Letters to the editor: Bring back 'let it burn'; no leadership over water crisis
Return to ‘let it burn’ policy
It’s summer and we are in the midst of fire season. As a former firefighter I would like to share some facts.
The ability to fight wildfires is less than a century old. Prior to then, fires burned until they either ran out of fuel, or the first winter rain or snowfall occurred. We had no means to extinguish such fires, nor was there a desire to do so. Populations in the western states were so sparse that many fires burned for weeks or months, going unnoticed.
There were no aircraft to conduct aerial measurements of acreage burned, and again, there was no desire to make any such measurements. Hence, for someone today to say that a particular fire is the largest in California’s history, that historic record goes back no more than about 100 years. We have no record of acres burned prior to then.
To demonstrate that wildfires are natural and extinguishing a blaze goes against nature’s intent, some species of coniferous trees will not re-seed until their pine cones reach a temperature of 800 degrees.
No wildfire should be described as destructive or a catastrophic, yet those terms are commonly used due to faulty government agencies permitting communities to be built in fire-prone regions.
The U.S. Forest Service once had a “let it burn” policy, recognizing that fires were a very important part of nature. But because of property losses and public outrage, the service was forced to go against nature, rescind that policy, and spend countless funds to extinguish such blazes.
It is my belief that we should return to the “let it burn” policy and give communities, that have been allowed to be built in fire-prone regions due to misguided government agencies, the tools to become more resilient to wildfires.
Jeffrey Herman, Port Hueneme
Hope isn’t a plan for water crisis
On Aug. 2, I attended a meeting on water restrictions sponsored by the City of Thousand Oaks. About 50 people were in attendance.
The presentation by Senior City Analyst John Brooks focused exclusively on water conservation, as was expected. While there were some good conservation suggestions, it is clear that the water crisis in Thousand Oaks is taking a “punitive” turn. Fines are being levied; “spotters” are already employed to identify “water lawbreakers”; the public is encouraged to report violators; etc. etc. Sprinklers are outlawed as of Aug. 1. Who knew? Will trees die? Yes. Is artificial grass encouraged? Absolutely not.
Can we conserve our way out of this crisis? No. Especially when residential water usage represents only 5% to 8% of the state’s water consumption. And new restrictions are coming on Sept. 1.
Congress passed a $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Bill on Nov. 15, 2021. What has happened since then to address the “worst drought for the Southwest in 1,200 years”? Are there desalination plants being built? Hardly. Are there plans to build water pipelines (think William Mulholland) to move water from the rain-soaked center of our country to the Colorado River? No. Are there plans to better capitalize on existing ground water? Crickets.
With the water crisis at such a critical level, maybe it’s time that “leaders” actually lead on the issue and find solutions to the supply side of the problem in addition to the focus on the conservation side. Hope is not a plan. This issue demands leaders with vision and solutions.
John Lynch, Thousand Oaks
This article originally appeared on Ventura County Star: Letters: Bring back 'let it burn'; no leadership over water crisis
