https://www.msn.com/en-us/weat...b3ef7a917051d1&ei=17

Massive Canadian wildfire leaves town "burned to the ground"
Story by Li Cohen • 7h • 4 min read


===============================================

The last time I drove to Alaska and back, three years ago as I recall, in September, I drove through Jasper entering through the west side, then drove through the park going south.

There was a huge wildfire north of Jasper, smoke bellowing high and wide.

The wind currents blew that smoke south and it followed me through Montana. Also there were several wildfires in the western states. I kept thinking I could drive out of it going south. I gave up and turned east and didn't get out of the smoke until eastern Kansas or so.

===========================================

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...b3ef7a917051d1&ei=50

Air tanker plane fighting Oregon ‘mega-fire’ disappears, officials say
Story by Cecilia Nowell • 5h • 2 min read

Wildfires are a part of life for us, along with most of the western states, every year. We've had two weeks of high temps between 95 and 105 degrees. Fortunately, a lack of strong winds has allowed lightning-caused fires to be successfully fought. Jasper was not so lucky. We work constantly to try and remove fuels around the place and keep equipment and water available all summer. In the last thirty four years, I have had to jump on one lightning strike and one human caused fire. In both cases, we were able to control them before they got away. Bill.

I was there just a couple of weeks ago. What a shame.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
I was there just a couple of weeks ago. What a shame.

So was I! Took a drive down through the ice fields. I had not been to the ice fields for 65 years. The glacier used to be right at the highway. It's still a nice drive. Bill

The number of current fires across Canada and US are shown on this map. And the season is yet early.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/weat...e59329787cef7f&ei=20

US and Canada wildfires map shows where blazes are raging
Story by Jessica Kwong • 2h • 2 min read

A good sized fire just blew up about 20 miles north of me. Up until today we had been very lucky, we had lots of snow and a nice wet spring but not much moisture since then. Pretty crunchy out there walking in the forest. We need more rain in a bad way.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
A good sized fire just blew up about 20 miles north of me. Up until today we had been very lucky, we had lots of snow and a nice wet spring but not much moisture since then. Pretty crunchy out there walking in the forest. We need more rain in a bad way.

That we do.


Several times in the past 2 weeks we can’t even see the foothills let alone the mountains.


I hope they were able to get Air Attack and Heliattack crews in there ASAP to try and get a handle on it while they truck the hand crews in to the trailheads.


I was up in Breckenridge last week and the hillsides and the hillsides near the tunnel look like the would go up from harsh la gauge and a dirty look.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
A good sized fire just blew up about 20 miles north of me. Up until today we had been very lucky, we had lots of snow and a nice wet spring but not much moisture since then. Pretty crunchy out there walking in the forest. We need more rain in a bad way.

You need some chainsaws and cows.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
A good sized fire just blew up about 20 miles north of me. Up until today we had been very lucky, we had lots of snow and a nice wet spring but not much moisture since then. Pretty crunchy out there walking in the forest. We need more rain in a bad way.

You need some chainsaws and cows.

The dimwits in the USFS won’t allow all of that fuel to be cleared.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Leeper:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
I was there just a couple of weeks ago. What a shame.

So was I! Took a drive down through the ice fields. I had not been to the ice fields for 65 years. The glacier used to be right at the highway. It's still a nice drive. Bill

We rode the train from Vancouver to Jasper and then to Lake Louise. Gorgeous country.

quote:

Originally posted by Hasher:


The dimwits in the USFS won’t allow all of that fuel to be cleared.

Way more complicated than that. Much of what needs to be cut is located on extremely steep slopes and has very little timber value. On the steep canyons around here they have done some, not nearly enough, fire mitigation and they have to pay to have it done. These areas are simply not money makers for timber extraction.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:

quote:

Originally posted by Hasher:


The dimwits in the USFS won’t allow all of that fuel to be cleared.

Way more complicated than that. Much of what needs to be cut is located on extremely steep slopes and has very little timber value. On the steep canyons around here they have done some, not nearly enough, fire mitigation and they have to pay to have it done. These areas are simply not money makers for timber extraction.

I never said anything. About timber extraction.

Even if it was viable so much of CO is chicom beetle kill it’s worthless.



The state and USFS need to do mitigation. It’s expensive but it needs to be accomplished.

