Our forest fire precautions

[Phils]

Yep, that Concow fire is nasty.

Most of the businesses in Paradise are closed due to smoke,even if not in the evacuation zones. Ever seen a K-Mart close? I heard they moved their inventory to Chico (maybe just a community rumour?). Even Wells-Fargo & BofA closed.

The fire is still 4 or 5 miles from us and tho headed directly this way there's still a river/lake to cross before we'd burn.

Without TBN I likely wouldn't have bought the machine I did (PowerTrac 422) and therefore wouldn't have been able to clear the amount of brush I have. If the fire makes it this far I have reasonable expectations that we'll survive just fine, again due mostly to 'seat time' over the past couple of years. Were it not for "the book" and this site I could have spent my money on a much less capable machine.

Phil

 

[Hotwheels]

RedDirt,
Glad to hear the fires are not up close and personal. Anything that close sounds as if it is worrysome. Your air quality must be worse than ours here in P'ville, and this is as bad as it has ever been. The GeoMac link is very useful, thanks for passing that on!

I have not found the pump I am looking for. I am still thinking of spraying a retardant and I believe I need a higher pressure, higher flow pump that I am finding on most spot/atv sprayer type rigs. About 4 -5 gallons per minue at 40-50 psi is the best I am finding. I am looking for something around 6GPM and 60 psi to get into some trees at the edge of my property. I will not be able to do much with that at risk area until the fall, so I am thinking of putting retardant on them. Since I have this new RTV900 I thought it would be a good thing to put togher my own spray rig for roundup and retardant, but I am still looking for the right pump!

Stay safe,
JR

 

[solarpowered]

Interesting subject, I am in the same boat regarding do it yourself fire protection.

I was wondering if anyone has any information on Phos-Chek AquaGel-K. It sounds like it's a powder that you activate when needed.

Fire Protection Using Polymer Gel

Seems like it should have a long shelf life vs the Thermo-Gel I have on hand.


Also, on those that have plastic nozzles I would replace them with a metal version. I had one break off when it fell off the steps (Two foot drop)of my brush truck.
Lucky for me I was testing the equipment and not dealing with a fire.

Got replacements off eBay that had the correct GPM for my pressure pump cheap. Flush is a desirable feature to have on the nozzle. My tank get's flakes of rust that foul the spray. A quick twist clears out the blockage.

Oops, I forgot to add the direct link to the Phos-Chek. The other link is still interesting info on gel foam.

Phoschek - Gel

 

[RedDirt]

solarpowered,
Welcome to TBN. I'm a fairly new member too. This is a great site.

I went to the link you posted and the Phos-Chek AquaGel-K seems to be the same basic product as the Barricade gel I bought earlier this summer but in a powdered form. Do you know what the mixing instructions are? This could be a drawback if it takes any length of time, effort or equipment as these are all in short supply during a fire incident, especially time. I could not find the mentioned mixing instuctions link at the site.

With reassurance from Barricade that I could keep my Barricade gel much longer than their three year warranty states eased my reluctance to purchase their product.

Thanks for the heads up on the plastic nozzle; that's what I've got. I'll look for a brass replacement.

 

[pappy19]

I worked a pipeline routing project in northern Californiaa few years ago from Reno to Yuba City across the Sierra's. I am a forester by trade and I remarked to my compadre's that this forest is doomed to burn. I have never seen a more unproductive, unsafe forest as what I saw from Sierraville north to Susanville. That forest needs thinning and bad. When the enviro's shut down the timber industry, they shut down all fire prevention as well. With no forest roads, there is no access. Logging companies were usually the first men and equipment on the scene of a fire and it was usually out before it became a problem. Proper thinning of a forest inhances both the fire protection and wildlife. Grass and brouse can't grow under a thick forest canopy. The enviro's have ruined the managed forest situation and I hardly think it will ever be close to what it was before it was shut down. After a burn, just watch the erosion into streams and another 50 years before it burns again. Dumbasses.

 

[schmism]

charliepff,
I think I will get a little booster pump in case my pressure drops too much to apply the Barricade. But I'm now looking at the $150 1HP pumps from Northern rather than the expensive ones from Dave. My wallet's a bit anemic after my trip to Dave's shop.

have you inquired with your insurace on getting some of that reinbursed? THey might be inclined to help you out with the expense of a several hundred dollars if they know it will significantly help prevent a payout loss of hundreds of thousands.

 

[RedDirt]

pappy19,
The green folk have done a fair amount of damage along with a fair amount of good. But from my perspective I think the US forest mismanagement predates the green movement by at least a couple of decades.

The culprit was the USFS poor understanding of how their logging management put a monkey wrench in the natural order coupled with a "Smokey the Bear" philosophy.

