Skip to content
Back to the collection

Barriers and enablers for prescribed burns for wildfire management in California

Rebecca K. Miller, Christopher B. Field, Katharine J. Mach

2020 · Nature Sustainability

Read the paper
HN score
0
Mentions
3
Readers
3
Months
3
What’s in a score?

In the conversation

Original HN comments, with labels from simple text rules. A label describes the whole comment and may miss context or irony. Read the discussion to make up your own mind. About the labels

3 selected excerpts · 3 total mentions

bariumbitmap
Neutral mention · rule
California already has a pretty good prescribed burn program, but it needs to be expanded, in part because the climate is significantly different today than it was a hundred years ago. There are some obstacles to prescribed burns: smoke inhalation is a public health hazard, firefighters need to be paid, private landowners are worried about liability, etc. Perhaps the biggest issue is that most of California is federal land, and the U.S. Forest Service does not have funding to perform prescribed burns. The private sector hasn't solved the problem either, in part because a lot of the fuel isn't desirable timber. Californians who are serious about this issue should lobby…
Read the full comment
their federal and state representatives. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-023-05997-w > Our results show that California and Oregon are the only severe-risk US states to conduct prescribed fire programs that are impactful at reducing wildfire risks, while other southeastern states such as Florida maintain fire-healthy ecosystems with very extensive prescribed fire programs. Our study suggests that states that have impactful prescribed fire programs (like California) should increase their scale of operation, while states that burn prescribed fires with no impact (like Nevada) should change the way prescribed burning is planned and conducted. > California has historically resisted prescribed burning to control their already big smoke problem > There are various reasons preventing California from conducting more Rx [prescribed burns], including lack of enough firefighters and 57% of land being owned by the Federal Government which lacks the funds to conduct Rx, especially after recent budget cuts to the U.S. Forest Service https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0451-7 > Academics warned that the financial incentives offered by mechanical thinning may be elusive, given the high ratio of thinning to merchantable timber in many locations. Legislative staff and analysts criticized the traditional forestry model of removing large-diameter, valuable trees and leaving smaller, less valuable and more flammable biomass.
alextheparrot
Neutral mention · rule
> Risk-related barriers (fear of liability and negative public perceptions) prevent landowners from beginning the burn planning process. Both resource-related barriers (limited funding, crew availability and experience) and regulations-related barriers (poor weather conditions for burning and environmental regulations) prevent landowners from conducting burns, creating a gap between planning and implementation [0] My opinion is that this legislation does not go far enough to address the chronic disregard of action to inhibit these cataclysmic events. I would much rather have the government over-correct and over-allocate instead of taking an incremental approach on this. I do not want to wake up to months of awful quality air or see the forests that I have come to love so much be scorched more than is necessary. [0] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0451-7
dredmorbius
Neutral mention · rule
See, e.g., 'Fire is medicine': the tribes burning California forests to save them (2019) https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/nov/21/wildfire-pre... Barriers and enablers for prescribed burns for wildfire management in California https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0451-7

Keep following the thread.

More in Other research

More from the same topics.