Trip planning with Fires and Smoke

Questions and reports related to Sierra Nevada current and forecast conditions, as well as general precautions and safety information. Trail conditions, fire/smoke reports, mosquito reports, weather and snow conditions, stream crossing information, and more.
User avatar
frozenintime
Topix Regular
Posts: 310
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2015 8:06 pm
Experience: N/A

Re: Trip planning with Fires and Smoke

Post by frozenintime »

i suppose smoke could be this localized in the sierra, but the windy forecast image below doesn’t give me great confidence in their prognostication. the n/s dividing line is roughly bubbs creek/roads end/180. this isn’t just one slide: the forecast is that north of bubbs will be good-ish while south will be totally socked in with smoke over most of the forecast window. someone with more knowledge than me could weigh in here, but this sure seems suspicious.
1AAD3218-0B6B-4783-BD3B-D267667D079D.jpeg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
TahoeJeff
Topix Fanatic
Posts: 1234
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 11:03 am
Experience: Level 3 Backpacker
Location: South Lake Tahoe, NV

Re: Trip planning with Fires and Smoke

Post by TahoeJeff »

"The enemy is socialism, the enemy is statism, the enemy is collectivism."
Javier Milei
El Presidente de Argentina
User avatar
c9h13no3
Topix Fanatic
Posts: 1398
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2018 1:19 pm
Experience: Level 1 Hiker
Location: San Mateo, CA

Re: Trip planning with Fires and Smoke

Post by c9h13no3 »

frozenintime wrote: Wed Aug 18, 2021 9:06 am the forecast is that north of bubbs will be good-ish while south will be totally socked in with smoke over most of the forecast window. someone with more knowledge than me could weigh in here, but this sure seems suspicious.
It seems to me that they're over-estimating the smoke from the Walkers fire, to me anyways. The EPA forecast is the opposite, and currently there's clear air around Lake Sabrina/South Lake.

This is obviously a question of risk tolerance, so it'll be a personal decision for you. But for me, risking a 12 hr drive, even if it was smoky and I bailed, I'd think I could have a good time. Obviously if you're getting on a plane, or if its easy to reschedule days you take off work, this changes the risk calculation for you.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
"Adventure is just bad planning." - Roald Amundsen
Also, I have a blog no one reads. Please do not click here.
User avatar
frozenintime
Topix Regular
Posts: 310
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2015 8:06 pm
Experience: N/A

Re: Trip planning with Fires and Smoke

Post by frozenintime »

thanks for your thoughts. my group is in the bay. unless things radically change between now and tomorrow AM, we are going.

i mostly wanted to chime in on the confusion and guesswork inherent to planning trips in the 21st century given the relative newness and accuracy (or lack thereof) of our forecasting tools. we will be reaping what we've sown with fire suppression and climate change for a long time, and i'm sure those smoke forecasting tools will get better pretty quickly. but for now, it all feels pretty damn magic 8 ball-ish. :)
User avatar
c9h13no3
Topix Fanatic
Posts: 1398
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2018 1:19 pm
Experience: Level 1 Hiker
Location: San Mateo, CA

Re: Trip planning with Fires and Smoke

Post by c9h13no3 »

frozenintime wrote: Wed Aug 18, 2021 12:36 pm i mostly wanted to chime in on the confusion and guesswork inherent to planning trips
Yeah, totally. I think this sort of exercise other people will find useful. You can throw out the websites to use, but reading other people discussing an actual example is probably helpful for some. :)
"Adventure is just bad planning." - Roald Amundsen
Also, I have a blog no one reads. Please do not click here.
User avatar
CAMERONM
Topix Expert
Posts: 477
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 10:04 am
Experience: Level 4 Explorer
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Re: Trip planning with Fires and Smoke

Post by CAMERONM »

I have been watching Airnow closely, and I often see areas where they claim three or four layers of smoke intensity, but their PurpleAir monitors report low AQI. Near hotspots, they coincide, but in much larger areas there does not seem be much of a correspondence.

All that aside, the hard truth is that it is all wind dependent, and the wind can change within hours.

It certainly is useful to see that the area I thought was sufficiently southern and "safe" to take a chance on grew two new fires overnight.
User avatar
Wandering Daisy
Topix Docent
Posts: 6960
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 8:19 pm
Experience: N/A
Location: Fair Oaks CA (Sacramento area)
Contact:

Re: Trip planning with Fires and Smoke

Post by Wandering Daisy »

I am not real clear on how AQI is calculated. I believe Purple Air AQI is of particles less than 2.5. These are particles that harm lungs. The AQI can be relatively low and the visual effect horrible, since the larger particles can cause more haze. Where the many components of air quality are shown separately, just adding them does not seem to equal reported AQI. Not sure if ozone is added. Purple Air is also "citizen's" reporting and very localized. If someone has a sensor in their back yard, it may be impacted by them BBQ'ing dinner! Not sure they even record ozone. And the overlying smoke map trends do not match individual sensor AQI's.

As more roads get closed across the Sierra here in northern CA, it may become harder to even get to the east side.

Saddens me that for all the talk about "protecting Lake Tahoe" from the Caldor Fire, Desolation Wilderness seems to be treated as a pawn in the big game. Wilderness has little "high dollar" value- sort if let it burn to provide a fire break for Tahoe. I would hope that this impression I get is not what is actually being done and Tahoe just gets more press space.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests