling during the next drought. 

[mu03eng]

I think the thing to keep in mind that as tragic as the wild fires are, they are the resulting combination of human decision making and as yet uncontrolled natural laws. Humans made the decision to live there...they also made decisions about how to manage the forests, how to build homes, etc etc etc. Forest fires are inevitable, they are part of the life cycle of a forest. My point is, that we should be sympathetic and supportive, but this is an inevitable consequence of a whole bunch of decisions from the micro to macro that were made that isn't bound by politics....it's simply human hubris that makes us believe we can do things in the world without consequence when we can't control all the factors that result in the consequence.

[WarriorFan]

As a California logger once told me (while we were sitting on the top of a hill watching a crew take down a giant redwood), the FIRES are 100% natural and are the best possible thing for the forests - long term.  The HUMANS in the forest are what's not natural. 

[jsglow]

I think the thing to keep in mind that as tragic as the wild fires are, they are the resulting combination of human decision making and as yet uncontrolled natural laws. Humans made the decision to live there...they also made decisions about how to manage the forests, how to build homes, etc etc etc. Forest fires are inevitable, they are part of the life cycle of a forest. My point is, that we should be sympathetic and supportive, but this is an inevitable consequence of a whole bunch of decisions from the micro to macro that were made that isn't bound by politics....it's simply human hubris that makes us believe we can do things in the world without consequence when we can't control all the factors that result in the consequence.

Yep, just like the folks in flood plains.

[Benny B]

It seems to me that all these disasters, be them natural or human-made, keep happening in the same places.  California, Florida, North Carolina...

So at what point does one say, “you know, I don’t think God wants us living here.”

(And if you’re an atheist, it’s even worse because there’s no illusion of some random omnipotent being saving your ass when it counts.)

Chicago may not have the luxurious weather of a place like, say, Charlotte this time of year, but we haven’t had a environmental disaster since the the cow (or myth of your preference) started that fire.  It’s so great here, in fact, that people’s kids live here.  Christ and Spaghetti, we get a foot of snow here and people grab their sleds in joy; rain pours down, and we tell people to drive their boats at no wake speed; funnel clouds brew up, and we tell Marengo to turn their lights on bright enough for Mother Nature to see.

Detroit and Cleveland notwithstanding (since those places are a whole different kind of disaster) but has anyone else noticed that the Great Lakes metropolii (metropolisses?) seem to be statistically insulated from disasters?

Global warming or not, last place I’d want to be over the past few years is within a few hundred miles of an ocean.