“What makes these fires bigger has a lot to do with how we’ve mismanaged the landscapes for the last 100 years. Fire suppression, changes in grazing patterns, loss of wetlands. We allow shrub lands and grasses to build up underneath it, add more fuel to the fire, and you have more urban development, just the more asphalt, the more cement you’re raising temperatures,” says professor Jim Steele, Director emeritus of San Francisco State University’s Sierra Nevada Field Campus.
Siyamak sits down with ecologist and author Jim Steele, who has studied the factors behind the increasing wildfires in California, and Ian Faloona, an associate professor and Biomicrometeorologist at the University of California Davis, who has been researching how wildfires impact air quality in the state.
“It’s a different type of chemical environment. This new source, not only has it become visible, it’s growing tremendous. It’s a new era of how we think about air pollution,” professor Faloona says.
*Views expressed in this video/article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of California Insider.
This and hundreds of other video may be viewed on our Climate TV page
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I’ve never bought into the idea that a few degrees have any effect on wild fires. The reality is moisture and fuel, the latter being most influenced by land use / stewardship.
Bingo. We had a previous home in the mountains where I removed the understory, dead trees (standing and on the ground), removed the “duff” and trimmed up the trees 6 feet. Our home owners policy insurer knew what I had done using satellite imagery resulting in a reduced HO premium. Was it worth it. Yes. Was there a substantial reduction in our HO premium. No. However, it did provide some peace of mind, though.
It should be obvious to the most casual observer what the cause of wildfires are today.
One only needs to look at the photographs of the Giant Redwoods taken back in the late 1800’s early 1900’s and compare those same areas ground cover, underbrush and overgrowth with recent photos. PERIOD.
The pioneers heading west frequently complained about the lack of firewood along the Platte River through Nebraska. They were warned to carry enough to get to the mountains as the nearest fire wood was miles away from the river. Today both sides of the Platte River have trees, underbrush and overgrowth extending miles from either side of the river.
I have been told all my life that most trees in Nebraska are non-native and few existed 100 years ago. look into the history of the Nebraska Tree “Conservation” Program. Hundreds of millions planted through governmental and “Conservationists” efforts starting back in 1870 for the extent of this endeavor. How can a conservationist knowingly plant non-native trees? Squirrels and chipmunks are now following the Platte River Valley trees across the USA. How many of the dead trees in California’s forests were nonnative and now dying off, creating more fuel for the wildfires? How did the tick that carries Lyme disease get from Connecticut to Nebraska and further west?
Most people do not realize that just a few hundred years ago America had much less forests than today, because the forest used to be burned to heat houses.
Once household heating is converted to electricity by regulation, America’s forests will once again be burned for home heating, solving the wildfire problem.
I think you forgot about Drax. Busy destroying North American forests single handed.
nonsense- you have no clue
Actual data:
Forest cover in the Eastern United States reached its lowest point in roughly 1872 with about 48 percent compared to the amount of forest cover in 1620.
The U.S. has been steadily adding back forests since the 1940s. According to The North American Forest Commission, we have two-thirds of the trees that we had in the year 1600.
Forest area has been relatively stable since 1907. In 1997, 302 million hectares— or 33 percent of the total land area of the United States— was in forest land. Today’s forest land area amounts to about 70 percent of the area that was forested in 1630.
The United States has about the same forest area as in 1920. The area consumed by wildfire each year has fallen 90 percent; it was between 20 and 50 million acres in the early 1900s and is between 2 and 5 million acres today
I was told that West Virginia was basically clear cut for the railroad industry except for two areas too rugged to log out. With Dutch Elm disease and the Chestnut disease, the forest we have now is very different from the apex forest prior to the railroad.
This article is about California fires NOT Eastern US fires. Indeed wildfire area has decreased dramatically especially due to the 10 AM rule. As all researcher will agree fire in the 1700s and 1800s were 4 times what they are today, largely due to the lack of fire suppression
What has “Eastern States” data got to do with California. ??
What has “all of USA” data got to do with just California. ??
In 1958 the ranger at Sequoia National Park told us that fire suppression in the park was bad management.
