Forest Fires in the Golden State

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach [See update at end] [Note correction under Figure 1.]

Our charmingly incompetent California Governor, Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown, has announced that all climate-change deniers are “definitely contributing” to the wildfires in the northern and southern parts of the state over the past few days, as well as blazes “in the coming years.” So look out, you dang “deniers”, it’s all your fault!

He continued:

“This is not the ‘new normal.’ This is the ‘new abnormal.’ And this new abnormal will continue, certainly in the next 10 to 15 to 20 years … And unfortunately the best science is telling us that dryness, warmth, drought, all those things, they’re going to intensify. Predictions by some scientists are we’ve already gone up one degree; I think we can expect a half a degree, which is catastrophic, over the next 10-12 years. So we have a real challenge here threatening our whole way of life.”

And what is his brilliant solution? Why … to my shock and surprise, Governor Moonbeam proposes throwing more and even more taxpayer money at it:

“And we’re going to have to invest more and more in adaptation. When we talk about things like the climate, and the warming climate, and we talk about words like ‘adaptation,’ that’s what we’re talking about. And it’s not millions, it’s billions, and tens, and probably hundreds of billions even in the span of a few years.”

So … did scientists actually “predict” that past temperatures have gone up by one degree? Can scientists actually predict the past? And can we really expect half a degree of warming in the next decade? To get some perspective on these questions, I thought I’d take a look at the records. I found an interesting site, the Western Regional Climate Center (WRCC), which has a variety of weather-related data state by state. So with no further ado, here is the average temperature in California from January of 1895 to the present, October 2018.

Figure 1. Average monthly California temperatures from the WRCC. The seasonal variations have been removed.

Now, has the temperature gone up by one degree as the Governor said? Well, yes, but only since 1895. Since 1895, it has been going up at a rate of about 0.12°C, twelve-hundredths of a degree Celsius, per decade. [NOTE: An earlier version of this post mistakenly stated that the trend was two-hundredths of a degree per decade, rather than the correct value of twelve-hundredths of a degree per decade. The text has been changed to reflect the correct values. My thanks to Grietver, the commenter who pointed out my error.]

How much is twelve-hundredths of a degree Celsius? Well, as is widely known, temperature decreases with altitude. You can feel this when you go from sea level up the side of a mountain, for example. The rate at which the temperature drops is about 1°C for every hundred metres of additional altitude.

And this means that 0.12°C is about the altitude-caused temperature drop between … wait for it … the ground floor and the fourth floor of a building. In other words, it’s equivalent to moving 12 metres (40 feet) vertically up the side of a mountain …

So obviously, the Governor is telling porkies when he says that anthropogenic temperature rise is the cause of the recent decade’s fires. The temperature rise in California is small, twelve-hundredths of a degree Celsius in a decade. That is not enough to make a big difference like the increase in fires that we’ve seen in the last decade.

Well, if it’s not the temperature, how about the rainfall? Is climate change making the state dryer? Fortunately, the WRCC has the data for that as well. Here’s the monthly rainfall in California.

annualized rainfall statewide CA

Figure 2. Annualized monthly rainfall in California per the WRCC. Since rainfall data is usually given in inches per year, not per month, I have multiplied all of the values by 12 to “annualize” them, in order to make the trend a yearly trend.

Is the precipitation decreasing? Yes … by a totally meaningless five-hundredths of an inch (1.1 mm) per decade. So that is clearly not the reason for the increase in fires.

So what is the reason for the increase in fires? Actually, there are a few reasons.

First, our forests have not been harvested properly for some years. This is the result of a variety of lawsuits, one of which banned logging in many areas in 1994. This was in a vain attempt to protect the Spotted Owl. Unfortunately, this was just a green fantasy—stopping the logging has had no effect on the decline of the Spotted Owl. It appears that instead, it is being displaced by another owl, the Barred Owl.  Oops … and there have been a host of other lawsuits that have stopped or restricted logging.

Next, California regulations highly restrict both the logging and the thinning of forests. After the fires in Redding, Governor Brown said he’d work to change the laws … but so far, crickets.

Naturally, when you don’t log and you don’t thin the forest, you get a buildup of what is called the “fuel load”. This is the amount of burnable stuff per acre. And when that happens, what would otherwise be a small fire turns into a large fire very quickly

Finally, a couple of years back we had a big El Nino/La Nina event. This led to the recent couple of warmer, drier years. There’s a name for this, and it is not “climate change”—it’s called “weather”.

Now, there’s been a meme circulating on the internet saying that President Trump is bad and wrong to blame the State, because according to the meme, 98% of the forest in California is National Forest, and 2% is State Forest. Nothing could be further from the truth.

trump forestry meme

But in fact, about 43% of the forest is privately held, and of the remainder 98% is Federal and 2% is State forest. So overall, about 44% of the forests in California are ruled by California laws and regulation.

But wait, as they say on TV, there’s more … both of the recent fires, the Camp Fire in Paradise and the Woolsey Fire in Thousand Oaks, occurred on privately owned forest. Which means the Federal Government had nothing to do with the regulations leading up to these fires.

Should President Trump have been so aggro? Of course not, that was a mistake … but I can understand his anger, given that Governor Brown is claiming that the fires have nothing to do with California regulations.

But not to worry. The Governor said that steps to combat global warming can still, eventually, “shift the weather back to where it historically was.”

Ah, yes, back to where it historically was, to the mythical Climate Eden, where the weather is the same year after year after year …

Where once it never rained till after sundown
By 8 a.m the morning fog had flown
Don’t let it be forgot that once there was a spot
For one brief shining moment
That was known as Camelot

[UPDATE] A commenter asked:

Could you please give us a ‘public relations’ plot of the “Average monthly California temperatures from the WRCC” on a hardware store thermometer

We’re nothing if not a full-service website:


Here, my gorgeous ex-fiancee and I staying in the Youth Hostel in Santa Cruz on our way back home. The smoke from the forest fires was bad in the Central Valley on the way up from LA, but it’s relatively clear in Santa Cruz. The word from where we live, though, is that it is still quite bad there … we’ll find out tomorrow.

Best regards to all,

w.

PS: When you comment, please quote the exact words that you are discussing, so we can understand just what you are talking about.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

231 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Windsong
November 12, 2018 8:21 pm

“We’re in extreme climate change right now…”
LA County Fire Chief Daryl Osby, 11/12/18, during a briefing on the Woolsey fire.
*Right now* I would like for the chief to read Willis’ post above.

