from the imagine-having-two-thousand-birthdays dept.
California wildfires threaten famous giant sequoia trees:
THREE RIVERS, Calif. (AP) — Firefighters wrapped the base of the world’s largest tree in a fire-resistant blanket as they tried to save a famous grove of gigantic old-growth sequoias from wildfires burning Thursday in California’s rugged Sierra Nevada.
The colossal General Sherman Tree in Sequoia National Park’s Giant Forest, some other sequoias, the Giant Forest Museum and other buildings were wrapped as protection against the possibility of intense flames, fire spokeswoman Rebecca Paterson said.
The aluminum wrapping can withstand intensive heat for short periods. Federal officials say they have been using the material for several years throughout the U.S. West to protect sensitive structures from flames.
[...] The Colony Fire, one of two burning in Sequoia National Park, was expected to reach the Giant Forest, a grove of 2,000 sequoias, at some point within days. It was unclear Thursday night whether that had happened. The fire didn’t grow significantly as a layer of smoke reduced its spread, fire spokeswoman Katy Hooper said.
It comes after a wildfire killed thousands of sequoias, some as tall as high-rises and thousands of years old, in the region last year.
The General Sherman Tree[*] is the largest in the world by volume, at 52,508 cubic feet (1,487 cubic meters), according to the National Park Service. It towers 275 feet (84 meters) high and has a circumference of 103 feet (31 meters) at ground level.
[...] Giant sequoias are adapted to fire, which can help them thrive by releasing seeds from their cones and creating clearings that allow young sequoias to grow. But the extraordinary intensity of fires — fueled by climate change — can overwhelm the trees.
That happened last year when the Castle Fire killed what studies estimate were 7,500 to 10,600 large sequoias, according to the National Park Service.
[*] Wikipedia description.
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 18 2021, @05:24PM
Great news for homeowners planning deck renovations.
(Score: 0, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 18 2021, @06:45PM (10 children)
YES, us humans have screwed over the forests, so these fires are worst then needed. But one glimmer of hope, redwoods are "fire" trees.
Redwoods seeds are spread a way most plants are. They are in pine cones, not the soft mussy fruits of other trees. The seeds are released only in high heat, when pine cones open and the seeds can spill out. Fire is one of those high heat events that help release the seeds.
Redwoods bark is "fire proof". yes, it can burn. But for small ground fires, that release the seeds, the trees do not catch fire. At the beginning of turn of 20 century, redwood bark (this is "soft fluffy type) was used for both insulation and as a fire retardant in homes, in California.
Redwoods are "rain" makers, the live is semi-arid areas and the their needles help to condense water from the air and fall to ground. Think of the San Francisco "Fog", actually low clouds, since fog is 50ft above the 'deck' and SF is normally between 200 and 1000 ft at base. The water condenses and falls, making the ground wetter for plants can grow.
Us, humans thinking fire is bad, have over the decades, destoried the ECO system. Creating great mounds of plants on forest floor, the smaller fire would burn out. Now when it catches fire the heat is great and fire reaches higher into the canopy, destoring large amount of the trees that help keep California green. The only plus out of these fires is nature is recovering the eco-system. Get those people out of the forests so nature can once a gain get the system working correctly.
Similar reason for FEMA to buy out gulf coast properties and send those family AWAY from the coast. Why does all of America have under write stupid choices, that also breakdown natural systems the that built the beuatiful beaches and marshes that brought them there in the first place.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 18 2021, @07:04PM (1 child)
Mostly right, if skewed just a little. But, why should FEMA buy the gulf coast properties? In effect, you're suggesting that the government should underwrite all of those bad investments. Odd. Let those rich bastards lose their investment, and stop worrying. If you're going to "buy" those properties, how about "$1 and other considerations". Those other considerations would be declining to prosecute the current owners for fucking up the environment. Those who decline the offer can still be prosecuted.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 18 2021, @10:39PM
To take control of the land. Emminiite Domain is another method.
A few back this done for town on Missouri River (?). FEMA helped the town to move a few miles away and uphill from the continuous flooding of the totwn. Town moved lock-stock-and-barrel. Fed did the same for town in Kentucty, when building a dam and the town will be flooded.