You can’t exclude the fact that higher temperatures dry out the vegetation, making it more flammable.
“You can’t exclude the fact that higher temperatures dry out the vegetation…..” Two degrees is a stretch to far for that statement.
Please look at a chart of global temperature from 1850 to date in Actual temperature [degrees F, C or K – your choice]. NOT degrees Delta which is used to inflate, magnify and exaggerate the actual change in temperature for nefarious purposes – Pure Adulterated Propaganda.
Also, there is rarely even a mention of Humidity.
There are hundreds of farms with cattle and milk cows on the Hawaiian Islands that rarely need to provide drinking water for their cattle/milk cows due to the fact that they get sufficient water from the dew on the grass. Which also greatly reduces the chance of wild fires. Same is true along many areas of the western coast of U.S. And. yes they do have problems with areas that have had wild fires due to the poor management of the forests.
Clearly Burl you dont know what you are talking about, again. First it is maximum temperatures that dry out vegetation and the maximum temperatures in Northern California, where the 4 biggest fires happened, have cooler maximums than the 1930s.
Second, prescribed burns are administered when Fuel Moisture is below 17% to ensure a complete burn, but must be ABOVE 8% or else the fires get too hot, erratic and out of control. When relative humidity gets below 30%, fuel moisture drops to the highly flammable 5% and lower no matter if the temperature is 70F or 110F. This is shown by several studies such that fire managers often just use these attached tables to determine fuel moisture and fire danger.
If you look at Chico CA average temperature for July when the Park Fire started, average temperature is 98.9F and with no rain RH is 28%. That calculates to 5% fuel moisture in the grasslands that carried the Park Fire to such a great extent. Chico’s vegetation is explosively dry naturally. Neither climate change nor the heat wave made any difference despite what alarmists llike Daniel Swain or Burl Henry bloviate!
To the nearest whole number of days – How much faster will cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) dry out if the daily Max-temperature reaches 88°F instead of 86°F?
Bonus question: Have you ever walked in a field of ‘Cheat’? 🙂
Vegetation in California is dry every summer. A 0.1 to 0.2 degree fire season temperature increase over a decade will not make dry vegetation any drier.
Up to 90% of forest fires are manmade, What is the connection between a slightly warmer fire season temperature and more accidents or deliberate fires? None.
If there are more fires in CA, it is because there are more people living in CA and more of them live in rural areas near forests because those areas are still affordable
The connection with deliberate fires is simple: the fires are started to blame warmer temperatures.
No, plus or minus a couple degrees is negligible in drying rate. Humidity and ventilation (wind) are much more significant.
Higher temperatures. Right? It all has to do with weather. Period.
We’ve had gorse fires here in Ireland for as far back as I can remember. A few weeks ago fire services were called to deal with a fire. We rarely see temps above mid 20Cs.Scrub, vegetation doesn’t need to hit 30-40C to dry out and provide fuel for when someone starts a fire.
Fires ae getting bigger?
The data do not say that:
2020 1,779,730 acres burned
2021 1,039,616 acres burned
2022 146,680acres burned
2023 131,489 acres burned
That is a three year downtrend
The author appears to living in a data free fantasyland.
Well Richard I was waiting to see what kind of Bullshite you would spin to engage in your ever predictable attacks against me. Only a troll would use just 4 years of data that is naturally highly variable, to suggest a trend. And use that bogus trend to dispute fires are getting bigger. It appears Richard is still living in a hate-filled ignorant fantasyland!
Here is why there is the perception that wildfires are getting bigger and why my statement said fires are getting bigger.
The 4 biggest fires in California history (that by some metrics are in the top 10 US fires), with date, rank in US in parentheses, acres burnt and ignition source:
AUGUST LIghtning COMPLEX 2020 (#6): 2020 – 1,032,648 ACRES 2. DIXE FIRE JULY 2021 (#8): ELECTRICAL SPARK – 963,309 ACRES 3. MENDOCINO COMPLX JLY 2018 (#9) SPARK FROM STAKE – 459,123 ACRES 4. PARK FIRE JULY 2024: ARSON – 429,000+ ACRES 39% contained
DEADLIEST Fire was the CAMP FIRE NOVEMBER 2018: ELECTRICAL SPARK- 153,336 ACRES
I would suspect that when you’ve had a couple of big burn years, 2020 and 2021 in the 4 years data then there’d be a few lean years afterwards until the burnable stock rebuilds
My only experience is Heather burning on grouse moors where adjacent strips were burnt one reason being that control was easier. It is strictly regulated now.
I suspect that anti-blood sports and rewilding pressure will lead to more wildfires on Scottish moors, that and more tourists due to anti-tourist action in the Iberian Peninsular.
“I would suspect that when you’ve had a couple of big burn years, 2020 and 2021 in the 4 years data then there’d be a few lean years afterwards until the burnable stock rebuilds”
Ben V.
Instead of suspecting, why not review the data and tell us if there is such a trend
Topic is California. !
Why not use a longer period for California which is what the article is about? There are records which go much further back for the USA why not use them?
Richard Greene dishonestly presents graphics from different scale and coverage distorting the discussion of California fires. The biggest fire in CA was the 2020August Lightning Complex, combine with other lightning swarms created the largest burned area, Indeed burnt areas have declined since 2020 so Greene hijacks those few yearsto suggest California wildfires are declining similar to alarmists who cherrypick dates to say fires are getting worse due to CO2.
I presented data which you can not refute.
So you huff and you puff, and you insult like a child would do. The angry old man is unwilling to admit there has been a steep decline in CA acres burned in the past few years.
THEN THE ANGRY OLD MAN CHERRY PICKS INDIVIDUAL FIRES, WHILE I presented complete data, for all fires in the state by year.
I have the data
You have the claptrap.
LOL This is why Richard Greene holds the record for most negative replies to his rants. Clearly Richard Greene never watched the interview. I never mentioned recent fire trends, except to show wildfires in the US burnt more acres in the 20s and 30s and 4 times more in the 1700 & 1800s before fire suppression and the US Forest Seervices 10 AM rule. Throughout my interview I frequently referenced the biggest fires- Mendocino Fire, Dixie Fire, Park Fire and the deadly Camp Fire. But Richard Greene, to support more hateful stupid personal attacks makes up his own narrative with an un-refutable 4-year trend and then accuses me of cherrypicking because I refer him to the data that the interview was all about. LOL
What a hateful buffoon! Perhaps a new record of negative reactions to his total dishonesty!
“Richard Greene holds the record for most negative replies to his rants.”
Jim “angry man” Steele
Data are not refuted by a popular vote
Or an unpopular vote.
You cherry picked individual fires in your comment.
What people care about is the trend of how many fires, total acres burned and damage done, per year.
It’s possible a year with a single huge fire was a year with a small number of acres burned.
You would focus on the one big fire
I focus on the total acres burned in a year.
LOL, here we have Richard excited over 4 whopping years to make sweeping conclusions that doesn’t hurt Jims’s presentation which is far more comprehensive.
The Chinchaga fire was a forest fire that burned in northern British Columbia and Alberta in the summer and early fall of 1950. With a final size of between 1,400,000 and 1,700,000 hectares (3,500,000 and 4,200,000 acres), it is the single largest recorded fire in North American history.
Indeed it was. And it’s size relates to the fire suppression issues. While fires in the US were approaching the lowest historical burned acres due to the USFS 10 AM rule, the Canadians just let it burn because it wasnt threatening any towns. I am not sure if the ignition was ever firmly determined but it was human caused. I don’t know how much the different vegetation types affected the spread. I do know trees like Black Spruce are very common in that region and those trees have evolved to be highly fire adapted, so assume there was plenty of flammable vegetation
Seems there’s some cross talk. Individual fires bigger, but total acreage burned not increasing.
I wish it was innocent cross talk. California Insider asked me to speak about as their title asks “Why California Fires Are Getting Bigger | Jim Steele | Ian Faloona.
If you look at any graph (attached) of burned acres or dates of the biggest fires, only a fool would argue there are fewer or smaller fires now. No one would take such a narrative seriously.
