Fire Limits: Sequoia Kings
Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 8:09 pm
Eeeeek. Just out of the woods and going through all the fun posts I missed. I hate to fire people up again (heh, heh, heh) but it might be useful to explain some of the why's and wherefore's of fire limits in Sequoia Kings and some of the Sierra.
A couple of folks had it right: for alpine elevations -- the fire limits are not established because of the danger of wildfires. They're there for resource protection and aesthetics. At alpine levels (over, say, 9,000 feet in the central and southern Sierra) not that much woody debris & pine needles etc. falls for soil development. It doesn't take many campers to consume even the small amount that does accumulate. In 2001 I did a series of wood transects between Tyndall and Crabtree, including controls. In the areas used by campers, there was literally no wood or even twigs out for a distance of 200 feet. The control areas (no campers) had a lot of wood, pine needles and subsequent soil development. Campfires were banned the following year, as exceptions to the otherwise elevational limit of 11,200 feet in the Kern.
Five years later, there is still almost no litter & soil developing in those areas. It takes decades.
Next: One of the reasons the Inyo banned fires on their side in the southern Sierra, was the importance of Foxtail Pine in developing a tree ring record. Some of those sticks and branches people were burning were as old as 8,000 years (which also gives you an idea of how slowly they decay...). The tree ring records from Foxtail and other trees in the Kern area has been a huge help in recreating a climate record for the last 8,000 + years.
Finally, it's also a matter of aesthetics. One of the comments in the posts was about the black fire scar on the rock. That's exactly right. Part of the idea of wilderness is a feeling of being the only person to visit a place -- often a polite fiction, but it's important to almost everyone and the less impact we have on an area, the more people get to experience the Sierra as it was before heavy human use. The other unfortunate thing is that fire rings become a magnet for garbage -- melted plastic, "burned" freeze dried aluminum packaging; a zillion bits of aluminum. If rangers don't reduce them (and we spend most of our lives doing just that) they steadily grow to 3 + foot high monuments of rock, old charcoal, garbage and dirt. In the open alpine areas, these fire rings are too often a major eyesore and distraction from a natural wilderness setting.
As a result of campfire bans, education, really cooperative campers, and the endless work of rangers (ta da!!), a repeat of campsite inventory (originally done in the 70s) this year shows that the number of sites has been reduced by 30% or more; that the camps are smaller in size; that there are fewer "improvements" (benches; rock tables; wind breaks etc.); fewer scars on trees from axes & nails) and etc. People are doing a much better job with minimum impact.
To a certain extent, I agree that there's been some "nickel and diming" of fire regulations -- especially in the Kern of Sequoia Park. The fire limit is 11,200 feet. But that is literally tree line and well into the vital Foxtail forest. Instead of making a more understandable limit of, say, 9,000 feet or something (down into lodgepole forest where there's a lot of forest litter and soil development), NPS has carved out these not very understandable exceptions.
Hope that helps.
George
A couple of folks had it right: for alpine elevations -- the fire limits are not established because of the danger of wildfires. They're there for resource protection and aesthetics. At alpine levels (over, say, 9,000 feet in the central and southern Sierra) not that much woody debris & pine needles etc. falls for soil development. It doesn't take many campers to consume even the small amount that does accumulate. In 2001 I did a series of wood transects between Tyndall and Crabtree, including controls. In the areas used by campers, there was literally no wood or even twigs out for a distance of 200 feet. The control areas (no campers) had a lot of wood, pine needles and subsequent soil development. Campfires were banned the following year, as exceptions to the otherwise elevational limit of 11,200 feet in the Kern.
Five years later, there is still almost no litter & soil developing in those areas. It takes decades.
Next: One of the reasons the Inyo banned fires on their side in the southern Sierra, was the importance of Foxtail Pine in developing a tree ring record. Some of those sticks and branches people were burning were as old as 8,000 years (which also gives you an idea of how slowly they decay...). The tree ring records from Foxtail and other trees in the Kern area has been a huge help in recreating a climate record for the last 8,000 + years.
Finally, it's also a matter of aesthetics. One of the comments in the posts was about the black fire scar on the rock. That's exactly right. Part of the idea of wilderness is a feeling of being the only person to visit a place -- often a polite fiction, but it's important to almost everyone and the less impact we have on an area, the more people get to experience the Sierra as it was before heavy human use. The other unfortunate thing is that fire rings become a magnet for garbage -- melted plastic, "burned" freeze dried aluminum packaging; a zillion bits of aluminum. If rangers don't reduce them (and we spend most of our lives doing just that) they steadily grow to 3 + foot high monuments of rock, old charcoal, garbage and dirt. In the open alpine areas, these fire rings are too often a major eyesore and distraction from a natural wilderness setting.
As a result of campfire bans, education, really cooperative campers, and the endless work of rangers (ta da!!), a repeat of campsite inventory (originally done in the 70s) this year shows that the number of sites has been reduced by 30% or more; that the camps are smaller in size; that there are fewer "improvements" (benches; rock tables; wind breaks etc.); fewer scars on trees from axes & nails) and etc. People are doing a much better job with minimum impact.
To a certain extent, I agree that there's been some "nickel and diming" of fire regulations -- especially in the Kern of Sequoia Park. The fire limit is 11,200 feet. But that is literally tree line and well into the vital Foxtail forest. Instead of making a more understandable limit of, say, 9,000 feet or something (down into lodgepole forest where there's a lot of forest litter and soil development), NPS has carved out these not very understandable exceptions.
Hope that helps.
George