I don’t expect anyone to read all this. It is just my peculiar way of thinking.
- If Voluntary Evacuation suddenly turns to Mandatory Evacuation, does this mean fire danger is imminent? I think it means that the officials want the roads clear of traffic and no people to worry about.
- If evacuation is mandatory, people are allowed to stay, but they are not allowed to return if they leave.
I wonder if there are exceptions, such as getting groceries, going to the dentist, checking on elderly parents, going to work… I’m thankful I get to work from home.
- Why do the officials deem it necessary to bring in more crews when the terrain is too rugged for boots on the ground? Oh, it is to protect the town and the cabins on the Mineral King Road.
- If they are unable to contain a fire when it is only an acre or two, why do they believe they can contain it when it is hundreds of acres? Wouldn’t it be better to flood it with that pink stuff when it is small?
- I am sure that the people in charge know what they are doing. (Pippin knows what he is doing; isn’t it interesting how well he blends in with the weird light and dry grasses?)
- How can anyone know what he is doing when fires do what fires do, which is be unpredictable, go crazy and ruin stuff?
- But the people in charge know a lot about fire behaviors, patterns, how weather and terrain affects it, don’t they? (Did Pippin know what he was doing back when this photo was taken?)
- The people in charge are trained to talk in code to keep people from getting alarmed. (My dentist does the same thing – I got him to admit this to me when I called him on it.)
- Lower temperatures with increased humidity slows down fires. It also means a greater risk that pipes will freeze and burst in our cabins because Mineral King was closed before we had a chance to take care of some basics.
- Why doesn’t California do more active forest management? Think of the wasted potential lumber while we import overpriced lumber from distant locations! If logging, logging roads, and grazing were allowed (I don’t mean in the Parks, but in the Forests), there would be less fuels and there would be firebreaks. If mechanical thinning was done around settlements, they would have a greater chance of surviving. (Why aren’t they asking me how to run their business? And why has the term “forest management” become political? Good grief Charlie Brown)
- Why do we believe that Three Rivers won’t burn? The towns of Paradise and Greenville probably thought the same thing, and look how that turned out.
- In response to the previous question, Three Rivers doesn’t have those conifer trees, particularly standing dead ones, full of ptich, waiting to explode. Instead, we have buckeye trees, which don’t burn very well.
- The Park Superintendent said the #1 priority is people’s homes (maybe he said “the community”). Within the Park, the big trees are more important than the Park’s structures because the trees are several thousand years old while the Park structures will probably collapse in 30 years.
- Helicopters carry a water container beneath that looks about the size of a marble in comparison to the size of the fire. Is this truly effective or is it the equivalent of a mouse with a squirt gun? (Just learned that there is some sort of fire retardant added to the water).
- Maybe it is a good thing that a great number of houses in Three Rivers are vacation rentals; that means less people to evacuate. (Would you believe that Moro Rock and Alta Peak are usually visible from this location? No reason for anyone to visit Three Rivers right now.)
- When thinking about evacuating, there are 2 parts to consider: A. What do I need for a week or two? and B. What can I not stand to lose?
- So many people have offered to help with trucks, trailers, places to store things, and places to stay. We don’t plan on leaving but have made piles of things in case it all goes nutso.
The same view in better times.