![]() Oregon’s ongoing push to map wildfire vulnerability follows a breakout of blazes that struck the state around Labor Day three years ago.Īfterward, state lawmakers passed a sweeping wildfire omnibus in 2021 to harden building codes, mandate so-called defensible space around structures and direct millions of dollars toward landscape work - efforts all based on mapping which areas are the most vulnerable. “It sort of defeats the purpose.” A tight deadline “Otherwise, we’re just playing games, and you don’t need a scientist to draw a political map - just let the politicians sit down and draw what they want,” Dunn added. “We do have this juncture going forward where we could sit down with all the cities and whoever, and let everyone turn the dials and create more of a political map,” Dunn said.īut officials who lobby to change the map’s parameters ought to offer objective justifications, he said. And there’s a limit to how far officials can bend the lines between hazard thresholds without undermining the whole map. Nevertheless, the inputs to the wildfire map can only change so much, he said. State law will require eight public meetings for the next round of mapmaking, though Dunn said “we need a lot more.” “We’re not trying to do this in a vacuum,” said Christopher Dunn, a researcher at Oregon State University who led the mapping team. The chief researcher behind Oregon’s wildfire map said public feedback has already helped improve how they model fire behavior across some of the state’s eastern pasturelands. There is no scientific standard, for instance, on where exactly to set the threshold between low and moderate wildfire hazard, or between moderate and high. And not every aspect of a hazard map is purely empirical. On-the-ground experience helps refine data and computer modeling. ![]() Scientists say the public can make important contributions to hazard-mapping tools - up to a point. “We’ve got folks that have watched tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of acres burn … that if we had a stronger policy about managing state-owned lands, we might not be in that same spot.” “The true rural and frontier areas of our state have heard a lot of lip service over the years, and then don’t see anything actually happen at a level that they can trust,” Pope said. But people resent the state’s tightening restrictions on them when many see the greatest risk as coming from the government’s own poorly managed lands. Rural communities want to manage fire risk, he said. ![]() “This is about trust as much as anything else,” said Polk County Commissioner Craig Pope, an Oregon Republican who strongly criticized the first wildfire mapping attempt. And across the West, rural communities worry that wildland building regulations could smother small towns that are already struggling to stay afloat. Landslide maps throughout the country have been met with disbelief and been shelved. As climate change fuels stronger fires and floods, policymakers across the country are discovering that adaptation - historically a rare oasis of bipartisanship - has the potential to elicit powerful blowback.įlood map updates have triggered political brawls from New Orleans to New Jersey. “We’re taking a second go at this, with the understanding that the first go was a communications disaster, if we’re being honest,” Marsh said. Yet elected officials say the new process is critical to rebuild trust and win over the rural communities that ultimately will be responsible for implementing these wildfire policies. And supporters concede that public outrage might be inevitable because any map that accurately portrays wildfire vulnerability will designate broad swaths of the state as hazardous. Some experts worry that subjecting a scientific tool to political influence could jeopardize the map’s integrity. Supporters hope a more transparent process will blunt further backlash. The first iteration was assembled by scientists and hazard analysts with most public input sought only after a draft was published - and after the state had begun notifying the most hazardous properties on the map to prepare for new regulations This time, Oregon residents and local politicians will have a greater hand in shaping the state’s wildfire map. But the strategy for handling the public is much different. Oregon’s new plan for dealing with wildfires is mostly the same as the old plan. “People are frightened of what all of this means … for their property, for their livelihood, for their long-term ability to stay and work and own land in these highly threatened landscapes.” Pam Marsh, a Democrat from southern Oregon. How well the second attempt goes could serve as a model - or a warning - for other states trying to get a handle on the real-life consequences of living on a warming planet.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |