Norman Spector- One of the key recommendations to come out of the Firestorm 2003 report was for communities to create wildfire-protection plans to reduce risk in and around their communities. Once the plans were complete, they could apply for funding from the province.
The risk reduction (known as fuel treatment) includes thinning timber, cutting underbrush and the lower limbs of trees, and removing woody debris from the forest floor. It is designed to keep fire on the ground, away from the upper reaches of the tree canopy where it can spread rapidly and burn more intensely.
Many First Nations, municipalities and regional districts have created wildfire-protection plans in the past two decades and some have made progress. For example, wildfire risk mitigation is credited with helping firefighters halt a fire at the edge of Logan Lake in the 2021 season.
But a 2022 Postmedia investigation found that in nearly two decades, less than 10 per cent of needed fuel clearing in and around communities on more than 11,000 square kilometres (an area identified by the province) had been completed.
The cost to complete that work could be as much as $6 billion, Postmedia found.
According to information provided by the B.C. Ministry of Forests this week, the needle on progress has moved, but not by very much. By the end of 2023, additional forested area more than 40 times the size of Stanley Park is expected to have had wildfire risk-reduction treatments, including from intentionally set fires called prescribed burns. But that’s less than two per cent of the total area that needs work in and around communities.
Robert Gray, a wildfire ecologist with decades of experience in B.C., said what needs to be done is known, but the resources and money required is not being put toward those preventive measures…
Postmedia’s investigation found that between 2008 and 2021, B.C. spent $4.16 billion fighting fires and just $224 million on reducing wildfire risk for communities.
“I think we’ve been awake for 20 years now. It’s actually just getting out of bed and doing something that’s needed,” said Dickson-Hoyle.
“We’re too busy fighting climate change to mitigate wildfires.”
Translation: We are spending billions, based on blatantly deceitful science, to prevent future citizens sweating a bit; and don’t have the money to prevent you becoming homeless. In addition, there are no CO2 emissions from wildfires. They’re natural, and natural is always good and healthy because Gaia loves us.
The only communities in the Rocky Mountain West where I have observed good, proactive thinning on surrounding lands so as to prevent uncontrollable forest fires (a long-known, well-understood and natural feature of this ecosystem) are Rapid City, South Dakota and Flagstaff, Arizona. Both of those cities very nearly burned down…which was a valuable lesson.
Burn back better.
https://www.kelowna.ca/our-community/about-kelowna/smart-and-intelligent-city-initiatives
I think I was a witch burned at the stake in a previous life. I am very mindful of fire risks/prevention. As well, for most of my design career, I worked on restaurants, hotels and resorts. Under the Ontario Building Code and the Hotel Fire and Safety Act, there were very clear directions (which were enforced by the Ontario Fire Marshall’s office) as to how to prevent fires.
When my sister and I visited the Grand Canyon National Park in February 2020, we were pleasantly surprised at the very good park management to mitigate fire risks. These included removal of deadwood and lower limbs of various trees to prevent fire from catching on the ground and then moving to the tree canopy.
I wish more people would follow good land management and follow building bylaws which proscribe clear side yards with 1.2 meter (4′-0″) setbacks. Sadly, many of my neighbours build illegal wood sheds in the setback and/or fill it with flammable junk.
Why would our political class want to reduce risk? Fewer fires would only undermine their fraudulent climate change agenda. Allowing the fires lets the farce continue at the cost of lives and property.
HA HA.
As usual, there is often no money provided by the politicians for the unsexy maintenance programs that are required to keep things running, while there is lots of money for the newest shiny thing that says “I’m doing something!”
I have no knowledge of contemporary info wrt fire fighting policies. However, back on the farm we always employed fire breaks around important structures. Every year, first trip to the satellite farm my instructions were to make a few passes over the firebreak until it was nice and black. Is this not a thing anymore?
Another AI article. I’m not shocked that this or any government is reluctant to spend money on preventive measures, that doesn’t get you much positive publicity and there are always panicked citizens to complain about a little smoke in the Spring.
This situation has existed in B.C for as long as I’ve lived here, since 1966, and no government has made any changes in their methods. This will be good campaign bullshit rhetoric for the BC United Liberal party in the next election campaign, and if elected they’ll do exactly as the current Dippers, the former Liberals, Socreds and NDP did.
Every town in BC would require upwards of a km of permanently fallowed treeless soil (short mowed grass acceptable) wherever forests adjoin developed land. As well, you would need to ban all sociopath-inspired tree bylaws which prevent their theoretical owners from cutting them down. Try running for Council on that platform. Thinning and brush removal helps only in preventing a ground fire spread. Once the fire is in the crowns its a different ball game. Don’t expect your typical snag-hugging loon to support real fire prevention.
All you have to do is eliminate conifers from a kilometer around towns. Sixty years ago I watched a forest fire go through a mile of deciduous forest. It took all summer and nobody even thought of fighting it. Clean the trash out in that kilometer and you couldn’t burn it if you wanted. I’ve seen coniferous forest fires run 30 km in a day in a hot dry wind. If you want marketable timber plant oaks. The only fire risk in a clean deciduous forest in northern Alberta would be a grass fire in a dry spring.
In Saskatchewan the fire fighters handle forest fires by directing the fires towards poplar and aspen areas of the forest. They do this by attacking the edges of the fire with water bombers. The fires basically self extinguish once they are run into Aspen.
Spruce and Pine will burn like crazy.
So we’re not doing fire prevention because they’re stealing the money. Business as usual in Canuckistan.
Wake up and smell the arson fires, Normies. They’re fleecing you like sheep.