The USFS has been intentionally underfunded for decades, yes it needs to be done and some money has recently been allocated but not nearly enough. The agency needs more funding to accomplish what needs to be done, currently a huge portion of the USFS budget is spent on fighting fires.

https://www.doi.gov/pressrelea...ation-and-resilience

https://www.fs.usda.gov/about-...in%20the%20future%3F

I haven't done the trip out west for three years but I figure the change in the forests hasn't gotten better but worse instead. The beetle kill trees has been bad for many years, all over the west. But in particular it's been bad in Jasper/Banff NP, all over Alberta, BC and Yukon, and Alaska too.

I know about the argument that the fires aren't related to climate change or beetle kill, but wind and dry conditions instead.

I say BS to that rationale. Fires start with a spark, like lightening or campfire or in some cases intentional. A controlled burn could get away too. And BTW, controlled burns are used where they can be controlled, mostly. Those vase areas of beetle kill up north are not logistically where so-called "controlled burn" is possible.

But once started, dry conditions and wind certainly contribute. But fire needs fuel. Obviously dry trees from beetle kill and so much of it is a big factor.

As Leeper said, forest fires happen every year out west. But conditions are worse due to fuel.

That leads the variables down to one question, for starters. Why is there more fuel? Then the logical questions/answers follow.

quote:

Originally posted by Hasher:
The dimwits in the USFS won’t allow all of that fuel to be cleared.

quote:

Originally posted by Hasher:

I never said anything. About timber extraction.

Even if it was viable so much of CO is chicom beetle kill it’s worthless.

The state and USFS need to do mitigation. It’s expensive but it needs to be accomplished.

I tried looking up what a "chicom beetle" is and didn't find a definition.

Also, what "mitigation"?

I've already explained and Steve explained why that's not practical or even possible except maybe on small areas around communities. But what good did it do for Jasper, for example?

I think this situation is going to continue for many more years, until perhaps the fuel is burned up, reduced, and maybe the prominent species of trees resistant or immune to beetle kill takes over.

Try Chinese Beetle.


Pretty sure West Tiwanese beetle won’t work.

quote:

Originally posted by Hasher:
Try Chinese Beetle.


Pretty sure West Tiwanese beetle won’t work.

There you go, again:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulomoides_dermestoides

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
The USFS has been intentionally underfunded for decades, yes it needs to be done and some money has recently been allocated but not nearly enough. The agency needs more funding to accomplish what needs to be done, currently a huge portion of the USFS budget is spent on fighting fires.

https://www.doi.gov/pressrelea...ation-and-resilience

https://www.fs.usda.gov/about-...in%20the%20future%3F

Which blows my mind! BLOWS MY MIND!

How do we really justify the reactive fighting fires instead of the proactive fighting fires? I looked it up a couple years ago and I don't remember the details, but the amount of carbon emissions pumped into the atmosphere by California wildfires far exceeded and clean air goals they hoped for with smog control on autos and killing natural gas appliances.

Why don't they get it?!?!?!?!

Burn some diesel in the tractors, burn some two stroke oil in the chainsaws, add some cow farts from public land lease grazing and in the end win the Clean Air Wars. It's hard for me to believe that anyone on any side of the equation can view an entire mountain of beetle kill and not think it should be cleared.

I remember somebody saying or reading somewhere years ago that the Oregon elk in the area of Mt St Helens boomed in population after the eruption. The "clear cut" of the volcano opened up huge swaths of previously unusable forage for the elk.

What kind of suicidal narcissism does it take to prefer to see a forest immolated rather than managed and logged/ grazed?

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
The USFS has been intentionally underfunded for decades, yes it needs to be done and some money has recently been allocated but not nearly enough. The agency needs more funding to accomplish what needs to be done, currently a huge portion of the USFS budget is spent on fighting fires.

https://www.doi.gov/pressrelea...ation-and-resilience

https://www.fs.usda.gov/about-...in%20the%20future%3F

Which blows my mind! BLOWS MY MIND!

How do we really justify the reactive fighting fires instead of the proactive fighting fires? I looked it up a couple years ago and I don't remember the details, but the amount of carbon emissions pumped into the atmosphere by California wildfires far exceeded and clean air goals they hoped for with smog control on autos and killing natural gas appliances.

Why don't they get it?!?!?!?!

