With over 9.3 million acres burned in wildfires nationally, the 2007 fire season was the second worst fire season in over fifty years (the 2006 fire season was the worst with over 9.7 million acres burned).
In terms of total acres burned, seven of the worst ten fire seasons since the early 1950’s have occurred in the last 12 years.
Average acreage per wildfire was nearly 110 acres, again the second worst in over fifty years (the 2005 was the worst averaging 131 acres per fire).
In terms of average acres per wildfire, nine of the worst ten fire seasons since the early 1950’s have occurred in the last 12 years.
The preceding graphs are based on data provided by the National Interagency Fire Center Wildland Fire Statistics [here]. The following is a recap of some of the high and low lights of the 2007 Fire Season.
December 31, 2007 | 2 Comments | Topic: 2007 Fire Season
The following graphs are based on data provided by the National Interagency Fire Center Wildland Fire Statistics [here].
December 30, 2007 | Leave a Comment | Topic: 2007 Fire Season
Restoration forester, photographer, and SOSF stalwart Backcut laid it down at a site called Gristmill [here]. (Be sure to read all the comments).
Some excerpts:
I’ve said it before… and I’ll say it again. What is wrong with restoring western forests to their natural stocking levels?
Until we can agree on the where, how and why, our forests will burn and our chance to sequester carbon by making durable wood products will be lost for the rest of OUR lives. And our children’s lives, too.
I’m currently working on a fire salvage project of about 300 acres of recently-thinned forest. Using the latest fire mortality guidelines, we’re applying cutting edge science to this burned forest, 5 weeks after the fire was extinguished.
The eco-embracement of wildfires is still proceeding, where opponents to fire salvage projects call wildfires “natural and beneficial”, ignoring the high-intensity acres that eliminate full recovery in less than 200 years.
Even the Forest Service has thrown up the white flags on National Forests like the Bitterroot, where they have chosen to make those lands part of a huge “Let-Burn” program, without any NEPA or public involvement.
The future doesn’t look good for our forests, especially if we all continue to be polarized, stubborn and emotional. On the flip side, we can’t just be “giving away” our forests. Even with careful and gentle management, our forests are full of value in many different forms.
But, if we don’t make our forests drought, insect and fire resistant, there will be nothing left to save except for brushfields and plantations.
Forest management deniers??!?
I see that there’s another “Inconvenient Truth” that people here at Grist-world are trying to ignore. I see that most preservationists agree with the Bush Administration on letting massive parts of National Forest burn, too. Nothing like releasing centuries of sequestered carbon, along with other toxic gasses directly into our atmosphere, eh?
Amazingly, no one even blinked when these programs were implemented without NEPA work or public opinion on an issue that will have environmental effects lasting well into your great grandchildren’s lives.
December 27, 2007 | 4 Comments | Topic: Saving Forests
Merry Christmas from SOS Forests. Best wishes to you and yours.
Due to the exigencies of the Season, and general Goodwill, we are going to rest SOS Forests and Wildlife and People, the two W.I.S.E. Commentary subsites, and work on the W.I.S.E. Colloquia over the Holidays.
Then we will hit the New Year running. We have high hopes for 2008. We are going to effect some changes, and maybe even save some forests. That’s the Plan, anyway.
Keep the comments coming; I’m merely refraining from adding new Commentary posts for a little bit. Look for more great references to continue to be posted in the W.I.S.E. Colloquia and Library.
May all your Christmases be bright, including this one.
December 19, 2007 | Leave a Comment | Topic: Introduction
Testimonies to the US Senate Energy & Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests on December 13, 2007.
An important hearing was held by the US Senate regarding forest restoration and hazardous fuel reduction. We will post the testimonies here as they become available.
Testimony of K. Norman Johnson and Jerry F. Franklin [here]
Testimony of Philip S. Aune [here] (1,624KB)
Testimony of Michael E. Dubrasich [here]
Testimony of Mark Rey [here]
Testimony of James Caswell [here]
Testimony of Russ Vaagen [here]
Testimony of Matthew Donegan [here] (1,760 KB)
Testimony of Russ Hoeflich [here]
Testimony of Boyd Britton [here]
This post has been replicated in Restoration Forestry
December 17, 2007 | 12 Comments | Topic: Federal forest policy
You may or may not have noticed (in all the hubbub) but some very interesting titles are starting to show up in the Colloquia. Slowly but Shirley we are installing the best, latest, most advanced, coolest scientific research in a variety of environmental sciences. Many books and articles you may not have read before, or even know about, have been listed already. The full text is available on many.
And we have a pile to go. A month from now it will be quite something. But don’t wait until then or else today’s titles might getting buried in the archives and elude you.