Kenji
Reply to  Windsong
November 12, 2018 11:32 pm

Yep … Here come those Santa Ana winds again …
https://youtu.be/pAuPMJlK92s

Seems as though the Chief moves around quite a bit.
https://www.fire.lacounty.gov/fire-chief-daryl-l-osby-making-history/
However, with his … uh … thorough … history in the State of CA … one would think he’d know something of the Santa Ana winds and take appropriate preventative precautions. Oh, I don’t know … ban burning, red flag warnings … something other than race pandering and CAGW pandering … Prog. politic pandering.

Don K
Reply to  Kenji
November 13, 2018 2:29 am

Kenji — The US weather service posts weather warnings on a national map at https://www.weather.gov/ I don’t check it as part of my daily routine, but I did pass through there a week or so ago — before the Camp Fire — and I do seem to recall red flag warnings posted for the Northern Sacramento Valley. Trouble is that you probably can’t realistically react strongly — beyond red flag warnings and banning burning — for every potentially hot, dry day. That’s half the year in California.

(Parenthetically, I think outdoor burning was banned in the LA Basin 60 or 70 years ago to fight air pollution. I recall that my dad used to burn trash in our backyard incinerator during WWII. He stopped using it in the late 1940s or 1950s.)

Kenji
Reply to  Don K
November 13, 2018 10:11 am

Let me clarify my point.

For this Fire Chief to be lecturing the public about global warming INSTEAD of focusing all his attention and resources on actually PREVENTING fires during exceptionally hazardous conditions is simply INCOMPETENT. And if you want to look at it more “complexly” rather than “simply” … a Fire Chief who acts like this … speaks like this (talk, talk, talk, talk …) … is CRIMINALLY NEGLIGENT! He has abdicated his duties to a mythical condition (beyond his control).

I have lived in this state for all of my 63 years and can attest to the fact that nothing has changed “climatically” during those 63 years. Nothing that in any way that has altered existing patterns (ex. Santa Ana winds, or 50% of warm, dry days) affecting fire danger. This sort of comment from the Chief and Gov. is perfectly emblematic of WHY focusing and devoting so many public resources on “global warming” is actually deadly-STUPID. This Chief and outgoing Gov. Brown need to shut the fkcu-up! about global warming and instead start DOING something proactive to PREVENT fires.

After my last rant here about the inexcusable explosion of mega-fires in CA and asking WHY there are no longer any simple public service messages about Fire Prevention … such as Smoky Bear reminders … suddenly on the radio there have appeared Smoky Bear (National Forest Service) advertisements warning about Fire danger (WUWT gets RESULTS!). In fact, the advertisements are so specific as to warn (stupid) people that dragging chains behind their automobiles when towing things can spark and cause fires! (reported cause of the devastating Carr fire).

So what has Gov. Brown DONE since the Carr Fire? Wagged his finger in the face of the public and lectured us about “global warming”! … implying that the fires are OUR fault for heating our homes and driving cars. What has Chief Daryl Osby done? … wagged his finger in our faces and lectured us about “global warming”! Thus absolving himself from any responsibility (except to attend the next UNION luncheon).

Until we get rid of STUPID people electing STUPID politicians and bureaucrats … nothing will change. The State will continue to “burn-baby-burn”. Makes me wonder if this African-American Fire Chief is channeling his inner Marvin-X when lecturing us about “global warming”

Burn Baby Burn is a poem by American poet Marvin X (aka El Muhajir). X wrote the poem shortly after the Watts Rebellion in 1965, to convey the oppression Black people faced in white America

PS … My grandfather and I used to rake-up and burn the brush that grew on the creek bank in his beautiful urban-wildland interfaced suburban town in N. CA. No incinerator … just raked into a pile and burned on a terrace adjacent to the creek. Somehow he managed not to be STUPID and burn on a windy day, or cause a massive conflagration.

Sheri
Reply to  Kenji
November 13, 2018 12:44 pm

I’ve seen prairie fires started by a person welding DURING a red flag warning (tens of thousands of acres went up), an art teacher leaving a burning barrel going when he left for several hours and the landfill carelessly leaving smoldering material under a compost pile. The latter took out 13 houses and cost the city dearly. People are foolish and careless with fire in many places.

JHB
Reply to  Windsong
November 13, 2018 8:36 am
Kenji
Reply to  JHB
November 13, 2018 10:14 am

That’s just revolting. Thanks for making my stomach churn. A lesson that it PAYS $$$ to preach the Party line.

Reply to  JHB
November 13, 2018 2:21 pm

But Chief Osby received [so, I guess, worked] no overtime 2011-2017 inclusive.

Devotion to duty [and a salary that reflects & includes that], or a 9-5, only, man.
I think the former is more likely, but YMMV.

Auto

November 12, 2018 8:23 pm

Hello Willis:

Excellent data-based post. I love it.

It falls apart a bit when you get into policies affecting forest fires. You left out development of of the urban forest interface and forest fire suppression since 1911, which is the proximate cause of forest fuels build-up. These data are readily available, too.

Glad you enjoyed your stay here in Santa Cruz. No global warming or sea level rise round these parts!

GogogoStopSTOP
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
November 13, 2018 11:53 am

Great post W. Could you please give us a ‘public relations’ plot of the “Average monthly California temperatures from the WRCC” on a hardware store thermometer. The result is utterly shocking.

Dr. Strangelove
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
November 14, 2018 5:59 am

I wonder if the 49 states also show that nice flat line. You should print it in postcards and give them away in global warming rallies.

OK S.
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
November 13, 2018 6:29 am

You can say that again.

bit chilly
Reply to  OK S.
November 13, 2018 7:46 am

and again 😉

i won’t comment on moonbeam and his idiocy, well except to say it was other idiots that voted him in. i have my fingers crossed your home is in one piece when you return willis, a beautiful place you have there.

Reply to  Michael Lewis
November 13, 2018 8:21 am

Michael Lewis is 100% correct. Pine forests burn! They need to burn periodically. That pine sap, excellent fuel.

People who want to live out in the woods are asking for it. Fighting forest fires is a fundamental error. And, apparently both of these fires started just after a power line failed, probably from a transformer fire. SCE and PG&E both reported outages right where the fires started a few minutes before, 2 minutes for SCE, 15 minutes for PG&E.

