What is a tried-and-true southern California "conservative" Republican to do when a hundred-foot wall of flames comes roaring up the slope toward his private home? Boldly stand his ground, garden hose in hand? Or does he step aside and allow "big government" professionals, paid and equipped by his taxes, to do their job? The attitude of his hero, Ronald Reagan, is crystal clear: "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'" It's a hard-case dilemma: stand by your principles and perish, or yield those principles to stark necessity and thus survive.
Kinda like the dilemma faced by a Christian Scientist with acute appendicitis.
And when "big gummint bureaucrats" impose a mandatory evacuation, does our conservative defy the order? When one of our neighbors in Lake Arrowhead did just that two weeks ago, the fire marshall replied, "Very well, but please leave us your dental records, so that we can identify your charred remains when this is all over." Sometimes reality can be a real bitch.
Of course, if the same stubborn conservative is then trapped by the flames, the fire fighters will come to his rescue, thus expending time and resources that would be better directed to a coordinated attack on the fire.
In tranquil moments, when there are no fires, conservative principle prevails. Thus, in wealthy, rock-ribbed Republican San Diego county, "tax reformers" had their way as police and fire department budgets were slashed. And when the fires came two weeks ago, the local and county officials frantically called upon federal, state, and outside municipal fire fighters to come to their aid, which they did. The cost of that necessarily delayed response was thousands of acres and hundreds of homes. Still more acres and homes were spared, thanks to the equipment and personnel paid for by the taxes of others. Thus the proud, "government-free," "self-made" San Diego conservatives became, in effect, parasites.
Blame the enviros -- global warming had nothing to do with it. The right-wing wasted no time placing the blame for the fires on their favorite target: the environmentalists. Quoth Rush Limbaugh: "The Sierra Club will not let you get in there -- none of the environmentalists will -- and get rid of the dead junk that is at the bottom of these forests that is just like kindling wood.... In order to thrive, we have to alter our environment, and, if altering the environment means clearing out some dead brush to make fire less of a gigantic possibility than it already is, then we have a responsibility to do that." And Glenn Beck at CNN: "the environmentalists, the same ones that [are] going to tell me it's my fault because I have an SUV, these same damn environmentalists are the ones that have stopped people in California from clearing brush on their own property."
It's a flat-out damnable lie! Residents of our mountain communities are required to clear brush on their property, and face fines if they refuse. Environmentalist have no problem whatever with these regulations. That's the simple truth of it, as Limbaugh, Beck, et al, could have found out in a moment simply by picking up their phones. But as we know so well by now, the right-wing screech-merchants never let the facts get in the way of a smear.
Didn't global warming have some role in the California fires? "No way!," the right wing tells us. At the same time that he told the whopper about brush clearing on private property, Glenn Beck was hosting Chris Horner and R. J. Smith of the Competitive Enterprise Institute. This is what Horner had to say:
Global warming is not a likely suspect for the following reason. The warming that the alarmists are talking about is one degree Fahrenheit over the past 150 years, most of which occurred before World War II. None of which are occurred in the last decade. OK. We can reliably take global warming off the suspect list. Second, it's not clear that a warmer world would be a drier world.
But here is the plain fact of the matter: southern California is in the midst of a prolonged drought. This year, Los Angeles suffered the driest year in the 130 years of record-keeping. And climate scientists have warned that permanent drought in southwest United States is one of the likely consequences of global warming. Did climate change cause the drought that led to the California fire storms of 2003 and 2007? Typically cautious climate scientists will tell us, "quite likely but not certain." That's all the slack that the right-wing deniers require, as once again they equate "not certain" with "certainly not!"
"It's the home-owners' fault, they shouldn't live in hazardous areas." Because I am one of those mountain-dwelling home owners, I must take this charge seriously and face it honestly. In the following, I will discuss conditions in the San Bernardino mountains, where I live. I am not qualified to comment on conditions in Malibu, San Diego county, or other fire locations.
