# Brian Head fire



## #1DEER 1-I

http://www.cedarcityutah.com/news/a...e-to-battle-the-brian-head-fire/#.WUx874VMGEc

This is a **** mean fire, and it looks as though the weather isn't going to help anytime soon. Tuesday is supposed to be windy, and it seems the wind and heat just doesn't want to stop. Sad situation, hope they can get a little bit of a handle on it.


----------



## plottrunner

Short of Rain, I don't think that one is going to stop until it runs out of fuel and there is a whole bunch of that. A fire will do good to the mountain in the long run but with fawns hitting the ground right now and the rate at which this fire is burning, it is going to be pretty devastating on the wildlife. Another bad things is that fire is burning on top of the drainage's that feed Yankee, Red Creek Reservoir and Panguitch Lake. If all that ash hits these lakes, the fish are going to take a beating as well on top of all the cabins that are threatened. Pray for rain.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

plottrunner said:


> Short of Rain, I don't think that one is going to stop until it runs out of fuel and there is a whole bunch of that. A fire will do good to the mountain in the long run but with fawns hitting the ground right now and the rate at which this fire is burning, it is going to be pretty devastating on the wildlife. Another bad things is that fire is burning on top of the drainage's that feed Yankee, Red Creek Reservoir and Panguitch Lake. If all that ash hits these lakes, the fish are going to take a beating as well on top of all the cabins that are threatened. Pray for rain.


Agreed, it will do good in the long run be has potential to be pretty devastating in the short run in many ways. Do they know how many cabins it has taken total now? Can see a big plume of smoke from here throughout the day.


----------



## plottrunner

#1DEER 1-I said:


> Agreed, it will do good in the long run be has potential to be pretty devastating in the short run in many ways. Do they know how many cabins it has taken total now? Can see a big plume of smoke from here throughout the day.


3 confirmed. I know the family that lost their ranch at Horse Valley, here is a link to some footage they shot.

https://quik.gopro.com/v/iLItvwUHTU/


----------



## Fowlmouth

A big problem is all the beetle kill pines on the mountain. There are so many dead trees I can't imagine how they will get this fire under control. So far my wifes parents cabin is okay, but I'm concerned.


----------



## 2full

It's getting very ugly. 
Hwy 143 is shut down all the way to Panguitch, the Cedar Breaks road is closed, and 
the Mammoth creek road is closed going towards the lake. 
All the cabins around Panguitch lake and up clear creek are evacuated. 
And, there is no end in sight. We watch the smoke plume at work all day. 
All because one moron wanted to burn weeds.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

Fowlmouth said:


> A big problem is all the beetle kill pines on the mountain. There are so many dead trees I can't imagine how they will get this fire under control. So far my wifes parents cabin is okay, but I'm concerned.


One thing is for sure, the weather isn't helping at all and with the forecasted winds next week it could get even uglier. I don't know if I've seen many fires that go from 5,000 acres to 11,000 acres in just a few hours in our state. There is a lot of beetle kill and it's actually good to see some of it being burned. Hope your wife's parents cabin continues to be fine and they can begin to control it before next week when winds could really make things scary.


----------



## Vanilla

Sad, sad deal for the cabin owners. Thoughts and prayers to those impacted.


----------



## LostLouisianian

Up to 17,000+ acres and only 5% contained. This is going to get a lot worse before it gets any better. I feel so sorry for the cabin owners down there.


----------



## PBH

2full said:


> All because one moron wanted to burn weeds.


Well....

Obviously, this moron will take the majority of the blame, as he should.
but there are others that _should_ take some blame as well.

what about the cabin owners around Brian Head who have never allowed any kind of logging for the last 30 years when beetles first started killing off stands of pine?
What about the USFS for not managing controlled burns to clear that fuel?

This is a bad fire. It will do some good to the forest -- those stands of thick pine need to be cleared. But that could have been done over the last 30 years in different ways. It didn't have to be this way. I fear mostly for the fish. This could take many years to rebuild fisheries in this area -- including Panguitch Lake which could be argued as the best fishery currently in Utah.

it's a sad deal, and there will certainly be a [justifiable] witch-hunt for the guy that started the fire. But we can't not forget all the other reasons that this fire turned from a 100 acre fire into an 27,000+ acre beast.


----------



## plottrunner

It wasn't the cabin owners or the USFS. The USFS had contracted a company to spray to stop the bark beetles when they first began to show up. An injunction was filed by the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance and then after the beetle damage was done, SUWA once again blocked the sale of the timber in Sidney Valley through the courts. The guy burning weeds was the flash point but if it wouldn't have been him, a lightning strike or something else would have finally triggered a fire up there. It has been a tinder box for 30 years... If you want to point the finger, point it to radical environmentalism....

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/366845/ENVIRONMENTALISTS-OBJECT-TO-DIXIE-FOREST-TIMBER-SALE.html


----------



## PBH

plottrunner said:


> It wasn't the cabin owners or the USFS. ... If you want to point the finger, point it to radical environmentalism....


OK. That's fine too. Lot's of places to point the blame -- not a single source.

Many of those cabin owners are pro "radical environmentalism". Look at Brian Head -- those are not ranch owners. They did not want logging to happen, and have continued to oppose logging for years.

Midway looks fantastic since they started logging it a few years ago.


----------



## plottrunner

I agree about midway and you are right about some of the Brianhead cabin owners being against logging but a lot of the people with cabins up there are from Parowan and Cedar and don't side with SUWA. The bark beetles could have been stopped in the early 90's if SUWA wouldn't have tied it up in the courts....


