Anti-Biomass Incineration Campaign - National Conference Call
Thursday, October 3, 2013 at 6pm EST
TOPIC: "Debunking Wildfire Myths"
RECORDING:
Debunking Wildfire Myths - October 2013
[[{"type":"media","view_mode":"media_large","fid":"111","attributes":{"alt":"","class":"media-image","height":"338","style":"color: rgb(73, 73, 73); font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; text-align: center; width: 333px; height: 250px; float: left; margin-left: 7px; margin-right: 7px;","title":"Photo: Doug Bevington","width":"450"}}]]We discuss how we can improve our advocacy about wildfire and forest practices and how those topics are inseparable from biomass incineration.
What's changing with our Western U.S. forest ecosystems, public budgets, and wood markets? Why does a "one size fits all" type approach fail? How do we reframe the debate to focus on protecting homes, water sources, and soils? Why is it important to look at the whole forest, private and public?
Guest Speaker
Roy Keene, Public Interest Forester and Director of Our Forests
Keene has more than 35 years experience as a forester in both wet and dry Western U.S. forest ecosystems. As a writer and researcher, he has drawn attention to the failings of forest policies and practices, especially under the guise of fire fuels reduction and "restoration." He has firsthand firewise home experience and has visited the Rim and Moonlight fires in the Sierras and Barry Point fire near Lakeview, Oregon. In 2008, Keene helped to warn the public about Senator Ron Wyden's Eastside Forest bill, currently repackaged as his Westside forest bill, based on the myth that logging reduces fire risk.
Facilitator: Josh Schlossberg (Energy Justice Network, VT)
Notes: Samantha Chirillo (Energy Justice Network, OR)
On the Call: 12 people
Recording starts...
Josh: [Introduces topic and guest speaker] Please hold questions till end.
Roy Keene: In the West, We've suppressed fire for over a century. This has resulted in massive fuel loads in these forests which, under normal conditions, have regular fire at maybe 15-30 yr frequencies. These fires have been low-intensity, with a lot of fuels and understory consumed by these fires. When weather conditions are right, fire occurs. Fuel load, gale force winds, and lightning are all contributing factors. We learned lessons from the Biscuit Fire. I had a cabin on the Illinois River in Southern Oregon. I had a fuel break around the property. The FS backfire after the Biscuit ignited was what threatened the cabin. Backfires often just put more money on the table, and they are often set in bad conditions. This one went over top of my fuel break, hit the woods around the cabin. The net effect was that it came right to the edge. The pond waterlines burnt up in fire, but I was able to use the pond to keep the roof wet. So many of these fires burn in the wild. Biscuit burned 500,000 acres. Only 4 buildings burned down but $50 million was spent on fighting the fire. People become fatalities when they don't stay out of the way. The agencies treat fire like a war zone, dropping retardant. Fires are normal in the Western forest though. Although frequencies are only 400-500 years in Western Oregon, these fires are often stand-replacing because they are infrequent. Often weather-driven. Our way of dealing with it is archaic. We know not to suppress but it has paid off for industry, which profits more than anyone because they get to salvage log. $900-100,000? per sugar pine. Even a light scorch, and, by archaic log grading rules they can salvage log it. You see bulldozers on the fireline. The Douglas Complex just south of me recently used feller bunchers instead of bulldozers, cutting firelines. The fire industry is a feeding frenzy from beginning to end. Where do we start? Education. The industry puts out a lot of money to paint fire as a menace. We have seen a lot of burns involving "thinning," including biomass removal, esp. east of the Cascades, although they dip into big timber with hotter burning groundfire and even crown fire in stands. At Conversations on he Forest, an event series here in Lane County, OR, earlier this week, we showed thinned stands, 20-yr precommercial thinned, even shelter woods seeddtree cuts, burned stands when wind dries up the interior and slash still remains, rarely removed much. What we see again and again is how "thinning" contributed to intensity. These stands get replaced with plantations which totally burn up often. The idea of managing to prevent fire is, tersely, bullshit. We can barely manage to contain or direct fire. Big fires are driven by superhuman events, and no amount of management can prevent these. The idea that we can log or manage to prevent is unproven. Science does demonstrate that logging can cause fire. The Moonlight Fire north of the Rim Fire burned inside a managed checkerboard. Sierra Pacific responsible. $120-133 billion, generated by logging in hot weather. There is ample evidence that logging often causes fires - either the source of ignition or source of fuel. Need to start with grassroots education, look at what age people begin to learn to fear fire. Fires create habitat, create fertile ground for bears to forage. But it's difficult to have a voice heard above industry's
Josh: Let's go to Q&A.
Loni (NC): I caught the part about there being no way to prevent fire. They are caused by nature. Our Save ? wilderness group is working to stop the USFS, which is using the excuse of prescribed fire to reduce risk in wilderness. I'm seeking research findings.
Roy: Where?
Loni: North Carolina
Roy: I don't know much about that forest.
Loni: The upper third is gorge, an uplift of 1,500 feet between bottom and top. The upper end receives 57 inches per year. Wildfire is uncommon in that part. The middle third is steep gorge with lots of laurel and rhodos. 50 years of suppression. no way they can suppress in such a steep place. The lower third is drier, but why have 4,000 acres have had severe fire if they are successful? Myth is the need to return to a natural state by prescribed burn.
Roy: Take a look at their budget. It often exceeds payroll. They will do whatever they can get money to do - burning or logging. Follow the money. Show that. We often make too many moral and ecological arguments.
Loni: Funding is $4.5 million. My wife specializes in contracts. Want to expose the shortterm use of funds, management.
