Stop this nonsense of rewilding. A month of dry weather and rewilded land becomes a tinder box.

Posted By: fostertomBang goes 300million years of forested pre-history then.

Posted By: djhWildfires are a natural phenomenon, some plants need them to germinate.

The giant sequoia being a very good example where forest rangers in the Sierra Nevada will deliberately light controlled fires on the forest floor.

AIUI, the building regs/stds are about protecting life, not protecting property.

So they have rules to contain and delay and detect internal fires to give the occupants time to evacuate or be rescued. On the face of it, that worked in the recent fires, though we don't know any details yet.

The question in the OP was about limiting damage to property. That's a reasonable question, but goes to the heart of what the building regs are actually for, and their burden:benefit.

<blockquote><cite>Posted By: fostertom</cite>Bang goes 300million years of forested pre-history then.</blockquote>

Not really the modern take on rewilding excludes the herbivores which then allows the understorey to grow completely out of control giving a far higher fuel load so if the forest burns it cannot survive due to the heat intensity being far greater for far longer. Allow the herbivores in and the fuel load is reduced allowing the trees to survive and regrow.

<blockquote><cite>Posted By: djh</cite>There were several notable fires around the country yesterday. Thankfully with no loss of life, which makes for quite a contrast between Wennington and Grenfell. Over 40 houses destroyed there, some of them pretty much completely.

Apart from the very obvious observation that timber floors and roof structures burn well, is there anything that could have been done, or that we might consider doing, to reduce or eliminate damage from fires like this? Would sprinklers have made any difference, for example? I know some places such as Australia have rules for building in the bush but would any of those rules transfer and be useful?</blockquote>

Metal sprinkler systems along ridge lines into steel gutters and steel spouting linked to the rain water capture tanks or pool. 3 mtr tiled decking all around the house instead of wood decking. Fly screen like on American houses but made of metal to protect from floating embers. Garden plants fire resistant ie high water content.

Apart from that not a lot really.

<blockquote><cite>Posted By: djh</cite><blockquote><cite>Posted By: renewablejohn</cite>Stop this nonsense of rewilding. A month of dry weather and rewilded land becomes a tinder box.</blockquote>Unlike the field of wheat next to us then? Or the rapeseed on the other side?

Wildfires are a natural phenomenon, some plants need them to germinate.</blockquote>

But the field of wheat or OSR will only be tinder dry for a couple of weeks before it is harvested and the risk disappears. The rewilded land has the tinder dry dead grass load throughout the year so just a week of no rain any time of year will make it a potential fire hazard. You cannot burn wheat or OSR while its still green and growing.

Which books have you been reading about rewilding, rj? I don't recognise your gist, quite the opposite. But on the one hand the arrival and uptake of the rewilding idea has put the whole ecology profession into a spin of controversy, not to mention threat to skilled jobs, funded projects, and prestige, and on the other hand the rewilding mainline is being revised all the time, as things don't work and experience points in surprising new directions. So maybe you're quoting something I haven't heard about.

<blockquote><cite>Posted By: fostertom</cite>Which books have you been reading about rewilding, rj? I don't recognise your gist, quite the opposite. But on the one hand the arrival and uptake of the rewilding idea has put the whole ecology profession into a spin of controversy, not to mention threat to skilled jobs, funded projects, and prestige, and on the other hand the rewilding mainline is being revised all the time, as things don't work and experience points in surprising new directions. So maybe you're quoting something I haven't heard about.</blockquote>

Dont be looking at text books its the real world we live in that you need to be concerned about and the fine examples of rewilding as outlined by the likes of the woodland trust and RSPB who are totally useless at land management. When it comes to fires the woodland trust and RSPB have got it down to a fine art. Create a "rewilded" area and do no fire prevention maintenance. Let any fire devastate a massive area which the fire brigade spend days trying to control. Then plead poverty and ask the public for money to plant more trees to replace the ones they have allowed to be burnt by mismanagement. Then get the public to plant the trees free of charge as their to daft to realise that there being used as slave labour and your good to go for another 5 years when you can repeat the process all over again. Dont worry about the frequency that the same areas of land catch fire as it is easy to blame it on climate change and global warming rather then the true facts of poor land management.

rj, what way do you get your view/experience/information, as above, of 'the real world' of rewilding? Trying to work out whether to take yours as gd info - or not.