----------



## gdog

I keep hearing people throw this back at USFS for logging issues....but who can profitably log beetle killed trees? I watched a special on tv some time ago about this very thing a few years back and they stated no one wanted the beetle infested timber. Not sure if that is still true today(?) There was no way to know the extent of the beetle kill +20 years ago and after that its all hindsight and finger pointing.

How could they have guaranteed to stop the bark beetles? I haven't seen any areas which have been claimed a victory in stopping them(?) 20 years ago there was very limited research on the bark beetle. Do they actually have a solution other then cutting down every tree in the forrest? Lots of scientific theory/opinions believe (not coming from timber companies) that thinning forrest does not stop the beetles. Not arguing your points...curious as to actual facts. I know Goob and I have looked down on huge swaths of forrest from up high Ptarm hunting and there are some signification areas of the N. Slope that could be next in line to burn.


----------



## bowgy

Over 27,000 acres and still going strong. Pretty sad. The last big fire in the Swains Creek and Stout canyon area got within 3 miles of my cabin. Pretty scary.

I sure feel for those that are losing property.


----------



## plottrunner

gdog said:


> I keep hearing people throw this back at USFS for logging issues....but who can profitably log beetle killed trees? I watched a special on tv some time ago about this very thing a few years back and they stated no one wanted the beetle infested timber. Not sure if that is still true today(?) There was no way to know the extent of the beetle kill +20 years ago and after that its all hindsight and finger pointing.
> 
> How could they have guaranteed to stop the bark beetles? I haven't seen any areas which have been claimed a victory in stopping them(?) 20 years ago there was very limited research on the bark beetle. Do they actually have a solution other then cutting down every tree in the forrest? Not arguing your points...curious as to actual facts. I know Goob and I have looked down on huge swaths of forrest from up high Ptarm hunting and there are some signification areas of the N. Slope that could be next in line to burn.


They only attack the spruce and the other pines are left unscathed. Your'e right about people not wanting the timber for traditional logging but they are using it to make OSB sheeting so they can put it to use. The way I see it, the only option is to treat infected areas but then spraying poison has bad side effects as well, especially on wildlife. I'm not sure, aside from removing the infected trees when they die, if there is an effective method aside from fire to fix it. Nature does have a way of fixing itself.


----------



## gdog

Some interesting info:

http://e360.yale.edu/features/how_science_can_help_to_halt_the_western_bark_beetle_plague

"e360: *Are we talking about one insect species that is doing all the damage here?*

Six: There are a lot of different pine beetles out there. In the Southwest, it is mainly the genus ips. A species in that genus, the pine engraver, is killing ponderosa, and a related species has wiped out big areas of piñon pines, some of which will probably never recover. With drought in some areas, spruce is becoming stressed, and the spruce beetle is blowing up - it is really active now in Colorado. With increasingly warmer and drier conditions predicted in the years to come, we can expect the Douglas fir beetle to become active. There are a number of other species that are waiting in the wings for their tree hosts to become more and more stressed and then they'll start to kick into action."

"e360: *The U.S. Forest Service has been thinning forests as a response to this. Any evidence that this is helping with the beetle problem?*

Six: The idea behind thinning is that if you have an over-dense forest where trees are so close together that they are competing for soil nutrients and water, if you thin that forest out, you will relieve that competition, the trees will become healthy, and that will strengthen their defenses against beetles. It was also thought that, if you thin forests, it disrupts the chemical communication of the beetles, which are the pheromones that they use to mass-attack trees. Neither of those ideas totally pans out.

Nobody has shown conclusively that pheromones get disrupted. Also, we know that thinned stands can go down as easily as un-thinned stands. In most of our forests, we have reached a situation where changes in temperature and drought have reached the point where thinning will no longer be effective. Under normal conditions it can help, perhaps. But the fact is we are just not there anymore. I visited one stand that had been thinned many years earlier as a demonstration of how thinning protects trees from bark beetles and enhances growth. Yet when the insects came through, that was the first stand to go down!
"


----------



## Critter

On the beetle killed wood here in Colorado there have been a few new start up companies that will take as much of it as they can get. They build everything from furniture to flooring with it. It is actually a booming business over here. 

On the logging of it I was up at Ferron Reservoir back in the late 90's during the deer hunt and watched them hauling it off of the mountain with a helicopter. They were doing quite well until the environmentalist had them shut down. They were making two loads a minute and keep the ground crews running. 

As far a spraying them, Colorado thought about that along with the Forest Service but figured that the cost would of been so high that the decided to just let nature take its course.


----------



## RandomElk16

Home depot now sells " barn wood" style sheets that are cut from trees that were infected, just not positive on which insect. It is actually really cool looking, its a good use of these trees, and they are making a fortune.

Edit: I can't remember the source of that lumber, but beetle kill pine seems to be popular http://mountainheartwoodworks.com/customer-profiles


----------



## PBH

There is value in removing fuel. It doesn't have to be sold to be of value.

right now this fire is running up a large bill. Maybe the value in the beetle infested stands of forest could be recognized by removing that fuel vs. waiting for it to ignite and then try to put it out.


----------



## Bax*

I haven't ever heard of a follow up on the financial costs of a human caused fire before.

When you consider the manpower, equipment, and property damage associated with this fire it is pretty plain to see that this will be in the millions.

But what I really wonder is what happens to the person who caused the fire? I know that they can be held financially responsible, but who has that much money or even a fraction of it? I would guess that these people end up filing bankruptcy?


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

The only real community to blame here is environmentalists. I do believe much more logging should be done on our public lands the problem is the environmentalists are willing to hire a lawyer and stop any active managment the forest service tries to pursue. I think anyone who visited this area knew this was coming, and it's coming in many other places as well. I can think of several other units that could be in big trouble if they start. The entire front face of Fishlake is dead timber and Monroe would be much the same by the Forest Service is integrating a Aspen regeneration program which is and will continue to fight back the deadfall and fire hazards.

Several things certainly lead up to this but the finger pointing has to go to the environmentalists. Every forest service personnel in the area I ever spoke with knew and was worried about this exact result, many cabin owners were, but what do you do when the court says you can't? When you get sued at every ten you tried to make? I don't support spraying poison to kill the Beatles because that can be very damaging on wildlife and fish as well for longer term than a fire will ever be. I think active logging and some prescribed burns are surly needed in many of our forests to improve there health or this won't be the last Brian Head. I don't know how desirable the wood is but another issue is the fact the forest service does not have the funding to properly manage areas that are in deep need. Hell im surprised they've got funding to do what they're doing on Monroe right now. If they can't get someone to log it (whether because of desirability, or lawsuits) then they need to have funding to thin areas themselves and set up prescribed burns. Many times environmentalists will sue if they want to use a dozer to create a fire line for a prescribed burn or something. The system that must be fixed to improve managment and stop disasters like this is the lawsuits issue. No a group like SUWA should not be able to sue and stop any form of forest managment, it's killing us.

This is very sad for property owners and my thoughts and prayers go out to them and I hope they can keep structures safe that this fire is approaching. It's terrible how hard some people have worked and then this will burn that work up in a few minutes. That being said, this will end up being good for wildlife in the years to come. The fire off I70 on the north end of the Beaver was over 45,000 acres. It had a lot of fuel build up as well, and just 7 short years later it has lots of deer, elk, turkeys, bears, and fish in the streams. It is in full recovery mode and is better off for the fire than prior to it. It would be nice to wave a magic wand and make this all go away, but unfortunately this, like many have said, is decades of build up and we will see more fires like this long before we see less.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

Bax* said:


> I haven't ever heard of a follow up on the financial costs of a human caused fire before.
> 
> When you consider the manpower, equipment, and property damage associated with this fire it is pretty plain to see that this will be in the millions.
> 
> But what I really wonder is what happens to the person who caused the fire? I know that they can be held financially responsible, but who has that much money or even a fraction of it? I would guess that these people end up filing bankruptcy?


I believe the cost was estimated at $1.8 million, but that's when the fire was much smaller.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

PBH said:


> There is value in removing fuel. It doesn't have to be sold to be of value.
> 
> right now this fire is running up a large bill. Maybe the value in the beetle infested stands of forest could be recognized by removing that fuel vs. waiting for it to ignite and then try to put it out.


You have to have funding for that, and the forest service doesn't. This fire I've read will be covered by FEMA at this point. It's been said a million times, but if we want better managment of public lands, it is vital that the agencies that manage them have the funding and tools to be able to do them. I completely agree with your statement PBH, but once agencies like the FS and BLM pay for fire costs they have about 45% of their budget left. They don't have the employees or funding to do much of what you're asking in this post. The majority of employees are deeply concerned about current managment, but there isn't the funding, and everything runs up against a lawsuit.


----------



## middlefork

Cost so far $4.5 M as reported this morning. https://www.nifc.gov/nicc/sitreprt.pdf
They will settle with the homeowners insurance and we eat the rest.


----------



## Fowlmouth

Bax* said:


> But what I really wonder is what happens to the person who caused the fire? I know that they can be held financially responsible, but who has that much money or even a fraction of it? I would guess that these people end up filing bankruptcy?


If negligence can be proved, then yes the person that started the fire will be held accountable.

The story I got from the in laws that live there is that the guy burning weeds was told the day before to stop. He stopped and then started burning again the next day. True or not this is what I got told.


----------



## ridgetop

#1DEER 1-I said:


> One thing is for sure, the weather isn't helping at all and with the forecasted winds next week it could get even uglier. I don't know if I've seen many fires that go from 5,000 acres to 11,000 acres in just a few hours in our state. There is a lot of beetle kill and it's actually good to see some of it being burned. Hope your wife's parents cabin continues to be fine and they can begin to control it before next week when winds could really make things scary.


In 2009, the west side of the Stansburys burned about 40,000 acres in one afternoon.


----------



## Vanilla

Bax* said:


> I haven't ever heard of a follow up on the financial costs of a human caused fire before.
> 
> When you consider the manpower, equipment, and property damage associated with this fire it is pretty plain to see that this will be in the millions.
> 
> But what I really wonder is what happens to the person who caused the fire? I know that they can be held financially responsible, but who has that much money or even a fraction of it? I would guess that these people end up filing bankruptcy?


Boy Scouts of America has paid out on more than one wildfire caused by scout groups. It's why they created a very strict (but rarely followed) fire policy on scout trips.


----------



## Vanilla

#1DEER 1-I said:


> The only real community to blame here is environmentalists.


It's the Republican Party's fault.



#1DEER 1-I said:


> Several things certainly lead up to this but the finger pointing has to go to the environmentalists.


It's the Republican Party's fault.



#1DEER 1-I said:


> No a group like SUWA should not be able to sue and stop any form of forest managment, it's killing us.


It's the Republican Party's fault.

Sorry, I digress. I won't claim to have all the answers, but I think everyone realizes 1-Eye's message on the other areas that are just waiting to explode. We've all seen them as we are out and about. Maybe it's too late? But maybe there is something that can be done to mitigate the results?


----------



## izzydog

middlefork said:


> Cost so far $4.5 M as reported this morning. https://www.nifc.gov/nicc/sitreprt.pdf
> They will settle with the homeowners insurance and we eat the rest.


