I think the biggest issue isn't the fires but the drought and high heat. Some places in the sw the trees can't get established and grow back after a burn so the land scape transforms from forest to shrubland or grassland.
-
For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.
2021 Wildfire Season
- Thread starter Tricia
- Start date
Thread Starter
TS
I just had a chance to watch that from start to finish. Just wow!
I live close to it and yet feel like I live too far away to really grasp it.
The smoke and poor air quality has been bothering me for weeks, but I remind myself that my minor inconvenience totally pales in comparing to the rough job performed by fire fighters (including some inmates) and those people who have to leave their homes behind and evacuate.
I worked at CZU fire shelter in Watsonville last fall, what an eye-opening experience. People left home in a hurry without their belongings including important meds, totally displaces and disoriented. Those unlucky ones without family and friends to stay with end up at the county fairgrounds shelter with us, completely away from their comfort zone.
Am reading a book named “Upstream: The Quest to Solve Problems Before They Happen” by Dan Heath. I was surprised to learn the first state to pass child restraint law in traffic safety, a major public health policy, was in Tennesse in 1977. A loophole initially allowed parents to hold babe in arm and many continued to ignore the law until studies showed what a huge difference child seat and seat belt made in kids surviving car crashes. Then all state followed TN’s lead.
Imagine the possibilities and the potential of working together to solve problems upstream rather than blaming who did what in the past…
I worked at CZU fire shelter in Watsonville last fall, what an eye-opening experience. People left home in a hurry without their belongings including important meds, totally displaces and disoriented. Those unlucky ones without family and friends to stay with end up at the county fairgrounds shelter with us, completely away from their comfort zone.
Am reading a book named “Upstream: The Quest to Solve Problems Before They Happen” by Dan Heath. I was surprised to learn the first state to pass child restraint law in traffic safety, a major public health policy, was in Tennesse in 1977. A loophole initially allowed parents to hold babe in arm and many continued to ignore the law until studies showed what a huge difference child seat and seat belt made in kids surviving car crashes. Then all state followed TN’s lead.
Imagine the possibilities and the potential of working together to solve problems upstream rather than blaming who did what in the past…
Last edited:
A peer reviewed study by Harvard on how smoke from wildfires can increase your risk to getting Covid-19 was just published Friday in a science journal.
Biostatistions studied data from 2020 for 90% of the population of California, Oregon, and Washington during last years active fire season.
50 counties in California were in the study. They found a positive correlation between smoke and heightened Covid risk. I was a doubting Thomas on this
but I read the version in the San Francisco Chronicle today Sunday 8/15/21 on page 1 which is very well written So now I'm thinking possibly true.
Some links all to same topic follow !: (Some behind paywalls)
Wildfire Today https://wildfiretoday.com/2021/08/13/smoke-linked-to-thousands-of-covid-19-cases-on-west-coast/ ( summarizes the Chronicle article)
Chronicle https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea...-linked-to-thousands-of-COVID-19-16385466.php
Yubanet (from Harvard)
https://yubanet.com/california/wild...d-19-cases-and-deaths-in-western-u-s-in-2020/
Harvard https://www.seas.harvard.edu/news/2...sands-extra-covid-19-cases-and-deaths-western
Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/clim...says-wildfire-smoke-leads-higher-covid-risks/
Also is in Seattle Times and others
Biostatistions studied data from 2020 for 90% of the population of California, Oregon, and Washington during last years active fire season.
50 counties in California were in the study. They found a positive correlation between smoke and heightened Covid risk. I was a doubting Thomas on this
but I read the version in the San Francisco Chronicle today Sunday 8/15/21 on page 1 which is very well written So now I'm thinking possibly true.
Some links all to same topic follow !: (Some behind paywalls)
Wildfire Today https://wildfiretoday.com/2021/08/13/smoke-linked-to-thousands-of-covid-19-cases-on-west-coast/ ( summarizes the Chronicle article)
Chronicle https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea...-linked-to-thousands-of-COVID-19-16385466.php
Yubanet (from Harvard)
https://yubanet.com/california/wild...d-19-cases-and-deaths-in-western-u-s-in-2020/
Harvard https://www.seas.harvard.edu/news/2...sands-extra-covid-19-cases-and-deaths-western
Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/clim...says-wildfire-smoke-leads-higher-covid-risks/
Also is in Seattle Times and others
Last edited:
If I hadn’t skip as many classes in that seemingly extraneous required environmental epi course in that school, maybe then I can read the actual paper more proficiently.