Burn some diesel in the tractors, burn some two stroke oil in the chainsaws, add some cow farts from public land lease grazing and in the end win the Clean Air Wars. It's hard for me to believe that anyone on any side of the equation can view an entire mountain of beetle kill and not think it should be cleared.

I remember somebody saying or reading somewhere years ago that the Oregon elk in the area of Mt St Helens boomed in population after the eruption. The "clear cut" of the volcano opened up huge swaths of previously unusable forage for the elk.

What kind of suicidal narcissism does it take to prefer to see a forest immolated rather than managed and logged/ grazed?

Scott

I think the answer is hysterical climate wokeism

quote:

Originally posted by Hasher:

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
The USFS has been intentionally underfunded for decades, yes it needs to be done and some money has recently been allocated but not nearly enough. The agency needs more funding to accomplish what needs to be done, currently a huge portion of the USFS budget is spent on fighting fires.

https://www.doi.gov/pressrelea...ation-and-resilience

https://www.fs.usda.gov/about-...in%20the%20future%3F

Which blows my mind! BLOWS MY MIND!

How do we really justify the reactive fighting fires instead of the proactive fighting fires? I looked it up a couple years ago and I don't remember the details, but the amount of carbon emissions pumped into the atmosphere by California wildfires far exceeded and clean air goals they hoped for with smog control on autos and killing natural gas appliances.

Why don't they get it?!?!?!?!

Burn some diesel in the tractors, burn some two stroke oil in the chainsaws, add some cow farts from public land lease grazing and in the end win the Clean Air Wars. It's hard for me to believe that anyone on any side of the equation can view an entire mountain of beetle kill and not think it should be cleared.

I remember somebody saying or reading somewhere years ago that the Oregon elk in the area of Mt St Helens boomed in population after the eruption. The "clear cut" of the volcano opened up huge swaths of previously unusable forage for the elk.

What kind of suicidal narcissism does it take to prefer to see a forest immolated rather than managed and logged/ grazed?

Scott

I think the answer is hysterical climate wokeism

At the end of 2024 I'm going to make sure and look up the amount of greenhouse emissions California pumped into the atmosphere with out of control wildfires while they banned barbecues and lawn mowers.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
The USFS has been intentionally underfunded for decades, yes it needs to be done and some money has recently been allocated but not nearly enough. The agency needs more funding to accomplish what needs to be done, currently a huge portion of the USFS budget is spent on fighting fires.

https://www.doi.gov/pressrelea...ation-and-resilience

https://www.fs.usda.gov/about-...in%20the%20future%3F

Which blows my mind! BLOWS MY MIND!

How do we really justify the reactive fighting fires instead of the proactive fighting fires? I looked it up a couple years ago and I don't remember the details, but the amount of carbon emissions pumped into the atmosphere by California wildfires far exceeded and clean air goals they hoped for with smog control on autos and killing natural gas appliances.

Why don't they get it?!?!?!?!

Burn some diesel in the tractors, burn some two stroke oil in the chainsaws, add some cow farts from public land lease grazing and in the end win the Clean Air Wars. It's hard for me to believe that anyone on any side of the equation can view an entire mountain of beetle kill and not think it should be cleared.

I remember somebody saying or reading somewhere years ago that the Oregon elk in the area of Mt St Helens boomed in population after the eruption. The "clear cut" of the volcano opened up huge swaths of previously unusable forage for the elk.

What kind of suicidal narcissism does it take to prefer to see a forest immolated rather than managed and logged/ grazed?

Again, this is a very complex problem that developed for a few reasons, but one of the big ones is that we have had literally a century of fire suppression policy which suppressed all fires and left us with a huge amount of fuel in the mountains. If you look at historic pictures of the area you will see maybe 30-40% of the trees that present today, fire in the past happened regularly and the fires were smaller.

As to why we fight fires reactively as opposed to taking preventative actions, look to the politics behind the situation. As I said earlier, the USFS has been intentionally underfunded for decades, there are certain groups in Congress that feel the Federal Government should not own land and they do everything that they can to restrict funding for our Parks, Forest, BLM etc. If you don't have the funds, you simply can't do the work.

Unfortunately the area around here does not lend itself well to timber extraction(lodge pole pine) or cattle grazing although a bit more of each would not hurt, it will take more than that to address the problem.