How nice would it be if the state of Utah controlled all of this land and had to foot the bill when it is all said and done? Transfer Federal Lands now!8)


----------



## #1DEER 1-I

Vanilla said:


> It's the Republican Party's fault.
> 
> It's the Republican Party's fault.
> 
> It's the Republican Party's fault.
> 
> Sorry, I digress. I won't claim to have all the answers, but I think everyone realizes 1-Eye's message on the other areas that are just waiting to explode. We've all seen them as we are out and about. Maybe it's too late? But maybe there is something that can be done to mitigate the results?


Oh without any doubt in the world the funding issues that undermine these issues is their fault. Maybe if they could fix fire borrowing, fix wild horse issues, fix sue and reimbursement loopholes, etc. that cost these agencies their budgets every year I'd lay off. The agency that will get the blame from the rural areas of this state will be mainly the Forest Service, and the politicians will be pointing their fingers soon after this blaze is put out. How long has Hatch been in congress? 120 years? I can guarantee you he hasn't done anything to help these agencies better carry out their jobs. How about Mike Lee? Oh I didn't know slashing budgets was the best way to fix these issues all while not introducing legislation to help so their funding can at least be used on projects rather than wildfires, or fixing loopholes to stop them from being sued every time they try to do something. The system these agencies work within is because of the people who don't wish to see federal agencies managing these lands in the first place. Fix the system and they ruin their argument of bad management, politicians gotta ride that party line even if it exacerbates problems like this.

At this point we are at a point of no return. These fires are going to happen, can results be mitigated? Surly, but most of these tinder boxes are going to go up in smoke at some point. The forest service is spending over 50% of its budget on wildfires that are happening, leaving very little to do projects or take fire preventive measures. I'm sure they'd much rather spend their money on preventive measures, but their fire employees are busy fighting active wildfires all summer that took decades to build up to this point. It isn't getting fixed over night, partly because the same setbacks like environmental lawsuits and funding issues still exist just as much today as they did 10, 20, and 30 years ago.


----------



## ridgetop

#1DEER 1-I said:


> http://www.cedarcityutah.com/news/a...e-to-battle-the-brian-head-fire/#.WUx874VMGEc
> 
> This is a **** mean fire, and it looks as though the weather isn't going to help anytime soon. Tuesday is supposed to be windy, and it seems the wind and heat just doesn't want to stop. Sad situation, hope they can get a little bit of a handle on it.


Today is going to be huge in fire suppression efforts. If they can get a good hold on the North/Northeast front of the fire today. They will be in good shape when the winds shift to the South tomorrow.


----------



## Catherder

Well, even before the fire is controlled, the finger pointing is in full swing.

http://kutv.com/news/local/talk-abo...s-heated-as-brian-head-fire-torches-more-land

Not surprisingly, the locals blame the BLM (and the enviros). The "greenies" blame the ...wait for it, Vanilla... the Republicans in Congress for budget cuts.

I just hope they can get a handle on things soon. It sounds like the fire blew up again on the Northeastern front this afternoon. Hopefully no one was injured and no more cabins lost.


----------



## Fowlmouth

I'm with Noel, I blame the bird and bunny lovers, the treehuggers and the rocklickers. Ha ha that was the best statement I have heard to describe the [email protected]# that is happening down South.

Noel quote:
"When we turned the Forest Service over to the bird and bunny lovers and the tree-huggers and the rock-lickers, we turned our history over," the Kanab Republican said at a news conference in Brian Head.


----------



## Steve G

A few photos of the fire from one fire fighter in the sky.


----------



## LostLouisianian

I hope to high heck that someone sues SUWA right out of existence for this.


----------



## middlefork

LostLouisianian said:


> I hope to high heck that someone sues SUWA right out of existence for this.


Nice thought but I wouldn't count on it. It would just attract more money for their program.

They wouldn't have won the lawsuits against harvesting the lumber if they weren't smarter and more agile than the people advocating timber harvest.

And not to belittle the people affected by this fire but it is a drop in the bucket compared to the amount of areas in the west affected by beetle kill.


----------



## Bax*




----------



## #1DEER 1-I

There's not many times I can agree with Mike Noel, I do here. Environmental lawsuits caused what is now the beast that is the Brian Head fire. To disagree a little though, the area will recover and benefit wildlife because of the fire. The scenery won't be as pretty but overall this fire will have done some good, that being said, 50,000 acres with no rain in sight and heat and wind every day, we are a long way from done piling onto that acreage before this fire is put out. It's been breezy today, and it looks like the fire has kicked back up again from where I sit, my bet is we will be approaching 60,000 by morning.


----------



## 2full

I'm afraid u are right #1Deer. 
The wind today was not good, tomorrow is suppose to be worse. 
The smoke plume was pretty big again today. Easy to see from town for sure. 
Maybe the tree huggers should go help fight it for a day or two. 
And, take 5 or 6 prairie dogs home with them to keep as pets. ;-)


----------



## plottrunner

Saw a video posted today of a newborn fawn that they found in the fire's path, it was still alive but wasn't going to make it. It also looked like the fire flared up again on the South East flank. I shot some video but can't figure out how to post it on this platform. The wind has it stirred up good today and the Northern smoke column looked as if it could be as far north Bear Valley.


----------



## Fowlmouth

There will be problems even after the fire is out. Watershed areas will be impacted for a long time. After looking at photos of Yankee Meadows I don't know how any fish will survive when the erosion from runoff starts happening. (maybe they are dead now from ash) I heard irrigation water already smells of smoke. It's possible the culinary water will have issues too I suppose. Anyway the in laws cabin was spared and that's a plus for now.


----------



## backcountry

I agree with some of the content here but disagree with some as there has been a lot misinformation flying around social media and the internet.

