{ title: 'Wescolite (Dillon, Mont) 1949-2009, October 07, 2001, Page 11, Image 11', download_links: [ { link: 'http://www.loc.gov/rss/ndnp/ndnp.xml', label: 'application/rss+xml', meta: 'News about Chronicling America - RSS Feed', }, { link: '/lccn/Wescolite/2001-10-07/ed-1/seq-11.png', label: 'image/png', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/Wescolite/2001-10-07/ed-1/seq-11.pdf', label: 'application/pdf', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/Wescolite/2001-10-07/ed-1/seq-11/ocr.xml', label: 'application/xml', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/Wescolite/2001-10-07/ed-1/seq-11/ocr.txt', label: 'text/plain', meta: '', }, ] }
About Wescolite (Dillon, Mont) 1949-2009 | View This Issue
Wescolite (Dillon, Mont), 07 Oct. 2001, located at <http://montananewspapers.org/lccn/Wescolite/2001-10-07/ed-1/seq-11/>, image provided by MONTANA NEWSPAPERS, Montana Historical Society, Helena, Montana.
Fire Suppression: Another View by Ben Sorensen Members of the public have brought up many questions and concerns due to the ex treme fire season that our country has encoun tered over the past four to five months. Many people have attacked the various government agencies over what they deem as unfit fire suppression tactics while others have praised the firefighting efforts. It seems that the most heavily disputed debates have occurred in the realms of forest management and fire suppres sion techniques, (more specifically on the accomplishment, or lack therein, of these two topics). Since the formation of type one fire crews, namely the Smokejumping elite, in the mid to late 1940's there has been a drastic increase in the response to and suppression of forest fires. This has obviously cut down on the amount of wildfires that become out of control and engulf thousands of acres of forest in flames. The zero tolerance for wildfires has lead to an extreme build up of dead and downed fuels in our forests, resulting in fire potential high enough to produce a season in Hell as was observed this past summer. Forest fires must be suppressed due to the ever-present possibility of a fire blowing up and threatening the homes, and possibly the lives, of individuals occupying the forests. I do not agree with the placement of many homes within the forests, but that is something out of mine and everyone else's control. People will continue to buy land in heavily fueled areas and they will also continue to build homes, (typically very expensive homes), in these areas. This is simply how things are. If a fire is not suppressed when it first begins it could end up becoming a large project fire with the potential to destroy the previously described buildings and persons occupying them. If this were to happen who would be to blame? The answer is obvious; agencies responsible for forest management. This is the reason that all fires, not inclusive of wilderness areas, must be suppressed. (The reason that I am not including fires in wilderness areas is because those fires are nearly always allowed to bum, giving Mother Nature free reign to rebalance the environment in those areas). Most of the personnel who took part in firefighting efforts this summer will testify to the fact that there is no one fire that can be written off as being not dangerous. No matter how good the conditions may be there is never a 100 percent sure way of guaranteeing that the weather will drastically change at the drop of a hat, a quality that Montana weather is notori ous for. When this happens, which it did on many fires during this past summer, there's no telling where the fire will go and what it will do. Only when fires begin to destroy high dollar homes does the public begin to criticize forest managers for not doing enough to lessen the fire potential in a specific area. These tend to be the same people who are against pre scribed fire (prescribed fire being fire that is introduced into sections of a forest, by humans, that contain high amounts of dead and down fuels and/or are very overgrown and crowded). Prescribed fire is much more controlled than wildfire, but still yields the end result of provid ing the forest with the proper treatment that it needs to remain healthy. The individuals in charge of these prescribed bums are highly trained in fire behavior and are very knowledge able in all areas of fire. These \bums” are also extensively researched and prepared before fire is introduced into them, making the chances of burning any unwanted areas highly unlikely. Granted there are times when controlled bums get away from those responsible, but when one is dependent on the cooperation of the weather to properly execute a function it is feasible to expect a few mishaps along the way. (This is by no means an excuse for disasters like the one that happened at Los Alamos this summer. The individuals responsible for that were careless and did not follow proper procedure, a fact that can be obtained from reports filed by the re sponsible government agencies). The final topic that I wish to cover is the misconstrued idea about logging in our forests and its relationship with fire suppression. Many people in our society think of only one thing when they hear the word logging, that thing is clear cut. The reality of today is that clear cuts are a thing of the past and have been for quite some time. Timber sales are now managed through terms of selective cutting contracts, stipulations that I have personally worked under for the past two years. These guidelines give the harvester a prescription for what type of trees can be cut, the size of tree that can be cut, how many trees have to be left in a specified square foot area and many other things relating to proper forest care. Here's the main point that I wish to make in regard to the relationship between logging and fire suppression. As a firefighter I have had the experience of fighting fires in forest areas that have been managed by selective logging and areas that have not been managed at all. Contray to disbeliefs of some there is a much higher chance of stopping a fire in an area that has been managed by selective logging than in an area that has had zero management. This is simply common sense because the area that had no management had a much higher fuel load than the area that had been managed. Another advantage to fighting fire in an area that has been selectively logged is that the fire does not have as high a chance of \crowning out\. Crowning out is when a fire moves into the treetops and races from tree to tree. In selec tively logged areas the distance between stand ing trees is at such a length that a fire will have a difficult time jumping between them. In contrast when fire gets into an area where no management has been present it has no problem moving from treetop to treetop in the heavily overcrowded forest. When a running crown fire begins there's nothing that can be done except for getting out of the way and snapping a few pictures. Areas that have been managed properly help keep fire on the ground and out of the treetops. Fire can be caught on the ground, but I have yet to hear of one that is stopped while being wind driven through the highest branches of an overgrown, mismanaged forest. Math Brainteaser # 2 Five people correctly solved the first problem posed. Students Shoni Dykstra, Mark Mus, Doug Carroll, and Jason Catron and physical plant electrician Tom Nichols all found the largest sum to be 981. This sum can be several ways using the digits 1,2,3,...»9 once and only once. Two possible solutions are 746 + 235 = 981 and 657+324 = 981. Other pieces of information which might help you solve this include: Solutions can be found by interchanging thenumbers in the hundred's positions of the addends such as 246 + 735 = 981. Similar interchanges can be made with the digits of the addends in the ten's position or the digits in the one's position and still have a sum of 981. Congratulations to the solvers! Here is the next problem. Again, a knowl edge of arithmetic and some clever reasoning are needed to solve this one. Daenzer and Thompson were walking along a road when they saw three people coming toward them. Thompson said, \Here is a little puzzle for you, Daenzer. The prod uct of the ages of those three people is 2450 and the sum is twice your age. What are their ages?\ Daenzer thought for a few moments and then said, \I cannot answer your question. You did not give me enough information.\ Thompson thought for a moment and then said, \Oh yes, I see now. Well, here is one further problem: I am older than any of those people.\ What is Daenzer's age? ***Submit your solutions to a math depart ment professor before October 26th!!
