Tahoe Fire, a lesson (Sacramento, Santa Cruz: new home, neighborhood, living)

[greatbasinguide]

There was a great article in today's Reno Gazette on the Tahoe Fire and blame.
RGJ.com: There's enough blame to go around

It is well worth reading.

Moderator cut: copyright

[tasmtairy]

I lived in Placerville for 30 years and my Daughter lives in Sacramento, so we were very interested in this fire as we had experienced a couple further down the hill during our lives there. I believe in cleaning the forest. My Dad and I were chatting ( we have freinds in SOcal), the driest in 31 years, Now the brush has grown and created a barrier of sorts and a place for the rain to go should it rain there, with the brush fire, without the brush, mudslides,devastating to the poeple in Malibu, Santa Cruz and such. What do you think about that?

[cynwldkat]

You are so right greatbasinguide!! In CA. so many of the pine trees have died/dieing from the "Bark Beetle". And yet the "Smoky-Bear" has yet allowed much clearing of these dead/dieing trees. They want them to remain for the Eagles, owls etc. Don't get me wrong....I am all for saving animals of our forrest but this is no way to achieve this. The whole forest is like a "match-head". Now when they have fires they lose everything and a lot more!!! As greatbasinguide said, there is no stopping these wildfires until they run out of fuel....and how far is that?? The whole forest is full of fuel! There needs to be some clearing done---soon!!

[NYSD1995]

There is a difference between creating defensible space around homes and opening up western forests to logging under the auspices of reducing fire danger. Make sure you are clear on that difference. I support the former, but the latter is a scam and a lie meant to line the pockets of the timber concerns and the politicians who they've bought.

[cynwldkat]

I lived in those mountains and have seen the dead trees personally. I totally agree with what you said about the logging for $$. Those infested trees need to be romoved. And of course the clearing around ones home is a must. If you have gone to the San Bernardion mountains recently it is a sad sight to see. And the worst part is the new growth is being infested as fast as it grows. I love these forests and want only what is best. I'm not saying clearing out the whole forest but take down the dead and dieing trees to prevent the spreading to what little healthy trees are left!! I never ment to imply that the forest should be opened up to logging....just clear out the infected and dead trees!!! Save the healthy trees. I am so aware of loggers---lived all my younger in the midst of those forest and saw the destruction they can create....but I also am now seeing the forest die. Any other good ideas on how to prevent this?? Just clearing around ones home is not going to stop a major forest fire---of course it will help to possibly save your home but what about the forest??

[Ultrarunner]

I've been around long enough to witness a complete 180 degree shift in Tahoe Regulations regarding the land use.

As a child, I would go around the neighborhood in South Lake Tahoe and rake Pine Needles for extra money in the Summer. Most all of the "Year Rounders" would have a USDA approved incinerator for forest slash and every year you paid the Fire Department $2 for a seasonal burn permit. The Fire Department would announce "Burn Days" usually following rain storms. In the 60's homeowners were encouraged to plant and maintain a green lawn around their homestead and keep the land clear of pine needles, pine cones and branches and cut back or remove trees near buildings in the name of Fire Safety.

Fast Forward to year 2000.

1.Pine Needles are to be LEFT ON THE GROUND to reduce erosion. One of the brochures I received called it "The forest's natural carpet" Have you ever seen how explosively pine needles burn?

2.Pine Cones, Branches, Twigs and fallen Trees are to remain is habitat.

3.Incinerator Burning has been outlawed.

4.Planting of Lawns is discouraged and not allowed around new homes. Lawn Fertilizer is blamed for lake water clarity problems and NO differentiation is made for home owners that don't use fertilizer.

5.Homes are to be constructed in and around existing trees. No more clearing allowed for a home-site.

6.Out National Forests came into existence as our National Timber Reserve as opposed to the National Parks. Now we have many National Forests where timber harvesting is no longer allowed... yet they are still classified as National Forests, instead of National Parks.

Apparently, it is OK to let Nature take it's course and let the Forest succumb to fire, infestation and blight... but no longer OK for the Government to sell the timber?