But Richard Greene for whatever reason has a hard-on for me and mindlessly attacks whatever I say, while in this case, ignoring Faloona’s dishonest climate connections. I really have come to think of Greene as a troll because he constantly gives alarmists a pass just to engage in personal denigrations.
Green engages in the same dishonest cherrypicking of time scales as alarmists do. The climate alarmists like to start their graphs in the 1980s when burned acres were minimal due to fire suppression, so they can dishonestly blame rising CO2 via correlation with rising CO2. The alarmists always fail to address the affects of fire suppression and human ignitions on their rising trends. Nor do they address the causes of natural variability or why California is so fire prone. Like wise Richard Greene cherrypicks just a 4 year time scale (making alarmist cherrypicking look tame) to dishonestly launch another one of his anti-science personal attacks while ignoring the causes of natural variability and why California is so fire prone.
“
Jim, the regulars here recognize Greene for the self-educated troll that he is.
“self-educated troll“
So he had a fool as a teacher…
You know, RG, based on Jim’s articles I at least have some idea of his background and experience and qualifications to write articles such as this. Maybe I’ve just missed it or it’s irrelevant, but I have no idea what your background or qualifications are or why I should care.
He has a degree in Bullshit obtained from the internet.
Jim Steele alluded to the fact that the Central Valley used to have a tremendous amount of wetland. This link shows some of the changes.
The disappearing wetlands in California’s Central Valley – High Country News (hcn.org)
Then there have been huge changes in water policy.
In the past, the Central Valley Water Project used most of the water for irrigation and some got sent to the coastal cities. The cities grew and demanded more water. Then “environmental discharge” to the ocean saw a third of the water from this project run out to the seas. When there are dry years, the environmental discharge is maintained, and the cities’ water needs takes precedence over central valley agriculture. The farmers then started pumping ground water. In the last decade, the state has drastically reduced that as well. Combine all these things and it’s pretty clear that the Central Valley is being desiccated by not letting much of the water collected in the mountains surrounding the valley to be emitted by evaporation from wetlands or transpiration from growing crops because there is no water for irrigation. Low humidity leads to higher as well.
I agree that land and fuel management in California has to change but water management, where you create policy that puts much more water vapor back into the atmosphere of the central valley during dry seasons are just as important.
Sounds like a good case for requiring coastal urban areas to get their water from desalinization plants and leave the water going into the Central Valley to the people of the Central Valley.
There are always unintended consequences, which while often obvious, are usually ignored by the planners. In the case of desalinization, if one evaporates all the water, there is the problem of disposing of the remaining salt. If only some of the water is evaporated, or osmotic filters are used, then one has an enriched brine to dispose of. If it is dumped back in the ocean, there will be a dead zone around the discharge point.
I imagine disposing of the salt will be easy enough. Sea Salt is a good seasoning for food, and much healthier than heavily refined table salt that has all of the trace mineral content removed.
Rewilding offers hope. In a nutshell, it is the large-scale restoration of nature until it can take care of itself
https://www.rewildingbritain.org.uk/why-rewild/what-is-rewilding
Only not in the way that it should as far as human settlements are concerned.
A case for some real green jobs…
Nature can ALWAYS take care of itself. It doesn’t need the help of naked apes.
Have there been any studies looking at the effect of our current CO2 levels? It seems to me that not only will it accelerate growth (if nitrogen isn’t the limiting factor) but it will keep growing into California’s arid seasons thanks to the more efficient stomata usage.
Together that means more undergrowth for the fire season.
Ric, I don’t think calculating the CO2 contribution to burnable biomass would be easily done, and maybe impossible. Increases in biomass due to greater rainfall due to El Nino years would overwhelm most data, as well as the added biomass from the invasion of non-native annual grasses like cheat grass. In terms of better efficiency, you would need to look at each species separately. Cheatgrass germinates in winter and sometime fall depending on soil moisture, so an earlier germination may allow greater biomass, independently of the dry conditions that trigger seed set and die-off. The further difficulty in separating added biomass from higher CO2 vs fire suppression vs lost biomass from changes in fire frequency from both natural and human ignitions, makes any such calculation untrustworthy.