So, we have the huge fuel load, dry conditions recently, houses where they do not belong, and lots of casualties. Wake up and smell the coffee, children, this is no one’s fault except the real estate people.

Reply to  Michael Moon
November 13, 2018 10:21 am

People who want to live the densely populated urban areas are just asking for it. Fighting urban property crimes is a fundamental error; it is a waste of resources that tries to maintain a disproportionate balance of the overall wealth.

And, apparently most of these property crimes occur when poor people don’t have access to something that they need or want. This need and want is the ongoing, so enforcement of property protections would not help anything.

So, we have the high density population; haves & have nots living next to each other; a huge & unfair wealth gap that does not belong in a civilized society; and lots of resulting crime. Wake up and smell the coffee, children, this is no one’s fault except the real estate people.

Reply to  DonM
November 13, 2018 3:39 pm

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery

Steve R
Reply to  Michael Moon
November 13, 2018 3:56 pm

Your Governer is a jerk. I have no responsibility for causing that fire, and my carbon footprint is a tiny fraction of his. You all need to give him the boot.

Steve R
Reply to  Michael Moon
November 13, 2018 3:58 pm

People who want to live in the woods are asking for it? Is this really what you meant to say?

Reply to  Steve R
November 13, 2018 4:11 pm

I can’t live in the woods, I can’t live by the ocean, I can’t live by rivers. Where am I suppose to live to enjoy this beautiful planet earth? In a big man made city….

Reply to  Steve R
November 14, 2018 8:52 am

Yes. I have never bought a house in an area known to sustain forest fires. I don’t know why people do this.

Seems like poor planning to me.

Eric Elsam
Reply to  Michael Lewis
November 13, 2018 8:45 am

Google Earth Street View shows that the residents of Paradise CA were living in the midst of a forest. An extreme example of the urban-forest interface. Almost every street was lined with tall trees, many of which were conifers. The resulting disaster was horrible and inevitable.

Kenji
Reply to  Michael Lewis
November 13, 2018 10:29 am

Here’s an idea! to “solve” development of the urban-wildland interface. Stop importing third worlders and H1b Visa holders and thus STOP the CA population from DOUBLING every 30 years (or less). Stop importing disaffected leftists from every corner of the US who vote for STUPID politicians (PS the “CA people” just elected a supermajority leftist legislature)

Until then … the urban-wildland interface will continue to grow … until … the wildlands have completely burned and no longer exist. The. It will be the urban-dead forest interface

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Kenji
November 14, 2018 7:13 am

I heard a commenter on tv the other day say that California’s population was about 15 million in 1960, and has grown to about 45 million today.

That’s a lot of new housing additions.

Walter Sobchak
November 12, 2018 8:39 pm

You can say that again.

KaliforniaKook
Reply to  Walter Sobchak
November 13, 2018 9:38 am

Oh, that was funny, Walter! Another coffee out the nose moment!
Now I have to clean up.

BTW – great post as usual, Willis.

J Mac
Reply to  Walter Sobchak
November 13, 2018 10:14 am

I’m experiencing deja view…

Tom Halla
November 12, 2018 8:40 pm

Blaming California politicians, not just the State Government, is also appropriate. As under the rules in place until very recently, Calizuela Senators, usually recently Democrats, had the ability to block Federal judicial appointments, under the so-called “blue slip” rule.
Federal judges in the state and the Ninth Circuit generally sided with the more extreme environmentalists in blocking any reasonable wildlands management.

Don
Reply to  Tom Halla
November 12, 2018 9:55 pm

I call it the PDRK: People’s Democratic Republic of Kalifornia

Robertvd
Reply to  Don
November 13, 2018 12:56 am

How could there be a place called Paradise in Hell ? And why do all those movie and other stars live in the warmest and driest places of the US but constantly blaming global warming while enjoying their enormous swimming pool?

Reply to  Don
November 13, 2018 7:38 am

ICE — Imperial Californy Empire ruled by Emperor/God Moonbeam. Maybe those lefty-kooks got a point when talking about abolishing ICE?

John M Ware
Reply to  Tom Halla
November 13, 2018 3:03 am

The “blue slip rule” is simply permission for legislators–most often senators–to make recommendations for some federal positions. As far as I know, nothing about the bsr is mandatory; the president is the one who chooses, and he can follow or disregard the blue slip. In some cases, Trump has disregarded it, much to the dismay of the Democrats. Case in point: New appointments to the 9th Circuit will most likely not follow the blue slip recommendations. Even after Trump decides who will fill the six vacancies, there will be more lefties than conservatives; but the margin will be less. Perhaps a few of the 9C rulings will be a tad less insane–I surely hope so!

Tom Halla
Reply to  John M Ware
November 13, 2018 7:21 am

The “blue slip” procedure was treated as if it was mandatory until Trump and McConnell recently changed it. The incumbent judges in the Ninth Circuit reflected the politics of the region’s Senators.

Curious George
Reply to  Tom Halla
November 13, 2018 9:52 am

I just heard our beloved Governor Jerry Brown (D) on TV. He acknowledged that a forest mismanagement was a problem, but there are many more problems to solve.

My interpretation: He will push for a high speed train to nowhere, which will stop the global warming. Ditto, windmills and solar plants. Who cares for forest thinning? That’s not glamorous.

Kenji
Reply to  Curious George
November 13, 2018 10:33 am

And what will our next narcissist-Gov. do? Check out his reflection in the closest mirror or television monitor? whilst wagging his bony finger in our face lecturing about some mythical, imaginary … “climate change”

November 12, 2018 8:55 pm

Hotter during the dust bowl
Most board feet harvested was in the 60’s
comment image

Tom Abbott
Reply to  upcountrywater
November 14, 2018 7:23 am

“Hotter during the dust bowl”

Yes, and figure 1 above shows just that.

That gives me another chart to put in my collection that shows the 1930’s as being as warm or warmer than subsequent years.

In the text below figure 1, David says (correctly) that “Since 1895, it [the global temperature trend] has been going up at a rate of about 0.12°C”. But it also can be said that the temperature trend is going down since the 1930’s in California and the rest of the United States.

Quilter52
November 12, 2018 9:05 pm

Where are the class action lawyers who could actually be useful for a change in going after any and all green groups that have prevented proper forest maintenance that would have reduced fuel loads. Manslaughter charges should also be considered against officials and persons responsible.

My deepest sympathy to the victims of the fires and their families. We know what it feels like here in
Australia but slowly there is beginning to be realistic action to reduce fuel load and therefore hopefully reduce the severity of fire.

hunter
Reply to  Quilter52
November 13, 2018 4:12 am

Suing big green would be extremely helpful.

Reply to  hunter
November 13, 2018 8:01 am

#biggreenknew

yirgach
Reply to  Robert Kernodler
November 13, 2018 12:56 pm

Uff da!

Kenji
Reply to  Quilter52
November 13, 2018 10:40 am

Burn Baby Burn is a poem by American poet Marvin X (aka El Muhajir). X wrote the poem shortly after the Watts Rebellion in 1965, to convey the oppression Black people faced in white America

I believe there are people in State Government and bureaucracy who are quietly pleased with all those hicks in the RED counties getting burned-out … baby.

yarpos
November 12, 2018 9:19 pm

“Predictions by some scientists are we’ve already gone up one degree…….”

You cant make this stuff up. Predictions about the past, and the expect to be taken seriously.

Reply to  yarpos
November 13, 2018 12:05 am

Predictions about the past are not climatology.
Because they are verifiable.

Robertvd
Reply to  yarpos
November 13, 2018 1:07 am

So what is normal climate? If we look at the last 100,000 years much colder with a mile of ice on top of Canada was the ‘normal’. If we think of the last 500 million years much warmer with No ice on the poles was the ‘normal’ So the climate we have enjoyed during the last 10,000 years is the NOT normal climate.

John M Ware
Reply to  Robertvd
November 13, 2018 3:10 am

Climate doesn’t have “normal.” It has averages, means, or other ways to express typical past weather. “Normal” refers to something with a quantifiable norm, or statement of what should be or what has been observed to be optimum for a certain situation: Normal human body temperature is 98.6, from which deviations of more than a few degrees up or down can kill you. Normal eyesight is 20/20, or seeing objects at 20-foot distance as though they are really at 20 feet away. Weather doesn’t have figures like that. Average rainfall per day here in central Virginia is about a tenth of an inch, but that doesn’t make a rainless day (or one with, say, an inch of rain) abnormal.

James Hall
Reply to  John M Ware
November 13, 2018 7:06 am

How true, John! One might also add that the only thing “constant” about the Earth’s climate is that it has been constantly changing since the atmosphere first formed a few billion years ago.

Loren Wilson
Reply to  John M Ware
November 13, 2018 7:18 am

And those averages are not particularly meaningful. You can take the average of an approximately cyclical behavior but it does not help you establish a trend. The average of a sine wave is not useful in the scale of one cycle.

DD More
Reply to  Robertvd
November 13, 2018 9:35 am

Rob – as Willis said “There’s a name for this, and it is not “climate change”—it’s called “weather”.

We can cut your time line down a bit, and see how much change there has been in ‘California Climate”.
Here is the map with Major Köppen type showing a change at least once in 30 years during the period 1901-2010.
http://hanschen.org/koppen/img/koppen_major_30yr_1901-2010.png
Rough count because state boarder’s not shown is 9 on a 0.5 deg Lat/Lng resolution. But what we don’t know is if those were all After 1950.

Toto
November 12, 2018 9:52 pm

https://www.foxnews.com/us/utility-contacted-woman-about-power-line-problems-day-before-deadly-wildfire

“The Pacific Gas & Electric utility company told a Northern California woman that power lines were causing sparks on her property the day before the deadliest blaze in the Golden State’s history destroyed the nearby town of Paradise, The Associated Press reported Monday.”

“PG&E has previously disclosed that it experienced a problem on an electrical transmission line near the site of the fire minutes before the blaze broke out. In a Friday filing to California’s Public Utilities Commission, it said it had detected an outage on an electrical transmission line near the site of the blaze. It said a subsequent aerial inspection detected damage to a transmission tower on the line.”

“PG&E had announced before the blaze started that it might shut down power in nine counties, including Butte County where Pulga and Paradise are, because of extreme fire danger. But it never did. On Thursday, the company said it had decided against a power cut because weather conditions did not warrant it.”

Donald Kasper
Reply to  Toto
November 12, 2018 10:38 pm

Microclimate is not predictable.

Jumbofoot
November 12, 2018 9:52 pm

Good Thanksgiving (11/23) conversation starter! Thanks Willis!

Linda Goodman
November 12, 2018 9:55 pm

And don’t forget the manufactured drought to ‘save the delta smelt’.

Jumbofoot
November 12, 2018 9:56 pm

Sorry, Thanksgiving is 11/22!

Toto
November 12, 2018 10:04 pm

http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2018/11/why-did-catastrophic-camp-fire-start.html

See details at his blog.

“And I won’t get into the global warming aspects of this event (which I believe are quite minor). If I talk about global warming having minor impacts, I get very threatening emails and folks try to get me kicked off the local public radio station in which I talk each week.”

Derg
Reply to  Toto
November 13, 2018 3:49 am

Nice Blog Toto

Kenji
Reply to  Toto
November 13, 2018 10:51 am

Wow! Well THATS the smoking gun isn’t it! What a beautifully constructed presentation. There is NO DOUBT that PG&E started the Camp Fire. I can’t WAIT for the lawsuits to elevate my energy rates even HIGHER$$$

However …

Don’t BLAME PG&E … because they’ve been WARNING us all about global warming and catastrophic sudden climate change for years on end now … and have deployed huge proportions of their massive resources $$$ into … eco-consultants, and eco-associates. Aided, of course, by the CPUC

https://www.pge.com/en/about/newsroom/newsdetails/index.page?title=20161025_pge_named_global_leader_on_climate_change

John F. Hultquist
November 12, 2018 10:10 pm

Thanks Willis — nicely done.
I’ll add:
A study a few years ago showed that >80% of fires are related to humans.
This is not to say a direct human cause such as a camp fire, or someone burning brush,
but more often it is a 2nd or 3rd degree of separation. Our area gets one or a couple of fires
each year from autos catching fire. The driver pulls to the side of the road and catches grass on fire.
Other causes are such things as poor extension cords, or used in the wrong place, or not the
correct size. Backyard grills, chimneys, . . . and on and on, are causes.
I spent some time today using Google Earth Street View to look at the housing near Paradise.
Why? Well, three years ago two of our county fire crew came by. We walked around and they pointed out things I should change — some easy, some hard. I said I’d get the easy things done before the next fire season. Okay, they said, we’ll mark your place as “enter”. They motioned to our neighbor’s over-grown place and said, she’s a “don’t enter.”
Most of the housing I just looked at around Paradise would have gotten a “don’t enter” mark.
I’m still working to “firewise” our place; a continuing process.
Seeing a fire-consumed home, not even one’s own, brings tears to my eyes.