Why keep paying for people to rebuild at a site that will be festroyied over and over. Give them a chance to be gone.
And NO, not all that live on the coast line is rich, so help start this process pay reasonable (requirement for Emminiite Domain). The pay out to move, can be fixed rates. Also place thumb on Insurance, stop selling flood insurance where it floods. or any insurance fire, wind, ... Put them on notice, we are helping in the rebuild.
So the New Jesery shore should be send on their way. Twice in less than 8 years. With more to come.
Say 40 miles from the gulf shores, take the money and leave. This is now a national park / reservere / protected area.
Let nature start to rebuild a coastline that protects again. Maybe nature can get ahead of the growing threat from see rise.
Or should we who live outside of flood planes, keep paying for the stupidity. Which gets to your view: why pay of these rich bastards at all. After the last offer from FEMA, take it. Nature is now allowed to be free in this area, We we will not be (re)installing any power, gas, water, sewer, roads, bridges. Pest control is also blocked - ant, terminates, gator, snake, wild hogs, IF there is an emergency and you are taken out... you cannot come back, period.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 18 2021, @07:35PM (7 children)
That logic, that wildfires are good for promoting new growth, held true in the past when wilfires were less extreme.
Now climate change is changing the rules.
Longer droughts, more extreme fires and the trees no longer have a way to regrow as the seeds get destroyed before hitting the ground and if they do manage to get there, there is no conditions conducive to sprouting.
Keep dreaming though.
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 18 2021, @07:43PM (1 child)
>> Now climate change is changing the rules.
Dude, climate's been changing forever. The only rule is that things change. Four billion years ago there was no oxygen, now there is. LIfe adapted. So stop freaking out, take a chill pill and adapt.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 19 2021, @05:45AM
Hope you like the life that adapted to Sahara conditions.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 18 2021, @08:39PM
Afire does need t. And changes in a weekend. Or e d of quarter. Or end of decade … century …. Millennium. Student will break through. Forest will regrow but not nessariy the same. It took a long long to be the monster trees that humans found and restored.
Once humans die off Nature will start to build the nextt great…. f .
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 18 2021, @09:16PM (1 child)
Stop reading all the talking points at the progressive media outlets. Fire is necessary for healthy forests. Unfortunately, we've been preventing forest fires for too many decades. Humans have decided that controlled burns are bad, so we are left with uncontrolled burns after piling up years of tinder. It isn't climate change, it's mismanagement fueling our current fire seasons.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 19 2021, @02:32AM
Do you have a rake? https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-says-raking-would-help-prevent-forest-fires_n_5bf0d578e4b0f32bd58a1aba [huffpost.com]
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Saturday September 18 2021, @09:31PM (1 child)
The reason the wildfires are more extreme is because they prevented the natural fires that should have been happening to clear out underbrush.
And so the solution to that problem is again to wrap trees in blankets and prevent nature from taking its course. I wonder which kind of irony this will end up being.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 2) by edIII on Sunday September 19 2021, @12:43AM
Actually, the solution has been underway for awhile. However, it's like plugging leaks on a submarine that is plunging towards the Laurentian Abyss. They're a good thing to do, but not a solution against the primary problem.
California has a controlled burn program. It needs to be expanded by at least 20x because it is way behind. If the controlled burns were conducted correctly and adequately, the risks of out of control wildfires would be a lot less. Those controlled burns mimic the beneficial effects that fire brings to a forest. Not to mention getting rid of the kindling on the ground.
Where Climate Change is greatly exacerbating things is how much of the forests are now dead. The lack of water has just flat out killed huge swaths of forest in California. Those dead trees are kindling for the fires that are now hotter, faster, and more destructive. I dunno if we're smart and mature enough to fix it, because we're still letting Nestle drain the damn forests for fucktons of water each and every day to sell back to us in plastic bottles. Fuck Nestle.
Groundwater reserves are dwindling, Climate Change is reshaping how water is distributed planet wide, and the future doesn't look good.
About the only good thing is when you look at this historical maps for the last 10 years and realize just how much of California has already burned. Part of the reason why the current fires have come under control is because they're traveling into areas already burned in the last few years. The fire season next year, which may start just as early as this year, can't burn what has already been burned. So the controlled burn backlog is being taken care of by nature itself.
