More on Californian Bushfires

Comments

1. Larry Fields says

   September 4, 2009 at 4:23 am

   from the article:
   “After a week of burning they finally pulled in the larger drop aircraft including the DC-10.”

   This delay is not necessarily a sign of negligence on the part of fire-fighting officials.

   Air tankers can slow down a wildfire, but they can’t be relied upon to put it out. Putting out the fire is a coordinated effort that must involve people on the ground. Here’s one simple scenario.

   The wind direction is steady. Ground crews have built a fire line (scraped down to mineral soil) around the origin and flanks of the fire. Then it makes sense to call in the air tankers, who can drop the liquid retardant a short distance in front of the fire, so that the fire crews can safely extend the hand line, and get the fire contained.

   Davey, please correct me if I’m mistaken about this.

2. Larry Fields says

   September 8, 2009 at 7:51 am

   Here’s an article about one aspect of California’s mush-brained bushfire management ‘strategy’. In addition to the problem of state law sending the wrong economic signal, there’s the welfare-for-the-wealthy angle. Other than some wealthy movie star, who would build a multimillion-dollar dream house in a brush-filled canyon in Southern California?

   California encourages buildings that are sure to burn
   18:00 04 September 2009 by Bob Holmes

   Arnie might want to rethink this one.

   In a classic case of a perverse incentive, California state law actually encourages homeowners to build in brushy canyons prone to massive wildfires like the “Station fire”, which burned over 350,000 hectares and destroyed dozens of homes near Los Angeles this month.

   If you want to read the rest of the NewScientist article, here’s a link.
   http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17743-california-encourages-buildings-that-are-sure-to-burn.html