California is a grand place. Unfortunately you have Brown and others like him, and we have Jay Inslee.

[I’ve used the WRCC site for years — teaching intro to weather and climate.]

icisil
Reply to  John F. Hultquist
November 13, 2018 5:59 am

Would love to hear what it takes to “firewise” a home (both difficult and easy). Maybe you could make some comments here, or possibly do an article for WUWT. I look at the nature of the building destruction in Paradise (houses gone, nothing else touched) and am simply appalled. The only things I can think that are able to cause such damage is close proximity radiant heat from nearby burning structures and embers driven by high winds (cars parked abandoned on the side of the road are another matter).

I would suspect that there are things that can be done to minimize those risks. For example, metal roofs, minimum house spacing, radiant heat buffers between homes (e.g, cinder block wall), radiant shields on windows (in FL we had hurricane shutters for the windows and removable panels for the doors and patio), etc.

Gums
Reply to  icisil
November 13, 2018 7:57 am

Salute icisil!

Our summer cabin is in a heavily forested portion of Pike National Forest, and we had Colorado’s largest fire back in 2002 ( Hayman), since eclipsed this past summer. The Forest Service folks commented at the time that trimming/thining restrictions had made the scope of the fire inevitable. Granted, much of the area was characterized by steep canyons or valleys and poor roads and ….. But we still lost many cabins and other structures that might have been saved.

We had great lectures about mitigation if we wished to attend the briefings. There are a few concepts which seem to apply across forests, vegetative species and human development in the forest or even suburban areas ( see Waldo Canyon disaster in Colorado Springs a few years back in “Mountain Shadows”.)

– No wooden shingles!!! Metal roofs rule!!
– Avoid wooden siding and go with other materials
– Don’t cram structures close together unless you consider the cluster as one unit ( I call it the cluster rule)
– Thin out your trees so the crown fires have a harder time. So no trees right up next to each other unless you count them as one “unit”. I cut down 15 – 20 trees the next spring after Hayman fire.
– No trees real close to your cabin, otherwise the “cluster rule” applies. Our local agent says if the tree is within 20 feet or so, then it is considered part of the house
– No firewood stacked up within 20 or 30 feet of the cabin

And more hints at the link:

https://www.nfpa.org/Public-Education/By-topic/Wildfire/Firewise-USA

If you live in an area that could have a fire, have your “go bag” ready, at least a half tank of gas all the time, a pre-determined escape route and renzezvous point for family and neighbors, and pay attention to the weather and county news. We have reverse 911, and a satellite internet because we do not have cable or cell phone or even DSL landline, but we have a reliable landline.

Gums sends…

Ken L
Reply to  Gums
November 13, 2018 6:18 pm

That sounds very analogous to the sort of disaster preparedness measures recommended in Tornado Alley or in hurricane prone coastlines across the southeastern US. And the single most important factor linking any uptick in devastation and loss of life from all types of natural disasters? More people living in harm’s way.

climanrecon
Reply to  icisil
November 13, 2018 9:55 am

From a 2014 California fire notice sent to homeowners:

Fire once played its natural role in California, keeping vegetation thinned out and healthy,
which in turn kept fires small and beneficial. As humans moved into wildland areas and began suppressing all fires, vegetation increased to the dangerously overgrown levels we see now, resulting in extremely destructive wildfires. To maintain the safety of our homes, families, firefighters,community, and natural resources, we must replicate fire’s traditional role by removing the excess vegetation around our homes and neighborhoods.

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  icisil
November 13, 2018 10:03 am

icisil,
Firewise is the name of a program, along with “fire adapted communities” that those with homes in the wildland – urban – interface (WUI; woo-e) should learn about. There are web sites and presentations. A couple of examples:. Look around your building. Wind will clean leaves from some spots and deposit them in others, so you have a little pile of fuel against your garage, say. Regularly, clean them up. A little more work is to remove the Arborvitae, or other fuel producers, from under your house’s overhangs. They are cute when first planted there, deadly after 10 years — look inside and behind them. Homes in the WUI often have real fireplaces: Don’t stack your firewood against the house or under your wood deck. Move the cutting and splitting place at least >50 feet from buildings.
The overhangs (soffits) have air vents, usually protected with 1/4 inch screens. These will suck glowing embers in — not good. Replace all these (a real pain) with a small size mesh screen. Take a look at the size of the fire trucks (often called mini-pumpers) that are common at fires. Make your driveway wide and clear for them. They will need a turn-around space and may want an exit, other than your regular driveway. They don’t want to use your just-watered lawn as an escape road. During a fire, lots of graveled landscape is your friend.
There are many more things. Contact your local folks for information and presentations. We’ve been to two of them. Videos, photos, and testimonials are well worth your time.

Donald Kasper
November 12, 2018 10:35 pm

If you lose property, part of the blame is litigation by the Sierra Club, National Resource Defense Council, Wildlife Fund, and other groups that blocked logging. I would think you would sue them for the consequences of their policies. If their legal action caused logging to stop or be curtailed, then they are liable for causing the magnitude of the fires seen.

Utterbilge
November 12, 2018 11:13 pm

Willis asks :

“Can scientists actually predict the past? And can we really expect half a degree of warming in the next decade? To get some perspective on these questions, I thought I’d take a look at the records. I found an interesting site,”

So did I– here’s what Anthony Watts said six years ago:

“Personally, I think wildfire risk (especially in the USA) would be better predicted by observing ocean patterns (ENSO, PDO, AMO etc.) than trying to apply climate models. Further, it seems they are weighting 2012 as being too significant in the scheme of things. Also, I had to laugh at this statement:
In contrast with wildfires, agricultural and prescribed fires are less affected by climate, especially drought, during the fire season.
Gosh, “less affected” how about “not at all”? …
– Anthony “

Fergus Mclean
November 12, 2018 11:21 pm

Data on the effect of thinning on subsequent fires is mixed. Little can be done when moisture falls below 10%. Some studies show young plantations have higher fire risk….

Willis, your link to evidence for logging restrictions seems to be dead.

Richard111
November 12, 2018 11:46 pm

Nobody ever mentions that the sun itself is slowly getting warmer.

Ah, well.

MarkW
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
November 13, 2018 8:38 am

1% over the last 100 million years, or something in that range.

Curious George
Reply to  MarkW
November 13, 2018 10:07 am

I remember it vividly!

Reply to  Richard111
November 13, 2018 6:17 am

Which sun are you talking about?
The nearest one is on a Solar Minimum.
THFSM,
Bob

Malcolm andrew bryer
November 13, 2018 12:14 am

Such is the effect of constant warming propaganda in the media. Goebbels would be proud.

Peter Stevenson
November 13, 2018 12:28 am

Presumably most of the homes destroyed in the fires were built at least partly with wood. Why don’t they build with bricks /concrete ? Where I live in Southern Spain I have witnessed severe fires leave houses built with brick virtually untouched

Reply to  Peter Stevenson
November 13, 2018 2:34 am

Peter Stevenson

Cost, speed of build, material availability, cost, tradition, skills availability, cost, insulation properties and of course, cost.

And by the looks of the current fire, there would be little left of a masonry building other than a shell as combustible materials are used for roofs, doors and windows etc. allowing fire to spread within to wooden floors, joists, fixtures and fittings etc.

Both masonry and timber buildings can be rebuilt of course, but we come back to that old chestnut of…..cost.

MarkW
Reply to  HotScot
November 13, 2018 8:40 am

If the fire gets hot enough, it can damage masonry as well.

kenji
Reply to  MarkW
November 13, 2018 1:59 pm

Reinforcing rods (rebar) inside concrete and masonry gets so hot and expands… that the concrete/masonry ‘spalls’ and renders the wall … destroyed. I have seen fires that left little more than a melted pool of aluminum and black smudges where the engine block and tires used to stand. But if you have the mentality of a “truther” like Rosie O’Donnell … then you might believe steel is unaffected by fire.

kenji
Reply to  HotScot
November 13, 2018 11:47 am

Thank you. Always the voice of logic and reason.

Don K
Reply to  Peter Stevenson
November 13, 2018 2:41 am

“Why don’t they build with bricks /concrete ?”

Earthquakes. Wood frame structures and their inhabitants have a high survival rate in quakes. Masonry doesn’t. In a region where there is a substantial chance that you will someday find yourself wearing parts of your house, you don’t want a lot of heavy stuff up in the air above your head. California banned unreinforced masonry construction after an earthquake in 1933 that damaged hundreds of school buildings many of them severely.

AGW is not Science
Reply to  Don K
November 13, 2018 3:52 am

STEEL REINFORCED CONCRETE. That should be the only method of construction in fire prone areas and that would cover the quake issue too.

hunter
Reply to  AGW is not Science
November 13, 2018 5:56 am

The radiant heat from intense fires will damage the concrete and set interior contents on fire, turning the structure into an oven, roasting anything inside.

icisil
Reply to  hunter
November 13, 2018 6:09 am

Intense fires are caused by heavy fuel load and proximity of same. Reduce those and radiant heat shouldn’t cause that kind of problem.

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  hunter
November 13, 2018 12:14 pm

hunter,
A comma after ‘concrete’ is advised.
The radiant heat goes inside via the windows. A house needs fire resistant window covers, not the cute and funny little things often seen for decoration.
Folks with a good view like lots of window. Needs about 100 feet of gravel landscape.

Hank Bradley
Reply to  hunter
November 18, 2018 6:59 am

If you travel through old towns in the Mother Lode part of CA, you’ll see masonry buildings with steel shutters at each window. Even 150 years ago they knew to block the radiant heat. There was a building in San Francisco in the early 1850s made of some newfangled stuff called ‘concrete’, and its owners and employees rode out one of the fires that periodically obliterated SF buildings by closing the steel shutters and bailing water from an interior well to cool them.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Peter Stevenson
November 13, 2018 8:41 am

Peter,

Many of the people living in and around Paradise are retired people living on reduced, fixed incomes. They don’t have the luxury of building fire resistant dwellings. They moved there because of a lower cost of living. Indeed, many of them lived in so-called mobile homes and older, poorly constructed wood-frame homes that predated modern building codes. There is little excuse for the commercial buildings burning down, except for building cheaply and inadequate building codes. Most of them probably had flat roofs (little snow to contend with) sealed with asphalt, and no rooftop sprinklers.

Fires were so common in the mining camps of the Mother Lode that the building practice became one of building with brick or native stone, with slate or iron roofs, and iron doors and iron shutters, particularly for commercial and public buildings. Earthquakes are less of a problem away from the coast.

Stonyground
November 13, 2018 2:11 am

I am intrigued to know how it is that I can cause forest fires just by not believing in man made climate change. What exactly is the mechanism for this? Is it like the way we revive Tinkerbell by believing in fairies really really hard? Oh no, that can’t be it because that would mean that the believers are causing it.

James Clarke
Reply to  Stonyground
November 13, 2018 5:30 am

Thank you, Stonyground! It boggles my mind that no one in the media calls the governor on these idiotic, childish comments.

No single person on the planet has more responsibility for the California wildfire problem than Governor Brown, but like all tyrants when their policies invariably go to excrement, they blame those who opposed them. I believe their insane arguments go like this:

Their solutions are perfect and infallible. But if someone opposes them in any way, then they will not be implemented in the precise way that is necessary for them to work. Climate crisis skeptics have prevented Brown and his delusional buddies from making the ‘climate’ perfect again (as if it ever was), simply by not getting on board and being enthusiastic enough. Crisis skeptics have sewed seeds of doubt, making it impossible for their flawless plans to be implemented flawlessly. So it must be the fault of crisis skeptics, you see!”

Brown would have fixed the climate by now, if it wasn’t for us meddling skeptics!

Judy Nolen
November 13, 2018 2:19 am

I feel very heart sick for all the lives lost to the fires they can never be replaced,houses can be rebuilt,forest will grow back in time a lot of wildlife’s habitats where lost,but still human lives should always come first. Maybe environmental groups could work with fire pron states for a happy medium.There are 27,000 fire dept. In the U.S. if 2 firemen volunteered from each station to be trained to fight forest fires that would be about 50,000 more firefighters to fight these giant fires.If we are going to have giant fires then we need a giant force of fire fighters,l don’t mean to train them as smoke jumpers as that takes excess training and they usually work for the Park service. Wouldn’t it be nice if they didn’t have 2 work 24 hrs.straight wetlands could be expanded in some areas and retention ponds built where there are no fire hydrants.Fire lanes need to be made so fire trucks could reach fires before they are out of control. Judy

Kenji
Reply to  Judy Nolen
November 13, 2018 11:02 am

Exactly. We need to deploy “rapid response” teams throughout the INEVITABLE urban-wildland interface. The Urban-wildland interface isn’t going away … so shut up about that, unless you want to LIMIT the population of the State. We need to get a shitload SMARTER about suppressing these conflagrations before they get started … which includes controlled burns, if necessary.

Ron Long
November 13, 2018 2:26 am

Every time I hear an announcement from Governor Moonbeam I think of Star Trek: beam me up Scotty, there is no intelligent life on this planet.

Ivan Kinsman
November 13, 2018 2:37 am

US sceptics are living in cloud cuckoo land if they think climate change is not contributing to these fires . These fires are now more extreme, the period in which they occur is getting longer, there is less snow to keep the soil moist, and there is an increase in drought periods. Trees, especially pine trees planted within or close to towns and settlements, do contribute but are just one piece in the puzzle. California has always had wildfires but nothinhg like the severity of these like the recent Camp fire: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46190118

ferd berple
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
November 13, 2018 3:10 am

Kalifornia has more people today than in the past. As a result smaller fires can do more damage.

One should also note that as kalifornias population increases this means that there are more and more morons living in the state. All caused by global warming.

Ivan Kinsman
Reply to  ferd berple
November 13, 2018 3:23 am

Keep up moronic comments like these. They achieve … zero.

MarkW
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
November 13, 2018 8:46 am

Self awareness is an art that few trolls can master.

John Law
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
November 13, 2018 3:19 am

I suggest you read the post above by Willis and look at the charts.

Farmer Ch E retired
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
November 13, 2018 3:32 am

Nice claims Ivan. Can you please provide trend plots to back them up like Willis did in this article? Maybe your trend plots would show it’s CO2’s fault and has nothing to do with fuel load and ignition source (also man-caused). I have yet to see convening data plots that correlate tide gauge sea level rise with CO2 and tropospheric temperate rise with CO2.

Ivan Kinsman
Reply to  Farmer Ch E retired
November 13, 2018 3:45 am

Everything I have written was the comments of a wildfire expert from a British university speaking at a wildfire conference in Portugal. What are your qualifications?

hunter
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
November 13, 2018 4:07 am

No links, Ivan.
Get them translated from the Russian please.
Also, one expert is clearly not sufficient. Come on, you are a climate troll- you know it takes a simple majority if sciencey experts to have credibility.

Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
November 13, 2018 4:32 am

Ivan Kinsman

A wildfire expert is an expert in wildfires, not climate. Nor do you provide a name nor a reference of any description.

Your BBC article includes “The state’s 40-million-strong population also helps explain the fires’ deadliness. That number is almost double what it was in the 1970s, and people are living closer to at-risk forest areas.” Confirming ferd berple’s comment, but that seemingly went over your head.

The only reference to climate change is the usual BBC’s casual acknowledgement of the party line backed up by no data “And then there’s climate change. Recent years have produced record-breaking temperatures, earlier springs, and less reliable rainfall.

And from your post “……..there is less snow to keep the soil moist.

My understanding is that unless subjected to very rapid weather change from cold to hot, most snow evaporates into the atmosphere with gently warming winds, leaving a bare minimum to actually melt. Paradise itself gets an average annual snowfall of between 2.5cm and 3cm with annual precipitation of ~1476mm. Snow is inconsequential in terms of irrigation.

MarkW
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
November 13, 2018 8:48 am

So Ivansky, your expert trumps all other experts?
It must be nice never having to think for yourself.

Farmer Ch E retired
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
November 13, 2018 1:07 pm

Ivan – My only qualification is I know how to look at and interpret data. I learned how to learn obtaining my Masters of Science at Rice U (paid for by NASA). Most all of my real learning took place on-the-job in the environmental field. Last time I checked my resume was 27 pages including hundreds of technical reports, 70 publications, with my name included on 10 patents. Granted I’m not a “climate scientist” whatever that means but it should help you understand why I’m asking to see supporting data for your claims.

Gary Mount
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
November 13, 2018 3:47 am

US skeptics are some of the worlds best climate scientists.

A C Osborn
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
November 13, 2018 4:01 am

Quoting the BBC, that is the way to convince us.
Stating the comments come from a UK University Fire-expert just compounds the problem.

MarkW
Reply to  A C Osborn
November 13, 2018 8:49 am

He usually quotes the Granuidad

hunter
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
November 13, 2018 4:04 am

Ivan,
Thanks for playing but no rubles for you today.
You know nothing of American history.
And you know less if forestry management.
And apparently even less about climate.
Have a great day.

OweninGA
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
November 13, 2018 6:14 am

My great uncle was a wildfire fireman, and he told stories about some of the fires he fought. Of course back in the 60s most of these fires were in areas with very few people, so the strategy was to cut fire breaks and light backfires when the conditions were right, very rarely were they trying to save structures or whole towns. When 50 mph winds are blowing, fires blow up like a bomb and always have. The deadliness and dollar figures of damage are mostly from the encroachment of civilization on what has traditionally been empty space. Just like with the hurricane figures, when you adjust for the development, there is little to no change.

The BBC ceased to be relevant to climate change discussions years ago. If you show one of their “presenters” (I refuse to dignify them with the term journalist) data refuting the latest talking point, they stick their fingers in their ears and yell “la la la la la” until you go away in disgust. Of course the US press is just as bad. It is a shame really, I used to enjoy some of the events reporting on the World Service. Now even that has been polluted with the “how can we shoehorn climate change into this story” disease.

