http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...183125,00.html
Worst ahead for fires in West
Experts: Complex factors at work
By Theo Stein
Denver Post Environment Writer
Sunday, February 16, 2003 - The worst is yet to come for fire-prone
areas of the Rocky Mountain West, the nation's top fire historian
says.
But forest thinning and restoration programs are helping Westerners
rethink their uneasy relationship with one of nature's most
spectacular and important ecologic processes.
"I think it's probably working its way out," said Arizona State
University professor Stephen Pyne at a symposium on the role of
science in ecosystem management in the American West.
"Lots of communities are already taking steps to reduce fire danger in
their neighborhoods. We're watching the crest of this wave, and the
next five or six years will see the worst of it. Then I think we'll
increasingly see people start to view fire as a routine problem
instead of a crisis."
But like the other speakers on the panel at the American Association
for the Advancement of Science annual meeting, Pyne agreed that
Westerners have a rough road in front of them.
"We don't have one fire problem in the West; we have many fire
problems in the West," said Pyne, a Fulbright scholar whose books have
made him among the most respected experts on the relationship between
people and wildfire.
Climate change will bring warmer weather and frequent droughts to the
already dry West, amplifying fire cycles and overwhelming federal and
state programs designed to limit the danger to rural residents, said
University of Idaho professor Penelope Morgan.
While the cause of climate change is still debated in political
circles, Morgan is among the majority of scientists who believe the
fossil fuel economy is making it worse.
"Human-induced climate change is very real and will have a major
impact on fires," said Morgan, who pointed to one study that showed
Canada has already experienced a dramatic surge in acreage burned
during the past few decades, which have been the warmest in the past
1,000 years.
The underlying reason the West burns so furiously is simple: Forests
become choked with flammable debris because it's too cold or too dry
for the dead wood and downed trees to rot.
But fires themselves are the product of complex interaction among
precipitation, forest growth, wind and human activities.
National firefighting policies have largely eliminated the small- and
medium-sized fires that used to clean out dead and downed wood during
presettlement times, Morgan said. Those policies set the stage for the
spectacular conflagrations that have hit the West roughly every two
years since Yellowstone burned in 1988.
"One of the most interesting paradoxes is once we suppress a fire, the
next one often burns more intensely," Morgan added.
Wildfires are only one contact point in the slow-motion collision
between society's demands and ecological reality in the arid West,
said Gary Machlis, a senior scientist with the National Park Service.
But the intensity and frequency of big fires has made them a major
political issue.
Adapting to the environmental limits is a process that will bring
disruption and dislocation, Machlis said.
"We may be in one of those exceedingly brief periods in history which
will influence future natural resource policies for a very long time,"
he added.
University of Colorado historian Patricia Limerick said scientists can
help society change gears by providing policymakers with a range of
options that show the true costs and benefits of their actions.
"When shifting paradigms, it's important to use the clutch," Limerick
observed.
One of the dangers confronting policymakers is the temptation to look
for simplistic solutions to complicated problems, said University of
Washington professor Jerry Franklin, who conducted pioneering ecologic
studies following the Mount St. Helens eruption in 1980 and the
Yellowstone fires of 1988.
For example, thinning to reduce fire danger may be smart policy for
ponderosa pine systems, but not high-elevation forests.
And he criticized a Bush administration plan to let loggers cut big
trees in payment for thinning forests.
"That's like saying you have to destroy the village in order to save
it," Franklin said. "It's absolutely inappropriate."
"Larry Caldwell" wrote in message
...
(Alastair McDonald) writes:
"Larry Caldwell" wrote in message
The problem with journalists is that they are too stupid or ignorant
to
say anything intelligent.
The underlying reason the West burns so furiously is simple: Forests
become choked with flammable debris because it's too cold or too dry
for the dead wood and downed trees to rot.
See what I mean?
No! That was said by Arizona State University professor Stephen
Pyne. It was only reported by the Stein, and I have no reason to
believe inaccurately. The sooner you face up to the fact that GW
is happening, then perhaps you will be able to read what is written,
not what your blind prejudice would prefer to see.
