Controlled burning on the Lower Buffalo
Controlled burning on the Lower Buffalo
Starting in about an hour the NPS and AFC will begin burning between 11,000 and 14,000 acres from just downstream of Rush to the confluence of the White. If you're planning a trip in the next few days you may call ahead to make sure the river isn't closed.
-
- ...
- Posts: 309
- Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:10 pm
- Location: Arcadia, Louisiana
Re: Controlled burning on the Lower Buffalo
http://www.nps.gov/buff/parknews/prescr ... erness.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- Canoe_Codger
- ....
- Posts: 402
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:17 pm
- Name: Michael
- Location: Snake River, Idaho
Re: Controlled burning on the Lower Buffalo
Butch Crain wrote:http://www.nps.gov/buff/parknews/prescr ... erness.htm
Thanks!The river corridor will not close at any time. Canoes and john boats will continue to have river access while camping will be allowed on gravel bars.
Re: Controlled burning on the Lower Buffalo
You guys beat me to it!! Just talked to one of the fireground supervisors and he told me that info. That's some good news.
- Canoe_Codger
- ....
- Posts: 402
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:17 pm
- Name: Michael
- Location: Snake River, Idaho
Re: Controlled burning on the Lower Buffalo
It would still be a good idea to check with the powers that be if one plans to float that section. If the burn is in progress in a section adjacent to the river and the wind is right (wrong?), the river valley could conceivably funnel a lot of smoke down the river. Cough, cough.
Re: Controlled burning on the Lower Buffalo
I thought that was the Lower Buffalo Wilderness Area?
kru
kru
I say, and I intend it emphatically, let the river be.
Thomas Hart Benton, on the Buffalo River
Thomas Hart Benton, on the Buffalo River
- Canoe_Codger
- ....
- Posts: 402
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:17 pm
- Name: Michael
- Location: Snake River, Idaho
Re: Controlled burning on the Lower Buffalo
Indeed! Look at a topo of Cow Creek South of Granite Mountain/Prince Fred Knob. A West/East valley, one of several on the Lower Wilderness area.kru1 wrote:I thought that was the Lower Buffalo Wilderness Area?
kru
http://www.topoquest.com/map.php?lat=36 ... out&size=m" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: Controlled burning on the Lower Buffalo
I could be mistaken(and probably am!!) but the Wilderness area lies on the Baxter County side and extends from the mouth upstream to Big Creek. And you sir are correct about smoke. If you have and respiratory ailments you may want to call and see if any active burning is going on. I just came back from the area and the smoke load is massive.
- Canoe_Codger
- ....
- Posts: 402
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:17 pm
- Name: Michael
- Location: Snake River, Idaho
Re: Controlled burning on the Lower Buffalo
Lung problems? That's me. I've even had to give up my beloved campfires and use a clean burning twig stove.
ETA: I believe you are thinking of the Leatherwood Wilderness Area to the East of the Buff?
The 11,284 acre Lower Buffalo Wilderness Prescribed Fire unit is located in southeast Marion County approximately 7 miles southeast of Flippin.
ETA: I believe you are thinking of the Leatherwood Wilderness Area to the East of the Buff?
Re: Controlled burning on the Lower Buffalo
They can't pay someone to empty a trash can but they can afford to pay professionals to burn a wilderness?
[Within wilderness areas, the Wilderness Act strives to restrain human influences so that ecosystems [the Wilderness Act, however, makes no specific mention of ecosystems] can change over time in their own way, free, as much as possible, from human manipulation. In these areas, as the Wilderness Act puts it, “the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man”—untrammeled meaning the forces of nature operate unrestrained and unaltered.]
I guess that I misinterpret that.
kru
[Within wilderness areas, the Wilderness Act strives to restrain human influences so that ecosystems [the Wilderness Act, however, makes no specific mention of ecosystems] can change over time in their own way, free, as much as possible, from human manipulation. In these areas, as the Wilderness Act puts it, “the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man”—untrammeled meaning the forces of nature operate unrestrained and unaltered.]
I guess that I misinterpret that.
kru
I say, and I intend it emphatically, let the river be.
Thomas Hart Benton, on the Buffalo River
Thomas Hart Benton, on the Buffalo River
-
- ...
- Posts: 309
- Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:10 pm
- Location: Arcadia, Louisiana
Re: Controlled burning on the Lower Buffalo
hate to entertain an old argument, but it does say free from human manipulation as much as possible
wildfire is not discretionary, when it hits it's usually catastrophic - reducing that risk is only one of the benefits of prescribed fire
kudos for referring to firefighters as "professionals" though
wildfire is not discretionary, when it hits it's usually catastrophic - reducing that risk is only one of the benefits of prescribed fire
kudos for referring to firefighters as "professionals" though
- Canoe_Codger
- ....
- Posts: 402
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:17 pm
- Name: Michael
- Location: Snake River, Idaho
Re: Controlled burning on the Lower Buffalo
If only management of wilderness areas were so simple. But it is not. Many things have to be weighed and a balance achieved, as can be seen by reviewing the BNR Wilderness & Backcountry Plan.
http://wilderness.nps.gov/document/buffalo.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I don't like to see our National Parks System being used as a political tool by politicians, and most definately not the BNR. But this controlled burn is a part of an ongoing management plan intended to keep the area ecosystem healthy. Imagine the destruction if fire swept through the area during a drought like we had this past summer/fall? The place might wind up looking like Mars with tons of silt washing into the Buffalo with every subsequent rain. And instead of a few months, it might take many years to recover. Heck, it hasn't totally recovered yet from the days when the cedar trees were made into pencils!
http://wilderness.nps.gov/document/buffalo.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I don't like to see our National Parks System being used as a political tool by politicians, and most definately not the BNR. But this controlled burn is a part of an ongoing management plan intended to keep the area ecosystem healthy. Imagine the destruction if fire swept through the area during a drought like we had this past summer/fall? The place might wind up looking like Mars with tons of silt washing into the Buffalo with every subsequent rain. And instead of a few months, it might take many years to recover. Heck, it hasn't totally recovered yet from the days when the cedar trees were made into pencils!
