Forest Fires

[Guest guest]

now that Prince buh and the family are all up in arms about forest fires and how

we must cut everything down, well, here is a letter to Grist magazine which

answers the question, in better terms then i usually use

 

 

 

Dear Umbra,

 

My husband says that Rush is blaming the Sierra Club for the huge forest fires

raging in Colorado and Arizona. He says that because environmentalists oppose

logging, the forest is too full of fuel. I told him that as far as I know, the

Sierra Club is really trying to prevent logging in roadless areas and wilderness

areas, not areas where people are living and building developments. But he

pointed out that with the fires the size they are, they could have burned

through some of both kinds of areas. I also told him that the U.S. Forest

Service's own policy of stamping out forest fires had the most to do with the

unusual build-up of tinder in the forests, and drought plays a part as well. So

my question is: Are the forests that are burning previously logged ones or never

logged ones, and what are the proximate and more distant causes? I have always

thought Rush had his head up his butt, but I need more logical arguments to give

my husband, whom I have to admire for at least trying to keep an open mind.

 

Maggie

 

Dearest Maggie,

 

A proper answer to your question would rival Anna Karenina in length, because it

would require recounting the long history of forest management in the U.S. and

explicating the political tinderbox that is logging politics, especially in the

West. But here's the short version: Rush argues that forest fires are raging in

Colorado and Arizona because we aren't logging, leaving the forests full of

fuel. Well: A forest is by definition full of wood, a favorite fuel since

Prometheus.

 

 

Fighting fire with firefighters.

Photo: USFWS.

 

Fire is a natural event in most forest ecosystems, serving to create food and

space for new growth. Certain tree seeds need fire in order to germinate. But

natural forest fires are briefer and cooler than the raging infernos that have

gobbled land and grabbed headlines this summer. Why? Because logging and human

development have interrupted the forest cycle, leading to more destructive

fires.

 

Here's how it works: Commercial loggers take out large, healthy trees, with

their fire-resistant thick bark, and leave behind a mess of bracken, smaller

trees, undergrowth, and tree leftovers known as slash. With the larger canopy

trees gone, the remaining stuff can become very dry in the summer. You get the

picture: one giant pile of kindling. Fire suppression near human development

also creates a pile-of-kindling effect, as there are no natural fires to burn

out the naturally occurring dead trees, undergrowth, and so forth. When fires,

lit by lightning or people, catch in these conditions, they burn hotter and

faster.

 

Both virgin and logged lands in the West have burned this summer, but the Sierra

Club is not responsible for these fires; moreover, its valiant efforts to

preserve wilderness areas in our national forests are making scant headway

against the " Come and get it, boys! " policy of President Bush. (Incidentally,

when I first read your letter, I thought you had made a typo -- hitting R

instead of B. Makes sense both ways.)

 

Smokin',

Umbra

[Guest guest]

Hi Fraggle

 

> now that Prince buh

 

I like the spelling mistake! :-)

 

BB

Peter

 

 

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.381 / Virus Database: 214 - Release 02/08/02