Science | AAAS
advances.sciencemag.org
Tim, not sure exactly what data you are after so I've attempted to cover the main likely items. If this is not on target then my bad.
If the question is: Are there been fires in those countries I listed? Yes and substantial ones too. Here's a typical new item.
Photos: Wildfires And Flooding Ravage Some Countries Of The Mediterranean
The photos do a better job of conveying what's happening than any words.
Hopefully you'd be across what is happening in BC, Canada. (I'm very aware of it as my son lives very close to one of the biggest ones.)
Siberia’s wildfires are bigger than all the world’s other blazes combined
If the question is: Have those regions had high temps? Again, yes.
And again, no doubt you are aware of the hot temps in PNW and BC.
If the question is related to fuel reduction then please note that after Australia has one of these big bush fire events (and 2019/20 was a real doozy) the powers that be hold a Royal Commission of Investigation. (Royal as we still have a Queen - the same one as Great Britain.) These RCs are a big deal here - essentially it's like a coronial inquest on steroids.
Here's the report from the RC after the 2019/20 bush fires.
Royal Commission into National Natural Disaster Arrangements
Good read when you are having a sleepless night.
The bit that relevant to fuel reduction (or fuel management as it is termed here) is around page 371.
Short answer - it's complicated. It may help, but all bets are off when it gets really hot, dry and windy.
Longer answer in some relevant extracts:
Fuel load management, including prescribed burning, can materially reduce the risk...
The amount of prescribed burning in the landscape (independent of the placement or arrangement of treatments) can materially affect the extent of bushfires. However, the evidence also suggests that the effectiveness of prescribed burning varies in different ecosystems and climates.
The effects of fuel load management in reducing bushfire impacts and enhancing the effectiveness of suppression and other mitigation measures is relatively short-lived. Generally, fuel loads re-accumulate relatively quickly in Australian forests, meaning fuel load management activities must be done reasonably regularly to be effective in mitigating risk. Consistent with this, research suggests that prescribed burning is most effective in reducing the severity of bushfires in the first 1-4 years post-treatment. Depending on the severity of the weather and forest type, it can aid suppression for up to approximately 15 years.
Weather has the greatest influence on bushfire behaviour and that, as fire weather conditions deteriorate, the influence of fuels declines. This means that the benefits of fuel load management activities also decline as fire weather conditions deteriorate. Research suggests that most bushfire-related impacts on lives and property in Australia have occurred in severe, extreme or catastrophic fire weather conditions.
In ordinary fires, there is generally a well-defined contagious fire front, with a relatively narrow band of flaming activity that delineates the unburnt fuel ahead of the fire from the burn fuel behind it. The research suggests that the behaviour of these fires, including their intensity and rate of spread, is a function of the prevailing environmental conditions, particularly weather, topography and fuels.
In extreme bushfires, the fire behaviour is no longer solely a function of the environmental conditions. These fires generate their own behaviour by interacting with the surrounding atmosphere. This results in fire behaviours that are difficult to predict.
We heard that, in extreme bushfires, fuel loads do not appear to have a material impact on fire behaviour.
In discussing the efficacy of their fuel management arrangements, state and territory agencies emphasised that the fires they were dealing with during the 2019-2020 season often occurred under severe, extreme and catastrophic conditions. For example, we heard that of the six major fire incidents that occurred in SA, ‘each of those occurred under catastrophic or extreme fire conditions. And… there are limitations on the success of hazard reduction preparation activities as the fire danger index increases’. Any assessment of fuel management efforts needs to be considered in this context.
There's a great more in there about fuel management and prescribed burning however this extract nicely places it in perspective.
We heard many perspectives from public submissions that describe prescribed burning as, in effect, a panacea – a solution to bushfire risk. It is not.
Last edited:
In all truthfulness, the vast millions and millions of acres of forest land would be impossible to “clear fuel from”.