California isn't alone. Look at the fire maps and historical data and you can see it is Oregon, Seattle, Idaho, and Montana.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 18 2021, @07:43PM (6 children)
Seeing the images of what looks like a McGyver pot head wrapping the trunk in toilet paper, stands analogous to what we are doing to tackle climate change.
But hey, just keep giving the oil companies more tax breaks and subsidies.
They need it to run their lawsuits as they sue governments for lost profits.
Anything we do at this point short of a moratorium on further extraction is utterly futile, like wrapping Sherman in what looks like a sandwich wrap.
Good luck with that.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 18 2021, @07:53PM (5 children)
>> Anything we do at this point short of a moratorium on further extraction is utterly futile
Explain that to the Europeans facing 10X increase in their fuel bills because the wind isn't blowing and they've decommissioned all the clean coal plants that could have handled the baseload If you hippy whackos hadn't freaked out about nuclear energy in the 1970s and put a halt to further R&D, we wouldn't have global warming now.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 18 2021, @09:10PM (4 children)
Clean coal plants? Shirley you jest.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 18 2021, @09:20PM (3 children)
"Clean coal plant" is no jest. Dirty coal can be shoveled into the fire by the ton, and zero effort made to clean the waste going into the air. Or, cleaner coal can be used, with all the modern efficiency methods, and scrubbers mandated to remove the worst of the pollution. If you think that all coal plants are equal, you are simply clueless. There is still need for coal plants, so let's upgrade them to be as clean and efficient as possible. If not coal plants, then other fossil fuels. Renewables simply aren't capable of carrying the load yet.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 18 2021, @10:10PM (2 children)
Don't try arguing with a Greta cult member... they're so deeply brainwashed that anything short of a moratorium on extraction causes them to glare.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 18 2021, @10:48PM (1 child)
They may be "cleaner" but they are not clean by any measure.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 19 2021, @06:50AM
Don't try arguing with a Trump cult member... they're so deeply brainwashed that anything short of a moratorium on reason causes them to glare.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Spamalope on Saturday September 18 2021, @08:09PM (2 children)
"fueled by climate change"
Fueled by preventing small fires, banning undergrowth clearing so the fires grow to this scale more like... Leaving lots of tinder around is such a good idea in drought prone areas. (that's not new, or man made... The Sequoia are evolved for fires - but not firestorms caused by human interference)
I thought CA was allowing forest management again? Was that not widespread or was it stopped before it got traction? (or is the problem so severe after decades of neglect they haven't been able to do enough?)
(Score: 2) by helel on Saturday September 18 2021, @10:52PM (1 child)
The whole "stoped all natural fires" and "never cleared the overgrowth" talking points are, at this point, decades out of date. California has employed a "let it burn" strategy starting in the 80's and especially in the mid 90's, and has only this year rolled it back because the fires, fueled by only the growth from the last few years, have become so bad they can't protect humans, property, and old trees like these without quick suppression.
The problem is that the west coast is now in a state of more-or-less perpetual drought making the sequoias (and other trees) vulnerable to fire in a way they wouldn't otherwise be and the fires themselves are hotter and faster due to everything around these giants being dried to kindling. There's simply only so much clearing out the growth every year can accomplish. Even if the budget existed to do it to the entire forest that would only solve the immediate problem of the fire itself and not the problem of the ecosystem needing those fires every so often.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 19 2021, @06:53AM
Bbbut socialist CA BAD!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 19 2021, @01:42AM (1 child)
Climate change in California drying the place out? Here is the part they won't usually tell you; California being wet during the 19th and 20th centuries was already climate change. California's usual climate is much drier than it is presently.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_in_California [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 20 2021, @05:01PM
These trees are thousands of years old. They didn't pick up and move to these areas when, "things got wetter in the last couple thousand years." Things are dryer now to the point that eons old trees are being destroyed by fire, for the first time in eons. And, 20% of the trees were being lost per year to fire in the eons prior to the most recent, these trees would have gone extinct long ago.
There were older giant sequoias than 2000 year old Sherman before humans blew them all up with dynamite in the 19th and 20th centuries.