Bootstrap_1644957972387644

What a sensible idea! And Jon Keeley is just one of many fire scientists who agree with you entirely.

Jon E. Keeley of the USGS is a world-renowned expert on the fire ecology of California. We have read his recently published book (Fire in Mediterranean Ecosystems: Ecology, Evolution and Management,Cambridge University Press, 2011) and many of his articles. Anyone with a sincere interest in wildfire hazards in California would be wise to read these publications.

Keeley’s most recently published study of specific wildfires in the Wildland-Urban-Interface (WUI) of California is most relevant to consideration of wildfire hazard in the East Bay hills: Alexandra Syphard, Jon E. Keeley, et. al., “Housing Arrangement and Location Determine the Likelihood of Housing Loss Due to Wildire.” PLOS ONE, March 18, 2012. The authors studied the property damage resulting from specific wildfires in California “…and identified the main contributors to property loss.” Keeley and his colleagues found that steep slopes in canyons that create wind corridors were the best predictors of fire damage and that grassy fuels were more likely to spread the fire than woody fuels. Applying these observations in the East Bay hills, its topography is the biggest factor in the potential for wildfire and substituting the forest with grassland and scrub will result in more dangerous fuel loads.

The folks who are advocating for the destruction of the non-native forest in the East Bay Hills are either native plant fanatics or are abysmally ignorant of fire science. Or perhaps both. Whatever their motivation, it's clear that if they get their way fire hazards in the East Bay hills will be increased.

Vote