Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
True, but, and I reiterate, before man came on the scene there was no one to clear the brush and the creatures that live there have been doing just fine for a very long time, so apparently the brush was not much of a factor until man stuck his nose into the equation.
If we followed sensible policies concerning forest fires instead of putting out every little blaze that came along there wouldn't be massive amounts of dead, dry brush to be ignited.
We are a very homocentric [sic] bunch.
How do you know what the forest fires were like, before man came on the scene?
True, but, and I reiterate, before man came on the scene there was no one to clear the brush and the creatures that live there have been doing just fine for a very long time, so apparently the brush was not much of a factor until man stuck his nose into the equation.
Exactly. The frequent fires cleared the fuel preventing catastrophic fires.
How do you know what the forest fires were like, before man came on the scene?
Um, uh, um, uh. What!? If this is a serious question, then I agree. There are no farm lobbies. Wait. Did I say that? I am confused. Is there a sensible answer to this silly question?
Then why are you so incredibly arrogant to assert the fact that everything was fine before mankind entered the picture?
Moderator cut: No flaming
Um, everything was fine? Hang on, I'm going back over all my posts.
Sorry, no mention of everything being fine.
Moderator cut: No flaming
Then please explain to me how real estate developers can receive subsidies for empty lots because they are "set aside" as unused farm land even tough the are in a city and less than an acre in size?
NorthPoleMarathoner, I apologize for the results of my posting in your thread. A (silly) disagreement in another thread was allowed to spill over into this one, which was not my intent.
I enjoyed this discussion, but I am going to refrain from any further posts so that it may get back on track.
The bottom line is that dry/dead wood is far more flammable than live trees, and small brush burns far more rapidly than larger logs.
So... IF you have a heavily forested area that is filled with dead trees and brush, and IF something starts a fire (anything from lightning to a hiker), that area will almost certainly burn out of control.
On the other hand... IF logging companies are allowed to responsibly harvest mature and/or downed trees from of forested areas, and other people are allowed to clear out dense brush, the chances of a forest fire raging out of control are lowered exponentially.
You could further lower the chances of out-of-control forest fires consuming hundreds of thousands of acres of forest if lumber companies were allowed to clear cut 1/4 mile wide strips of trees every several miles. Of course, nobody likes the looks of that, so it's never going to happen.
How do you know what the forest fires were like, before man came on the scene?
There is an interesting set of photos of the Black Hills of South Dakota. General Custer made an expedition into the Black Hills before he met his fate, and the expedition had a photographer. Years later, someone went back to the same spots and took pictures of the same scenes. Here is a link to a site that shows some of the galleries from a book about the subject.
What was most interesting about the photo sets is the increase in the number of trees since Custer's time. The Native Americans (First Nations) of the area routinely burned the prairies within the Hills, whereas we have had fire suppression since those times, and the pines (Ponderosa) have been growing where once prairie grasses grew.
This is one set of evidence about what forests were like before (white) men came upon the scene.
Last edited by Teak; 07-04-2009 at 01:38 AM..
Reason: added link
The Black Hills is actually an interesting case study on this climate change issue. The demarcation between where the prairie ends and woodland begins moves back and forth over decades and is sensitive to slight changes in precipation, temperature, growing season, and human activity. It is really on the margins between vegetation zones -like in the Hills- where the changes are most easily seen.
One might wonder what the forests looked like before the Native Americans began their burning activities. I suspect that the number of trees was not greater, however, given the ease with which forest and prairie fires start due to dry lightning strikes: thunderstorms without rain. It is the fire-suppression tactics of the U.S. Forest Service in the 1950s and 1960s that probably caused the greatest increase in the number of trees (and, thus, fire fuel on the forest floor: say that fast several times!). Poor old Smokey Bear may have done more harm than good, in the long run.
Last edited by Teak; 07-04-2009 at 02:10 AM..
Reason: addition
There is an interesting set of photos of the Black Hills of South Dakota. General Custer made an expedition into the Black Hills before he met his fate, and the expedition had a photographer. Years later, someone went back to the same spots and took pictures of the same scenes. Here is a link to a site that shows some of the galleries from a book about the subject.
What was most interesting about the photo sets is the increase in the number of trees since Custer's time. The Native Americans (First Nations) of the area routinely burned the prairies within the Hills, whereas we have had fire suppression since those times, and the pines (Ponderosa) have been growing where once prairie grasses grew.
This is one set of evidence about what forests were like before (white) men came upon the scene.
Good illustrations, thanks for that.
I actually lived literally on the edge of wilderness for 24 years in the San Jacinto Mountains. I worked closely with the Control Burns (now called prescribed burns because some got out of control) programs to lessen the amount of fuel build up caused by years of fire suppression. I suppose in the old days before we actually understood the real nature of things, we suppressed many fires like the monsoonal lightening strikes because saving Smoky Bear's was the noble thing to do. It really had nothing to do with environmentalists (which seems to be the poster child blame game here in modern times and this sub-forum), it was just the thinking by all at the time no matter what stupid political persuasion they belonged to.
One of the ways I learned about the way things were in nature was by reading the works and dairies of men like Juan Baptista De Anza (Spanish Explorer) and also John Muir, who wrote about the nature of Yosemite Valley and the horse back races they would have on the valley floor racing through the forests. I have'nt been there since the 1980s, but at that time it would have been impossible to race through those valley floor forests because of the dense undergrowth. I remember the studies done about what an ideal and healthy forests should look like and most were old growth forests and structured much we see in any city park like setting.
While it's true many fires were started by Indians, many were also lightening strikes during the monsoonal season of summer. Of course they did their thing of clearing the understory of brush and overpopulation of competing tree seedlings. The interesting thing about these fires though is that they naturally occured during these periods of high humidity and often followed by flooding rain bursts either that day or not long after in a day or two. The catastrophic fires we get now come from other reasons which would also include lightening strikes. Just taking southern California as an example, there are simply too many people consentrated in such a small area. As people desire to move to the rurals to get away from city life there is more potential for disaster, not just from a devastating and costly $$$FIRE$$$, but also the potential for more than normal and at any time of the year fires.
Having lived in the back country all those years I can attest to some of the stupidty of people in general for starting fires. Most common stupid mistakes that started a fire were some clown welding a trailer of farm equipment near a field with dry foxtail grass (might as well have been Gasoline). Other things in mountainous areas were of course more powerlines for newer development and potential for high winds snapping lines and creating sparks during perfect fire conditions. Another component is all the Kooks (some even firefighters) within society now days who get their kicks from arson. I swear everytime the weather news reported on TV and warned of fire danger, these jerks would come out of the woodwork. One common ploy many used was lighting a cigarette and sticking it in a book of matches to burn down slowly. By the time it ignites the book of matches and the dry grass and stick pile built around it, the jerk is at least 15 miles away. Most of these times the modern fires are occuring during these worst of weather conditions and almost always man caused. These things were never that abundant/frequent and disasterous when I was a kid. And speaking of kids, areas around population areas receive more because of the kids. Society has changed and the potential for the bad to happen is far greater.
The title of the thread does'nt even seem to fit the article sited. I have first hands on knowledge of that Stephen's Kangaroo Rat controversy and it had nothing to do with forests. I'll get back with what actually occured when I have time and perhaps we can turn this Green Living sub-forum thread into something constructive rather than this, "Yeah, well you're a doo-doo face" sandbox playground garbage that is usually present here.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
