11/20/2009 10:20:00 PM Editorial: Prescribed burns now over; enjoy
Well, everyone with sensitive respiratory systems can rest easily for a while. The Prescott National Forest has completed its program of prescribed burns for 2009.
The national forest's website says rangers had hoped to burn 26,000 acres of the forest's total of 1.25 million acres, but accomplished only about 15,000 acres.
Although those who suffered most physically from the prescribed burns should be happiest, all of us who live in or near the world's largest ponderosa pine forest should be happy as well.
First, we are much safer. It's far better for rangers to burn off all the accumulated underbrush, dead branches, fallen trees and pine needles on the forest floor under controlled conditions rather than have a wildfire catch and endanger homes and lives.
Secondly, the forest is much healthier. For 100 years, forest managers fought every fire in the forest to protect the timber resource. They ignored the natural role of fire in the life of a forest. Left alone, a forest usually will experience fire in two- to six-year cycles. The naturally occurring fires would remove brush and other accumulated fuel on the ground. That was healthier for the trees and the entire forest. By suppressing the natural fires, rangers unwittingly allowed the accumulation of underbrush, dead trees and branches to the point that when fire inevitably did erupt, it was much hotter and far more destructive. Some recent fires that occurred in areas killed off by bark beetle burned so hot they sterilized the soil and sometimes even turned some topsoil into a ceramic crust.
Third, prescribed burns reduce the likelihood of more serious fires. Anyone who was here during the 2002 Indian Fire knows that only a fortuitous change in wind direction and the presence of fire retardant aircraft at Ernest A. Love Field kept it from burning a substantial part of Prescott.
The prescribed burns will resume in early 2010. Until then, the people who suffer during them can enjoy the respite, and all of us can enjoy the enhanced safety.
Reader Comments
Posted: Tuesday, December 01, 2009
Article comment by:
SOMBODY'S LYING
They are lying. No one quit burning. They are just covering it more. The area is covered in smoke causing more health problems.
Posted: Tuesday, December 01, 2009
Article comment by:
I AGREE
I agree. The burns do not do anything but kill animals and children. It's just another stupid idea from the Bush administration.
Posted: Saturday, November 21, 2009
Article comment by:
Fear tactics contrinued
It appears that the only time we get a wild fire is when the Government creates one. Then all the folks get to inhale the pollution. This whole idea of saving us from devastating wild fires is nothing but a fear tactic just so the Gov can get more money. If you research this, you can find that other states do not start fires but rather clear the brush and dead trees by logging and chewing up the brush with machinery. This practice provides jobs and actually makes money for the government and helps the local economy by creating jobs. So what is wrong with the picture around here folks? Don't forget the many controlled burns that mysteriously got out of control and cost millions to get back into control not to mention the people that lost homes and had their lives turned upside down. Oh! don't forget how the Forest service does not take responsibility for all of this. Sheesh what a sham.
Posted: Saturday, November 21, 2009
Article comment by:
nothimagain
I lived in Ponderosa Park at the time of the Indian Fire, and I saw that fire blow right through the campground and jump Hwy 89. Why do I say this...that campground had just be cleared of underbush by way of cutting and burning. The clearing did not even slow down the fire. That one fire proves that the buring and slashing does not stop a wild fire. Live in the forest or on the border of the forest...then you accept the risk of fire..I know I do.
Posted: Saturday, November 21, 2009
Article comment by:
AHHH Fresh Air again !
