At least we saw it coming and made some preparations. I think climate change is a massive problem but we can't put it all on climate change because droughts are part of California history and we can put some of the blame on forest management practices.<p>100 million dead trees in the Sierra are a massive risk for unpredictable wildfires<p><a href="https://news.berkeley.edu/2018/01/18/sierra-wildfire-risk/" rel="nofollow">https://news.berkeley.edu/2018/01/18/sierra-wildfire-risk/</a><p>Fire Suppression — And Climate Change — Is To Blame For California’s Megafires<p><a href="https://www.capradio.org/articles/2020/09/12/fire-suppression-and-climate-change-is-to-blame-for-californias-megafires-experts-unpack-the-term/" rel="nofollow">https://www.capradio.org/articles/2020/09/12/fire-suppressio...</a>
The Federal Government, who has been partially in charge of the Dixie Fire, has a more relaxed approach to wildfires. The recent River fire was fought with California management and resources. It was put down within a day. I really don't think the Federal Government should be able to own so much land in a state. The state of California is closer to the land and could manage it better in my opinion. The forests need to be managed defensively and need to be cleared to recreate what an uncontrolled wildfire would have done in the past. There are parts of California that do manage their forests better than others. From my time in the woods, there has been more defensive forest management around the outskirts of Truckee, CA. They cut down dead trees and pile them in separate areas that could not have a chain burning reaction.
My hope is that California finally gets serious with its environmental management after this. I know, feels like a pipe dream, but we should have been doing things like Israel had done, like transitioning farms and cities to desalinated water sources decades ago for instance. Another lacking practice is controlled burns done with the intention of decreasing these types of fires and actually healing forests. I’ll stave more rants but this isn’t exactly a new problem it’s just new in its scope
Yet another record-setting fire started by PG&E.<p><a href="https://www.abc10.com/article/news/local/wildfire/pge-may-be-linked-to-dixie-fire/103-540294e8-8c6f-413c-b7f1-23cc63e46922" rel="nofollow">https://www.abc10.com/article/news/local/wildfire/pge-may-be...</a>
Is this a process of California desertifying? That is, we will have a period of fires and then a new equilibrium? Or will California keep burning, healing, and then burning again?
Many of the larger ones were "complexes", near by started at the same time, bit distinct fires added together I think. (Not a fire expert)<p><a href="https://www.fire.ca.gov/media/4jandlhh/top20_acres.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://www.fire.ca.gov/media/4jandlhh/top20_acres.pdf</a>
what's so special about California that it's always on fire? Why don't we have this kind of issue in say Maine, Michigan or North Carolina which all have lots of forest?
California has by far the most number of wildfires and most acres burned each year compared to other states, no matter your measure. States can sue one another over water rights if one state is polluting water upstream to another state. Is a similar right available for air rights? It seems unfair that Nevada, Idaho, Colorado and Montana have to suffer from California’s mismanagement and lack of prevention, and perhaps a lawsuit would finally provide the right incentives.