California will begin backing intentional burns to control wildfire

Re:California will begin backing intentional burns to contro... by alexb_ on Friday June 23, 2023 @11:15AM (#36447997)

I'm not taking it as an attack at all. The people who hated controlled burns for racist reasons (such as calling people "primitives") were being incredibly stupid. I am not denying that at all, that should be obvious. The point is, that in and of itself is not a reason to do controlled burns. The reason we do controlled burns is that they control wildfires, help make more of the state inhabitable, etc - we don't do it because it's the opposite of what racists did.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:California will begin backing intentional burns to contro... by throwawaymaths on Friday June 23, 2023 @11:40AM (#36448398)

moreover people have been calling for controlled burns for decades (if anything, typically republicans). It's hard to believe at this point what's holding it back is racism.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:California will begin backing intentional burns to contro... by mrcrumb1 on Friday June 23, 2023 @12:19PM (#36448988)

The regulations ban the practices is the racism here

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:California will begin backing intentional burns to contro... by primitivesuave on Friday June 23, 2023 @01:29PM (#36449863)

Part of what's holding it back is expensive multi-year environmental reviews for logging projects. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=li_Rv4t2htc

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:California will begin backing intentional burns to contro... by w7b7s7 on Friday June 23, 2023 @02:31PM (#36450575)

Yes, selective logging and controlled burns have to be paired if the forest has ever been clear cut.

Where I live (Santa Cruz Mountains) the vast old growth redwood trees were extensively logged (via clear cutting) into the early-to-mid 20th Century.

Then widespread logging just stopped. And for at least the past 50-60 years there has been intense hostility to logging. Everywhere, doesn't matter if public or private land.

The redwood groves that have grown back are all extremely densely packed, relatively small diameter trees mixed in with tan and coast live oaks and lots of smaller shrubbery. Lots of low branches on all trees. Lots of redwood needles and dead tan oak and coast live oak leaves laying thick on the forest floor.

Perfect tinder.

About 3 years ago a lightening storm sparked a fire that burned hundreds of thousands of acres.

Controlled burns would have helped remove the forest duff. But the trees themselves are perfectly set up to respond to fire, unlike in an old growth forest.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:California will begin backing intentional burns to contro... by mrcrumb1 on Friday June 23, 2023 @12:16PM (#36448929)

The point of bringing it up is because one of the natural questions is "why did we stop doing controlled burns?". If you don't address this, people will think there was a good reason when, in this case, it doesn't seem like there was.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:California will begin backing intentional burns to contro... by Zetice on Friday June 23, 2023 @12:53PM (#36449416)

This article is not written as a way to explain to the world the fact that California will begin backing intentional burns, it's written to explain why that wasn't already the case from a historical perspective.

[ Parent | on HN ]