<blockquote><cite>Posted By: fostertom</cite>rj, what way do you get your view/experience/information, as above, of 'the real world' of rewilding? Trying to work out whether to take yours as gd info - or not.</blockquote>

Really not difficult just analyse the major fires for example in the North West typically on the local water authority land who have devolved the management to a rewilding scheme run by either the RSPB or Woodland Trust. You then look at the tv reporting footage showing the fire service trying to put out the fires but faced with totally unmanaged land with fire load built up over the previous 5 years. In the past this would have been removed by annual mosaic controlled burning but instead its now easier to say the fires are due to climate warming as it fits the agenda rather than its a bunch of idiots that are clueless on how to manage the landscape and think they can manage it better than the proven techniques developed by their ancestors over centuries.

Posted By: renewablejohna bunch of idiots that are clueless on how to manage the landscape

Oh dear, it appears someone has an agenda

<blockquote><cite>Posted By: fostertom</cite>I take in what you say. But there's something wrong, if wild nature's own way for forests and heaths and animals thereon to thrive over millions of years, now can only survive through perpetual costly management by humans. That can only be because there are agricultural humans in the landscape. Those humans have more to learn, and willingly, about how to minimise that malign influence, which is sanctified and defended within 'traditional wisdom/way of life', while still being agricultural. 'Rewilding' is the movement that wants to learn that and act, and includes a v rapidly growing number of practical farmers and countrymen.</blockquote>

Yes your missing the point your correct in wild natures own way for forests and heaths and grazing ANIMALS. Which is the problem with the rewilding schemes as the grazing animals are beimg kept out of the newly planted woodland areas by human intervention of fencing. ie deer fencing leading to the increased fire load which eventually kills the woodland. The problem has been recognised with an example of Bison being introduced to bulldoze the understorey but its rather a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

Posted By: renewablejohnYou then look at the tv reporting footage showing the fire service trying to put out the fires but faced with totally unmanaged land with fire load built up over the previous 5 years.

What stands out to me in the TV footage is that I dont once recall hearing the fire service complain that an area on fire has been mismanaged, but I do hear them complain regularly about people discarding burning barbeques and throwing burning cigarette butts out of car windows.

Posted By: renewablejohn

Posted By: Jonti

Posted By: renewablejohna bunch of idiots that are clueless on how to manage the landscape

Oh dear, it appears someone has an agendahttp:///newforum/extensions/Vanillacons/smilies/standard/sad.gif" alt="" title="" >" title="http:///newforum/extensions/Vanillacons/smilies/standard/sad.gif" alt="" title="" >">

Yes I have an agenda as I dont want my farm going up in smoke due to these idiots. The last warm summer resulted in uncontrolled fires for days only 5 miles and 20 miles away from me as the crow flies caused by these idiots. Fortunately the wind direction meant the embers carried in the smoke did not come across the farm but if it had my woodland would have been at serious risk due to these idiots. We are only a very small island. Just look at the devastation at the moment in France Spain and Portugal a distance of 5 or 20 miles has spread over there in a matter of hours. After only 2 days of hot weather fires are breaking out all over the country and you think we dont have a problem. Everyone should be concerned with this agenda. Do we have to wait until we have the nightmare scenes of whole towns going up in flames like in california before you act. I am fortunate being in horticulture I have my own reservoir and sprinkler systems to protect myself. Others will not be so fortunate as the devastated houses on the news clearly shows.

Have you thought you might get further if instead of labelling 'everybody' as idiots actual positive and constructive engagement might work better.