You might want to make it a habit to check the front page (click HOME on the navigation bar) for the latest and most recent titles. I don’t plan on announcing them all here.
Except that once in awhile I might. For instance, I just did the first review ever of Stephen J. Pyne’s brand new book, Awful Splendor: A Fire History of Canada. So that’s pretty cool.
Lots of other goodies in the Colloquia now, and many, many more to come. It feels like a Christmas catalog for the forest-obsessed. And as time goes by, we hope even more so.
December 17, 2007 | Leave a Comment | Topic: Introduction
Long-time SOSFers may recall my review of Ecological Science Relevant to Management Polices for Fire-prone Forests of the Western United States, Reed F. Noss (editor), Jerry F. Franklin, William Baker, Tania Schoennagel, and Peter B. Moyle, Society for Conservation Biology Scientific Panel on Fire in Western U.S. Forests. Feb. 2006.
That four-part review was sarcastically entitled Save the Tick Brush and I called the Noss-Franklin paper “The Worst Forest Science Paper of the 21st Century.” See [here], [here], [here], and [here].
“Eco…States” will go down in history as the rock-bottom worst forest science paper of the Modern Age. However, the paper is significant because it marks the final collapse of the old forest science paradigm. The inner contradictions, the abundant anomalies, and the tragic destruction of millions of acres of priceless, heritage forests have overwhelmed the old science, and branded it a failure. The Old Paradigm has been dying for quite awhile. “Eco…States” is the death rattle.
Every imaginable eco-error was committed in that paper, which was a paean to holocaust. Recall that Noss-Franklin extolled the virtues of “rare and/or uncommon early successional stands,” i.e. the brushy wastelands created by incinerating old-growth forests. Recall that Noss is a “former” Earth First! monkey-wrenching eco-terrorist.
And recall that I used the occasion to declare the Death of the Old Paradigm.
The Old Paradigm is dead. The shouting is not over, nor the weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth. Congress will be the last to figure it out. There will always be adherents; witness the Flat Earth Society. But for all useful intents and purposes, the Old Paradigm is dead.
There will be no service, no memorial ceremony. It might be nice, but Science is not like that. Science is like a herd of water buffaloes, each a paradigm, and when one goes down to logical lions or anomalous crocodiles, the rest of the herd moves on without stopping. Historians look back; scientists look forward. Most forest scientists of professional caliber eschew the Old Paradigm already, and have for many years. Old adherents do and will deny any affiliation, current or former, with the deceased theories. …
The Old Paradigm was too dumb, too political, and mostly, too destructive. The forest fires of recent years, historically huge and catastrophic, are what really killed it. The gears never meshed. The monkey wouldn’t dance. The Old Paradigm theories flopped, big time. Now the show has jumped the shark.
December 15, 2007 | Leave a Comment | Topic: Saving Forests
“Our testimony focuses on forest restoration in the National Forests of Oregon and Washington… To conserve these forests, we need to modify stand structure (e.g., treat fuels) on one-half to two-thirds of the landscape.” - Johnson and Franklin, December 13, 2007
Today the Forest Paradigm shifted in public, just a little bit. Drs. K. Norman Johnson and Jerry F. Franklin gave public testimony calling for forest restoration, protection, and maintenance. The statement was given before the Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests (Chair Ron Wyden, OR), who heard testimony regarding forest restoration and hazardous fuels reduction efforts in the forests of Oregon and Washington in Hearing Room SD-366 today.
Drs. Johnson and Franklin are famously (or infamously) two members of the Gang of Four, the cabal that took over the USFS in 1993 and engendered the Northwest Forest Plan (1994), among other forest-destructive actions.
The set-aside of 25 million acres of public forests (and some private, too) into No Touch Zones has led to catastrophic megafires such as the Biscuit Fire (2002). Moreover, the Northwest Forest Plan has failed to save any spotted owls, spotted owl habitat, or to protect rural and regional economies, all key goals of the NWFP. Indeed, after nearly 14 years of the NWFP, the situation is much worse in all regards.
But the worm has turned. The idea that abandonment is good forest stewardship has been chucked into the dustbin of history by two of its (former) proponents. Shocking but true, and a very good thing. Today is a welcome and historic day for our forests.
Excerpts from the Testimony:
Forest Restoration and Hazardous Fuel Reduction Efforts in the Forests of Oregon and Washington
Testimony of K. Norman Johnson Jerry F. Franklin
December 13, 2007 - Hearing of the Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
I am Dr. K. Norman Johnson and I am here today to give testimony for myself and Dr. Jerry F. Franklin regarding forest restoration and hazardous fuel reduction efforts in the forests of the Pacific Northwest. I am a University Distinguished Professor in the College of Forestry at Oregon State University. Jerry Franklin is Professor of Ecosystem Sciences in the College of Forest Resources at University of Washington. These comments represent our view and not those of our respective institutions.