Historically, fires typically kept the underbrush cleared out. Fires stayed low to the ground and the big timber was not affected. Logging after the gold rush "creamed" the western forests but the real devastation did not occur until chainsaws came into their own in the fifties and sixties. By the seventies, when I was a timber faller, the chainsaw had become lightweight, efficient and manageable and logging machinery kept pace getting bigger and more efficient.

I saw the Forest Service sell huge stands of timber, require reseeding, but never follow up with release work or invest in proper post harvest silviculture. Release work clears out the brush, thins the stands and allows the timber species to grow (to provide that thick canopy pappy refers to). I watched countless logged acres in this area become overgrown with brush and/or choked with 10, 20 and 30 times the seedlings the land could support. When the brush did not win the battle the saplings that poked through were small, spindly and too closely spaced. Proper government management would have taken some of that timber revenue and spent it on properly preparing the next stand of timber. But the focus was on timber sales not on sustainability.

The poor timber (post logging) practices and the concept of putting out every fire has left us with a National Forest (here) that is generally stunted and overgrown with brush. This is the situation the early environmental movements were trying to remedy.

I think there is still a way to recover/repair the forest. The job would be massive but it would employ thousands and spawn several industries. I think any entire generation (or two) of forest workers could clear the underbrush, thin the timber, chip it and use the pulp in co-gen electrical plants. In this time of energy crisis and low employment the time couldn't be better to start.

I've outlined a forest rejuvenation plan to several legislators but have little hope. If nothing else I count on my government, though the best in the world, to take a wrong and stupid turn in an instant but be twenty to thirty years behind in the implementation of an obvious worthwhile and needed project.

In the meantime, citizens living in the National Forest have got to work with the cards we're dealt and that is to prepare for the eventual forest fire in the neighborhood.

Bear in mind I am speaking from a totally local perspective. I have no idea what condition other forests are in. Maybe they have not been mismanaged as poorly as ours in the west (or "mine" in a very small section of the west).

 

[RedDirt]

have you inquired with your insurace on getting some of that reinbursed? THey might be inclined to help you out with the expense of a several hundred dollars if they know it will significantly help prevent a payout loss of hundreds of thousands.

I have not but it would certainly be worth a call. They already give me a cut for the roof sprinklers and the corner hydrant. I wouldn't expect any reimbursement but would welcome a reduced premium.

 

[dfkrug]

.
.
.
.
Bear in mind I am speaking from a totally local perspective. I have no idea what condition other forests are in. Maybe they have not been mismanaged as poorly as ours in the west (or "mine" in a very small section of the west).

Good response, RED. I gotta wonder about the energy costs of chipping,
however. In a large forest, there would be an incredible amount of chipping
and you are talking about collecting and transporting the chips, too. In my
forest, I make low piles of slash that can rot in place. CDF timber harvest
plans are supposed to specify how slash is managed to minimize fire
hazards.

As for insurance companies, I once asked mine about the costs of removal
of a hazardous tree that could fall on the house. They would pay the full
cost of damage if it fell, but nothing towards prevention or removal before
it fell.

 

[RedDirt]

Good response, RED.
1.) I gotta wonder about the energy costs of chipping, however. In a large forest, there would be an incredible amount of chipping and you are talking about collecting and transporting the chips, too.

In my forest, I make low piles of slash that can rot in place.

2.) CDF timber harvest plans are supposed to specify how slash is managed to minimize fire hazards.

3.) As for insurance companies, I once asked mine about the costs of removal of a hazardous tree that could fall on the house. They would pay the full cost of damage if it fell, but nothing towards prevention or removal before
it fell.

1.) A few relatively quick studies could show if the underbrush removal was a one time deal or would be ongoing like painting the Golden Gate Bridge...just keep painting. For the former I advocate development of small modular co-gen plants that could be moved from place to place and be re-assembled at locations near a tap into the electrical grid and close to thinning operations. They'd be set in one spot until transport of materials neared the red zone of the expense sheet. The later scenario dictates larger permanent plants but still small enough and close enough to each other to keep transport costs down to a break-even distance/cost relationship to the outlying zones. The correctly implemented program should be self supported by energy sales or run at an extremely low cost offset by the savings in forest fire fighting expenses and an increased timber harvest yield.

2) Forest Service also specifies slash removal which is usually pile and then burn (and most piles are burned poorly because, I suspect, nobody "watches" them or there isn't (enough?) retention held back in the logger's contract to force a good job). A waste of a resource in the first place but the rub is what happens to the now bare ground of the logged area. This disturbed ground is ripe for the brush to take hold which is exactly what it does and gives us the often impassable understory we have around here...forest fire fodder. If the govt agencies can't tag the loggers to take care of the ground until the next timber growth is established then that govt agency, CDF, BLM or USFS, needs to take that task themselves in OUR forests and force private landholders to do the same as a condition of their logging permits.

3) That sounds par for the course. The prevalent mentality is beyond a doubt lacking common sense.