Archaeological evidence has shown that during the 700 year drought, large swaths of California burned. It is part of the reason the Spanish found few people in California when they colonized it. The tribes had moved far north in the territory because that was where the water was. Only a few stayed farther south on the coast where the rivers still flowed from the Sierras to the sea. Human settlements need a source of food and water to stay viable. If they had tried colonizing around 800AD, they might have met resistance.

Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
November 13, 2018 7:06 am

More falsehoods and fakery from ivank.

“Ivan Kinsman November 13, 2018 at 2:37 am
US sceptics are living in cloud cuckoo land if they think climate change is not contributing to these fires . These fires are now more extreme, the period in which they occur is getting longer, there is less snow to keep the soil moist, and there is an increase in drought periods. Trees, especially pine trees planted within or close to towns and settlements”

Cloud cuckoo land, a truly pathetic attempt at an adolescent insult, is reserved for lamebrains who invent falsehoods while spreading faux fears.
ivank makes claims, in spite of evidence to the contrary. Instead ivank relies upon logical falsehoods for it’s argument.

“These fires are now more extreme”, Utter BS and historically proven wrong.

“the period in which they occur is getting longer”, More BS.

“there is less snow to keep the soil moist”, Utter BS and proven wrong by history.

“and there is an increase in drought periods”, Utter BS, historically, droughts have been much worse and far longer.

“Trees, especially pine trees planted within or close to towns and settlements, do contribute but are just one piece in the puzzle”, Landscaping planted by residents are a resident’s personal choice. Failure to clear flammables away from the property is also a personal failure common to California residents.

“California has always had wildfires but nothinhg{sic} like the severity of these like the recent Camp fire”, another Utter BS invention by ivank.

Tom Halla
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
November 13, 2018 7:16 am

Ivan, that is perhaps one of the more ignorant comments on the California fires not said by a California politician. Your history is bass-ackwards, and the Beeb are as much True Believers as Jerry Brown.
Blaming the fires on CO2 levels is about as constructive, and accurate, as a fundamentalist blaming God’s wrath for the states open sinning.

Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
November 13, 2018 7:44 am

Here you go Ivan,

Drought And Fire Are The Normal Climate Of California

https://realclimatescience.com/2018/11/drought-and-fire-are-the-normal-climate-of-california/

You ignored several factors that caused massive fires, if you bothered to read what Willis pointed out, that FUEL LOADS were a few decades in the making.

CO2 has NOTHING to do with it!

bit chilly
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
November 13, 2018 7:47 am

i knew at least one of the idiots that voted for moonbeam would make an appearance.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
November 13, 2018 8:30 am

Ivan,

It seems that you know little about California. Basically, most of the state experiences what is called a Mediterranean Climate. That means it really only has two seasons: a cool, wet Winter and a hot, dry Summer. Every year the grasslands turn brown about the first of May and stay that way until the rains start in November. It matters little how much moisture is in the ground, unless there is so little that the trees die, because it isn’t the ground that burns. There are many areas that get over 100 deg F in the summertime for several days. Even if the ground is damp, the vegetation (which is adapted to such extreme temperatures) often becomes senescent. One commonly sees horse chestnut trees with brown leaves in July.

Archaeologists have documented megadroughts, particularly in southern California, in the past. So, even droughts are nothing new to California.

It rarely snows below about 2,000′ elevation, and that doesn’t stay on the ground for long. It is only above about 5,000 feet where a snow pack accumulates and might experience changes in Summer soil moisture with warming. So, your claim is not germane. The recent Camp Fire took place in rugged terrain that ranged in elevation from about 2,500′ down to about 1,500′, well outside the area of accumulating snow pack.

You are simply parroting things you have read, written by people who don’t really know what they are talking about.

With regard to the severity of the Camp Fire, the trees are scorched, but it is the human structures that are totally destroyed. That is probably because the buildings and cars are less resistant to fire than the natural vegetation is. People didn’t plant the pine trees, they moved in among them.

You are the one “living in cloud cuckoo land!”

MarkW
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
November 13, 2018 8:46 am

As always, the trolls can be counted on to trot out lie after lie.
1) While unprecedented over the last few decades, there have been bigger fires in the past. That’s lie 1.
2) Snow levels go up, snow levels go down. If you are capable of remembering past the last decade or two, there is nothing unusual in snow levels. That’s lie 2.
3) Modern droughts are pikers compared to the droughts of 1000 years ago. That’s lie 3.
4) Pine trees aren’t being planted. They occur naturally, that’s why they call it a forest. That’s lie 4.
5) Repeating a previous lie is still a lie. That’s lie 5.
6) Of course the troll completely ignores the roll of government in fighting fires in the past, allowing fuel levels to build up. Lie by omission makes number 6.

Reply to  MarkW
November 13, 2018 11:14 am

MarkW

I bet Ivan really wishes he hadn’t said anything.

Lambasted by about ten people in succession…….What a laugh.

kenji
Reply to  HotScot
November 13, 2018 1:35 pm

Lambasted is the action … the result is that Ivan got DESTROYED.

Richard G.
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
November 13, 2018 3:38 pm

In pre-colombian California the native people ( in this case the Maidu, Yana, and Konkow in the Paradise area) subsisted on acorns from the oak/conifer forest. They managed the landscape by periodic burning to keep the under story open. This protected the oaks from intense fires and facilitated harvest of acorns.
Current fire wise land management should include seasonal grazing with sheep and goats to manage the fuel loads. It is amazing how a herd of ‘range maggots’ can clear out the undergrowth as they graze through.
John Muir, one of the original conservationists, was a sheep herder in his youth.

Russ Wood
November 13, 2018 2:52 am

I noticed on a satellite picture of the fire that it’s covered the area above the Oroville Dam. I’m wondering if this extensive loss of ground cover is liable to bring yet MORE troubles to that dam in the next rainy season, as there may be little to absorb the rain.

hunter
Reply to  Russ Wood
November 13, 2018 4:11 am

Yeppers.
The greens are destroying California.
The extremists are, as the last two Governor demonstrate so well, operating at a medieval superstitious level of thinking.
The Californian implosion could end up with concentration camps for political dissidents and I would not be surprised.

Greg S.
Reply to  Russ Wood
November 13, 2018 6:04 am

The main spillway and emergency spillway have been completely re-engineered and rebuilt. The main spillway is currently ready for full operation. It’s highly unlikely that the dam will experience a failure like it had before. Massive outflows however could cause extensive damage down river.

1 2 3 4
Verified by MonsterInsights