When we bought our house ten years ago we were, of course, aware of the fire hazards. But it seemed to us to be an acceptable risk. Now, having evacuated in October, 2003, and again two weeks ago, we are much less certain that it was a wise decision. But conditions are significantly different now than they were a decade ago. Four to five years ago, hundreds of thousands of ponderosa pine trees in the San Bernardino mountains were destroyed, not by fire, but by the prolonged drought and the resulting bark beetle infestation. Those vast stands of brown ghost trees threatened an inferno, and when it arrived in October, 2003, those dead trees intensified it. That fire, "The Old Fire," consumed 91,000 acres and 970 homes, and burned up to our property line, where it was halted by the fire crews. From our refuge at a cousin's home, a false internet report and the TV news led us to believe for about three agonizing days that our house was lost. Then reassuring news came to us from the internet. It was a very close call. (See "If it Burns, it Earns"). Last month's "Grass Valley Fire" at Lake Arrowhead was contained about six miles to the east of us.
Those who build and buy homes amidst chaparral, which is found on the south slope of the mountain adjacent to the city of San Bernardino, are asking for trouble. Fire is a natural, even a required, occurrence in a chaparral biotic community. Accordingly, there are few structures to be found there. Most of the "Old Fire" took place in the largely uninhabited south slope. It caused the most damage when the Santa Anna winds from the mountain blew the fire into the city of San Bernardino, and then later when the fire approached and crossed the ridge line and moved into the forested communities.
The thriving, century-old pines and cedars in the San Bernardino National Forest testify to the ability of the forest to survive wild fires. Under natural conditions, occasional fires burn away the ground fuel, sparing the trees. If fires are suppressed and ground fuel builds up, then a conflagration can follow that levels the entire forest. The right wing critics to the contrary notwithstanding, the Sierra Club is fully aware of this and encourages the clearing of brush in inhabited areas.
I don't know when the last fire took place on what is now our property, but it was probably more than one hundred and twenty years ago. We know this from the stump of the huge, beetle infested ponderosa that was removed from our property two months before the Old Fire in 2003. That stump has about one hundred and twenty annual rings, and no apparent fire scars. (See Elegy for a Ponderosa Pine Tree).
Today, our house and our neighborhood are safer than they were four years ago. Safer, but not safe. Hundreds of thousands of dead and dying ponderosas have been removed from the mountains, eight of them from our property. Now there are meadows and open spaces where before there were thick forests. My immediate neighbors and I have surrounded our homes with wide fire breaks and, as required, we have cleared the brush away from the structures. Numerous fire hydrants, installed decades ago, are at the ready. Nearby lakes -- Silverwood, Gregory, Arrowhead, Big Bear -- have abundant water available to the fire-fighting helicopters and aircraft.
Dr. Ernest Partridge is a consultant, writer and lecturer in the field of Environmental Ethics and Public Policy. Partridge has taught philosophy at the University of California, and in Utah, Colorado and Wisconsin. He publishes the website, "The Online Gadfly" (www.igc.org/gadfly) and co-edits the progressive website, "The Crisis Papers" (www.crisispapers.org). His book in progress, "Conscience of a Progressive," can be seen at www.igc.org/gadfly/progressive/^toc.htm .
I think you would be hard pressed to find a anti-gummit person stupid enough to be against fire protection agencies supported by tax dollars.
The fires in California as a sociological phenomenon were interesting. Lots of sociological meat to chew on. It seems that the blame fingers are being pointed in all directions at once and in which direction didn't seem to really depend on one's political ideology although there were the usual small but loud group nutcakes ranting about it somehow being George Bush's fault or Global Warming's fault. Everything thing seems to be George Bush's or Global Warming's fault lately.
I really don't know about either. George isn't allow to play with matches so we can count him out and there have been fires and droughts in California since before people got there. Climate scientists are as wrong as many times as they are right when they make predictions so their ideas should be taken with a grain of salt. Ask one "Where are the huge number of violent hurricanes you predicted for the past two hurricane seasons? Where are they HUH? Mr Climate Predictor?" Climate changes with or without man's help. The Vikings (not the football team) used to raise cattle and hay in Greenland in the 15th century. They had to abandon it because of colder conditions. Climates change and there is plenty of evidence for that happening for a long, long, long time. Large volcanic eruptions can cause world wide climatic changes. 5-10 years ago these same climate scientists were warning of the approaching ice age. No doubt all the crap we are putting into the air is having an unhealthy effect on things but is it effecting long term climate changes? It is better, whether we are causing long term GW or not, to be as green as possible. This is the only plantet we have. GW or being green is being politicized and that is bad. We should demand and practice greeness. The best way to demand is to not buy stuff in excessive packaging and to work within the company you work for to insist they practice green methods throughout the company. We do not need government agencies making binders full of stupid rules written for and by lawyers about it.
In AZ where I live we have an occasional fire like the huge Rodeo fire a number of years ago on the Mogollon Rim. It was caused by a disgruntled fire fighter I understand. Lots of finger pointing of course after it was put out. One of the most educational thing for homeowners in the fire zone was a picture of a man standing by his pristine house and around him there was total destruction. Every house in his area was leveled. Why, he was asked, were you so lucky. He said it was because I am a God-fearing Republican and they were heathen Democrats. No. Just Kidding. He had cleared not only the brush but the trees away from his house. There was probably a 50 yard buffer zone around his house. He heard the warnings and heeded them. His neighbors loved having their property full of beatutiful, mature, dry and deadly trees that went up like matches taking their houses in the middle of the trees with them. Forests need to burn. If they don't huge fires will eventually happen. Just like the people in New Orleans should have known a hurricane was eventually going to hit them and prepared for it or the people who live in flood plains know that they will be flooded sooner or later and move out, people who live in forests should prepare for the worst. Those who don't shouldn't be in front of a camera whining about it with their hand out for our tax dollars to bail them out of a situation they themselves are responsible for or blaming George Bush. Forest, Forest Gump, wisely said stupid as stupid does.
by
Mad Jayhawk (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 305 comments)
on Thursday, November 8, 2007 at 6:00:28 PM
While the fires in San Diego had burned to the coast and the winds shifted, now bringing it back toward the east and once again threatening the far east county of San Diego, I turn on KGO out of San Francisco and there is a discussion going on promoted by right-wingers that San Diego just should have CLEAR CUT their forests. Not having clear cut our supposed forests, we were getting what we deserved. What planet do these people live on? There are no forests to speak of in San Diego and what forests there are were not the serious fire areas. What we have is bushes, some tall, some short but bushes (chaparrel). The loggers do not want them believe me. And, since the 2003 fires in San Diego, there were large fire breaks (big swaths of nothing but dirt about 2 or 3 lanes width) protecting living areas. What the problem was during this fire was the wind. It was blowing fire like a monster fire torch with huge flames flying all by themselves through the air into other areas. The winds were from 35 to 80 miles an hour and the fire was burning 3 miles every half hour at the 35 miles an hour speed. So at 70 miles an hour in 15 minutes there were 3 miles burned.
The next step I can see is to get those foam sprays and specially made wood that did not burn and make it available to everyone.
Many homes were saved by private AIG personal protection people who sprayed those individual homes who had paid for their service, leaving the other homes to burn. Then there was the special patio wood that a couple was able to hide under after their home burned and their pool became unbearable.
Whatever that wood was and whatever that foam was needs to become common names and ready for sale within the next 6 months so we can be ready for next year's Santa Ana blow torch flame shooting winds. When the humidity is in the single digits, grass rubbing against itself can make sparks that start fires.
The very idea that someone would say San Diego deserved to burn because we did not clear cut our forests (what forests, how absurd.) Except for a small ridge of trees clumped together in the Lagunas, there is just an oak here and an oak there - like in those black and white cowboy movies filmed in San Diego, LA and Riverside Counties way back when. The very idea that building in the "fire prone" areas should be banned. People are flocking to this area at an appauling rate and have to live in something. Most anything will burn if the humidity drops low enough and the wind blows strong enough with those monsterously huge shooting flames of fire. We just need the new products made readily available and as cost effective as possible - like now if now yesterday.
by
ljs (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 55 comments)
on Thursday, November 8, 2007 at 6:27:04 PM
2 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
