HikeArizona.COM

SR 69 closed both ways from SR 169 to I-17 due to Goodwin Fire (smoke).

Note: Editorial comments, conjecture and supposition WELCOME in this thread.

ljcygnet wrote:Listening to the police scanner for the area -- some absolute moron is flying a drone over the fire right now.

You've GOT to be kidding me. They've got air support grounded.

http://http://www.broadcastify.com/list ... /15199/web

No exaggeration--this is at least the 10th time I've heard that just for Arizona fires this year.

So. Many. Idiots. So many.

They need to catch a few of these idiots and make an example of them. And take a 12-gauge to the drone.

The Valley is pretty smokey right now. Must be smoke coming from some other region or fire. Maybe Buckeye?

ljcygnet wrote:some absolute moron is flying a drone over the fire right now.

"If I had a rocket launcher..."

Sredfield wrote:They need to catch a few of these idiots and make an example of them. And take a 12-gauge to the drone.

Or..... https://youtu.be/X27-2WDIZR0?t=248

Do they have a trained eagle?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAYVyj6vf3Y

good map from the daily courier:

https://www.dcourier.com/documents/2017 ... 062917-am/

There is a fire along Highway 87 at the same location as one 4 days ago--Mesquite Wash. Quite the coincidence I'd say, if I were cynical or anything.

My feeling is smokers driving cars that no longer have ashtrays so they toss them out.

SR 69 is now open.

ljcygnet wrote:Listening to the police scanner for the area -- some absolute moron is flying a drone over the fire right now.

Score one for the good guys!: http://www.abc15.com/news/region-northe ... with-drone

Anyone know of the Grapevine creek area? Did the fire burn through that area? One of my favorite hikes

@kelly14
Grapevine Creek definitely falls within the perimeter of the fire. That doesn't necessarily mean the riparian area is scorched, though. Fire hops around and parts of the canyon could be spared (hopefully).

[img][/img]

Did you all notice that the recent fire along Highway 87 north of Mesquite Wash burned the saguaros? Saguaros don't tolerate fire, so one can deduce that this area has not burned in many many years. Many of them are quite tall with 2 and 3 limbs, so easy to say at least 100 years. The landscape is changing.

There was a fire through there, maybe 15/20 years ago. It burned fast though, so the saguaros made it. This last one had more fuel from our winter rains. I don't think there is an area along 87 that hasn't burned in my lifetime.

Pix of the Goodwin carnage...
https://hikearizona.com/photoset.php?ID=46324

Peter_Medal wrote:Pix of the Goodwin carnage...
https://hikearizona.com/photoset.php?ID=46324

Terms like "carnage" and "gone" are kind of misleading. Manzanita, scrub oak, and a bunch of other chaparral species have evolved to burn. They're highly flammable and resprout quickly after a fire. It looks like there's already some regrowth happening in your photos (though I couldn't make out what was growing). Anyway, as a general rule at least, fire in chaparral is both unavoidable and not necessarily a bad thing for the plant communities. Obviously, the total net harm or benefit of a fire depends on a lot of factors, but in a chaparral landscape, the dead plants (above ground) are not necessarily an indication of a problem. A lot of that stuff will be growing back soon.

The first couple of pages here have some relevant information: https://extension.arizona.edu/sites/ext ... az1516.pdf

flagscott wrote:Terms like "carnage" and "gone" are kind of misleading.

They may be misleading to somebody sitting at a desk reading scientific studies on a computer screen.

But for the guy who actually went outdoors and hiked through it, then had the courtesy to share his experience by writing a detailed triplog and posting numerous photos for all to see, I fail to see anything that doesn't match those adjectives.

I appreciate your optimism for the future. Sprouts of oak and holly are encouraging. I think we all look forward to seeing nature's resiliance in this burned area. But the post isn't about what the area will look like next summer. It's about right now. It's difficult to say that the current state of the area doesn't look like "carnage".

chumley wrote:

flagscott wrote:Terms like "carnage" and "gone" are kind of misleading.

They may be misleading to somebody sitting at a desk reading scientific studies on a computer screen.

But for the guy who actually went outdoors and hiked through it, then had the courtesy to share his experience by writing a detailed triplog and posting numerous photos for all to see, I fail to see anything that doesn't match those adjectives.

I appreciate your optimism for the future. Sprouts of oak and holly are encouraging. I think we all look forward to seeing nature's resiliance in this burned area. But the post isn't about what the area will look like next summer. It's about right now. It's difficult to say that the current state of the area doesn't look like "carnage".

I used misleading because if you are not educated on fire science, then it really seems like the area was destroyed. But ecology tells us that the area should come back fairly quickly, and within a few or several years, there will be plenty of shrubs again, and the grasses and flowers should follow quickly as long as the soils hold.

Personally, I think that one of the biggest problems that humanity faces today is our inability to think long-term (and by long-term I mean like 10 or 50 years, not thousands). In the long-term view, fires in chaparral are pretty insignificant because the vegetation will return. Like I said above, these plants have evolved to burn. Their leaves are full of flammable chemicals. Their roots resprout quickly after fire. For the shrubs like manzanita and scrub oak, fire is an adaptation to take out trees that will eventually shade them out and kill them or prevent them from thriving.

I don't see how taking the long-term view is bad. In fact, there's a good argument to be made that short-term thinking is the cause of a lot of our biggest problems. If people thought more long term, maybe we'd be doing something about climate change. Or thinking about how land use policies might affect the landscapes our children or grandchildren will hike through. Or--relevant to our discussion here--enacting fire policies that encourage regular burns in fire-adapted areas to prevent giant conflagrations. A lot of people on this site get upset every time a fire is allowed to burn in an area they like to hike in. I get it--watching somewhere you've enjoyed being outside burn is painful. But allowing that type of short-term thinking to guide our fire policies is counterproductive because if we suppress fires, we will eventually get even bigger, hotter fires. That's all I'm trying to say here.
.