I’m sitting here in orange/red AQI, hundreds of miles ( or more) from any large fires, feeling pretty defeated that my daughter is playing in a high school tennis match today. Why are they not canceling these events just like they would for rain? She is varsity singles as a freshman. She’s an important piece of the team. She loves to play, and has overcome a lot of personal challenges to reach this level. I told her to forfeit if she starts to feel her breathing compromised. I don’t know what else to do.
The mountain west is quickly becoming quite uninhabitable during the summer months.
I’m sitting here in orange/red AQI, hundreds of miles ( or more) from any large fires, feeling pretty defeated that my daughter is playing in a high school tennis match today. Why are they not canceling these events just like they would for rain? She is varsity singles as a freshman. She’s an important piece of the team. She loves to play, and has overcome a lot of personal challenges to reach this level. I told her to forfeit if she starts to feel her breathing compromised. I don’t know what else to do.
The mountain west is quickly becoming quite uninhabitable during the summer months.
Thread Starter
TS
I was thinking about this on my way back from the grocery store, looking up at Peavine.
To the point you made. You know how much vegetation there is on Peavine Peak.
Well, the Poeville fire last year is an example of what you're talking about.
Poeville Fire Before and After
Snowboard Bench. Before: After: Scrubbrush. Before: After: Access to Mahogany Forest. Before: After: Thank you Biggest Little Trail Stewardship for the "After" pics
www.skitalk.com
Thread Starter
TS
IMHO if the AQI is above 50 they should reconsider outdoor activities for all ages. If its above 100 they should be required to cancel.
This is a quick shot of the AQI in your area.
Last edited:
Yeah, you don’t need a forest for a fire. And mesquite/piñon pine are great fuels….burn like crazy. We used to use them in campfires back when we could do campfires out west.
In the Australian bush, they have a bush/grass called spinifex. (Not sure I spelled it right). That stuff burned like crazy. We used to use it as a firestarter (relied on camp fires for cooking food there for 4 months).
And you can’t…well, should not, clear that scrub. it prevents erosion and preserves what moisture is left in the soil. Not to mention is a vital part of the habitat/biosphere.
I need to go find some links, but I’ve read that controlled burns in the American West, which are often used to prevent fires by copying what nature does, have become nearly impossible because it’s just too dry,
IMHO if the AQI is above 50 they should reconsider outdoor activities for all ages. If its above 100 they should be required to cancel.
^This. Very much this. At these particulate levels, the damage is done long before anyone feels compromised.
Jesus.IMHO if the AQI is above 50 they should reconsider outdoor activities for all ages. If its above 100 they should be required to cancel.
This is a quick shot of the AQI in your area.
View attachment 139988
She should be brave and forfeit. Not worth it!
This map requires a WTF.I see I'm not the only one thinking this.
Oh man. I feel for all you guys. As the fires aren’t likely to be out soon, hopefully there will be a change in the jet stream.
^"684"? Is that even allowed?
I would really like to see an actual correlation done between PM2.5/PM10 AQI numbers and snowfall data.
I don't think high PM AQI in areas with historically high snowfall is an accident or a coincidence. Read: places where one would want to move to for skiing are suspect for high AQI in summer because of the same atmospheric mechanisms.
I would really like to see an actual correlation done between PM2.5/PM10 AQI numbers and snowfall data.
I don't think high PM AQI in areas with historically high snowfall is an accident or a coincidence. Read: places where one would want to move to for skiing are suspect for high AQI in summer because of the same atmospheric mechanisms.
It would seem that anything above 500 would be “500+” but I don’t know how those sensors are calibrated.
That would be an eye-opening study, indeed. But do the same atmospheric mechanisms hold in both summer and winter?
Determining the strength of seasonal changes is the one major free variable left; the correlation of snowfall to both intentional and unintentional particulate matter seeding is relatively well researched.
At this point I'm thinking of AQI>500 like octane numbers and imaginary numbers - artifacts to make the math work out.
I mean no one's seen either e^iwt or 102% octane liquid concentrations.
Last edited:
The attitude about protecting kids from bad AQ here correlates with the attitudes about protecting them from Covid. I hate to say it but it’s true.
It creates a real conundrum as a parent.
It creates a real conundrum as a parent.
But you can SEE bad air quality. The pictures I’ve seen on this thread remind me of some cities we visited in China. And that air was awful.