[pct-l] Swarthout Canyon--fire closure

[Mary Kwart]

I was a battalion chief for the Forest Service for 7 years in California and a fire management officer in Alaska for 4 years on a wildlife refuge. Falling snags were the number two cause of fire fatalities from fires. Areas are typically closed to prevent accidents from fire caused hazards like snags, burnt out root holes,etc. Although when I worked as a fire manager for the National Park Service in Yosemite, the public was often allowed in the vicinity of a fire on the trails so that people could be educated about the fire process. Areas were signed extensively to warn people and then the trail users could decide whether to take the risk.

I think in recent years, with less people available for patrolling and putting out signs and making them, the Forest Service has just decided on the safest route for them legal wise--just keep people out of the fire area. It is regrettable because it would be good for more people to become familiar with the effects of the fire process. But in our society, the public has a tradition of being "protected" by paternal bureaucracies and tends to sue of something goes wrong on public land.

--Fireweed
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 18:26:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: nosirreeb <nosirreeb at yahoo.com>
Subject: [pct-l] Swarthout Canyon
To: pct-l at mailman.backcountry.net
Message-ID: <35045.48551.qm at web31813.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

> It seems to have become the bureaucratic "easy out" to close off 
> entire areas because it is "too dangerous" for the public

Hmmm ... I always supposed the after-fire closures were to protect the terrain from unnecessary erosion, allow vegetation to regrow, and to enable wildlife to repopulate the area, not to protect people. These processes can take years and I support the effort.