MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
No doubt, some environmentalists take it too far. But the only way to avoid these types of fires is to not develop in these areas that are in or border wilderness like Big Sur and the North Coast.
Ok California. Now what?
- Thread starter quad decade guy
- Start date
Thebrownblob
Well-Known Member
No disagreement for me, and if people want to develop their, they should take on all the liability and responsibility. If California thought home insurance rates were high now I can only imagine what they’re going to be in the next year or two.
BrownFlush
Woke Racist Reigning Ban King
oldngray
nowhere special
Fred's Myth
Nonhyphenated American
Got it!
Californians are hand-wringers, lacking foresight and the ability to address known dangers.
That explains why Pelosi, Schiff, and Newsom are still in office.
It didn't literally take hours. It started in the early morning, burned all day, and burned overnight and.into the next day and is still burning in some places. It didn't all go up at once and we'll never know if it could've been contained because they quickly ran out of water and 200 hydrants never even had water.
oldngray
nowhere special
They should have pre positioned fire trucks to high risk fire areas. They could have got to most of the fires before they became a problem if they had done that. Or had refilled the reservoirs before fire season would have certainly helped too.
They knew there would be fires yet totally failed to prepare for them.
You keep saying all the forests in California to deflect from the issue of keeping the forests near the metro areas clear of underbrush. Fires do not exist on their own. They need fuel. When you see the huge flames in California it isn't just the trees burning. If you don't remove the underbrush and dead wood but let them accumulate then eventually when a fire starts it's much bigger, much more intense, and much deadlier.
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
Could better brush clearance have helped slow the spread of the Palisades fire?
As the Palisades fire raged, critics blamed overgrown vegetation for driving its spread. But some scientists and fire officials say removing it may not have made much of a difference, and also risks making the landscape more flammable in the long run.
www.latimes.com
Vegetation management efforts are typically most effective when firefighters are able to take advantage of the reduced fire intensity they provide to snuff out flames.
Advertisement
In this case, Fennessy said, fire was blowing sideways from house to house, with the structures themselves serving as fuel. The winds grounded firefighting aircraft. And firefighters on the ground were focused on getting people out of the path of the fast-moving inferno as it burned deeply into communities.
California
The L.A. fire victims: Who they were
Jan. 15, 2025Several experts noted that the intense gusts lofted embers miles from the fire front, essentially spreading flames through the air — not by brush. They also pointed out that landscape-level fuel reduction, in which brush is cut back over large swaths of land, is controversial in Southern California’s sensitive coastal ecosystems.
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
There's literally millions of acres of forests and brush in California.
Almost as if they wanted it all to burn.
I don't know if it's feasible but I wonder if when they rebuild they could put in a sprinkler system in that could be turned on during fires? Have a sprinkler head on a high pole every so many yards up and down every street and in alleys between houses?
"Some." As in some environmentalists trying to protect certain plants and some fire officials trying to CYA. Notice the last part of the paragraph about controversy. Already had the fire chief discussing lack of personnel and trucks. Budget cuts.Fennessy said.Could better brush clearance have helped slow the spread of the Palisades fire?
As the Palisades fire raged, critics blamed overgrown vegetation for driving its spread. But some scientists and fire officials say removing it may not have made much of a difference, and also risks making the landscape more flammable in the long run.
Vegetation management efforts are typically most effective when firefighters are able to take advantage of the reduced fire intensity they provide to snuff out flames.
Advertisement
In this case, Fennessy said, fire was blowing sideways from house to house, with the structures themselves serving as fuel. The winds grounded firefighting aircraft. And firefighters on the ground were focused on getting people out of the path of the fast-moving inferno as it burned deeply into communities.
California
The L.A. fire victims: Who they were
Jan. 15, 2025
Several experts noted that the intense gusts lofted embers miles from the fire front, essentially spreading flames through the air — not by brush. They also pointed out that landscape-level fuel reduction, in which brush is cut back over large swaths of land, is controversial in Southern California’s sensitive coastal ecosystems.
oldngray
nowhere special
Sprinklers would probably be impractical. Clearing the brush to remove fuel sources is most likely the best strategy. But the environmentalists would rather do nothing and let it burn.
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
Yeah, thousands of firefighters, engines, aircraft and they wanted it to burn. You Trumpers are
ing delusional.I get it now. The Pacific Palisades community would've still burned down if there was a fire 300 miles away because "there's literally millions of acres of forests and brush in California."There's literally millions of acres of forests and brush in California.
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
Could better brush clearance have helped slow the spread of the Palisades fire?
A home is consumed by flames from the Palisades fire, which ignited Jan. 7 amid hurricane-force winds, with gusts of up to 100 mph recorded in some areas.