1) The fire started and stayed on state and private land for its first 3-5 days. The theory that this is solely related to management and lawsuits about federal land falls apart with this fact. If that was the case then it should have been contained and mopped up fast. But it wasn't. The dead timber on those lands was just as bad as on USFS lands. The bark beatle has reeked havoc across all types of lands and diverse management attempts have had minimal affect. If harvesting and logging were such straight forward, easy, and profitable solutions than why did the private lands and state lands (where revenue is often a big variable) not prevent the initial spread? I have no doubt it will be a variable but its not the only culprit in such a complex mess.

2) Litigation is often the first scapegoat but people forget the lawsuits win because of violations of the law. Dixie National Forest had their chance to win their case but the plaintiffs presented enough evidence that the cursory method of approving the salvage timber harvest was inconsistent with the laws and regulations governing such choices. And don't forget, its often these same types of lawsuits that prevent us from being locked out of our public hunting lands, that allow us to properly preserve wetlands for migratory waterfowl to hunt, and even provide ATV and OHV trails for those so inclined. Malign lawsuits all you want but its a hallmark of a democracy to be able to sue the government when it fails to behave in a legal or ethical manner. And I would wager its a tool used by most of the special interest groups most of us support individually. 

3) We are ignoring one obvious culprit: global warming. Southern Utah is still considered to in a 10+ year drought according to hyrdological studies. Drought increases the stress on trees to abnormal levels. Bark beetle populations explode in stressed forests. Our winters for the most part have been milder (temperature and precip) which has allowed the bark beetles to move up in altitude and survive winter in higher numbers. Bark beetles have always existed but the current explosion is directly related to our changing climate. 

4) Plenty of USFS staff are "rock-lickers" working 16 hours a day in what I call "gardening in hell". Anyone who has been red-carded and worked a fire line knows its a team effort compromised of people diverse backgrounds and ideologies. The gross simplification that environmentalist aren't also doing their best to contain this fire ignores the reality that they are also putting their lives on the line to save homes and our forest right now and every summer. You would be shocked at how fast the type of ideological poison spouted on places like this spreads and begins to show itself in the field. You can't call people heroes while at the same time throwing them under the bus.

5) Fuels projects and prescribed burns have been happening on the Dixie every summer I have lived in SW Utah. Fuels crews are some of the biggest and most funded of any on the forest. They have put significant effort into reducing fire risk in many places, like Duck Creek Village. But in general, funding reductions over the last two decades has crippled the USFS and forced most districts to triage. If you have worked for the USFS you know getting staff for seasonal crews (the essence of field work) has gotten harder each year. This affects how much can be done each summer.

Luckily I didn't see anyone here state it was about roadless "wilderness". Trying to find a sizable swath of roadless area to hunt on the Dixie is a nightmare. Wilderness should not be confused with the lawsuit arguments about roadless inventories. They aren't remotely the same. Its disheartening to see how little many of our fellow citizens know about land management but great to be a part of a community that has a long, historical connection to public lands.

Hopefully the Brian Head Fire will create a dialog that digs into the complexities of modern forest management but if the politicians, social media, and special interest groups are any sign people are more than willing to dig into the pre-existing ideological bunkers and lob talking point grenades at each other. Which is a shame as we can learn from the myriad of decisions that has lead us to such a significant fire. And if the past is any indication those lessons will not align cleanly with any political ideology.

Best of luck to everyone and hope all stay safe. I am hoping my cow elk tag is my first choice and not an august hunt right in the middle of this fire


----------



## LostLouisianian

There are many ways to stop dead in it's tracks the spread of pine beetle and the damage it does and mitigate it's after effects. Just ask any forester down south that actually does it for a living. I've participated in numerous clean up efforts as well as mitigation. Trust me it's proven science over decades and decades of successful practice. You never see large beetle outbreaks on private land managed for timber and pulp down south. As soon as a forester or timber cruiser finds a single beetle tree it's attacked with vigor to stop it instantly. Down south you don't have the restrictions and enviro whacko's that you do out west so forests can actually be properly managed and maintained. I've managed both pine and hardwood forests and have close friends that have managed pine forests for nearly 40 years now with IP. It's really not rocket science at all.


----------



## backcountry

Private forests in the south have different management then federal lands in the west. They have been multi-use long before the litigation of "environmental wackos". 

The Dixie itself covers 2 million acres spread over 170 miles. And much of that land is "roadless". Its budget was slashed over the years. Its already measly 2011 budget of $20 million was reduced to less than $17 million in 2015. The entire 2 million acres only has a budget to employ 150 seasonal employees. Its obscene.

You used the phrase "its not rocket science". That's probably true on some private land with a singular vision. To be honest, "rocket science" is easy compared to managing federal land with a multiple-use mandate that requires public input from diverse, often conflicting stakeholders. The human dynamics of federal land management is difficult at best to navigate. Timber harvest (up 250% on the Dixie in 2015) and fuels management are just two components of forest management. As a hunter and fisherman I am glad they consider other elements like overall habitat health, wildlife including native species, and recreational opportunities. I do 80% of my fly fishing on the Dixie and it wouldn't be nearly as good without the USFS (and state) working to adhere to complex ecological ideals. 

I'll take my western USFS lands over southern private forests any day. There is a reason western big game hunting is so coveted. The Dixie can always do better and learn from past decisions but its not a simple undertaking.


----------



## backcountry

Only climbed to 53,000 acres overnight. Sounds like the dozier lines on the southern side are holding as they claimed their was no uncontrollable growth of the fire the last 24 hours. They have moved alot of resources into the Red Creek area. Hopefully they can hold a line on that side soon. 

Temps and winds are forecast to be much lower Thursday and Friday. They are sticking to an estimated containment by July 15th. 10% contained as of this morning. Fingers crossed for today!


----------



## backcountry

Wow, perimeter containment jumped from 20% to 60% today.


----------



## elkfromabove

backcountry said:


> Wow, perimeter containment jumped from 20% to 60% today.