What IS trustworthy is the inevitable claim that any “bad” outcome will be blamed on “climate change” (TM). 🙄
I remember reading something 25 or more years ago about a fire in California that destroyed several homes. Aside from the “Santa Winds” (which occurred often enough to be given a name), a contributing factor was that home owners were forbidden from clearing dead brush from their property because it was habitat for the endangered Kangaroo Rat. Such a rat hadn’t been seen in the area for over 50 years.
gotta save the rats! 🙂
Not if my dog sees ’em
They are the Santa Ana Winds.
I think that’s the “Santa Ana Winds.”
karlomonte and AGW is Not Science,
I knew that. But my fingers forget while I was typing. 😎
(Hmmm … Maybe in New England they call “Santa Winds” Nor’easters? Everybody else probably calls them “The Polar Vortex”? 😎
Charles has omitted the reason most inconvenient for his narrative:
The heat of the night
East Pole, first Charles is the moderator who posted my article. Its my narrative not his.
Second a general change in the heat of the night is useless for several reasons. Your stats may not coincide with actual fires. Second lower nighttime temperatures do lower relative humidity, and lowers winds driven by daytime convective heating, but for night time heating to have an affect you must also analyze the winds. Lastly and most importantly, if the Relative Humidity is 50% or lower, it doesnt matter if the temperature is 70F or 110F, the vegetation is highly flammable.
Jim, it says something about the commenter when they are so inattentive to details that they address their comment to the wrong person.
“The heat of the night”
All measured in urban centres, not where the fires under discussion are.
And none in California, which is where the topic is about.
Complete FAIL !!!
And, less forestry- good forestry will open up the forests, thin them out, deal with woody debris/slash- while, get this folks, producing economic value!
A harvested tree is of more benefit than a burnt tree.
(Though I must admit I was a bit confused by “less forestry- good forestry will open up the forests”.
But I’m sure I’ve confused many when I think faster than I type. I’ve skipped whole phrases at times!)
I meant the less forestry is part of the problem- ergo, more excellent forestry is part of the solution.
Thanks.
Remembering your forestry background, I figured you meant something along those lines.
Interesting discussion. One point that seldom get mentioned in the discussion
regarding forest management is how the major timber company’s restructured
as REITS. They are now considered as Real Estate Investment Trusts. This
has had an enormous impact on how our forests are managed…just follow
the money. When this change happened here in the N Rockies the timber
companys started clear cutting their land then selling it off to be developed
or in some cases put into a wilderness status which removes the property for
being managed in perpetuity. When the last big beetle kill happened back in 06ish
there was a movement to convert a pulp mill to a Fischer-Tropsch plant to
maintain jobs and forest management and it was the Big Timber companys that
stopped it cold. Our public lands are being exploited by the Green Blob and these
Corporatist Fascists…
Jim,
In the video you reference “mosaic” landscapes which you say help suppress big fires. Can you elaborate on what these are and show any examples of “mosaic” patterns of landscaping which have detered fire spread? What happens (or doesn’t happen) in a mosaic landscape that helps to contain a megafire?
Hi Bill, Landscapes mosaics are simply heterogeneous habitats comprised of different species of plants with varied susceptibility to burning and thus spread. Most ecologists now believe more mosaics creates more animal diversity as animals are adapted to various vegetation. There has been a push by some for experts to better understand the natural dynamics that create mosaics in order to guide the size and frequency of prescribed burns.
As seen in the attached graphic, the frequency of fires can create a mosaic. The landscape that was just burnt in 1970 now has trees that are harder to ignite, The section that was burnt again 30 years later is a shrubland, and the section that was burnt a few years later is mostly grass and herbaceous plants.
The other photo shows different intensities of the same can create a mosaic.
Read:
Patch-mosaic burning: a new paradigm for savanna fire management in protected areas? Koedoe | Vol 42, No 2 | a237
Abstract: The shift in ecological thinking, from equilibrium to non-equilibrium processes has been accompanied by a move to encourage heterogeneity rather than homogeneity in landscapes. Spatial and temporal heterogeneity is thought to be a major source of biotic diversity, and disturbances such as fire, producing heterogeneity are now recognised as being important. A patch-mosaic system of burning is based on the premise that fire pattern is a surrogate for diversity, and produces a range of patches in the landscape with unique patch characteristics and fire histories.
