Would you support the use of drones to locate small fires before they turn into huge wildfires?

[NNN0LHI]

Seems like the perfect use for them.

Might even catch a few arsonists in the process too.

Don

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. 'nother use, after a quake

or during a chemical spill, where I need to scout large patches of ground fast... oh I would have given a lot for one of them during a few situations.

[Kalidurga]

2. why not

unless there is a let it burn policy. Someone explained that to me once, I still didn't get it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. Some areas are experimenting with letting the forests

follow the normal burn cycles. Brooks and creeks that had gone dry from overgrowth are back.

[Kalidurga]

6. How do they know

when it is a normal burn cycle or arson?

[joshcryer]

8. Generally lightning strikes.

We have a good idea of when and where lightning strikes these days, so if there's a fire associated with strikes, it is sometimes allowed.

Note: this policy isn't really being followed with the latest burn seasons because when they've been happening it's during high fire danger, very hot days, and lots of wind. I'm pretty sure they're not doing that then, it would be suicidal.

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. They don't, but one reason for the much hotter fires

is that we have had a no burn policy for close to 100 years. So the Forest Service started experimentally to let fires burn in isolated areas, instead of the policy of get if off by ten in the morning.

By the way, in isolated areas lightning gets those fires going very often, as in extremely often. It is part of the cycle.

In San Diego we know manzanita needs a hot fire for it's seeds to sprout.

[joshcryer]

12. Yeah, because of this well intentioned but ill considered approach...

...the only way to have a let it burn policy is after we've cleared a massive amount of undergrowth. Until we do that we're kind of stuck now putting them out and dealing with massive, incredible wildfires. And of course the Forest Service wants funding for undergrowth clearing but it never gets it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. It's like NASA, for god sakes

they wanted to stop funding the Smokey the Bear program (which in the light of some of the emerging science might not be that bad of an idea)... because it was TOO EXPENSIVE.

If I had my way, I'd fund them at 120% of what they ask, would be a worthy employment program too.

[joshcryer]

19. Yep, a lot of hand labor.

You might have some 4 wheelers with trailers but you can't take anything much bigger into the deep forest. It would employ tens of thousands of people and take years, but it's a worthy goal. Then implement let it burn, long term the forest is healthier for it, and the cost savings from not having to put out these massive wildfires is apparent.

[joshcryer]

7. Forest Service put out a lot of fires after it was instated.

This resulted in artificial undergrowth. Total fire suppression sounded like a good idea but it has resulted in weaker forests because now wildfires have massive undergrowth to consume which otherwise would've burned up if the Forest Service wasn't putting out each and every fire.

The Forest Service really just needs more money to clear out undergrowth and deadwood that would naturally be burned up in medium to small fires without adversely affecting entire forests but they don't have the resources to do it and can only do so selectively around where homes are.

[cilla4progress]

4. Of course!

It's never the thing itself..it's how it's used!

[MannyGoldstein]

5. Of course. Unless

it's armed to execute anyone on the unitary executive's secret kill list, in case they're spotted.

[joshcryer]

10. Only if it's run by civilians.

And only if those civilians are not directly within the government appratus. ie, scientists getting a grant would be OK, but a "Directorate of Drone Surveillance for Fires," I wouldn't trust.

[NNN0LHI]

13. You would want it privatized?

What could possibly go wrong?

Don

[joshcryer]

14. No, acedemia / grants.

[ErikJ]

11. FIRE is an ESSENTIAL NATURAL PART OF THE ECOSYSTEM!!100% suppression leads to catastrophic fires!

and dangerous insect infestation. The greatest danger to forests is NOT fire -it is man fooling with nature!

[NewMoonTherian]

26. Well, strictly speaking, 100% suppression would lead to no fires.

The trouble is we'll never achieve 100% suppression, and trying to do so will lead to catastrophic fires.

Sorry. I know what you meant. I just had to be a smartass real quick. Carry on

[Downtown Hound]

16. Sure.

As long as no weapons were installed and they could NEVER be used for law enforcement surveillance.

[XemaSab]

17. I'd rather have traditional lookouts

instead of militarizing the forests with black helicopters, drones, and SWAT teams.

[nadinbrzezinski]

23. That's already happened

War on drugs...

[XemaSab]

24. My point exactly

[Warpy]

18. Only when the technology is perfected

to the point the drones won't crash and start fires, themselves.

[Arctic Dave]

20. I support Demotex.

Far more reliable and much better conversationalist.

[JDPriestly]

21. Only if they can be launched without crossing or viewing anyone's private property.

It's bad enough to have helicopters overhead so much of the time here in LA. Please don't add drones too. The noise of the helicopters is wearing. I can only imagine what drones are like.

[Speck Tater]

22. More important: would you support helicopter drones to delivery pizza to your front door?

Imagine; no cold pizza due to traffic jams. The drone would get it to you hot and steaming.

[Yo_Mama]

25. What if they crash and cause a wildfire?

If you have them roaming around high up, I can imagine that they would be a danger to passenger and freight planes.

I don't think these things are perfect, and I suspect it might cause more havoc than it would alleviate. Satellites can detect astonishing levels of detail now.

[lostnote12]

27. It appears to be a positive idea however the undergrowth remains the incendiary source it is..

......I tend to believe that Dov Zackheims UAV manufacturing interests have been rewarded conspicuously enough already.....