And now it's 65% contained, which is great, but the 35% not contained has still grown from 60,301 acres yesterday July 1 to 65,377 acres today (+5,076 acres). However, some of that may be previously unburned areas within the perimeter. The latest colored progression map isn't posted yet.


----------



## plottrunner

Wind blew pretty bad today as well, the smoke is terrible here in Beaver County...


----------



## klbzdad

This was taken from the Panguitch Lake General Store around 5:00 pm. One can see some of the active burning from the Bear Paw Resort and even from the Panguitch Lake Resort.










I didn't take pictures along SR 143 today because there were crews working there but it was remarkable to see one side of the highway turned to charcoal and the other side still green. Fire crews did very well there. Another remarkable thing is the actual volume of green not only around the burn scar but in the middle of it and even where the fire crowned and didn't touch the forest floor. Elk and deer were everywhere on our property in Rainbow Meadows and we were fortunate not to have any fire encroachment on that side of the southern flank. DWR was already going to remove trout from Lowder and Mammoth Creek to reintroduce native trout species but the land itself up here acts as a filter as much of it is volcanic mixed with clay. Maybe I'm overly optimistic but the tragedy of this fire could turn into a blessing moving forward. I sense that our federal delegation has now had their eyes opened to the cost and assets necessary to handle something like this. The state doesn't have the capacity or the money.

Solutions? Reform EAJA to include caps on attorney fees and require up front bonds on any and all injunctions. There still needs to be a way of joe citizen holding the government accountable while also protecting the taxpayer from frivolity. While were at it some reform to NEPA and ESA would help as all three played into the case of the spotted owl. Which, didn't work out so well for the spotted owl but attorneys sure made a killing. Finally, FUND THE GOSH DAMNED AGENCIES! There is so much truth in what everyone has posted here. The solution to this is right down the middle. I have a doe tag, I'm dedicated on this unit, and I always buy the OTC archery tag. The trail cameras that aren't now melted puddles of plastic produced greatly today. Lots of elk and bucks o plenty!!!!!


----------



## backcountry

The perimeter map is giving me hope for several of the fisheries. 

We had a small fire today next to Canyon Park. Was controlled fast but definitely got some attention. Its dry out there, be safe.


----------



## backcountry

Excellent article highlighting some of the points here:

Salt Lake Tribune
:

I was wrong in a previous post. The Friends of Dixie lost their lawsuit but no one ever began the salvage afterwards. All recent lawsuits against the Dixie, regarding timber, have lost or dropped. Sorry for my mistake in that regard.


----------



## paddler

backcountry said:


> Excellent article highlighting some of the points here:
> 
> Salt Lake Tribune
> :
> 
> I was wrong in a previous post. The Friends of Dixie lost their lawsuit but no one ever began the salvage afterwards. All recent lawsuits against the Dixie, regarding timber, have lost or dropped. Sorry for my mistake in that regard.


Yep, I read that article this morning, and was considering posting it myself. Always nice to hear the Paul Harvey version, ie, the rest of the story. I just read this entire thread, too, and in light of the Trib article I expect a few retractions from earlier posters. 1 Deer 1-I stands out, but is not alone. Oh, and it's probably not a good thing to kill the Beatles. Only two left, you know.


----------



## Vanilla

"We need more active management of our forests to remove excess fuels and increase diversity in the forests — both in the types of trees growing and the age of the trees. To do that, forest officials need to be able to do their jobs, without the fear of litigation." -From the article. 

Isn't that exactly what 1-eye's posts were saying?


----------



## paddler

Vanilla said:


> "We need more active management of our forests to remove excess fuels and increase diversity in the forests - both in the types of trees growing and the age of the trees. To do that, forest officials need to be able to do their jobs, without the fear of litigation." -From the article.
> 
> Isn't that exactly what 1-eye's posts were saying?


Not exactly, V, and I'm sure you're aware of that. 1-I said, "The only real community to blame here is environmentalists." That is patently untrue, and your statement is once again misleading. Once again, you quote out of context. I think most agree that the USFS should have the funding they need. Gehrke's full quote, in context, reads thusly:

*"We need more active management of our forests to remove excess fuels and increase diversity in the forests - both in the types of trees growing and the age of the trees. To do that, forest officials need to be able to do their jobs, without the fear of litigation. But that also means that there needs to be trust on both sides.

Maybe that trust will grow, like a tree, over time, but it is hard to see that happening when you have people like Mike Noel eager to throw firebombs into the tinder-dry forests for the sake of trying to score partisan political points."
*
Funny you should actually quote him, as I recall you recently impugned his journalistic integrity. Without substantiation, of course. Tell you what. You start posting honestly, I won't run you to ground.


----------



## Vanilla

Ironic that you just posted about quoting out of context, don't you think? 1-eye has many posts on this thread that are detailed and thought out, and you picked one sentence that I'm not even sure was a direct quote without going back and reviewing all his posts. 

And please, please stop 'running me into the ground.' You're just so superior to the rest of us.


----------



## paddler

1-I's posts are typically thoughtful, genuine and accurate. I was very surprised to read his rather scathing, and ultimately inaccurate criticism of environmentalists. That's why I singled him out. Fowlmouth seemed out of character, also. For others, it's repetitive behavior. They'll never get it. It's always best to wait long enough to fully sort things out before pointing fingers.


----------



## LostLouisianian

Perhaps the forest service should contact International Paper and find out how to mitigate and minimize beetle infestations and how to remediate after an infestation. It't not rocket science.