(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)
By Alex WigglesworthStaff Writer
Jan. 13, 2025 3 AM PT
- Share
- 115
- Destruction from the Palisades fire could have been tempered had officials cleared brush in wildland areas, which could have slowed its spread, some critics say
- Fire officials and others dispute those claims, saying bone-dry conditions and fierce winds made the fire unstoppable.
“We knew the winds were coming. We knew that there was brush that needed to be cleared 20 years ago,” Rick Caruso, the developer and former Los Angeles mayoral candidate, told The Times. “This fire could have been mitigated — maybe not prevented.”
Elon Musk wrote on X that the “biggest factor, in my opinion, is that crazy environmental regulations prevent building firebreaks and clearing brush near houses.” And actress-producer Sara Foster chimed in with an X post saying “our vegetation was overgrown, brush not cleared.”
Did these and other second-guessers have a point? Scientists, wildfire specialists and firefighting officials had differing viewpoints. But several of these experts — including strong proponents of brush clearance — said that the winds fanning the flames were so fierce, and ground conditions so dry, that clearing more shrubs wouldn’t have had a significant effect.
Advertisement
“All of the brush clearance, fuel breaks — they’re very effective on what we would consider a normal day,” said Chief Brian Fennessy of the Orange County Fire Authority. “But what you’re talking about here is probably less than 1% of all the fires that we respond to in Southern California.”
The Palisades fire ignited Jan. 7 amid hurricane-force winds, with gusts of up to 100 mph recorded in some areas.
“You could have put a 10-lane freeway in front of that fire and it would not have slowed it one bit,” Fennessy said.
Vegetation management efforts are typically most effective when firefighters are able to take advantage of the reduced fire intensity they provide to snuff out flames.
ADVERTISING
In this case, Fennessy said, fire was blowing sideways from house to house, with the structures themselves serving as fuel. The winds grounded firefighting aircraft. And firefighters on the ground were focused on getting people out of the path of the fast-moving inferno as it burned deeply into communities.
California
The L.A. fire victims: Who they were
Jan. 15, 2025Several experts noted that the intense gusts lofted embers miles from the fire front, essentially spreading flames through the air — not by brush. They also pointed out that landscape-level fuel reduction, in which brush is cut back over large swaths of land, is controversial in Southern California’s sensitive coastal ecosystems.
In the forests of Northern California and the Sierra Nevada, large blazes are often stoked by a buildup of trees and brush that accumulated due to decades of fire suppression. Removing some of that vegetation can help make those forests both more fire-resilient and healthier, since an abundance of plants competing for finite resources makes the ecosystem more sensitive to drought, said Patrick T. Brown, co-director of the climate and energy team at the Breakthrough Institute, an environmental think tank.
Modeling by the nonprofit suggests that clearing brush — and thus eliminating fuel — can reduce the intensity of wildfires in the Los Angeles Basin even during extreme weather, Brown said, although it’s not likely to have prevented the kind of destruction Pacific Palisades is experiencing now.
Science & Medicine
How to protect yourself from the smoke caused by L.A. wildfires
Jan. 8, 2025At the same time, he said, unlike in forested areas, fuel reduction in the region’s chaparral shrublands risks harming the ecosystem rather than making it healthier.
That’s because the Santa Monica mountains, Malibu canyons and other wildland areas near coastal Los Angeles generally burn too frequently, said Alexandra Syphard, senior research ecologist at the nonprofit Conservation Biology Institute and adjunct professor at San Diego State University.
Advertisement
That’s caused native evergreen chaparral shrubs, which take several years to mature and make new seeds, to be replaced by invasive annual grasses that die in the early summer and catch fire more easily, said Helen Holmlund, biology professor at Pepperdine University.
“That promotes more frequent fires which, in turn, leads to more loss of chaparral shrubs and more invasive species,” she said.
Large-scale attempts to preemptively thin or burn these coastal areas could therefore actually make the landscape more flammable in the long run, said Max Moritz, a cooperative extension wildfire specialist at UC Santa Barbara.
“Those are trade-offs that, as a society, you have to think about if they’re worthwhile,” Moritz said.
I did say almost.... ttkuYeah, thousands of firefighters, engines, aircraft and they wanted it to burn. You Trumpers are
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
That's the claim from every Trump wacko on every California wildfire, regardless where it is.I get it now. The Pacific Palisades community would've still burned down if there was a fire 300 miles away because "there's literally millions of acres of forests and brush in California."
Yah, let's not clear the underbrush that we admit would help in a normal fire because there's a 1% chance that under the right conditions it wouldn't matter anyways. That's some interesting logic. Trying to deflect from the fact that environmentalists in the area prevent proven forest management techniques because they might harm certain plants and animals. Let's not even mention the governor of the state is letting water run off into the ocean instead of filling reservoirs.Could better brush clearance have helped slow the spread of the Palisades fire?
