The other day I couldn't stand to look at the inside walls of the house another day so the dogs and I loaded up and headed to the Hills. We all needed some fresh air, unfortunately, what we found at my favorite lake - Sheridan Lake - was a temperature inversion from the spot fires the Forest Service was conducting. My guess is there were a minimum of 30 fires burning to "destroy" slash piles.
I fashion myself an outdoor person. I believe, through experience, I have gained knowledge about the pros and cons of prescribed controlled burns. My understanding is decisions for these burns in our backyard are made in D.C. - and many times no weight is put on these decisions by local Agency management (i.e. prescribed burn lit during red flag conditions in Wind Cave National Park - 2014).
-
Reduces hazardous fuels, protecting
human communities from extreme fires;
-
Minimizes the spread of pest insects
and disease;
-
Removes unwanted species that threaten
species native to an ecosystem;
-
Provides forage for game;
-
Improves habitat for threatened and
endangered species;
-
Recycles nutrients back to the soil;
and
-
Promotes the growth of trees, wildflowers,
and other plants
Cons of Prescribed Burns (source: my personal feelings/experience)
- No Agency Employees or other persons monitoring burns to ensure "control";
- Slash piles often are left to simply smolder rather than burn therefore not truly returning nutrients back to soil;
- Loss of habitat for specific season burn takes place (yes, I realize that growth often times comes back richer the following spring);
- Young plants generally are unable to withstand the heat of fire;
- Intensify effects of drought by destroying mulch layers
My Humble Opinion to Combat Out of Control "Prescribed" Burns:
- Burn ONLY when weather is conducive to "controlled"burn (I DO understand the benefits of fire when used properly);
- Staff on sight of burn to ensure it stays within targeted area;
- Allow public to harvest fire fuels for personal burning;
- Allow logging companies to responsibly log forested areas;
- Allow access to slash piles for public to make positive use of fuels rather than simply letting it all go up in smoke
I've obviously not spent days researching facts for this blog post, but rather quick internet searches for the "pros". Mostly, I put my heart on my sleeve and speak from the passion of my love of the outdoors. I'll say it again, yes, I do understand the benefits of controlled burns. However, mostly I am infuriated by the lack of responsibility of responsible agencies during the prescribed controlled burn process. All it takes is one change of the wind with no one monitoring a fire for it to become completely out of control.
Most of our fire departments are volunteer which naturally have a longer response time than paid full-time departments. Couple this longer response time with the fact that these burns take place miles away from any agencies anti-fire equipment/personnel, many times no cell service for passers by, and unfortunately, a recipe for disaster is born.
The biggest change I would like to see to prescribed burn policy: Staff on sight with means to call in more staff should a fire jump the targeted area. Someone readily available to put out a spot fire would save acres of habitat, thousands of dollars, not to mention public opinion.
An enjoyable time. I walked through the State park crossing the river several times, watched the water from the observatory, then we went to the Canadian side so I could set my camera up for the light show. Both the Americans and the Canadians project lights onto the Falls; American side is red, white and blue while the Canadian side is all the colors of the rainbow. I'm sure it has something to do with you driving across the "Rainbow Bridge" to get to Canada.
