traderjohn Loc: New York City

Do you think the state bears any responsibility??

foathog Loc: Greensboro, NC

So it's Trump's fault after all? LOL

usnpilot Loc: Ft Myers Fl

[quote=ken_stern]Only 2% of California's forests are controlled by the State the other 98% of the forests within the State fall under the US Federal Government.[/quote

The Federal Government controls 57% of California’s forests according to Google.

gerdog

Interesting that the President is threatening to withhold federal funding from California, even though the fire started on federal land. Guess he finds it easier to blame others before people realize that the federal government bears most of the responsibility for forest management. California isn't even allowed to perform any maintenance on federal forests without special permission. It's also harder to plan controlled burns when drought is a year round thing. Don't want to turn areas into desert either by removing all the plant life. Very tough problem. I am keeping all those affected in my prayers.

traderjohn Loc: New York City

[quote=usnpilot][quote=ken_stern]Only 2% of California's forests are controlled by the State the other 98% of the forests within the State fall under the US Federal Government.[/quote

The Federal Government controls 57% of California’s forests according to Google.[/quote]

Does it control the land in question??

gerdog

Keep in mind that this was a wildfire, not a forest fire. Grass and brush and wind and drought were the driving forces. A true forest fire moves more slowly. No easy solution when the grass itself is so dry.

traderjohn Loc: New York City

That's a sketchy explanation. It's a fire.

gerdog

The point is that it's more dangerous because grass and brush ignite faster than a 100-year-old tree. People need to be able to respond to the danger more quickly than our system is set up for. Trying to place blame on the forestry service when the non-forested areas are tinder boxes is pointless. Controlled burns during a drought result in more area for brush to grow. Private fields and yards full of dying grass also pose a problem. There aren't going to be any cheap fixes. I'm sure more communities out there are going to try more controlled burns, but you can't do it right without some rain during the year. You can't just burn everything off and turn the area into a dust bowl.

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

Exactly. When my son was studying natural resources in college, this present situation was predicted, specifically caused by what you say. The same thing goes for those houses that slide off the mountains during mudslides; they shouldn’t have been built there to begin with.

elad Loc: Arizona

I suppose that on Google one can find the answer one favors:

In fact, regardless that he expressed his opinion in classically inelegant Trumpian terms, the president is correct in at least this: The state of California has been doing an awful job of managing its forests.

The degree to which that mismanagement contributed to this latest round of wildfires may be called into question, but the fact of the state’s mismanagement itself is beyond doubt.

The non-partisan California Legislative Analyst’s Office released a report entitled “Improving California’s Forest and Watershed Management” in April of this year. In a related fact sheet, they recognized that “[m]ost of the forests across the state are in an unhealthy condition.” They further stated that overgrown, unhealthy forests resulted in “increased risk of severe forest fires” and recommended actions to thin California’s many overgrown, unhealthy forests that have developed in the name of environmental puritanism.

And no, this sad situation is not the federal government’s fault. While the feds own the land on which the wildfires occurred, the Bureau of Land Management delegated its authority to manage that land—and most of the rest of the federally owned forests in California—to the state’s Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) as part of that agency’s State Responsibility Area (SRA) a long time ago.

The fire that consumed Paradise, California, occurred in a part of Northern California within the state’s SRA, as is most of the state outside of the deserts in Southern California. Some say these fires started in the high chaparral, a bush-like vegetation that is unrelated to forestry management. Perhaps that is the case.

Whatever the facts, no one can question that the fires started in a part of the state for which California itself is wholly responsible for fire protection and that California’s irresponsible forest-management practices are sure to lead to more fires in the future. It’s just a matter of time.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

More stuff should be free.

Thruxton Loc: Indiana / California

I wonder if folks who build their homes in areas likely to burn have to pay premium insurance rates as those who live in flood zones? Are those fire zones identified by insurance companies too?

andesbill

The “controlled” fire that the fire department set in the forest in Naples Everglades area, quickly ran away from them and it took weeks before they gained control. Some few people lost their homes, and it threatened larger developments such as the one I am living in.
The fire department offered to set a controlled burn in the woods just outside our development this year, but our board voted it down after last years problems. Frankly, they had to vote it down. If the fire damaged property in our development, the board would have been sued.
There have been other times when “controlled” burns became uncontrolled, including a huge one last year in New Mexico (I think).
There are no easy solutions.
I am so sorry for all those who lost their lives, and even for the “lucky” ones who lost their possessions.

gerdog

In 2008, just 10 years ago, that part of California was logged in an effort to clear out fuels and make the area safer. That is a fact. Look it up for yourself if you don't believe me. That very act of thinning the forest left more room for grass and weeds and brush and saplings to grow, and those plants burn a lot faster than the old mature trees. It was the speed of the fire moving through the thinned out areas that caused the deaths of those people. More thinning of the forests just isn't the answer, when flaming dry grass and weeds are just as deadly and harder to escape from. The area hadn't had any appreciable precipitation for more than 200 days. No amount of forestry management can easily overcome that, especially when accompanied by high daily temperatures.

rstrick2 Loc: Beverly Hills, FL

It is not just California, I have been going to the Smokey Mountain for last few years and the forest is littered with fallen dead trees and dead brush everywhere. A few years ago they had a major fire which took out much of Gatlinburg,TN. Driving up the road to get into Cades cove is litter by the hundreds dead logs that are down from storms. I am afraid that if a fire started it would be out of control very fast from dead jungle.