Concernsโข Mount Over Proposed California Wildfire Regulations
Proposed regulations aimed at โreducing wildfire riskโข in California are facing โฃgrowing โฃopposition, โparticularly in Southern California, with critics arguingโค they are overly broad and potentially counterproductive. โThe rules, developed byโ theโฃ California Department of Forestryโ and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), focus on vegetation โฃmanagement around homes inโข high-risk areas, butโ experts and residents alikeโ are raising concerns about theirโ potential impact.
A report by the University of California, Riverside’s Center for โฃPreservation Research (as reported on Sept. 4) suggests that removing irrigated, healthy vegetation could exacerbateโฃ problems by eliminating shade, increasing erosion risk,โฃ and destroyingโฃ crucial wildlife habitat. Theโฃ report advocates for a more โnuanced approach, moving away from a โค”one-size-fits-all” policy and incorporating an appeals process.It specifically recommends exemptions forโข “healthy, โขhydratedโฃ and โwell maintained โฃvegetationโฆ not likely to be ignited by embers,” alongside protections for native trees and โshrubs, historicallyโ significant trees, โand well-maintained municipal street trees.
according to Michael Hubach,โ a representative โfamiliar withโ the regulations, public awareness โขis low.”Most people don’t noโข this is coming their way, and when they find โout about [the proposed rules] theyโ don’tโค think it will makeโ them safer. They think it will โmake their neighborhoods hotter, dryer, uglier and less โsafe.”
Environmental โscientist Travis โLongcore, former president of the Losโ Angeles Audubon Society, recently โpresented a detailedโ analysisโฃ of theโ proposedโ regulations online. While agreeing with some aspects, such as removing flammable materialsโฃ like woodโฃ fencesโ attached to โขbuildings and debris from roofs, longcore echoed theโ call forโ allowing healthy vegetation toโ remain. He emphasized the distinction between plants proneโ to accumulating dead wood, like junipersโฃ and โฃcypress, and those less likely toโข ignite.
Enforcement of the regulations is alsoโ a point of contention.Both Longcore andโฃ former State Fire Marshal โฃRuben Grijalvaโค expressed โconcerns about the capacity of existing inspectors. โขGrijalva further criticized the “one-size-fits-all” approach, arguingโค it fails to โคaccount for building code updates. He pointed out that homes โbuilt after 2008 areโ already subject to stricter fire-resistant construction standards, including โignition-resistant materials โคand โember-resistant vents, implemented throughโ Chapter 7A of the California Buildingโค Code. โข
Grijalva now works with developers to create fire-resistant communities, like Rancho Mission Viejo,โ while still prioritizing the benefits of trees like oaks and sycamores for cooling and aesthetics.
Residents will have opportunities to voice their concerns atโ upcoming meetings. An informational town hall โis scheduled โขfor Sept. 17 โขfrom โ5:30 to 7:30 p.m. at the Venturaโค County Fireโข Headquarters in โNewburyโ Park; RSVPโค is requested through Ventura County Supervisor Jeff Gorell. โฃThe Board of forestry and Fire Protectionโค will hold a public โฃmeeting on Sept. 18,โค though in-person attendance mayโข be prioritized due to anticipated high turnout.
The committeeโฃ plansโ to โฃdiscuss theโข feedback received on sept.18 at its regular meeting in sacramento on Sept.โ 22, at which โpoint it will decide whether toโค revise the proposed โrules or โคforward them to the full boardโ for consideration.