Did you hear about the fire in LA? It's massive. Tasmania doesn't even get those kind of fires. Only little controled ones.
They had some fire issues last year too, but I don't think they were as bad as this. We get some bad forest fires from time to time, but nothing that destroys so many houses o_o
<span style='color:purple'>You would have thought that after years of this the local government and its authorities would have learned how to prevent, control or stop this kind of thing happening.</span>
You can't really prevent fires such as these. The heat and pollution levels will be enough to set things ablaze. I haven't seen the news on this, so I'm going on what I know about forest fires. The most sensible thing they can do is not build houses near forests that are liable to burn. Generally speaking I don't think the US does a bad job controlling the fires as best they can. But what they should probably do is set up some system that monitors the over all heat in the forest (not just at canopy level, but beneath the canopies, where heat can't escape all too well). I'm not a Scientist, exactly, but it seems to make some form of sense. I hope =D I don't know if there would be complications in setting up a system, but hey, if they could monitor the heat levels, then they could predict and respond more affectively. Like monitoring weather systems, they can predict hurricanes. They're able to tell people in enough time whether or not they should move away. I don't see why the same principle couldn't be applied in the case of forest fires.
i'm not sure about the geography of the fires here, nor the climate and such, but forest fires are natural occurrence and in some cases it is necessary that they occur. such is the cycle of things (guru moment). no really, it is important for some ecosystems to have fires to bring nutrients back to the ground. although a lot of human factors have been introduced and are putting so much pressure on local ecosystems that forest fires occur in weird places. s: bad signs, yo.
<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (phylus @ Nov 17 2008, 07:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> i'm not sure about the geography of the fires here, nor the climate and such, but forest fires are natural occurrence and in some cases it is necessary that they occur. such is the cycle of things (guru moment). no really, it is important for some ecosystems to have fires to bring nutrients back to the ground. </td></tr></table> <span style='color:purple'>On that note there is truth in that. Some species of trees in Australia need bush-fires to open their seed's and clear an area for more trees. Though this in itself is rare and far between each instance. Cheers for reminding me. ^,^</span>
Gotta love a good controlled burn every now and then to get rid of all the dry stuff. I know they do this in most places that are well organized, not sure about California though, they have a pretty dense population. I've always loved the trees that have protective cases around their seeds that won't open unless it gets ridiculously hot = forest fires. It seems so clever of nature :D Now I'll return to studying Typhus.
Right. I know there were fires one new years day because of the fire works. The sparks they give off started to burn up trees and stuff.
I live in Southern Idaho, but luckily the fires are far enough away to not affect us. I'd hate a smokey sky. We never get fires. Always Montana and Cali that get's em.
