Skip to comments.Fire maps tag homes to skip ( Defensible Spaces : fire buffer )
Posted on 06/11/2006 6:46:57 AM PDT by george76
Wildfire triage helps districts decide which properties to protect...
Increasingly wary of powerful forest fires..mountain fire districts are mapping out which vulnerable homes might be sacrificed to avoid putting firefighters in harm's way and make best use of limited resources...
Since [ the ] disastrous fire season of 2002, fire districts and departments...are rapidly assembling data to assist in hard decisions about what neighborhoods are defensible and which ones may be left to burn.
But should a fast-rising fire force districts with too few resources to make deployment decisions fast, new maps and software give firefighters instant access to the barriers and hazards some homes pose, be it long driveways, propane tanks in the trees or shrubbery surrounding the foundation.
Some of those homes...would end up as fast food for forest fires...
Only about 30 percent of homeowners have put a fire buffer around their homes by clearing trees and brush...
Even openly marking homes as defensible and burnable ahead of time is [ not enough ] of a motivator.
What is, he said, is the wrath of insurance companies.
Slowly, a small number of companies are considering the risk of living in a high-fire hazard zone when setting rates, or even whether to write a policy.
Just recently, Egizi said he received a panicked call from a real estate agent whose sale was falling through because the buyer couldn't get insurance as the house was in what Egizi called "a high-hazard zone."
Thin trees, brush to create a "defensible space" around home.
Stack firewood away from house.
Clear vegetation around fire hydrants, cisterns and propane tanks.
Make sure driveway is wide enough for firefighting vehicles.
(Excerpt) Read more at rockymountainnews.com ...
Thats OK, if the fire is big enough FEMA will step in with taxpayer funds.... Our government just hates us...
People would do themselves and the federal taxpayers ( us ) a big favor by assuming some personal responsibility.
I quite agree. My feeling is, if FEMA pays for it ONCE, FEMA owns it, therefore we don't have to pay for it again. No insurance, TF Bad! Nothing ticks me off more than, "Yup, we've been fishing off the porch for years. Never expected the river to flood."
If you live in the Mountains you should build your own firebreak around your house. That's just common sense.
Local officials keep stressing that all neighbors pitch in and help each other thin out dangerous areas on their property.
Do you think we can get any locals up here to cut trees in exchange for the firewood? Hell no! Everybody wants to be paid to cut and to take the wood, too.
We can't afford it so we'll probably end up on this list.
Common sense is precious and rare, thus the herd is thinned whilest the wise homeowner is conducting fire drills with the expensive hosing and other fire fighting equipment he so thoughtfully included in the Master Plan for his new home in the Wilderness.
Many city people ( like Oprah, Dave Letterman, Ted Turner...) build a vacation home in the mountains. These " Hollywood " liberals have no clue.
They convince others with no common sense to ban spring bear hunting, vote to close existing roads ( even to fire fighters ), vote to ban logging, mining, jeeping, hunting, fishing, boating, ranching, grazing, vote to introduce wolves...
Now we have to try to educate some of these "nice people.".../s
Often, they refuse to cut one tree ...
They have no understanding of a fire break's value until after the fire has destroyed their home.
I see two issues.
One, building a "moat" around your home. This defensible space might help fire fighters save your home.
Second, having a healthy forest.
The eco-nuts have convinced many that massive fires that pollute the air during the fire, then pollutes the water after the fire, kills wildlife, destroys the 'organic' soil from the high heat, causes mud slides after the fire...is "friendly."
Something new in the field? I thought that was what insurance companies were supposed to do.
Agreed, living up here in the Flathead Valley in Montana we see that kind of idiocy all the time. Hollywood types like living here.
It would be nice to use the educated and experienced minds of scientists to make scientific decisions.
Instead, we have politicians, lawyers, and emotional judges making these important scientific decisions.
"Thats OK, if the fire is big enough FEMA will step in with taxpayer funds.... Our government just hates us..."
trailers all around folks
They've just recently woke up to the realization that there are a lot more people moving into the urban-wildland interface.
And a lot of them are doing stupid things, because it wasn't stupid when you lived in a city...but it is in the country.
You described what is happening. Lots and lots of bug killed trees to burn very very hot, and the soil gets screwed. Fire on the mountain = mudslides and degraded watershed, especially when it burns as hot as it has with all the dead wood.
Every time the forest service "vacates" a grazing permit, we all can see the end of another working, family rancher.
Then some "Hollywood" gentleman rancher will buy the old family homstead for his "sanctuary."
Hopefully, this sanctuary is near an airport for his private jet.../s
What I don't understand is why they don't have insurance. If they do, then what do they need from FEMA. If not, then why not and why should that be our burden. We all have enough of our own. Fire insurance too expensive? Then too bad. Either pay for it, assume the responsibility if you proceed w/o it, or sell your house and move to a place where you can afford it or where it is standard with homeowners insurance.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.