Where did the global warming crap come in? The recent catastrophic fires
in the West were not caused by global warming, they were caused by
overcrowded and dying forests. The entire West, except a thin band along
the coast, gets dry enough to burn every year, and always has. The
problem is becoming extreme because the American public despises the land
and refuses to care for it. The vast public holdings in the west are
treated by political spoils by whichever party wins the most recent
election.
So it is the politicians who are burning the forests. Perhaps you should
read what was written again.
http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,...183125,00.html
Worst ahead for fires in West
Experts: Complex factors at work
By Theo Stein
Denver Post Environment Writer
Sunday, February 16, 2003 - The worst is yet to come for fire-prone
areas of the Rocky Mountain West, the nation's top fire historian
says.
But forest thinning and restoration programs are helping Westerners
rethink their uneasy relationship with one of nature's most
spectacular and important ecologic processes.
"I think it's probably working its way out," said Arizona State
University professor Stephen Pyne at a symposium on the role of
science in ecosystem management in the American West.
"Lots of communities are already taking steps to reduce fire danger in
their neighborhoods. We're watching the crest of this wave, and the
next five or six years will see the worst of it. Then I think we'll
increasingly see people start to view fire as a routine problem
instead of a crisis."
But like the other speakers on the panel at the American Association
for the Advancement of Science annual meeting, Pyne agreed that
Westerners have a rough road in front of them.
"We don't have one fire problem in the West; we have many fire
problems in the West," said Pyne, a Fulbright scholar whose books have
made him among the most respected experts on the relationship between
people and wildfire.
Climate change will bring warmer weather and frequent droughts to the
already dry West, amplifying fire cycles and overwhelming federal and
state programs designed to limit the danger to rural residents, said
University of Idaho professor Penelope Morgan.
While the cause of climate change is still debated in political
circles, Morgan is among the majority of scientists who believe the
fossil fuel economy is making it worse.
"Human-induced climate change is very real and will have a major
impact on fires," said Morgan, who pointed to one study that showed
Canada has already experienced a dramatic surge in acreage burned
during the past few decades, which have been the warmest in the past
1,000 years.
The underlying reason the West burns so furiously is simple: Forests
become choked with flammable debris because it's too cold or too dry
for the dead wood and downed trees to rot.
But fires themselves are the product of complex interaction among
precipitation, forest growth, wind and human activities.
National firefighting policies have largely eliminated the small- and
medium-sized fires that used to clean out dead and downed wood during
presettlement times, Morgan said. Those policies set the stage for the
spectacular conflagrations that have hit the West roughly every two
years since Yellowstone burned in 1988.
"One of the most interesting paradoxes is once we suppress a fire, the
next one often burns more intensely," Morgan added.
Wildfires are only one contact point in the slow-motion collision
between society's demands and ecological reality in the arid West,
said Gary Machlis, a senior scientist with the National Park Service.
But the intensity and frequency of big fires has made them a major
political issue.
Adapting to the environmental limits is a process that will bring
disruption and dislocation, Machlis said.
"We may be in one of those exceedingly brief periods in history which
will influence future natural resource policies for a very long time,"
he added.
University of Colorado historian Patricia Limerick said scientists can
help society change gears by providing policymakers with a range of
options that show the true costs and benefits of their actions.
"When shifting paradigms, it's important to use the clutch," Limerick
observed.
One of the dangers confronting policymakers is the temptation to look
for simplistic solutions to complicated problems, said University of
Washington professor Jerry Franklin, who conducted pioneering ecologic
studies following the Mount St. Helens eruption in 1980 and the
Yellowstone fires of 1988.
For example, thinning to reduce fire danger may be smart policy for
ponderosa pine systems, but not high-elevation forests.
And he criticized a Bush administration plan to let loggers cut big
trees in payment for thinning forests.
"That's like saying you have to destroy the village in order to save
it," Franklin said. "It's absolutely inappropriate."
Whomever this ASU prof is, he was either misquoted or he is an ignorant
idiot. Whichever the case, the statement is false.
He is a Fulbright scholar, and he is backed up by Professor Penelope
Morgan, Professor Jerry Franklin, and Gary Machlis, a senior scientist with
the National Park Service. I don't think it is Stein who is the ignorant
idiot! I can think of one or TWO others!
HTH,
Cheers, Alastair.