The stories out of Colorado Springs about the Waldo Canyon fire are pretty horrific. Here is a recent one from the Guardian. Next to Indiana and Ohio, Colorado is probably the state I know best. My Dad moved there sometime around 1978, and I’ve been going there ever since. It’s where I first learned about drought. And probably something about government antipathy — I seem to recall picking up some dissatisfaction about water policy. (In particular, I remember flushing the toilet and saying, “there goes the water to Denver” to some general levity from adults in the vicinity.)
A couple of notes: 1) The idiots who pointed to snow storms as evidence that Al Gore was stupid and wrong about global warming should be offered up as human fire breaks. This doesn’t prove the case for global warming – just that they’re misguided for conflating weather with climate.
2) These fires go well beyond anything individuals can contend with on their own. Government is vitally necessary to combat the flame and will be vitally necessary to deal with the aftermath. It should be interesting to see how Colorado Springs – a hotbed of anti-government sentiment copes with that reality. My guess is by grabbing federal money and resources with both hands, ignoring the dissonance, and, if confronted, by explaining that their only against other, unspecified, types of evil government.
Also, as a final note, Indiana is dryer than I remember seeing it. The fireworks lobby is making noises about what a bad idea and potentially illegal for governments to restrict fireworks use. I’ve seen individuals grumping about their god-given right to use fireworks around the Fourth of July. Without getting too deep into the weeds on this issue just now, don’t be stupid people. I know the fireworks people need to make money, and people like to celebrate their country by blowing stuff up. But sending hot, flamey things into bone dry vegetation puts everyone at risk.
Doug, It reminds me of the importance of our public employees. We don’t need them, until we REALLY need them. By that point, if they’re not there, its too late. Texas slashed their public employee funds, only to have a disasterous wildfire of their own. I don’t know if the same thing happened in CO, but now is when we realize how vital they are to us.
Here’s the anti-government types’ response, right in the article:
“I hope the whole thing burns to prove the government should have put out the fire a long time ago instead of pussy footing around. They let it get out of control,” said Lingle, who divides his time between homes in Colorado and Texas. “If they can’t put out a little bitty fire, how are they going to put out one that is in the whole town?”
See, it’s ALWAYS “the government” in the wrong, whether they do something or do nothing.
Fire in residential areas is obviously a problem. But people get far too bent out of shape about forests catching on fire. Ever been to a forest a few years after a fire? Green and lush, the new growth is incredible.
No, of course, weather doesn’t prove climate change. But then neither does using 140 years of recorded temps, feeding them into a computer, and concluding long-term trends for a planet that is 4.5 billion years old. 140 years is just a tiny grain of time. We have short term changes in the climate that last 10,000 years or more. We have long term changes that last 100,000 or as much as a million years old. You can’t take 140 years and assume the temperature trends in that 140 years will continue on.
Another thing about global warming, er climate change. The models predicting it said the US would see increases in precipitation, not droughts. Of course the global warming crowd will say that droughts also prove it and everything in between also prove it as well. It’s a pretty convenient argument.
Good points Paul. I always forget if “global warming” was supposed to increase temperatures first (as the name suggests”) or reduce temperatures first (like “The Day after Tomorrow”), and then they switched their minds.
Forest fires are a concern. Perhaps govt. can fix it, perhaps they can’t. Still, I don’t think that fighting forest fires is the main concern of the “small government” crowd.
increased precipitation was predicted in some areas of the US, not a national condition.
My wife is a Purdue biology professor. She is teachinng a summer Intro course.
Anthropogenic global warming is established science it is a core topic in the teaching of environmental biology and changes in species range (neutral barometers of increased temptures that do not listen to AM radio or read the Texas Republican party platform. They just extend their ranges northwards to adjust to tempatures changes )
There are about three climatologists that are in dissent and two of those agree with the increased tempatures but deny a man made influence.
There is not point in trying to reason with the Two Pauls on this issue. I read Paul K. Ogden’s blog, and usually he is reasonable. He has a blind spot on climate change, however.
You did not say fire crackers. But fireworks have little social utility, while stairs have an amazng amount of social utility.
But you are of course free to install ladders in your home and business.
If I were an oil company or coal company executive, (or a politican like Inhofe that is owned by them), I could understand global warming denial. It hurts my revenue stream. And if I were an oil company attorney, I could see myself making baseless statements “discrediting” the established science. But at least I would know that I was a whore and would clearly understand the science and know that I was lying for the filthy lucre.
And I can understand the core of the GOP, mean old white people that the world is passing by, relying on AM radio and contrainess to reject science. Hell, their grandparents probably said that if man were meant to fly he would have been “given” wings.
But for other Republicans that are educated and presumambly took science in high school and college, and understand the rigor of the scientific method, I am dumb founded. But then again, it is also dogma among Republicans to deny the established science of evolution. But be as dumb as you want. The dumber you are, the more you will make are’ins more successful.