This is an issue that can be dealt with but it will take time and a whole bunch of money.

Quote, originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

It's hard for me to believe that anyone on any side of the equation can view an entire mountain of beetle kill and not think it should be cleared.

I'm wondering if there is lots of beetle kill near Dillingham?

I'm sure you are aware that Alaska has lots of beetle kill and many forest fires each summer. As I recall most of those fires are let to burn with no control attempts at all. A few years after the burn they do make good moose pasture.

It's the same with the standing beetle kill. Some of it is harvested, that near a road, or by snow machine in winter, if not too far to haul on a sled. The harvest is more for firewood than timber. Some harvest if caught early might be for house logs.

Would you want your TP dollars used to clear the beetle kill all over Alaska including the remote areas?

The local fires here are not in beetle kill areas at the moment, they are in our lodge pole/ponderosa pines and right on the front range in the urban wildland interface.

To your point, not everywhere can be cleared, it is not practical or economically viable. New strategies have been developed of the last 20 or so years including clear cutting close to housing, and controlled burns(which do not always stay in control despite the name).

This is a serious problem and it deserves much more attention and funding than it gets.

In our area, the story also was that timber extraction would not be profitable, and it might even be necessary to pay to have it done. When some of us pointed out that we local residents would be thrilled to have the opportunity to harvest timber in the area and were pretty sure we could profit greatly, we were told this sort of thing was best left to a coalition of the government and multi-national corporations who could fleece us thoroughly while accomplishing little in the way of fire mitigation. That's about it, in a nutshell. Regards, Bill.

So much for controlling the earth and nature
Nature almost always wins

There is more than one way to look at it, M.Shy.

Your default mode is showing.

You are correct - Nature almost always wins. That includes human nature. The denialism of climate science and the sections in project 2025 declare loudly the human nature of Rightist ideology. Drill baby drill.

Even the notion that environmental activists and climate science advocates are promoting the controlling of the earth and nature is far more telling of the human nature of those harboring the notion than the activists and advocates.

My understanding of it is the flip-side. Instead of controlling nature, the notion is to do something human nature hasn't; namely control itself on behalf of the rest of nature, which if allowed will make corrections naturally.

Meanwhile, singing Kumbaya we harmonize.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...899fa1edd1706&ei=133

Wildfires spread across Colorado as firefighters in California battle massive Park Fire
Story by Christopher Cann, USA TODAY • 35m • 5 min read

That fire in CO up near Steve is proving pretty nasty to fight.

From the reports I heard today it look like air attack is their only option right now. They did say they have close to 300 wildland firefighters inbound which hopefully will help once it gets into easier terrain.

https://www.nifc.gov/fire-info...cs/suppression-costs

So the number that I liked was for 2021.

4.4 billion dollars. $4.4 billion. Right, in Suppression not prevention.

So to me this brings home the lunacy of discussing prevention budgets and whether or not logging, land management and public land grazing is either profitable or cost effective.

I've said it before, the land owners used to be paid to allow grazing on their land, today land owners pay grazers to be on their property.

Why are the environmental impacts of grazing and logging scrutinized when the environmental impacts of wildfires are accepted?

We are not in this situation due to environmental concerns over logging and grazing, we are here due to 100 years of policy that suppressed all fire and left us with a huge fuel load.

The area here is very steep and rocky, not good for cattle. The trees are second growth, have little to no timber value and need to be removed from very difficult to access locations.

It is not environmental policy stopping the tree removal, it is simply going to be very, very costly.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
There is more than one way to look at it, M.Shy.

Your default mode is showing.

You are correct - Nature almost always wins. That includes human nature. The denialism of climate science and the sections in project 2025 declare loudly the human nature of Rightist ideology. Drill baby drill.

Even the notion that environmental activists and climate science advocates are promoting the controlling of the earth and nature is far more telling of the human nature of those harboring the notion than the activists and advocates.

My understanding of it is the flip-side. Instead of controlling nature, the notion is to do something human nature hasn't; namely control itself on behalf of the rest of nature, which if allowed will make corrections naturally.

Meanwhile, singing Kumbaya we harmonize.

I agree with you ME
Most of the west is fairly impossible to log, grazing is destructive to wildlife…flora and fauna equally
Not letting fires burn until snows come is simply self destructing as is urban development in these fire prone areas
And I’m not getting into a politics