Started By
Message

Without human intervention how big would these fires get?

Posted on 11/12/18 at 7:36 am
Posted by al_cajun
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2017
2442 posts
Posted on 11/12/18 at 7:36 am
I wonder how wide spread the fires would get with out human intervention. Do you think it could engulf an entire state?
Posted by CoachChappy
Member since May 2013
32538 posts
Posted on 11/12/18 at 7:37 am to
It would burn most of the state the way God intended.
Posted by Oilfieldbiology
Member since Nov 2016
37513 posts
Posted on 11/12/18 at 7:38 am to
They would get so big that they would engulf the Rockies and spread to the Great Plains and race al the way to the Atlantic, burning down the entire continent of North America. All because we didn’t listen to Al Gore and his inconvenient truth
This post was edited on 11/12/18 at 7:39 am
Posted by jcaz
Laffy
Member since Aug 2014
15619 posts
Posted on 11/12/18 at 7:39 am to
As big as nature intended. I read that most areas naturally see fire every 10-15 years. Circle of life
Posted by Statestreet
Gueydan
Member since Sep 2008
12933 posts
Posted on 11/12/18 at 7:44 am to
Do these fires count against California's Carbon Credits?

Posted by DustyDinkleman
Here
Member since Feb 2012
18176 posts
Posted on 11/12/18 at 7:52 am to
Very big.


But they would do what nature intended and near-future fires wouldn’t be as bad or as expansive.
Posted by ABearsFanNMS
Formerly of tLandmass now in Texas
Member since Oct 2014
17462 posts
Posted on 11/12/18 at 8:24 am to
Too bad there isn’t a way to lessen the impact if properly implemented
Posted by fr33manator
Baton Rouge
Member since Oct 2010
124216 posts
Posted on 11/12/18 at 8:27 am to
Should have been doing controlled burns and these wouldn’t likely be as bad
Posted by Tiger Prawn
Member since Dec 2016
21898 posts
Posted on 11/12/18 at 8:34 am to
quote:

All because we didn’t listen to Al Gore and his inconvenient truth
Posted by BigB0882
Baton Rouge
Member since Nov 2014
5308 posts
Posted on 11/12/18 at 8:48 am to
If nature had its way then there would be fires more often that would naturally act as a buffer for future fires. The fires we have today are so big because we do not allow nature to do what it is supposed to do. There is an interesting TED talk about this somewhere, I will link if I can find it.

LINK
This post was edited on 11/12/18 at 8:51 am
Posted by Mid Iowa Tiger
Undisclosed Secure Location
Member since Feb 2008
18647 posts
Posted on 11/12/18 at 8:49 am to
Depends on what you mean. Without human intervention these fires would have likely been a series of smaller ones to clean up the dead falls over the years. Add to that the (mis)management of water resources and who knows.

You can't isolate this one fire about non-human intervention, but if you tried to play along with that thesis I would say most of Cali would burn at this point.


Way to go enviro wackos.
Posted by arcalades
USA
Member since Feb 2014
19276 posts
Posted on 11/12/18 at 9:44 am to
A lot, if not all, of these fires are the result of the govt banning locals and locales from properly clearing underbrush and other preventive work most states do.
Posted by LSUJuice
Back in Houston
Member since Apr 2004
17670 posts
Posted on 11/12/18 at 9:49 am to
I assumed they routinely do controlled burns. They don't?
Posted by Tridentds
Sugar Land
Member since Aug 2011
20384 posts
Posted on 11/12/18 at 10:17 am to
You would have to really say no human intervention ever. That way fires year to year are able to consume tinder. Human intervention in previous years actually stockpiles flammables and then when a fire gets into these areas they are heavily fueled due to human intervention n the past decade or decades.

As of this moment... taking a snapshot... human intervention is probably helping a reasonable amount but it doesn't really look like it.

Posted by real turf fan
East Tennessee
Member since Dec 2016
8649 posts
Posted on 11/12/18 at 10:44 am to
The Black Dragon Fire in China
took out 1/6 of China's timber reserves.

quote:

May 1987. It was one of the largest wildfires ever to occur, and the largest to strike China in over 300 years. Nearly two-hundred people died in the fires and hundreds more were injured. The fire ended up destroying 18 million acres of forest, including one sixth of China's entire timber reserves


There's a book about it as well.

