Periodic reminder of the Native American approach to minimizing the power of forest fires.
They say the California forests are not "natural." They were planted by humans, 10,000 to 20,000 years ago.
They learned that if you don't do controlled burns, that in
~100 years, you get fire tornadoes.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Mby72d2Vz30
It's difficult for many US people to accept that native Americans planted entire forests. They seem too big.
But just in the past 20 years, we've seen multiple examples in many countries, of one individual human creating entire forests. In India. Brazil. Indonesia. China. Etc.
Like this dude:
https://youtube.com/shorts/APL35AVtWqM?si=Zoqo8tJnKD4ptwuN
The Karuk tribe says, "Making forests is easy! Just plant a few trees every day for a few years. But some years are drier, hotter, and windier. You can't let fuel build up. If you don't do controlled burns, then 1 year within about 100, you will pay a terrible price. The sky will turn red."
Indigenous people learned this the hard way when they were starting out planting forests. They said that the biggest fires crossed entire rivers by raining burning embers for miles, and "created their own weather of wind and lightning." Entire villages disappeared.
Of course we didn't believe them.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=q92H5PHsWQY
I guess what I'm saying is, all those feel good videos of people planting entire forests in Brazil and India and China and Mexico etc, are probably making the same mistake that indigenous people in those same places made *checks notes* 20,000 years ago, before they figured it out.
Yes, we do some burns. No, we don't do enough. There's still too much fuel.
And we stopped burns for the better part of the past 100 years. We started limited burns again in large part due to the advocacy of people like Dr. Frank Lake, a Karuk person who also has a PhD in Environmental Sciences.
https://research.fs.usda.gov/about/people/franklake#orgs-tab
To put it in perspective, in 2023, California treated 700,000 acres. That's a lot! But California has ~33 million acres of forest.
For much of the past 20,000 years, many parts of that 33 million acres were treated regularly. Then for the most recent 100 years, they were mostly not treated at all.
https://www.gov.ca.gov/2025/01/08/california-forest-management-hotter-drier-climate/
@mekkaokereke Can't find the source, since it's been a while I read it (might in a Jared Diamond book), but I remember it's well documented through dendrochronoly that for millenias forests burned regularly, effectively removing the undergrowth and preventing *massive* fires.
When people started building houses near/in forests, they started controlling fires more, and the undergrowth kept growing until it fueled more sporadic but bigger fires.
@remi @mekkaokereke If this is regarding southern CA, it's not forest that's burning. It's all "undergrowth".
Fair. But a few things:
1) Controlled burns are specifically designed to burn that undergrowth and the forest litter, not the trees. You don't want the trees to burn. The undergrowth is part of the problem.
2) Minimizing the chances of a wildfire starting and getting really hot, and keeping the ground moist (by reducing undergrowth), reduces the chances that it will make it into urban areas.
3) ...but the problem in LA right now is chapparal + high winds + near urban areas. There is no controlled burn that can prevent a fire like this from spreading once it's in a suburban area.
https://m.youtube.com/shorts/vEo7O71o4RU
It's too large and that wind is deadly. It fuels the fire. In a dry enough area, any of those embers could start a new fire.
@mekkaokereke Wow that looks like a hurricane.