----------



## bowgy

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/130672/LOGGING-INDUSTRY-SHAKEN-TO-ITS-ROOTS-BY-ACTIVISTS.html

http://archive.sltrib.com/story.php...9-78/forest-service-project-national.html.csp

https://vault.sierraclub.org/sierra/199607/field1.asp

http://www.heraldextra.com/news/loc...cle_7c2f42b3-81de-5eae-89b3-f2d9b60a4be0.html


----------



## backcountry

bowgy said:


> http://www.deseretnews.com/article/130672/LOGGING-INDUSTRY-SHAKEN-TO-ITS-ROOTS-BY-ACTIVISTS.html
> 
> http://archive.sltrib.com/story.php...9-78/forest-service-project-national.html.csp
> 
> https://vault.sierraclub.org/sierra/199607/field1.asp
> 
> http://www.heraldextra.com/news/loc...cle_7c2f42b3-81de-5eae-89b3-f2d9b60a4be0.html


Not sure of the intent of the links other than showing a history of litigation.

Most expose private organizations filing lawsuits with a claim that the USFS didn't adhere to requirements under NEPA. Sadly, without alot of time digging into each case its difficult to know the outcomes of these cases (especially given the vague nature of articles). But again, it seems fair for citizens to sue the government if they believe they have evidence its not following the law.

For some clarity, NEPA was passed in 1969. It had a rough passage in the House that was likely party-line favored by Democrats but passed unanimously by the Senate (57D/43R), which is relatively unheard of for such big policy now a days in our hyper-partisan reality. It was signed into law by Republican Nixon. It was one of the first major laws that formalized federal agencies need to study impact to the environment for proposed projects. Relatively speaking, there was very little oversight of federal agencies before this bill regarding impact to wildlife, land or waters. Out of it came the EA and EIS planning and assessment the articles above highlight.

For comparison, the Backcounty Hunters and Anglers have filed lawsuits against the USFS with claims of violations of NEPA in relation to elk habitat (2016).

Also, one linked article discusses a rider that radically changed forest management law and eliminated public feedback. Riders are controversial because they bypass the rigors of legislative oversight in the form of up or down votes. They are often pork put into an unrelated bill to assuage a reluctant congressman to vote for a bill that they might otherwise oppose. Neither that or eliminating citizen involvement seems democratic or ideal for sportsmen.

I personally see logging as one tool of many for forest and wildlife habitat health and maintenance. Even though I support our right to litigation I do also think there are better ways to affect change and I also think some are too narrow-sighted for overall environmental health. But I find those on the other side who over generalize the importance of logging to also be problematic. The ideology of logging often gets ahead of the nuanced requirements of each forest and its diverse stakeholders.

And to reiterate....we don't have any evidence beyond political rhetoric that this fire's principle culprit is beetle kill or a lack of logging. There a ton of factors that complicate that assumption. To be honest, the worst days of this fire had 50+ mph winds, 5-10% humidity and temperatures well above average. Those are extreme conditions by any wildfire parameters and even in healthy forest lead to major runs, torching and crowning. Fire crews are forced to maintain less than ideal perimeters in those conditions because of the safety requirements. The worst runs were on the 21st-23rd and those were the conditions on the ground. Add to that the number of terrain traps around 2nd Left Hand Canyon/Yankee Meadows and a crew suddenly outsized by rapid fire growth and you have the perfect storm.

Its appealing to listen to the easy answers of politicians and special interest groups but they don't fit the reality of this fire.


----------



## elkfromabove

bowgy said:


> http://www.deseretnews.com/article/130672/LOGGING-INDUSTRY-SHAKEN-TO-ITS-ROOTS-BY-ACTIVISTS.html
> 
> http://archive.sltrib.com/story.php...9-78/forest-service-project-national.html.csp
> 
> https://vault.sierraclub.org/sierra/199607/field1.asp
> 
> http://www.heraldextra.com/news/loc...cle_7c2f42b3-81de-5eae-89b3-f2d9b60a4be0.html


Hmmm! The rest of the story.

You don't actually have to win a court case to get what you want. All you have to do is appeal a few times and drag it on long enough in order to put your current opponent out of business. And then threaten to do it again and again and again with others. Those lawyers (I mean, environmentalists) are sure clever, aren't they?


----------



## backcountry

paddler said:


> It's always best to wait long enough to fully sort things out before pointing fingers.


I find that ironic (sadly, as I agree with it) given you just said in another post that:



> I am accustomed to making judgements based on incomplete information. It's my job.


I think its fair to expect logical consistency.


----------



## Vanilla

backcountry said:


> I think its fair to expect logical consistency.


I think you've seen enough from him to now clearly understand you are not going to get that. Ever. It's best to just see it for what it is, and continue a healthy discussion among the rest of the people that really want answers and solutions. These are complicated issues. Childish BS just doesn't pass the test.


----------



## backcountry

I can't go that far or judge Paddler like that. I am sure I would be more than happy to share a beer or campfire with most folks here no matter the passionate disagreements. Ideally its about critiquing the idea, not the person, and at the end of the day I still act respectfully.

My style is the result of far too many internet butt kickings and a ton of time getting to know people with different (often radically) worldviews and perspectives. That not only changed my style of interaction but how I think. I'm sure I'll change again in the next 5-10 years. Clearly there are different ways to approach this.

So it goes.


----------



## paddler

backcountry said:


> I find that ironic (sadly, as I agree with it) given you just said in another post that:
> 
> I think its fair to expect logical consistency.


"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." Emerson

In some situations, one must make a decision rapidly and with incomplete information about how best to intervene in order to minimize morbidity and avoid mortality.

As I stated previously, I saw all I needed from Trump during his birther days to know he's a liar, a carney barker, totally devoid of integrity or class. Actually, it was an easy call. I just don't understand how anybody who followed that story could support this POS. Unless, of course, you don't believe trustworthiness is an important quality in a president. There are a multitude of reasons people support Trump, none of which reflect positively on said supporter.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-hawaii-investigators_us_57dc3bffe4b04a1497b46da1

I knew then he's not to be trusted, and he's done nothing since then that doesn't reaffirm my assessment.