7.The forest service requires loggers to construct logging roads and fire breaks as part of the timber harvesting program. Less logging means less fire breaks and logging roads.

I'm all for balance, but I clearly think the system is totally out of whack.

In my own city, there is a completely dead 40' Monterrey Pine... It is dead to the point limbs fall. Why is the tree still there? It is unclear if the tree is on city land or on one of 3 privately owned lots.

In the past, one of the neighbors would have just taken it down. That has all changed since the city now requires an official evaluation from an arborist and a $50 tree removal permit. So now the tree just stands there in a state of decay waiting for the next big wind storm.

[cynwldkat]

That is EXACTLY what I have experienced--that radical change!! And you know what----it isn't working! I remember in the sixties growing up in the mountains and yes, we did take care of our forest. We removed dead, sick trees. But now, by the time a person can get the needed permits and at the cost to remove those tress it's totally crazy!! It's gone so far now that OUR national forest are difficult often times for US to even visit and enjoy!!! Yes, the system is very out of wack!! I am not for the clearing of miles of good, healthy trees (there are few of those left anyhow) but I am for keeping our forest healthy.

[greatbasinguide]

Sassberto, to address your point specifically. The ancient forest were wide open. It was said that a man could gallop a horse through the forest without fear of hitting a tree. the land was clearcut to build America. Today, the land is overstocked. The trees are near pencil thin and crowd each other, if I tried to gallop my horse through my own woods, I would crash pretty quick.

Because of the overcrowding the trees are unhealthy and that contributes to insect investation, and dead trees, the dead trees on the ground today contribute many tons per acre of fuel.

If there is not 20 feet between the green, that is when you look up you should be able to see 20 feet of air between each tree, you will lose it all when it burns.

It is not a question of if it burns, but when it burns. Now the question is, what to do with the overstock. In your garden you thin the carrots, what is left grows stronger and larger, forests are the same. We can say that we do not want to turn the woods over to the loggers to ruin, to late, the land has already been logged, mills have closed allover the West, not because of the politicians and the environmentalists, but because the merchantable timber is gone..
A. Most ancient forest in the West is gone, what we have is overcrowded regeneration.
B. In the remaining ancient forests trees die naturally, but due to the suppression of fire their remains merely add to the tonnage of fuel waiting to burn.
C. Fire used to occur naturally on a frequent basis, often these fires were set by indians as the left the higher elevations to insure their hunting areas remained clear.
D. These fires burned at a low intensity and cleaned the forest without destroying the forest.
E. Today a fire destroys.
F. The west needs billions of dollars spent to rectify the errors of the last 150 years, this will require large scale removal of biomass, and we had better do it.
G. I have a great book, it was done recently, a series of photographs of the Sierra Nevada taken in the 19th century and then new photos taken from the same spots during the 1990's. The difference is staggering, in every case number of trees is vastly greater today than in the virgin forest.

Those of you who feel that loggers are evil or close to evil I imagine live in steel homes, but wait, have you seen what a Iron ore mine looks like.

Logging can be done sustainably, for the health of the forest, and profitably. Look at Germany, their forests have been logged for over a thousand years, and yet, their forest are healthy and productive today.

Let me close, on my own property to create a forest resembling the ancient forest, to create the 20 feet between the green, to insure the health of the forest, to insure the survivability of the forest, 3 out of 5 trees need to be removed, that equation is probably accurate throughout the Sierra.

I have logged my land selectively for 20 years I am not where I need to be, but it is in a lot better shape than when I bought it.

That should be the mantra of the West.

[cynwldkat]

My brother-in-law is a logger...but he appreciates the forest. I totally agree with greatbasinguide. Not all loggers are out for the $$. Sure it is how they make a living but done properly it will make our forest what they use to be. Healthy and beautiful. His home has always been in the forest and he appreciates his home. He would be the last person to destroy it for $$.

[NYSD1995]

I think the question is whether or not anyone can be assured that the land will be selectively logged. Loggers don't want the dead stuff. I am all for selective logging but the industry's reputation makes it hard to trust that they will do the right thing.