When this forest fire raged in California, with thousands of emergency people displaced from their homes and dozens of people died.
Earlier this year, a series of forest fires on the coast of Greece killed 99 people. Then in July 2018, smoke from fires in Russia reached North America.
Some people might view the order of events as ordinary. But when the fires multiplied in all the world, there were also questions and misunderstandings about them.
Here are five common myths about forest fires – some of which can damage your success in fighting them.
Myth # 1: Regular logging can prevent forest fires
The general assumption is that logging, or removing many trees, will counteract fires. Many experienced forestries write ineffective logging.
This is because the remaining trees after logging, like stumps and twigs, become super-user fuel for fires – which are even drier (and easier to burn) without a forest canopy.
There are not a few scientific propositions that support this claim. For example, new research indicates that the severity of fuel wants to be higher in areas with more senior management levels.
Experiences working in the field of fire conservation have also broken the argument that logging protects species that are in danger of becoming extinct from forest fires, a general discussion that supports the removal of trees.
It seems that animals like iconic owls still use it from the burning forest, and the removal of trees can hurt them.
Logging after a fire is counterproductive and can result in fewer fires. A different practice is to clean all areas of the forest, a common approach used by firefighters to ward off spread fire.
Myth # 2: There is nothing you can do to protect your property
Forest fires are the most powerful and threatening, but the location of living stairs can minimize their risk by taking anticipatory measures at home. The building itself must be the first concern. Houses with fireproof roofs have more opportunities to survive the flames. The owner must also remove materials that are quickly burned from the structure, classified as leaves in gutters and roof lines.
Families can create a ‘defense zone’ between the location of their residence and the surrounding wilderness. This means washing everything that can burn, like a brush, dry leaves, and wood piles within 30 feet (9 m) of a residential building. That’s why currently many casinos shifting to online mode and make the login easier, so they didn’t worry about fire in their building, maybe only for the server security, but usually, there is a special treatment for server location.
When the distance is 30-100 feet (9-30m) from the house, the tree must have a large gap between the canopy – 12 feet (3.6 m) of space between the peaks between 30-60 feet (9-18m) from the house, and 6 feet (1.8 m) of use space tops that are 60 feet (18 m).
This disrupts the fire path and slows down the pace.
Myth # 3: Forest fires are an inevitable natural phenomenon
Forest fires are natural phenomena, but the level and intensity that occurs when this is not – and among the effects of climate evolution.
We witnessed more and fewer fires between 1930 and 1980, a period that coincided with a cooler and humid situation.
But because the climate has become hotter and drier in the past four decades, the number of fires has increased. Only in the two years between 1980 and 1999 did forest fires burn more than 6 million acres (2.4 million hectares) of US wilderness.
But between 2000 and 2017, there were ten years with land burning above that threshold. Globally, the duration of the fire season increased by almost 19% between 1978 and 2013.
Even though we cannot indicate climate change as the cause of a particular fire, it affects the factors that help trigger and spread fires, such as large droughts, high temperatures, low humidity, and strong winds.
As a result, all scientists wrote that the addition of forest fires in all the world, from Siberia to Portugal, was related to climate evolution.
Myth # 4: All forest fires are bad and must be put out immediately
Fires have played a crucial role in the ecosystem around thousands of years, and life has developed after a fire broke out:
Some beetles breed solely in the heat of a fire, pine cones sprout with periodic fires and washing space from burning trees makes it possible for new plants in the spring.
The uses that not a few people now expect to be reached by logging or forest management – the introduction of dense forests are naturally carried out by forest fires.
Fire routinely engulfs smaller branches and trees, eliminating forests that would otherwise not be useful as fuel.
By fighting endless forest fires about centuries ago, you have counteracted this ‘cleansing’: not enough of 1% of US fires were ignored.
This strategy works better when there are not many forest fires – but in our current fanatical condition, pumping less money to fight fires may have a reduced rate of return.
Myth # 5: It is possible to eradicate (or control) all forest fires
As we have seen, climate evolution, in addition to other factors such as the increasingly widespread human settlements, is thought to increase forest fires, especially at the upper-middle latitudes, in the coming decades.
The tropics may feel a decline in fires, which is a relief for countries around the equator. But the element of the world is different having to deal with the addition of the number of events.
Some fires, like California’s wildfires, are too fast to handle. Evacuation and relocation is the only reasonable response.
This leads to the question of whether a community like Paradise, which is almost destroyed by fire, must remain in their location – or move to another location.
Some experience calls for a return to traditional knowledge to deal with the fire. Because efforts to burn fire appear to be inadequate – and the cause of fires is likely only to increase severely – that is the question that all policymakers must face.