Are there any areas of California that have NOT been the victim of fires in the last 5 to 10 years?
I think much of the Central Valley has been okay. Rather than forests and undergrowth, most of it is farms.
most of it is farms.
And they control the underbrush that is so incendiary. Most of the fires in that area are human caused along the highways.
Well, it also helps that a lot of it is wetlands and farmland.
They do get some pretty bad wildfires from time to time. But with the terrain so flat and lots of farmland there is little to no damage and are largely contained.
Several years ago I remember they had to reroute US 99 to I-5 because a wildfire had closed the freeway.
But one thing in common with most of the bad fires they get, they occur in rugged mountain terrain. Malibu, Angeles Crest, Lake Berryessa, Paradise, even the current Hughes fires all have that in common. Very rough and rugged terrain, that is almost impossible to get to so it can be fought on the ground. So they are very limited in how they can be handled.
Also as there is no real "forest management", those areas will build up decades of debris and deadwood between fires, so each one is worse than the last. In the Central Valley, as that is mostly agriculture they simply do not allow it to build up the same way.
Thinking about it, the Imperial Valley (between San Diego and Arizona) is pretty immune to wildfires.
I read that they are considering an arsonist for most of the fires. Too many fires are starting where there is no reasonable natural cause, like lightning.
Most wild fires here in Arizona have been human caused. Mostly from carelessness. Though there was a case of some being set by a firefighter so he could get more hours. Several were started by people setting off explosive devices. And we do get fires in the desert when we have had a rainy winter or spring.
There is a mountainous amount of pictures, video, and eyewitness testimony that points a gigantic finger at PEOPLE (arsonists) setting fires all over the area.
Mainly VAGRANTS.
No idea what they intended to accomplish, but it is pretty obvious.
Side note...
The huge problem is the government/s and stupid regulations that prohibit control burns and kept the water from being directed to storage areas.
I live in the South where we have mostly Pines. We have a carpet of pine straw that burns like gasoline. We have plenty of underbrush to burn.
Reason WE don't have fires?
We do CONTROL BURNS to eliminate the hazard.
The huge problem is the government/s and stupid regulations
I don't remember the details, but Calif once had goats roaming free to eat the stuff that fires are made from. It worked. But then that was banned by the environmentalists or someone.
Reason WE don't have fires?
One reason might be the South isn't dry like Calif (and Arizona). But forest management is important.
We do CONTROL BURNS to eliminate the hazard.
CA's mountains are different from mountains in the south.
1 - they are taller and steeper.
2 - the terrain is more rugged and less accessible.
3 - the majority of the mountain area has no trails.
A controlled burn requires access to control the burn.
There are no trails that would allow people to move thru the forest and control the burn.
You do realize that the only access to most of the mountainous areas is by air.
CA's mountains are different from mountains in the south.
1 - they are taller and steeper.
2 - the terrain is more rugged and less accessible.
3 - the majority of the mountain area has no trails.
None of which applies to the areas around LA where the most recent wildfires occurred. These were relatively flat and more importantly, populated areas.
Also adding to the problem, years ago CA environmentalists banned the goats that roamed the hills and ate the wild vegetation, for health reasons, goat poop. Then they blocked people from reducing the amount of brush since it could lead to mudslides.
👍👍👍
First people filed suits against the electric companies when they discovered that one of the fires started at the base of a high voltage tower, but there was no fluctuation recorded on any of the lines and the wires were intact until after the fire started. Still waiting for the judge to dismiss that one. Now CA is talking about suing fossil fuel companies (CA's wording) for the damages, but there was no fossil fuel systems present except for natural gas lines that ruptured either when burnt buildings collapsed, or from the heat of the fires. They are really getting desperate to find someone to blame.
Now CA is talking about suing fossil fuel companies (CA's wording) for the damages, but there was no fossil fuel systems present except for natural gas lines that ruptured either when burnt buildings collapsed
They're suing them for causing climate change which caused the fires.