Roy: In the West, often prescribed burns get loose, which becomes salvage logging when it does. Take em on about wilderness, no intention for active management. Where could those dollars go? Fireproofing. It's about arguing the economy.
Loni: The general public gets it.
Roy: Turn their logic around - why are we spending money to light fire in order to prevent fire in a wild area that has had fire despite suppression?
Loni: Yes, we say they are lighting fires.
Roy: Sure, and it's is risky -- look at how many prescribed burns have turned into live fires. We can talk about money wasted when 21,000 acres burned anyway. Whereas ecological arguments often go over people's heads.
Loni: Thanks, that makes sense. There is a lot of rain. Widespread fire is infrequent yet now they want to use prescribed burn across the region. Maybe a precursor for hydraulic franking.
Denny (TN): Lance Olsen does a lot of bullshit control on this issue and logging for biomass. I hope we tap into Lance's info. I agree that wildfires in the Eastern U.S. are prone to bogus arguments. Despite all the fire-suppressed and logged-over areas, they build roads into wilderness. Let's focus on lies used by the agency.
Josh: This is usually a Western issue. Interesting that it's East also now, clearly national. Could you speak about precautions people can take, as opposed to going into the backcountry?
Roy: Materials used is a major factor. Shake is bad. The roof is the major source of fires spreading across terrain from house to house.
Denny: I built in the interface like many. Suddenly heroic efforts are needed to save homes.
Roy: Start with materials used. Here in Oregon there are home suppression systems, which run about $7-12 thousand dollars. These pay off in a fire though. Steel roofs are expensive but will prevent the house from burning down. The Berkeley Fire showed which houses burn, which didn't. Those left standing were built in the 30s, tile roofs, stucco finished. Have a plan, create defensible fuel zone around the house. Basically clearcut around your house. Keep the shrubs down, vegetation controlled. Clear out all the way around. This worked for my cabin. I had to backfell trees up the slope from the house. I was glad I did when the fire hit. Takes common sense. There's lots of literature about it. Starts with the right materials, then a defensible zone, also a water system. Need a cistern uphill or a pond to draw water from. Some places are more vulnerable than others. Colorado mixed confider burns every 20-30 years.
Josh: There are government programs out there. Some federal. Much of it has gotten cut back. Meanwhile increasing logging. Do you think its worthwhile to target calling for money for firewise homes instead of logging to reduce fire risk?
Roy: Great idea to encourage and help people who need help protecting their home. Can use equipment for this, not just hauling logs(?)
Denny: Some say it's encouraging people to live in the woods.
Roy: Yes, but millions of people already live in the woods. We can promote firewise or rezoning, maybe a multipronged approach to discourage living in the woods.
Denny: Burn it down preemptively.
Roy: "Log it to save it." Have to have resources to counter myths.
Josh: Media are a problem, too. Many are not doing research and like to dramatize. Hard time selling a rational argument.
? - are you familiar with the Fire Learning Network? The Nature Conservancy has given $1 million for wildfire education.
Josh: They also get funding to log.
Roy: Yeah, they're folded in.
? - The Fire Learning Network - all working on the propaganda machine. Even ecologically aware people say fire is good. Good if ?
Denny - There area differences between forests east versus west [U.S.]
Loni?: Our website is savelgw.org Research from west saying prescribed burning does not work for severe fire, for drought. Snags are part of the habitat, necessary for biodiversity.
Samantha: Roy, there's a difference between cutting and logging, right? Could you explain why the distinction is important to some forests, like Western Oregon Ponderosa Pine forests? Aren't there some cases in which cutting is appropriate?
Roy: In dry pine forest types. Understory density is important to consider. Like in parts of AZ. From ecological persp. In very dry pine, we see old pines fade away because understory species outcompete for moisture. As you get older, you don't have the same vigor. Likewise, the old pines don't have the vigor to compete. The best way to relieve these sites and create the most jobs is to go in and cut, lop, scatter or pile, burn. I've operated in these dry forest types.
Denny: There's less water retention when trees are removed.
Roy: It's not that way in the dry pine forest. You end up losing marginal trees without treatment. The stands I'm talking about I've looked at 20-30 years since we treated them, and they've picked up growth increment. There are vast areas of dying old pines, which would not have happened if not for fire suppression.
Denny- ?
Roy: Fellerbuncher is different from coming in manually.
Josh: They cut larger diameter to pay for the rest.
Roy: Logging is using large, destructive industrial equipment. I'm not talking logging or fellerbunchers.
Josh: No one is doing manual.
Roy: Right, there's not funding to do it. Only funding to log. More logging will not restore forests. Might be an exception, but 97% of ? I haven't talked yet about compaction.
Denny: Most of forest is not a?
Roy: Also the hydrology.
Denny: What about carbon release?
Roy: Yes, when you get up at high elevations, most carbon is stored in the first few inches.
Denny: Montana high-elevation plantations could reestablish.
Roy: No, takes a long time.
Denny: ?
Josh: The biomass industry spinning things to log and remove biomass. We have our worked cut out for us. Not just the legislative push. We need more opinion pieces. We will be asking people to submit some on this topic this month. The San Francisco Chronicle has not run my response. There are many biomass propaganda articles. Need to contact journalists, ask them to point out the other side.
Roy: I need to take off.
Josh: Good timing, thanks for joining us. We have these nationwide network calls the 1st Thursday. The next is Nov. 7 on nuisances, especially noise from facilities. [The date of this next network call has been changed to Nov. 14.] For a link to a recording of today's call or notes contact josh@energyjustice.net
End of call.