It was simply huge. BUT the difference was it wasn't in a desert or near desert like the southern CA fires right now. There really isn't timber there to be managed, just shrublands that are parched much of the year.

In northern CA, uncut timber burned as well as to town on the top of a ridge (destined to catch every spark that went by.)

The hot dry winds there are a major problem.

If you remember the eastern fires that hit Gatlinburg TN, there was a small fire and the weather forecast very dry weather and strong winds from the south. Nobody panicked and they should have. It was blow torch conditions. A neighbor working initial clean up (making sure gas lines were closed) brought back an aluminum "icecycle" that looked like melted icecream that had run down hill. No idea what it had been.

Back to Black Dragon. A depressing read about how big a fire can become. the book
Posted by Buryl
Member since Sep 2016
826 posts
Posted on 11/12/18 at 11:15 am to
quote:

A lot, if not all, of these fires are the result of the govt banning locals and locales from properly clearing underbrush and other preventive work most states do.


Do you have a source for that? Having fought fires for years, I can tell you that most landowners won't clear brush even if you paid them to. We used to roll up for structure protection and just laugh - trees right next to houses, wood shingle roofs. I mean how stupid can you be. Oh and there's Literally NOTHING you can do to save a house when 300 foot tall flames from a crown fire are moving through.

The Forest Service DOES do prescribed burning, where possible, but again, every year people would bitch and moan about roads being shut down, the smoke in the air, etc., and we were highly limited due to weather and other factors as to what days we could burn, and there's always a risk that the fire escapes containment.

Fire is just a normal part of the ecosystem, and people have known if for hundreds if not thousands of years. The issue is now we've built cities right in prime burning territory, and for some reason are surprised when, shocking, they burn!

The buildup of fuel hasn't helped, but you can't even blame the enviros for this either. The major shift to suppressing wildfires vs letting them burn happened after the Great Fire of 1910. 3 million acres burned, nearly 80 firefighters killed.

In short, the issue is people.


from widipedia:

quote:

The Great Fire of 1910 cemented and shaped the U.S. Forest Service,[16] which at the time was a newly established department on the verge of cancellation. Before the epic conflagration, there were many debates about the best way to handle forest fires—whether to let them burn because they were a part of nature and were expensive to fight, or to fight them in order to protect the forests.[20] One of the people who fought the fire, Ferdinand A. Silcox, went on to become the fifth chief of the fire service. Influenced by the devastation of the Big Blowup, Silcox promoted the "10 a.m." policy, with the goal of suppressing all fires by 10 a.m. of the day following their report.[21] It was decided that the Forest Service was to prevent and battle every wildfire.[20] More recently, this absolutist attitude to wildfires has been criticized for altering the natural disturbance mechanisms that drive forest ecosystem structure[21], which paradoxically increases the destructive potential of forest fires.
Posted by GetCocky11
Calgary, AB
Member since Oct 2012
51274 posts
Posted on 11/12/18 at 11:17 am to
quote:

Should have been doing controlled burns and these wouldn’t likely be as bad


That is mostly on the federal government since they own most of the forestland in California.
Posted by madmaxvol
Infinity + 1 Posts
Member since Oct 2011
19148 posts
Posted on 11/12/18 at 11:19 am to
quote:

I wonder how wide spread the fires would get with out human intervention. Do you think it could engulf an entire state?



Hard to tell...prior intervention has allowed more growth/fuel to survive earlier fires.
Posted by jbgleason
Bailed out of BTR to God's Country
Member since Mar 2012
18905 posts
Posted on 11/12/18 at 11:23 am to
quote:

All because we didn’t listen to Al Gore and his inconvenient truth


The wacky Governor of CA got on the TV this morning and blamed the entire fire on Global Warming and Pres Trump's policies. I couldn't believe he went there. He said that the droughts will continue across the US and become a threat to human life. All as I was driving through a torrential downpour in Baton Rouge.
Posted by 1MileTiger
Denver, Colorado
Member since Jun 2011
1786 posts
Posted on 11/12/18 at 11:24 am to
The fires would hit natural barriers eventually, or wind directions would push the fire back towards the already burned areas.

The fires wouldn't continue to burn indefinitely. Living in Colorado and spending some time with Yosemite park rangers, you learn the reasons why these fires are getting so big. It was standard practice to squash out these fires as quickly as possible. That leads to overgrowth and massive build up of fuel sources.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram