![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
fire on the mountain redux
Jul. 10th, 2003 11:25 amTwo days ago there was a little article in the local paper about a little 4-acre lightning-caused fire in the Vallecito area that was being mangaged as a wildland fire, rather than being fought, because it was bounded by last year's burn on one side and old clearcuts on the other, and not considered a threat.
Yesterday evening, Britt commented on the odd color of the sky. "Looks like a fire," he said.
Last night Britt's brother, who is caretaker for a ranch right next to the wilderness area where the fire's burning, phoned us to tell us that the fire had jumped the clearcut and was heading his way. (He was supposed to help Britt's folks bale hay today -- Britt had to go up instead, since his brother had to stay up in the mountains and keep an eye on things.)
This morning, the paper reports that the fire's up to 225 acres. They're still not actively fighting it, though, just watching it.
It hasn't rained here since early June. No rain is in the forecast. We're in the 5th year of a drought.
Britt's brother says that the tourists are leaving Vallecito in droves. After last year's Missionary Ridge fire closed down tourism there, the businesses were counting on this summer to make up for those losses.
I'm of mixed feelings on this. I think that we should strive for being able to allow natural wildland fires to burn; fire suppression is bad for the land, and allows underbrush and density to build up such that any fire will be devastating. But considering the drought and the high level of available dry fuel, not to mention the case of nerves everyone has because of last year's huge fire, letting this one burn might not be a good idea. I really hope the people being paid to manage this sort of situation know more than I do. (Anyone who read John McLean's Fire on the Mountain knows that this is not automatically the case.)
Yesterday evening, Britt commented on the odd color of the sky. "Looks like a fire," he said.
Last night Britt's brother, who is caretaker for a ranch right next to the wilderness area where the fire's burning, phoned us to tell us that the fire had jumped the clearcut and was heading his way. (He was supposed to help Britt's folks bale hay today -- Britt had to go up instead, since his brother had to stay up in the mountains and keep an eye on things.)
This morning, the paper reports that the fire's up to 225 acres. They're still not actively fighting it, though, just watching it.
It hasn't rained here since early June. No rain is in the forecast. We're in the 5th year of a drought.
Britt's brother says that the tourists are leaving Vallecito in droves. After last year's Missionary Ridge fire closed down tourism there, the businesses were counting on this summer to make up for those losses.
I'm of mixed feelings on this. I think that we should strive for being able to allow natural wildland fires to burn; fire suppression is bad for the land, and allows underbrush and density to build up such that any fire will be devastating. But considering the drought and the high level of available dry fuel, not to mention the case of nerves everyone has because of last year's huge fire, letting this one burn might not be a good idea. I really hope the people being paid to manage this sort of situation know more than I do. (Anyone who read John McLean's Fire on the Mountain knows that this is not automatically the case.)