Our testimony focuses on forest restoration in the National Forests of Oregon and Washington…
Our definition of “restoration” is the re-establishment of ecological structures and processes on these forests where they have been degraded and, simultaneously, *restoration of economic and other social values on these lands*. One product of this restoration will be substantial reductions in uncharacteristic fuel loadings. We emphasize restoration activities in which ecological, economic, and other social goals are compatible…
Restoration of Forests Characterized by Frequent, Low- and Mixed-Severity Fire Regimes
We will lose these forests to catastrophic disturbance events unless we undertake aggressive active management programs. This is not simply an issue of fuels and fire; because of the density of these forests, there is a high potential for drought stress and related insect outbreaks. Surviving old-growth pine trees are now at high risk of death to both fire and western pine beetle, the latter resulting from drought stress and competition…
Without action, we are at high risk of losing these stands–and the residual old-growth trees that they contain–to fire and insects…
We know enough to take action (uncertainties should not paralyze us). Inaction is a much more risky option for a variety of ecological values, including preservation of Northern Spotted Owls and other old-growth related species. We need to learn as we go, but we need to take action now. Furthermore, it is critical for stakeholders to understand that active management is necessary in stands with existing old-growth trees in order to reduce the risk that those trees will be lost.
December 13, 2007 | 11 Comments | Topic: Federal forest policy
Perhaps I have been too circumspect regarding Gail Kimbell’s latest Pronouncement. Perhaps I have left too many of the dots unconnected.
Kimbell has declared that the policy of the US Forest Service is to commandeer 400 million acres of private land and turn it into wilderness. In effect (and in reality) she has joined the USFS to the Wildlands Project, the Earth First! plan to destroy America.
Gail Kimbell has sunk to level of the eco-arsonists now doing time in Federal penitentiaries. She openly advocates holocaust and takeover, destruction of homes, farms, whole communities, and indeed our American culture and society. She is a radical communist/fascist filled with hatred, not just for public forests but for this entire country.
That’s a big deal, not small potatoes.
In truth, the USFS capitulated to leftwing anarchist arsonists many years ago. But what was more or less unstated is now out in the open and the Official Policy of the US Government.
Saddam Hussein would be proud. So would be Joseph Stalin.
Slowly (due to numerous interruptions) I am posting the story of fire in Canada. But that story is about more than fire; it is about corporatist Socialism and the enslavement/destruction of land and people.
The tragedy of Canada is minor, however, compared to the oncoming tragedy of America.
I have said it before and I will say it again: there is a war going on, right here on American soil. It is not a joke, or hyperbole, or exaggeration. It is real. The devastation of public lands by holocaust is just the beginning, the early skirmishes.
If you value freedom, human rights, and our American Experiment in democracy, then you must become aware of the forces arrayed against us. Gail Kimbell is a monster, and not alone in her bellicose anti-Americanism. The time has come to stand up in opposition.
December 13, 2007 | Leave a Comment | Topic: Federal forest policy
by Forrest Grump
On December 5, 2007, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rendered its decision in Sierra Club v. Bosworth, 05-16989. The judges hearing the case were David R. Thompson, Andrew J. Kleinfeld, and Sidney R. Thomas; Thompson wrote the opinion with a short concurrence by Kleinfeld. You can rustle up the docket yourself [here].
Put that one in your Favorites, and use it.
As usual, the Forest Service lost. As usual, the opinion cites about a gazillion cases brought by environmental groups before the Ninth Circuit that resulted in terrible, paralytic precedents. As usual, environmental lawyers are doing handsprings and cartwheels. Same old, same old, right?
Well, there’s a new, particularly unfortunate twist to Sierra v. Bosworth that I found particularly alarming.
For years, one of the first things I’ve done when a natural resources ruling comes down from the Ninth is to not only look who wrote the ruling – I especially love Stephen J. Reinhardt these days – but also to check out which president appointed them. In this instance, Thompson is a 1985 Reagan appointee, formerly a San Diego-area private attorney. Kleinfeld is a 1991 Bush I appointee, after being first appointed to the federal judiciary in Alaska by Reagan in 1986 from his practice in Fairbanks. Thomas is a 1995 Clinton appointee from Montana, formerly an adjunct law professor and private practitioner in Billings. So in this case, the majority of the panel was appointed by “conservative” presidents, something that doesn’t seem to happen in the “liberal” Ninth very often.
So I read this 32-page ruling more closely than most.
December 12, 2007 | 3 Comments | Topic: Federal forest policy
