The column title is taken from a series of presentations, essays, articles, and interviews I participated in during the early 1990s (including Evergreen March-April 1994), at a time when my research regarding the role of people as a keystone species in forest ecology was receiving attention.  The reason for the attention was because most of my findings were in contradiction to state and federal forest management policies in play at that time, and directly challenged the “best” forest science assertions that were the basis of those policies.  Unfortunately -- to my way of thinking -- the same misguided policies, based on the same unproven assertions, remain in play to this time.  Further, these policies have resulted in a series of costly, deadly and destructive catastrophic wildfires that were both predicted and largely preventable.

I agreed to undertake these writings for two principal reasons: one, I was asked (by Jim Petersen, a man whose word and work I greatly admire and respect); and two, because of you, the reader.  I see this as an opportunity to present and discuss ideas and information with an intelligent and influential audience that cares as much as I do about the importance, beauty, strength, and health of our nation and our nation’s forest resources.

I plan on this column being provocative and factual, and hope that you will respond in kind.  Good essays and presentations can be interesting or even inspiring, but good discussions are usually a lot more stimulating and seem to more readily lead to important actions.  My job is not necessarily to be right, but to help make you think and (hopefully) to act. Our nation’s forests are currently a mess, and I believe it is in both of our best interests to make them better. I hope you agree.

My first several columns will be a four-part series on catastrophic wildfires, which have plagued the western US, Canada, Australia, and other parts of the world to a worsening degree for more than 20 years -- beginning, perhaps, with the Yellowstone and Silver Complex fires of 1987-1988, and continuing until the present.  These fires should never have taken place, or at least should not have resulted in the numbers of lost lives, homes, and dollars, destroyed wildlife, plants, and soils, and polluted airs and waters that they did.  They are an unprecedented abomination based on bad science and worse policies, which continue to the present time and should be stopped. At least those are my general thoughts on the matter.

The first part of this series (beginning with the next paragraph) will focus on the general problems associated with large and catastrophic-scale forest fires.  Part two will describe why they are predictable, how to predict them, and why that is important.  Part three will explain how to prevent these events before they happen -- or how to keep them from recurring if they have already taken place.  Finally, part four will focus on why it is so important to prevent future mega-fires and to keep them from returning.  Let’s get started!

 Part 1.  The Problem with Wildfires

For purposes of this column we will define “large” wildfires as those greater than 5,000 acres in size, “catastrophic” wildfires as greater than 100,000 acres in size (or resulting in human deaths), and “wildfires” in general as representing both categories.  Definitions for “mega-fires” and “complexes” will be introduced in future columns.

There are numerous well-known problems with wildfire – not the least of which are the deaths of people, pets, wildlife, and trees, including old-growth (trees that have lived 200 or more years).  Other recognized problems are air pollution (see Fig. 1 below), water pollution, soil loss, charred vegetation, escalating suppression costs, reduced recreational opportunities, loss of jobs and timber revenue, destroyed homes and structures, unhealthy smoke, and the unsightly and dangerous aftermath of dead, charred trees across the landscape (see Fig. 2 below).  For those that believe in Global Warming, or fear its consequences, there are also the tons of carbon-dioxide released into the atmosphere during these events, and that is subsequently produced and released as dead shrubs and trees decompose over time.

Fig. 1.  Tillamook Fire smoke plume, August 24, 1933.  In a single day, the 1933 Tillamook Fire increased more than 200,000-acres in size, creating a mushroom cloud 40 miles wide and 8 miles high.  This cloud was formed by water vapor, ash, soil, carbon monoxide, and carbon-dioxide gas of nearly immeasureable proportions.

Fig. 2.  The Pacific Crest Trail, May 14, 2004, near its entrance from the south to the Mount Jefferson Wilderness Area. In addition to being unsightly and dangerous due to the threat of falling limbs, trees and reburning, much of this trail has been closed or difficult to traverse since the 2003 B&B Complex Fire because of accumulating debris.  Dead trees are also ugly, dirty, and continue to release large amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere as they rot over time.

What are the benefits of catastrophic wildfire?  That is a tough one.  Pro-wildfire environmentalists will often tout some immeasurable, indescribable “plethora of ecological benefits”, or some form of mystical “forest renewal” when queried.  But those answers border on puerile nonsense.  They are almost knee-jerk “scientific” babble, with no real meaning.  There are no photographs or eyewitness accounts of these things, much less concrete definitions, measures, or examples.

Actual wildfire benefits that have been documented include: firefighter job security; increase in browse for ungulates; increased revenue for university and agency “fire ecology” studies; secure employment for “environmental” litigants and their lawyers; and . . . It is obvious that these are mostly not good things for most people (especially taxpayers), unless you enjoy litigation or hunting ungulates in charred landscapes.

In the next few months I will be arguing that we have a forest management crisis on our hands, and that the crisis can be traced to 1964 and implementation of the Wilderness Act.  The attached graphs (Fig. 3, Fig. 4) show the historical trends: wildfires have been getting much larger, more costly, and more frequent since 1964, and are currently in a dramatic upswing in all categories. We will take a closer look at these numbers in my next column.

Will these events keep happening?  Can they be stopped?  Should they be stopped?

Up Next: Part II - Why wildfires are predictable

Published data source:
Schuster, Ervin G. Analysis of USDA Forest Service Fire-Related Expenditures 1970-1995. Research paper PSW-RP; 230. Berkeley, Calif.: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, 1997. ii + 29 pp. illustrations, bibliography.