Viewpoint: Lessons from the devastating Los Angeles fires
George Wuerthner
As I write this, the Los Angeles fires are still burning. The loss of property, the disruption and loss of lives, and the trauma these fires created are horrendous. Such catastrophic losses are almost unimaginable.
If there is anything good to come from these blazes, it is that there are lessons we can learn to change fire policies to mitigate (not prevent) such tragedies in the future. Wildfires are a natural part of many Western landscapes. Extreme weather and climate are responsible for all large blazes.
In LA, Santa Ana winds up to 100 miles per hour, fanned the flames, and cast embers miles ahead of the fire front.
In just 24 hours, the Palisades Fire grew more than 15,000 acres. That's several football fields a minute. A year ago, I wrote an essay titled "It's the Wind Stupid," pointing out that wind is the main culprit in all large blazes.
Santa Ana winds have been stoking fires for millions of years. The difference is that we now have sprawl and entire cities on the fire pathway. These are urban fires ignited by wildfires. Once dozens of homes are ablaze, firefighters are overwhelmed.
An important lesson from the LA fires and others is that extreme weather conditions negate fuel reductions. State and federal agencies' mantra about "reducing fuels" fails to recognize that high winds invalidate the effectiveness of logging, thinning, or prescribed burns. The wind blows embers over, around, and through such "fuel reductions."
If you have vulnerable structures on the landscape, they will ignite. Embers land in gutters, roofs, and wooden decks or are pushed by high winds through unscreened vents to ignite homes.
Furthermore, like those in Los Angeles, most acreage charred annually is in non-forested landscapes. The LA fires are burning through chaparral. In the West, 80% of structures destroyed by wildfire occur in grasslands or shrublands, not forests. Yet federal and state agencies have continued to emphasize logging forests as if this will safeguard communities, which is delusional under extreme weather conditions but doesn't apply to many western landscapes.
Given that traditional measures like thinning the forest or prescribed burns are ineffective during extreme fire weather (and all large blazes only occur during extreme weather), how can communities protect themselves?
First, land use zoning can limit construction in fire-prone areas. Second, most human ignitions (fire starts) occur near roads. Road closures and not building roads into the hinterlands are potential defenses against fire starts.
Third, it's critical to reduce flammable materials near homes. Work from home outward. Fuel reductions of more than 100 feet from structures provide little extra protection from fires. A wood pile adjacent to a house, a wooden fence, and shrubs planted adjacent to the structure are all potential ignition points.
Fourth, reduce the flammability of the home itself. A metal roof or a non-flammable material can withstand burning embers. Windows with vinyl frames quickly melt from radiant heat and fall apart, allowing embers to enter the home. Construction with metal, cinder blocks, brick or packed earth, and other non-flammable materials can sometimes help a home to survive a blaze.
We must adopt a new paradigm. Climate warming is influencing the occurrence and size of wildfires. We cannot build homes the same way as in the past or construct them in places that were perhaps safe from fires 50 years ago.
George Wuerthner has studied wildfires for decades. He's written several books about wildfire policy and ecology.