They don’t actually just use 140 years of temperatures. Global trends can be elucidated through ice cores, lake sediment, tree rings. Right now, we have events that are proceeding as predicted by the greenhouse gas model. The oppositing viewpoint has finally moved from “No, the earth is actually cooling!” to “Yeah, but we’re not causing it to any degree”. Now, most have moved to “Yeah, we’re making it worse–but not by much.” Next will be “Yeah, but we can’t do anything about it anyway.” Then maybe it’ll be “The markets would have fixed this, if it weren’t for socialist Democrats wasting our time on the healthcare bill”. The sad thing is that the fixes aren’t nearly as expensive as the deniers claim, and would stimulate domestic job growth, energy independence, and health.
Well-meaning fire suppression has made things worse by far. All of the lodgepole pines got older than is typical, all at the same time. They succumbed to the bark beetle due to both their age and abnormally warm temperatures. Now there are millions of trees out there, dead for years, still standing, with dried pine sap (a wonderful accelerant) conveniently coating their bark.
I was in Boulder in June when the High Park fire was raging in Ft. Collins. I was struck by all of the high-end residential development that has sprung up right up against the Front Range. At some point, nature will burn the forest near the new homes and some will be lost. It reminds me of folks who buy homes in the flood plains of the Wabash and Tippecanoe rivers. I will never own a structure in a flood plain or near a forest that will one day burn. I don’t think in IN and CO people are forced by economics to live in flood- or fire-prone areas. Maybe the insurance market will dissuade future development.
The insurance market is the most effective deterent to such development because many local zoning authorities will permit such development at the behest of developers.
I lived for eight years in the high desert of New Mexico and saw several fire emergencies. These are areas that as a general rule cannot support dense populations and are always at risk of conflagration. When sparsely populated, these areas burn over every few years and take out underbrush and other accelerants. But over the last few years as building has occurred in such fire-prone areas, property protection has won out over burnover. And the results are predictable.
The problem with insurance is that they have been bailed out by the federal government so many times for foreseeable “natural disasters” that they expect it. So, rates go down for people that voluntarily choose to live in disaster zones, and taxes go up when the federal government pays the claims.
The fireworks grumping is due to do-gooders keeping them illegal for so long, so we fireworks fans get snippy about it. Especially those of us with a garden hose and fire extinguisher at the ready.
btw – From channel 8’s site, “State law protects the use of fireworks in the days surrounding the 4th of July whether there is a burn ban in place, or not. Yet a local jurisdiction can prohibit the use the fireworks by issuing an emergency disaster declaration and some are doing so.”
As a mostly-Libertarian I do think those in Colorado Springs etc, do see the need for government to provide many functions, especially those required for protection, that are on such a grand scale. Please don’t paint the mural with a roller.
Your garden hose and extinguisher will have little effect on aerial fireworks that land in adjoing land or on neighboring structures . But as a libertarian, if your are ready to pay for any damages caused by your fireworks, go ahead.
And by all means, volunteer to work in the emergency room on the 4th. Fireworks create land office business for opthamalogists digging metal and other foreign substances out of human eyes.
? – I was referring to firecrackers. Fireworks do create injuries, as do stairways and trampolines. Maybe we should ban stairs and trampolines ?
Getting back to the main point, large parts of Colorado are hell on earth, and my impression from the news and gizmomathboy’s post below is that we’re f—ed because of the severe drought. Firefighters should not be put in a position of potential harm because a bunch of knobs built their houses out in the boonies. Shut off the utilities to whatever Colorado Springs suburbs are threatened by fire, and if they have to burn, so be it…that’s what insurance is for.
As a one time forest fire fighter, USDA Forest Service employee, and one time resident of Montana (grew up there until I moved to Purdue) I’ve seen all sides of this.
Yes, we overprotected the forests for a long time, however the Forest Service changed that policy along time ago. However, they are still having to deal with those people that put houses in at risk areas and don’t take proper landscaping and architectural precautions. A cedar shake roof is not too fire resistance no matter how much water you throw at it.
No amount of good fire policy would help in the case of a drought. You’re just plain fucked. High temperatures, high winds, and low humidities are a recipe for ignition. Those little fires start in places that are difficult to get to usually. By the time you get there you might be able to control it with just a small squad but sometimes they blow up.
The government is in a no win position. There doesn’t seem to be a lot of rational actors (at least in terms of the public good, lots of rational actors in terms of getting re-elected and consolidating politcal power) in government let alone our citizenry.
Extreme moderates of the world unite!
http://www.indystar.com/article/20120628/OPINION08/206280318/Editorial-Playing-fire-during-drought?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|Opinion|p
The Star has an editorial criticizing the fireworks sellers and their statutory interpretation.