Wildfire management on public lands, whats your view on it in the way of hunting in fishing.

[KMO385]

See the other thread where a smoldering fire is closing access.

I can at least say I know that's done because a smoldering fire can blow up to a running crown fire faster then you'd think.

 

[SAJ-99]

The fire behavior has definitely more extreme all over the country. Many Pondarosa Pine ecosystems have become too dense and the park like stands have closed in. I believe at least before the 20th century or late 19th century most of the ecosystems had a somewhat normal fire regime that was closer in line to what they evolved with. I just think we're stuck in place were extreme fire behavior, fire in the urban interface and large fire are going to be a norm.

So why did you ask the question? I don't know of anyone that is against the general concept of fire management or timber harvest or anything else. But, like the answer to pretty much every question, it depends.

 

[KMO385]

So why did you ask the question? I don't know of anyone that is against the general concept of fire management or timber harvest or anything else. But, like the answer to pretty much every question, it depends.

Just read other people's thoughts. I like to learn what others think and experience. I have an education in wildfire/nature resources and I've work in fire as a career. But that doesnt mean im an expert, things are well and good in a book or lecture or what I see in tallgrass prairie. People in different places know, see, and think different things.

 

[rustednuts]

AZ does a good job with fire management overall. They have effectively let fire burns. A lot of that has been a result of thinking and fuel reductions work that have done in the past that lowers the risk on some of these fires.

 

[SAJ-99]

Just read other people's thoughts. I like to learn what others think and experience. I have an education in wildfire/nature resources and I've work in fire as a career. But that doesnt mean im an expert, things are well and good in a book or lecture or what I see in tallgrass prairie. People in different places know, see, and think different things.

As they say, everyone has an opinion. A person may even have different opinions if they drew a tag in a unit and a fire broke out. Regardless of the solution, we remain reluctant to put money and resources toward the them. Too much to be gained politically from the "Feds suck at managing forest" theme.

 

[brymoore]

Just read other people's thoughts. I like to learn what others think and experience. I have an education in wildfire/nature resources and I've work in fire as a career. But that doesnt mean im an expert, things are well and good in a book or lecture or what I see in tallgrass prairie. People in different places know, see, and think different things.

I definitely don’t have a wildfire education.

Everything in Idaho seems to have burned twice. I’ve had three evacuation notices in the past 20 years at my house.

Excluding wilderness, put out the fires that you can put out. A lot of times there aren’t the resources to react quickly to the many mini fires from heat lightning strikes. Big fires happen but stop what you can stop.

The timber around me seems to be cut/trimmed enough considering the regulation requirements. I support a good timber plan that’s environmentally sound.

 

[hunter49]

Need more consistent fire on the landscape. Paired with sound timber management. The prairie needs to see way more fire. Looking dire in places.

 

[sapperJ24]

Fire is a complicated topic and I strongly believe that there is not simple or easy solution. As others have alluded to, appropriate response to fire varies greatly by ecosystem and proximity to values. There are places where fire should be extinguished as soon as possible and other places where there might not be a need for that.

I like the direction of the PODS concept and the ongoing work to build a robust network of managed areas which may allow for future fires to be managed more indirectly. Work (harvest, thinning, burning) will never cease, but progress may be made.

My concern with our current fire management strategy of full suppression is that managers are missing opportunities to get smaller and overall lower intensity fires on the landscape. Firefighters can accomplish a lot of good work when the dead fuels aren't too dry, the live fuels still green, the temps not too hot, the relative humidity not too low, and resources plentiful. In the right pre-identified places, some of these fires might be instances where maybe the fire should be allowed to slowly grow to a few hundred or few thousand acres.

However when the fuels are dead and dry and firefighters are facing record heat and drought, they may struggle to put out fires. And these fires occurring at the 97th percentile (of heat/dryness) are often the ones that get up and rip leaving large alterations to the landscape. I think back to fires I've put out in the past where we got on scene and were able to easily get on top of it due to the conditions, maybe the live fuels were too green to carry fire or we had high overnight relative humidity and the fire mostly burned itself out. And then a couple years later a new fire starts under hot and dry conditions and within days it rips over the hillside or the ridge where we suppressed that previous fire. I just wonder how the new fire would burned had there been a three or five year old burn scar of a thousand acres. Instead of having a patchwork of various ages, sizes, and severity, we're left with larger and likely more severe fires which are routinely described as catastrophic.

I've found it incredibly interesting to see how large wilderness landscapes in Montana have responded to the reintroduction of fire and more so the impact of reburns within the last 25 years.

Somewhat related, Montana recently passed legislation (2025) to support responsible prescribed fires by private landowners which is certainly in a positive direction.