Should we have public review of Gorge fire management plan?
Posted: February 10th, 2018, 2:41 pm
Thanks to everyone who commented on my previous post about the Gorge Fire Management Plan and hiking's future. I'd like to hear some specific comments from hikers on having a public review of the Gorge's fire management plan. Are you in favor of one? Why or why not?
For some background see: http://www.lensjoy.com/Blog/EagleCreekFire.htm
Luck is not a fire management strategy. If the fire had started in the days before September 2, it could have been much larger. Some simplified fire growth modeling indicates this possibility: Here are some predicted sizes of the fire for other start dates. Conservative parameters cause the size for one starting 9/1 to be low.
Start Date Peak Size (acres)
8/26 1,065,564
8/27 623,247
8/28 487,762
8/29 213,217
8/30 119,094
8/31 72,943
9/1 23,830
And yes, I know we don't have a million acres of fuels on Oregon and Washington sides of the gorge. What the model is predicting is the fire growth potential. A number that big means we would have lost nearly everything that could burn until the fire reached areas where it wouldn't spread further due to lack of fuels.
For some background see: http://www.lensjoy.com/Blog/EagleCreekFire.htm
Luck is not a fire management strategy. If the fire had started in the days before September 2, it could have been much larger. Some simplified fire growth modeling indicates this possibility: Here are some predicted sizes of the fire for other start dates. Conservative parameters cause the size for one starting 9/1 to be low.
Start Date Peak Size (acres)
8/26 1,065,564
8/27 623,247
8/28 487,762
8/29 213,217
8/30 119,094
8/31 72,943
9/1 23,830
And yes, I know we don't have a million acres of fuels on Oregon and Washington sides of the gorge. What the model is predicting is the fire growth potential. A number that big means we would have lost nearly everything that could burn until the fire reached areas where it wouldn't spread further due to lack of fuels.