Whenever something doesn't go according to plan, people understandably want to know what went wrong. And so the officials at Yosemite National Park have put together this list of frequently asked questions about what went awry with the Big Meadow fire -- a prescribed burn that quickly got out of control.
Here's a list of four of the most frequently asked questions, and their answers, from a community meeting Acting Superintendent Dave Uberuaga had the other night in El Portal.
Why did the National Park Service ignite the Big Meadow fire in August?
The Big Meadow prescribed fire was initiated based upon a written and predetermined “window” of very specific conditions (temperature, humidity, fuel type, wind speed, smoke dispersal, etc.). At the time of ignition all conditions were within this window. Prescribed fires may be done any month of the year depending upon the objectives of the burn.
Why couldn’t the meadow be burned in much cooler conditions?
The Park uses prescribed fire to accomplish specific objectives. In the case of the Big Meadow fire, those objectives were meadow restoration and the maintenance of fire resistant vegetation for the Foresta Community. For vegetation to burn it must be sufficiently dry and flammable to maintain a fire. The prescription for the Big Meadow burn was based upon these objectives.
What went wrong then?
The development of the prescription window and its review and sign-off are processes that agencies have carefully developed to minimize the risk of a fire escape. However, when dealing with all the complexities that can affect a fire, it is nearly impossible to reduce risk to zero. The National Park Service will conduct a careful review once the fire is extinguished.
Will someone be held accountable for the fire and the damage it has done?
In the National Park Service, prescribed fire plans are reviewed and approved by multiple individuals and then authorized by the Superintendent or his/her representative. Any escaped prescribed fire requires a review once the fire is extinguished. The review will include independent, knowledgeable fire professionals and will produce findings. Based upon those findings, the agency may take further actions including those that might affect responsible officials.
Support Essential Coverage of Essential Places
Comments
With all controlled burns, control is very important. Man power making fire breaks where years of no burn costs hours of labor. We need to use prison labor to cut costs of labor and give those people work to help pay back their debt to the state.
Bringing in labor from other states to fight fires has the costs out of control. Why not use our prison labor preparing fire breaks before the fire season and get a upper hand to help stop large fires. In the 1940's, we used prisoners of war in our national forest, making trails, building road and fighting fires.
Stop giving these prisoners a free ride, health care, dental care, room and board. The taxpayers have footed the bill for the prisoners to the point of bankrupting the state. If a prisoner doesn't want to work, make prison life worst than outside the walls.
Take an look at the prisoners working in Pina Co. Arizona. Less returning criminals to the system. Prisoners paying their own cost of lockup.
Awake up taxpayers. For every prisoner, it costs over $20.000 per year. Isn't that enough reason to make a person work for their keep? How many family members of your home, cost $20.000 a year to support?
1: The latest map is at:
http://www.inciweb.org/incident/maps/large/1869/0/
2: From the acting superintendent's q&a transcript:
http://www.inciweb.org/incident/article/9328/
Why did the National Park Service ignite the Big Meadow fire in August
The Big Meadow prescribed fire was initiated based upon a written and pre-determined "window" of very specific conditions (temperature, humidity, fuel type, wind speed, smoke dispersal, etc.). At the time of ignition all conditions were within this window. Prescribed fires may be done any month of the year depending upon the objectives of the burn.
Why couldn't the meadow be burned in much cooler conditions
The Park uses prescribed fire to accomplish specific objectives. In the case of the Big Meadow fire, those objectives were meadow restoration and the maintenance of fire resistant vegetation for the Foresta Community. For vegetation to burn it must be sufficiently dry and flammable to maintain a fire. The prescription for the Big Meadow burn was based upon these objectives.
3: To the south, FS already is being criticized for not having burned enough in Angles NF: they got the air quality permits last year, but didn't have enough days of conditions meeting the prescription for a safe, controllable, effective fire:
http://www.latimes.com/news/la-me-fire3-2009sep03,0,2624824,full.story
The Forest Service Wednesday also answered criticism that it had not cleared hundreds of acres in the Angeles National Forest, despite obtaining permits to burn away the shrubs and brush that fuel wildfires. Officials said that just because the permits were granted, the Forest Service would not necessarily conduct the permitted burns.
The agency only sets intentional fires under ideal conditions, officials said, taking into account temperature, humidity and environmental concerns.
"All conditions must have been met before we can engage in the burning," said Jody Noiron, an Angeles National Forest supervisor. "We have had very few days for prescribed burning."
Wow... I love the government b.s. those were supposed to be answers...sounded like a bunch of beating around the burned bushes.
There is no such thing as controlled burning when you are talking about that large of a fire.
Great to see the commentary about fire ecology and the effects of humans on the natural environment. We need more fire on our landscapes to keep firefighters and our homes safe.
Anonymous--
Alas, its not quite that simple. At least for chaparral, we (almost certainly) need more fire on the landscape for ecosystem reasons, but more burns probably won't reduce the intensity, size, & danger of future fires the way it does in other forests. If you're interested, google Jon Keeley USGS: either his USGS or his UCLA website has links to pdfs of some of the most recent research and thinking about fire in chaparral.
you almost burned down my home! what person would start a fire in august with extremely dry conditions, low humidity, wind, it was tottally stupid. and they didnt account for all the dry left over fuel from the 1990 fire. all that $$$$$ etc just to burn some weeds in the meadow, retarded!
video of burn
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YvyA2PcH9w