The fires in the Los Angeles area continue to rage, and reports are that at least 16 people have been killed. The Kenneth Fire is now 100% contained, but winds continue to be a threat. The BBC has ongoing updated coverage here and the LAT here.
I want to return to the conversation we were having in my previous post on this subject. There was a lot of back-and-forth in the comment section which, as it often does, obscured some basic points. Let me clarify where I am on all of this, recognizing that, as always, my views are open to amendment based on new evidence and information.
In the simplest of terms, it continues to appear to be the case that this is a tragic confluence of extremely dry conditions and unusually strong Santa Ana wind in the broader context of a specific pattern of urban development in the greater Los Angeles area. Moreover, climate change has made a situation that was already prone to wildfires much worse.
In other words, there was a lot of dry fuel already present. Then the winds provided a delivery mechanism for spreading a fire. So all that was needed was a fluke (a spark) or carelessness (a cigarette butt) or negligence of some kind to provide a flame.*
To me, it seems that these ingredients mean that there was little in the recent past that could have been done to prevent this tragedy (in much the same way that nothing could have been done to prevent the devastation caused by Hurricane Helene in North Carolina).
Let me parse out a couple of things, as I think multiple commenters took this issue in more than one direction. There are, certainly, hypotheticals we could discuss about what might have been done many, many years ago. Could more have been done to mitigate climate change? Could the humans who developed greater Los Angeles done so differently? These are, however, to me “time machines” based scenarios insofar as, yes, we can say things done decades ago could have created a different set of parameters.
There is also the general truth that if more resources had been expended in various ways (more sophisticated fire suppression in houses, different construction, more money for fire departments, to name a couple off the top of my head) that could have helped. But, again, we are talking about time machines and the reality that resources are always limited.
So, it is nonetheless true, as a general statement, that there are “things” (a great big bucket of them) that might have been done. But we can say that after every disaster to one degree or the other.
There is also some level of hope that lessons of use for the future will be learned from this tragedy.
However, my ire in my post the other day, and what was at the heart of the debate in the comment section from my point of view, was focused on two, somewhat related, reactions to the fires.
The first is what I think of as “one weird trick” explanations (e.g., the “raking the forest” crowd).**
The second is just people trying to score political points.
These are what I was referring to when I said the following:
It is always tempting to assert that something could have ben done to have prevented all of this, but I am not seeing it (but am open to being corrected).
People who are using this moment to make cheap political points are, however, heartless ghouls.
To be clear: I wish there was some easy solution, but I fear that instead, we are seeing exactly what all the people who warned us about climate change tried to tell us. As such, I expect that we will see more tragedies of this nature (and, again, I point to Helene and North Carolina as being in the same category).
Now, of course, there will be lessons to be learned from all of this, but at the moment I am not sure what lesson will be learned that could have prevented all of this. No rain + California’s scrubby hills + dry winds (up to 100 MHP) + sparks equals the conditions for massive wildfires. I suppose I simply feel utterly fatalistic on that count.
In terms of “one weird trick” responses, a major focus has been forest management and specifically controlled burns. Kevin Drum has a detailed piece on the use of such burns: Why don’t we do more prescribed burning? An explainer. He notes that, in fact, their usage is up, but notes underfunding and regulatory hurdles. He further notes that conditions have to be right for such burns as well as the following point that is key for SoCal:
And even if you do manage to clear out the vegetation—either with fire or chainsaws—it will grow back quickly because these are native plants adapted to the climate. And in the meantime you’ve turned the hillsides into massive mudslide machines the next time it rains. This is not a great tradeoff.
I think people hear “forest” and assume that the problem is dead brush amidst tall trees and that burning off the brush solves the problem. Rather, most of what we are talking about is chaparral.
As such, I have not seen anything that convinces me that forest management is the solution to .4 centimeters of rain in three months plus 100 MHP Santa Ana winds.
Worse, however, than Monday Morning Quarterbacking on all of this is the gross politics. As per the incoming president:
On Truth Social, he called politicians “incompetent.” adding: “They just can’t put out the fires. What’s wrong with them?”
Because, you know, it is good and useful to stoke anger and discontent in the midst of a tragedy, especially in an utterly dishonest fashion. But I guess that’s okay if you think it can make your political opponents look bad.***
Look, if Democratic Governor Gavin Newsome or Democratic Mayor Karen Bass of LA (or whomever) are demonstrated to have done something worthy of excoriation, then have at. But it is rather obvious that, like everything else in our current political climate, this is being spun on cable news and in social media as a partisan story to just create the requisite emotional rush. I can tell what Fox News is saying often by listening to acquaintances whom I know to be steady consumers. One such acquaintance quipped yesterday that “there won’t be in Democrats left in California after all these fires.” That’s just ridiculous partisanship and is reflective of our unhealthy media environment. But, of course, when leaders such as Trump are setting the tone on these matters, this is what we are going to continue to get.
To sum up.
- No rain + low humidity + dry, fast winds equals a tinderbox.
- Yes, we will learn things from this, but I don’t see some obvious fix that was missed.
- It is an additional layer of tragedy that we turn all of these events into cheap partisan politics.
I will note, however, that there are more serious political debates to be had (and that the cheap version is a distraction from those more serious ones). The more serious debates are about climate change as well as things like zoning and construction, as well as how many resources to be dedicating to things like fire departments and other services.
*I am highly influenced by the fact that I lived in Southern California during a time when there was a more regular rainy season and I also experienced normal Santa Ana winds. It is not hard for me to extrapolate what no rain and extreme winds could create.
Also, I live in a fairly humid place and was recently reminded of how dry the West can be during a visit to Arizona. As I write this I can see acres and acres of brown, dormant grass (with some intermittent green vegetation despite recent lows in the 20s). The ground is still soggy from recent rains and the grass is damp from frost this morning (and most mornings is covered in dew). Startin a fire out there would really, really difficult. Indeed, I like a good outdoor firepit and it is amazing how hard it can be to get a fire started if the fuel is not adequately dry.
However, if the fields around me had only had .4 cm of rain and if the humidity was low for months on end and then the was a consistent dry wind, these fields would be a serious fire risk. Conditions matter, and those conditions are not fully in human control.
As I noted in the comments of my previous post (and Drum passingly notes in his post), controlled burns of fields are not unusual around here. I am not a fan because I don’t like the smoke, but I am not at all afraid of out-of-control fires because it is just too wet here. But, also as the Drum piece notes, “controlled” burns in SoCal have gotten out of hand at times. I think people see the word “controlled” and overestimate how much control there is.
**For example, via The Guardian: Republican congressman calls for halting of disaster relief to California. Comments made on Fox Business, I would note.
***I find the cheap partisan politics to be galling for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that is sowing more discontent and distrust in the broader population in a way that makes actual solutions harder to achieve. It isn’t just that one team beats up on the other. It is that it damages the long-term ability for us to collectively solve problems.
