High Sierra Topix

Backpackers should take a special interest in this:

http://yubanet.com/regional/Yosemite-Co ... iEYKj_NmSg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It is going to take a lot of trailwork to get the trails out of Shingle Springs, Eleanor, and Hetchy Hetchy back again. Contributing to trail restoration is something we can help with.

why? they're gonna work on trails at their own pace anyway, and the fire was overdue.

how is a trail impacted by a fire? other than the trees being gone. yes that is sad but. It was overgrown. No prior plans to reduce potential risk. Not paying for that.

It's a big sierra.

How is a trail impacted by fire? Deadfall and erosion, primarily. Furthermore, dead trees standing continue to fall and obliterate trails for years after a fire--Kibbie Ridge was a classic example and it will be worse now. Also, the disappearance of tree canopy creates an explosion of brush that must be pruned. And erosion during the first winter can be severe, creating a need for rockwork.

So fires create an enormous need for repair and greatly increased maintenance needs for years--and neither the Park Service nor the Forest Service will be getting an additional dime for any of this in the era of the sequestered budget.

Ideally we would live in a society that valued things likes trails, trailheads, campgrounds, etc. and amply supported them at public expense. Sadly, that is not the case in our nation any more. The political base for this sort of thing has declined since the 1970s and about half the trails that were once maintained are already in various stages of reversion, or gone completely (think Kibbie/Flora trail, for example.) It is entirely possible that some of the trails recently burned will never be restored.

As for the idea that fires of this sort are needed to thin out "overgrown" forests: This sort of mega "crown" fire in the Sierra is entirely unnatural (the Rim fire is already the largest fire in the history of the Sierra) and could only occur in an ecosystem already greatly altered. The Forest Service should be doing many, many more controlled burns to make up for a century of ill advised suppression, but the lack of budget and the fear of public lawsuits paralyzes it and sets us up for gargantuan destructive fires that burn to granite. Unless our political and legal systems change rather radically, the only way to support our trails as they deserve will be through volunteer efforts and private contributions.

so in the most part we're in agreement. they should have done more up front controlled burns. They could have managed more like yose and do some maintenance on the "fat" years.

Other than that, I give enough to the state. I've been to Kibbie.. not memorable. It must be for you. sorry for your loss.

Well, my feeling here is that an ounce of prevention is worth.... oh maybe........a trillion metric tons of cure. People need to be more careful with fire-and I'm not just talking about backpackers, I am talking about people tossing cigarettes, operating heavy machinery, and such in areas adjacent to the forest. I agree with rlown too about thinning and doing controlled burns before the carbon content becomes too dense. It's like we didn't learn anything from Yellowstone.

Too bad there's not yet a way to harvest the underbrush, shred it, and make methanol from the cellulose. Instead of taxpayers paying for the brush removal, some company could pay the state a royalty for taking it as a resource. Maybe someday.

I think we all agree that the various agencies could do a much better job of managing the fire ecosystems.

The original intent of my post was to let people know how they could contribute to rebuilding trails.