In the wake of several disastrous California wild fire seasons, state officials are considering using controlled burns in order to reduce future risk by reducing the amount of fuel available. Experts are also saying that fires started naturally, i.e., by lighting strikes, and pose no threat to human habitation should simply be allowed to run their course.

In most cases, when a fire breaks out in a wilderness area – even one that starts under relatively damp, cool conditions – the immediate reaction by federal firefighters is to race to the scene and put it out. This is in fact what happened recently when a small fire broke out in the Sierra foothills east of Sacramento.

The fire had been ignited by a bolt of lightning, and the area was still wet and green from the rain. Instead of allowing the fire to run its course, firefighters rushed to the scene and extinguished it before it could spread past a 65-acre area – roughly the size of city block.

Now, ecologists and other scientists are saying that is the wrong way to control a potential California wild fire.

A Better Way To Prevent a California Wild Fire

In his 1998 book “There’s a Hair in My Dirt!: a Worm’s Story”, cartoonist Gary (“The Far Side”) Larson, whose educational background is in biology, pointed out that “young trees don’t burn easily.”

He then went on to explain, in his typical tongue-in-cheek manner, how naturally-occurring fires are part of how a healthy ecosystem regulates itself. This is something that scientists have only understood for the past 30 years or so.

Another expert, Timothy Ingalsbee of the Oregon-based Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology (FUSEE), takes the idea a step further according to the Sacramento Bee. He advocates for “prescribed” burns for the purpose of getting rid of the dry fuel upon which a California wild fire feeds.

These are fires that are set deliberately, carefully supervised and controlled. Noting that “nothing fights fire like fire,” Ingalsbee warns: “If we don’t start applying a lot more fire now, while conditions are still somewhat amenable to fire control, years ahead — given climate change — it’s just going to be really an untenable situation.”

Playing Politics With Human Lives

Part of the problem lies in California’s own conflicting rules and regulations. On one hand, there is understandable pyrophobia that has developed as a result of the last several horrendous California wild fire seasons.

There is also the state’s own environmental regulations, which are among the strictest in the country, which come up against fear of litigation and violation of private property rights.

Competing approaches at the state and federal level have resulted in a conflict between local fire officials who understand the wisdom of allowing natural fires to run their course and federal firefighters who are legally obligated to put them out. At least on state-run lands, officials are beginning to change their policies. Some new proposed legislation is aiming to make future real estate developments safer from wild fire risk.

By using controlled, prescribed burns to eliminate dry brush and deadfall, the next big California wild fire might not happen at all.

This article is not legal advice. It is presented
for informational purposes only.