Contact
Jim: jdipeso@rep.org
(253) 740-2066 / 2009
Archive / 2008
Archive / 2007
Archive / 2006
Archive / 2005
Archive
The Fire This Time
August 24, 2007
Cheeky
headlines and playful captions make The Economist a newsweekly unlike
any other. With its droll humor and traditional conservative ideas
about politics and economics, this London-based publication, or
"newspaper" as its editors prefer to call it, provides a useful
outsider's perspective on American goings-on, including environmental
matters.
The
latest edition, for example, takes a look at the wildfires burning
across the northern Rockies and in southern California. The article
avoids the apocalyptic language typical of fire stories in U.S. media.
On the contrary, The Economist seems almost cheery, starting with the
headline: "Burn, baby burn." The article listed reasons why the growth
in wildfires has its up sides: there is less willingness to put
wildland firefighters at risk, greater willingness to let fire assume
its natural role in fire-prone ecosystems.
Every
fire season, there is a call to step up commercial logging in national
forests as a way to "fireproof" the forests. Like everything else with
natural resources management, it's not that simple. Logging the forests
to save them is a bromide that overlooks the variables that influence
wildfire behavior. In northwestern Montana, for example, fires have
broken out this summer on thousands of acres of intensively managed
timberlands and old clearcuts, as well as in sickly, dog-hair stands
that could stand some thinning. When the weather is as dry as it's
been, trees are more likely to burn. If global warming results in more
intense, frequent droughts, fire seasons as tough as 2007 may become
the norm.
Site-specific
forest management that removes ladder fuels, removes dangerous brush
around homes, and carefully re-introduces fire in the back-country can
help reduce the odds of conflagrations. But fire cannot be excluded
from Western forests, any more than hurricanes can be kept away from
Florida. A fireproof forest is a foolish oxymoron that invites cheeky
headlines from The Economist.