🚀 go-pugleaf

On Jan 30, 11:34 am, SMITH29 <smit...@comcast.net> wrote:
> y_p_w wrote:
> > On Jan 28, 6:47 am, "Jon" <jonm...@none.non> wrote:
> >> "SMITH29" <smit...@comcast.net> wrote
>
> >>>> On Jan 27, 1:51 am, jazzerci...@hotmail.com (-) wrote:
> >>>>> Bush Opens Roadless Tongass National Forest to Logging
> >>> We eventually lose unmanaged forest land to uncontrollable fires.
> >> Fire can be a non-artificial part of the ecosystem.  Artificial fire
> >> suppression can lead to significant build up of fuel load which
> >> may make eventual fires less natural in their effect.
>
> > I heard it's the underbrush accumulation from years of fire
> > suppression that can lead to uncontrollable fires in the future.  I
> > was in Yosemite Valley last summer when they were doing a controlled
> > burn to remove some of that vegetation without clearing trees.  The
> > trees were certainly scarred by fire, but their nature is to survive
> > small fires.
>
> >http://nature.nps.gov/firemanagement/index.cfm
>
> xxxx
> The ash from fire is a soil nutrient so control burning is a good thing.
> A forest fire burns tree top to tree top as flame balls jump ahead of
> the rest of the burn and the trees explode from the intense heat.
> Ground burning won't help that kind of fire which likely as not was a
> lightning strike of 100,000 amp or more which can literally split a tree
> open and set it ablaze in a few seconds.

Not with the coast redwood or giant sequoia.  Or at least not
typically.  I've seen a few that were burned down to a short 20-30 ft
stack.  Most typically looked like this one (Redwood Mountain Grove -
Kings Canyon National Park), where you can see where lightning
tunneled through the bark from the top and exited near the bottom.

http://img252.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img5154ai6.jpg