Re: Controlled burning on the Lower Buffalo
Those are Wiki's words, not Bob Marshall's or Congress. I was just lazy and didn't track down the Wilderness Act of 1964.
I just don't like it. They are burning biomass and understory. There is nothing natural about that. If I wanted to see what a managed forest looked like I would visit a National Forest.
kru
I just don't like it. They are burning biomass and understory. There is nothing natural about that. If I wanted to see what a managed forest looked like I would visit a National Forest.
kru
I say, and I intend it emphatically, let the river be.
Thomas Hart Benton, on the Buffalo River
Thomas Hart Benton, on the Buffalo River
Re: Controlled burning on the Lower Buffalo
Below is a notice from Ozark Society Conservation Chair, Alice Andrews:
Please help stop the burning of the Lower Buffalo Wilderness.
The Ozark Society position is opposition to the use of prescribed fire in Wilderness. A few reasons:
1. Burning federally designated wilderness is a violation of the intent of the Wilderness Act which states that wilderness is to be “untrammeled” by man, a wild place to enjoy visiting and left using the “leave no trace” ethic.
2. Burning is costly, especially in the current economic climate when most federal agencies are experiencing budget cuts.
3. The National Park Service purpose in burning is to “restore and maintain glades in the LBW” and to reduce woody fuel loads on the ground. The LBW has been burned several times; there is relatively little fuel load.
4. We believe that lightening fires should be allowed to burn, a natural process. The exception would be if people or homes were threatened. There are very few homes near the LBW.
5. Some naturalists believe that ground dwelling species, especially turtles and some amphibians, are lost to fire; also den trees for bear and foxes are lost.
Sign petition: We will share this petition with the Park Service on March 12th when we meet with them. Visit the following online campaign, by Kirk Wasson on iPetitions: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/stop ... o%2BFriend" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Click the above link to sign the petition.
Next - Make contact: 1.) Call Buffalo National River Administration. Ask Superintendent Cheri to stop the burning of the Lower Buffalo Wilderness. Add any information you wish. 870-741-5443; 2.) Call Senator John Boozman with same message. 202-224-4843 or Arkansas office 501-372-7153; and 3) Call Senator Mark Pryor, same message. Toll free: 877-259-9602 or 202-224-2353 or Arkansas office 501-324-6336. You can also email them. Simply Google Senator Boozman and Senator Pryor, click on the contact choice that displays. Each of their websites has an option to email them.
Please help stop the burning of the Lower Buffalo Wilderness.
The Ozark Society position is opposition to the use of prescribed fire in Wilderness. A few reasons:
1. Burning federally designated wilderness is a violation of the intent of the Wilderness Act which states that wilderness is to be “untrammeled” by man, a wild place to enjoy visiting and left using the “leave no trace” ethic.
2. Burning is costly, especially in the current economic climate when most federal agencies are experiencing budget cuts.
3. The National Park Service purpose in burning is to “restore and maintain glades in the LBW” and to reduce woody fuel loads on the ground. The LBW has been burned several times; there is relatively little fuel load.
4. We believe that lightening fires should be allowed to burn, a natural process. The exception would be if people or homes were threatened. There are very few homes near the LBW.
5. Some naturalists believe that ground dwelling species, especially turtles and some amphibians, are lost to fire; also den trees for bear and foxes are lost.
Sign petition: We will share this petition with the Park Service on March 12th when we meet with them. Visit the following online campaign, by Kirk Wasson on iPetitions: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/stop ... o%2BFriend" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Click the above link to sign the petition.
Next - Make contact: 1.) Call Buffalo National River Administration. Ask Superintendent Cheri to stop the burning of the Lower Buffalo Wilderness. Add any information you wish. 870-741-5443; 2.) Call Senator John Boozman with same message. 202-224-4843 or Arkansas office 501-372-7153; and 3) Call Senator Mark Pryor, same message. Toll free: 877-259-9602 or 202-224-2353 or Arkansas office 501-324-6336. You can also email them. Simply Google Senator Boozman and Senator Pryor, click on the contact choice that displays. Each of their websites has an option to email them.
"The challenge goes on. There are other lands and rivers, other wilderness areas, to save and to share with all. I challenge you to step forward to protect and care for the wild places you love best"
- Neil Compton
- Neil Compton
-
- ...
- Posts: 309
- Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:10 pm
- Location: Arcadia, Louisiana
Re: Controlled burning on the Lower Buffalo
see "Are Rednecks the Unsung Heroes of Ecosystem Management" at:
http://www.afrc.uamont.edu/whited/Putz%202003.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
and "Are Grandchildren the Unsung Heroes of Grandparental Time Management" at:
ah well, somebody could write that one
http://www.afrc.uamont.edu/whited/Putz%202003.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
and "Are Grandchildren the Unsung Heroes of Grandparental Time Management" at:
ah well, somebody could write that one
Social Media
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests