Risk vs Reward. Does the state want to take responsibility for a fire that burns up a campground with 10 families in it because the single road in/out is where the fire started? For 99.9% of the time they do take that risk. but now with so many major incidents going on within the state resources are beyond stretched thin… Response times suffer because of that. if a community or a campground is effect by a fire it could take HOURS for personnel to get to each area for evacuations… Any new starts WILL be many times larger than they would be if this was a normal season. because of this more campgrounds and hikers will have to be found, Stretching resources even thinner. Think of it as an evacuation order for all forests… is the regional forester happy about it? no. is anyone happy about it? no…
But guess what, that evacuation order is for a reason. get out of harms way. Lakes are being closed also because for every single person out on a boat I bet there is double the amount of people on the shore. Fire kicks off, People can be an hour away from their truck and trailer, evacuate the whole lake? have you seen some people try to back their trailers down the ramp and try to load their boat. that would take forever, especially since the fire thats now probably 2K acres only gets a couple BC’s and a strike team or two of engines…
I get it, abundance of caution.
So worrying about hunters not getting to hunt is selfish? I would think hunters should be worrying about starting fires and burning our homes down. Who’s selfish here???
you don’t get it. Put the fires out and everyone will be happy.
Better to close and lose some sales tax, than stay open and lose millions in property taxes from several thousand home and businesses gone. It’s no guarantee it would help, but safety first.
There are 35 IMTs mobilized nationally. All trying to put the fire out. I think they get it.
But these fires aren’t being caused by people out recreating on the National Forests. It’s lightning and PG&E. This ‘what if’ game is a little ridiculous. I can’t wait for some of these businesses that are going to be impacted to take the FS to court.
WHO? Don’t get it? Stay out and stay away…
There are not enough resources to deal with new fires from careless people in the woods. This is not new. It is what needs to be done,
Thank y’all for proving my point
…and your point was???
Folks, let us NOT take out our frustrations on each other. We can disagree with one another without attacking each other. That solves nothing except to provoke the other individual and causes them to dig in to their position. There are substantial pros and cons for both sides of this argument but at the end of the day, the decision has been made, we aren’t going to be able to sway the decision, but what we can do is discuss the matter civilly. I made my case earlier in this thread and I still stand by that post but that doesn’t mean that I don’t respect or am not willing to listen to alternate views.
I disagree chukar, however I appreciate and respect your right to have that opinion. We had closures last year and in years past as well.
All I am saying is that now is the time to do what we can to prevent additional large fires.
Trying to avoid another Creek fire situation. I remember when they were trying to get visitors out of Huntington lake and Shaver while people were trying to sneak up Jose basin road with travel trailers and RVs all while this was happening at mammoth pool.
They don’t want to assume the legal risk.
my forest leadership backs this decision 100%. We should have done it sooner and it should go through the end of Oct IMO. why not until the 22nd? probably to give folks who are camping/hiking a few days to pack up and leave. and for our staff to properly close sites and post closure notifications.
I really understand the whys of people being unhappy with the Forest Closure Order.
But there are people who recreate in the woods with no idea what is going on around them.
I was horse back riding last year and came upon a campfire left unattended just after the North Complex had burned. The risk at the present time with exceptional drought, extreme fuel receptivity , limited resources is just too high from my standpoint to take the chance.
This logic truly baffles me, so let’s just not do anything anymore because something might happen??? I don’t get it
True, don’t close them. Enter camp, and enjoy as long as no first responders are responsible to evacuate and risk their life for you.
You clearly do not understand the risks and factors involved so maybe you should not weigh in?
Without being confrontational this isn’t something comparable to kids going to play rough get hurt so they shouldn’t play, this is more like if they play and make a mistake it’s highly probable many lives will be forever impacted.
The more kids playing the more likely the mistake.
Recognizing that this question may well further inflame the debate, I would truly be interested in knowing what the best course of action should have been. As I have told subordinates too many times to count, bring an alternate solution to the table. Criticism of a direction or plan is ok however, that comes with a responsibility to provide an alternative plan. The strategy of doing little to nothing and hoping for a positive outcome has not turned out well this year and there is nothing to suggest that it will get better until there is some substantial rainfall to begin FM recoveries. These are by in large, 1,000 and 10,000 hour fuels which are well below critical FM levels. While there are good woodsmen still around, there are becoming fewer and fewer who know how to properly and safely manage themselves in the public lands. The person responsible for the Rim Fire was in fact a hunter, who had no business being anywhere near the public or private land for that matter. I personally enjoy the full use of the public lands including: Fishing, hunting, dirt bike riding and shooting. But the conditions and the 95+ percent of people who use these lands, today do not have, nor do they care to have, the skills which we traditionally have labeled woodsmen.
So, with all of these elements in mind, I ask, what would your solution to this very non-normal condition be?