Landscape composition influences local pattern of fire size in the eastern Canadian boreal forest: role of weather and landscape mosaic on fire size distribution in mixedwood boreal forest using the Prescribed Fire Analysis System International Journal of Wildland Fire 2010, 19, 1099–1109
Fire mosaics in south-west Australian forest landscapes International Journal of Wildland Fire 30(12) 933-945
It’s interesting to see nature’s versions of mosaic design. I became familiar with – and taught – “mosaic” formats as part of print journalism. It basically involved rectangles and squares, light and dark elements and the “weight” of pictures, captions, photos, etc… on a double-page spread. These things, to stretch the analogy, determined its overall “balance” and effects on the reader. Well, in a way we’re the readers.
I picture our ancestors on the west and east foothills of the Rocky Mountains as being tenacious burners for crop clearances. Landscapes “designed” by human behavior over thousands of years.
Thanks for the post.
In Australia, the 2019 bushfires brought out all the “climate change” clowns, yapping and carrying on like mindless chooks…
Since then… they have been very quiet ! 😉
I’m sure in a few years there will be another bad bushfire season…
… that is what happens in Australia…
… and all the “climate change” yapping will start all over again.
Yes, that’s the typical pattern. Busy season of anything “bad” = “climate change.” Quiet season = *crickets.*
Which is why I like to do things like ask a “climate true believer” why the longest period on record without a single “major” hurricane (Cat 3 or higher) hitting the US was in the 2000nds (2006 ,2016, 11 years), not some time in the distant, cooler past, since “climate change” is supposed to be making “bad weather” BOTH more frequent AND more severe, and watch the veins pop out of their head while they stew in their cognitive dissonance. 😁
Boomer treehugger bureaucrats ruined our parks and forests.
Lots of countries have sustainable logging and forest management. This is 100% just the result of ideologues being allowed to do dumb sh*t on the taxpayer dime.
Let’s drop the “generational” crap, since if anything there are far more of the Eco-Fascist types in the “generations” that came after the “Boomers” than there are anong the “Boomers.”
The issue is “leftist indoctrinated trehugger bureaucrats, activists, and pseudo-scientists,” nothing to do with “generations “
Jim’s interview was very good and informative.
Faloona’s was weak and lacking.
Number one Faloona cherry picked just as Jim suggested by comparing wildfires for the last five decades.
Second he defeats his own argument by praising how much we have done to lower fossil fuel use and therefore CO2 emissions yet average global warming is increasing more so in California than the rest of the US. Which is odd since California has been more aggressive than the rest of the country in the effort to lower CO2 emissions. What ever they are doing it clearly isn’t working.
Third he wants us to believe that science has shown manmade emissions are primarily responsible. Science has done nothing of the sort, rather CAGW rascals have declared human emissions as the cause and have nothing but climate models and anecdotal evidence to back up their claims. That is not science that is propaganda.
I seem to recall that MUCH more acreage burned in the 1970s than any year since, so OF COURSE alarmist “climate” stories a out wildfires always pick a post-1970s start date.
Look at the fire map of the US last week and notice that the entire West was on fire all at exactly the same time. The fires did not extend into Canada or into the middle of the US. There were no fires in the Eastern US. These were all set simultaneously in the Western US.
It was during the time that the Chinese were finishing their tests of their new laser weapons technology. Now look at the map and imagine your are looking down from a satellite and have one of their new laser weapons. How closely does it appear as though someone was firing a laser at a target? Can you unsee this resemblance?
A couple of years ago Chinese cameras were used to take detailed images of these areas. We were told it was for the use of our power companies to manage the vegetation and minimize its potential for causing fires. Because Chinese made cameras were used, the Chinese received these detailed images of our terrain, towns and cities.
We have had hotter summers and worse droughts. Had we really cleaned up the excess vegetation in the past sufficiently to prevent sudden simultaneous fires all over the Western US? How did we do that? I don’t remember it happening. I have seen a lot of clear cutting that left swaths of untouched forest all along the highways so it appeared thee were a lot more trees let than there actually were.