We have been having a fascinating discussion about dead trees burning differently, but I wonder if debates about the science obfuscate an underlying reality of agreement. I am wondering, that’s all.
This morning, I am proposing that we may all agree that
Fuel treatments (completed with fuel removed) to create defensible space and change fire behavior within 1/2 mile of a community are generally OK.
I would like to throw this proposition out there and see what everyone thinks.. because if everyone agrees to this proposition (or and edited version), much of the “science” discussion is not relevant (historic patterns, etc.). We are interested in making conditions safe for firefighters by changing structure (not having jackstrawed piles of dead trees, for example) and fuel conditions around communities (we can discuss what “communities” means).
Some people think that we should just let the homes burn and not put firefighters in, thereby solving the problem (and saving much money, both for fuel treatments and for suppression) but this does not seem socially and politically realistic.
I would be interested to know what people on this blog think about the proposition. Feel free to propose edits. From this discussion, I’d like to move on to the question of fuel treatments that are not in the WUI.
Check out some of this paper and other photos from the Wallow fire and fuel treatments.