A home is consumed by flames from the Palisades fire, which ignited Jan. 7 amid hurricane-force winds, with gusts of up to 100 mph recorded in some areas.
(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)
By Alex WigglesworthStaff Writer
Jan. 13, 2025 3 AM PT
- Share
- 115
The allegations flew as fast as the flames. The Palisades fire raging through the coastal mountains of Los Angeles, rich and powerful critics said, wouldn’t have been quite so devastating had authorities done a better job of clearing hillside brush.
- Destruction from the Palisades fire could have been tempered had officials cleared brush in wildland areas, which could have slowed its spread, some critics say
- Fire officials and others dispute those claims, saying bone-dry conditions and fierce winds made the fire unstoppable.
“We knew the winds were coming. We knew that there was brush that needed to be cleared 20 years ago,” Rick Caruso, the developer and former Los Angeles mayoral candidate, told The Times. “This fire could have been mitigated — maybe not prevented.”
Elon Musk wrote on X that the “biggest factor, in my opinion, is that crazy environmental regulations prevent building firebreaks and clearing brush near houses.” And actress-producer Sara Foster chimed in with an X post saying “our vegetation was overgrown, brush not cleared.”
Did these and other second-guessers have a point? Scientists, wildfire specialists and firefighting officials had differing viewpoints. But several of these experts — including strong proponents of brush clearance — said that the winds fanning the flames were so fierce, and ground conditions so dry, that clearing more shrubs wouldn’t have had a significant effect.
Advertisement
“All of the brush clearance, fuel breaks — they’re very effective on what we would consider a normal day,” said Chief Brian Fennessy of the Orange County Fire Authority. “But what you’re talking about here is probably less than 1% of all the fires that we respond to in Southern California.”
The Palisades fire ignited Jan. 7 amid hurricane-force winds, with gusts of up to 100 mph recorded in some areas.
“You could have put a 10-lane freeway in front of that fire and it would not have slowed it one bit,” Fennessy said.
Vegetation management efforts are typically most effective when firefighters are able to take advantage of the reduced fire intensity they provide to snuff out flames.
ADVERTISING
In this case, Fennessy said, fire was blowing sideways from house to house, with the structures themselves serving as fuel. The winds grounded firefighting aircraft. And firefighters on the ground were focused on getting people out of the path of the fast-moving inferno as it burned deeply into communities.
California
The L.A. fire victims: Who they were
Jan. 15, 2025
Several experts noted that the intense gusts lofted embers miles from the fire front, essentially spreading flames through the air — not by brush. They also pointed out that landscape-level fuel reduction, in which brush is cut back over large swaths of land, is controversial in Southern California’s sensitive coastal ecosystems.
In the forests of Northern California and the Sierra Nevada, large blazes are often stoked by a buildup of trees and brush that accumulated due to decades of fire suppression. Removing some of that vegetation can help make those forests both more fire-resilient and healthier, since an abundance of plants competing for finite resources makes the ecosystem more sensitive to drought, said Patrick T. Brown, co-director of the climate and energy team at the Breakthrough Institute, an environmental think tank.
Modeling by the nonprofit suggests that clearing brush — and thus eliminating fuel — can reduce the intensity of wildfires in the Los Angeles Basin even during extreme weather, Brown said, although it’s not likely to have prevented the kind of destruction Pacific Palisades is experiencing now.
Science & Medicine
How to protect yourself from the smoke caused by L.A. wildfires
Jan. 8, 2025
At the same time, he said, unlike in forested areas, fuel reduction in the region’s chaparral shrublands risks harming the ecosystem rather than making it healthier.
That’s because the Santa Monica mountains, Malibu canyons and other wildland areas near coastal Los Angeles generally burn too frequently, said Alexandra Syphard, senior research ecologist at the nonprofit Conservation Biology Institute and adjunct professor at San Diego State University.
Advertisement
That’s caused native evergreen chaparral shrubs, which take several years to mature and make new seeds, to be replaced by invasive annual grasses that die in the early summer and catch fire more easily, said Helen Holmlund, biology professor at Pepperdine University.
“That promotes more frequent fires which, in turn, leads to more loss of chaparral shrubs and more invasive species,” she said.
Large-scale attempts to preemptively thin or burn these coastal areas could therefore actually make the landscape more flammable in the long run, said Max Moritz, a cooperative extension wildfire specialist at UC Santa Barbara.
“Those are trade-offs that, as a society, you have to think about if they’re worthwhile,” Moritz said.
Not so. No one is saying go to remote areas and clear brush. They are saying manage forests near housing. But environmental wackos are preventing it in court.