In the case of the Brian Head fire, it really is prudent to wait for all available information before chiming in. This thread serves as a great example. I will say that I appreciate your contributions here and especially on this particular thread. You demonstrate knowledge and fair-mindedness.


----------



## Vanilla

There are lots of people I don't see eye to eye with on forums like this on lots of issues. But reasonable people can disagree on most issues, it just isn't personal. 

Until people make it that way. Disagree a few times with him and he'll tell you you're stupid. Just wait.


----------



## middlefork

The forest has been plagued for a hundred years by "mismanagement". You can blame it on whomever you like it is not going to solve the current problems with the forest.

As a property owner in the forest, I would be completely delusional to tell myself that my property will never burn be it from a lightning strike or some idiot leaving a camp fire burning on the adjacent public land. 

I have seen the effect of both controlled and uncontrolled burns nearby and both improve the forest with the caveat that you get to look at some black tree stumps for awhile until they all blow down.

Given the current hassle and cost effectiveness of clearing hugh swaths of dead trees it actually makes sense to let it burn where possible.


----------



## LostLouisianian

middlefork said:


> The forest has been plagued for a hundred years by "mismanagement". You can blame it on whomever you like it is not going to solve the current problems with the forest.
> 
> As a property owner in the forest, I would be completely delusional to tell myself that my property will never burn be it from a lightning strike or some idiot leaving a camp fire burning on the adjacent public land.
> 
> I have seen the effect of both controlled and uncontrolled burns nearby and both improve the forest with the caveat that you get to look at some black tree stumps for awhile until they all blow down.
> 
> Given the current hassle and cost effectiveness of clearing hugh swaths of dead trees it actually makes sense to let it burn where possible.


A properly executed controlled burn is designed to reduce fuels and clear out understory, it doesn't wipe out forests and leave black stumps. I did my share of controlled burns in the past. Again, it ain't rocket science unless you don't know what you're doing.


----------



## middlefork

Well LL I guess the controlled burns in my area were for "Aspen regeneration" and the fuel reduction specifically targeted the Spruce groves and yes there there were black stumps when they were done. Did it burn super hot? No, just hot enough to kill all those pesky pine trees.

Pine trees are a climax species and will go away one way or another. We had a logger come in to thin them on our property. He only wanted the Douglas Fir no money in Spruce. Couldn't even recoup his cost selling it for firewood. Took what he wanted and then would not clean up the dead and dying Spruce. We finally came to an agreement that he vacate the property immediately.

We haven't yet found an economical way to get rid of all the dead wood.


----------



## bowgy

A little more interesting reading

https://www.nps.gov/cebr/planyourvisit/upload/Why Are The Trees Dying Site Bulletin.pdf

https://www.fs.fed.us/rm/ogden/pdfs/dixie.pdf


----------



## backcountry

LostLouisianian said:


> A properly executed controlled burn is designed to reduce fuels and clear out understory, it doesn't wipe out forests and leave black stumps. I did my share of controlled burns in the past. Again, it ain't rocket science unless you don't know what you're doing.


Fuel and understory reduction are just two reasons federal agencies in the west perform prescribed burns (I think only the USDA still uses the controlled burn terminology). Another is habitat maintenance or creation in which case some snag and burnt timber remnants can be beneficial.

I have definitely seen prescribed burns through chapparal biomes that leave behind partially burned or remnant oak/etc. Prescribed burns also help force a succession of sorts in historically fire suppressed ecosystems. Many of the western forests and systems are now post-climax because of years of putting out every fire. As such, the intensity of the fire is different for each environment depending on the biological needs of rejuvenation. If I remember right chapparal requires higher intensity to have an affect on soil structure and recruitment.

If I understand right, LL, you worked for private timber firms whose mandates are vastly different than those of the USFS and BLM. That alone explains some of the differences. And those don't account for the federal and state hurdles a burn plan most go through in both the planning and implementation phases. More than one prescribed burn has been delayed into different years solely because of atmospheric conditions, weather and air quality standards.


----------



## paddler

bowgy said:


> A little more interesting reading
> 
> https://www.nps.gov/cebr/planyourvisit/upload/Why Are The Trees Dying Site Bulletin.pdf
> 
> https://www.fs.fed.us/rm/ogden/pdfs/dixie.pdf


Thanks for the links. I understood that drought and age played a role, but didn't know about fungus infecting the roots.


----------



## bowgy

paddler said:


> Thanks for the links. I understood that drought and age played a role, but didn't know about fungus infecting the roots.


Yes, this discussion has been interesting and has given me cause to do a little more research. It is not as easy as blaming just one reason or one entity other than possibly poor management.

Looks to be caused by many things, from fire suppression, to drought, to not logging old timber and other things.

Law suits have hindered some of the management too whether by winning or just delaying a certain management procedure.


----------



## backcountry

Have y'all seen the length of dozer line, on the newest maps, they have cut into the NE edge of the fire? Wow. Alot of unburnt fuels between it and the fire remain but its impressive. Will be interesting to see what happens with this heat wave and then dry thunderstorms forcast through the next period.


----------



## Vanilla

Where can we see these maps, backcountry?


----------



## backcountry

You can find them on the Brian Head Fire page on InciWeb:

InciWeb

They have standard maps for each day as well as a few progression overview maps. Its also the site that has all of the daily fire updates they give residents and journalists.


----------



## plottrunner

It needs to rain. The smoke is so bad tonight I can barely breathe....:sad::sad:


----------

