Bush needs to rebuild Tahoe

I remember when Lake Shasta was waaaaaay down in the early/mid 70's...to say that the bottom was littered with those pull-tabs from beer cans of the day would be a gross understatement.

 

I actually remember the pull tabs at Tahoe more than the beer cans -- but I didn't think anyone would remember what I was talking about.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Jun 28 2007, 08:07 AM) [snapback]469013[/snapback]</div>

So back to this topic -- some of the most beautiful places to live seem to be "dynamic" or disaster-prone. So what you do is adapt how you live and build in those places, or just visit.

I do wonder though, do people in trailer parks pay higher insurance premiums? They always seem to be tornado magnets...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Jun 27 2007, 04:21 PM) [snapback]469095[/snapback]</div>

Um, WHAT???? :huh:
The two have nothing in common, except that they BOTH cloud the lake.

Sure, ash falling on any lake is a natural occurrence, so is particulates in runoff.
But then . . . so is humans eating food . . . but if they too eat too much, they ALSO get sick and die.

Did you NOT read the last third of the link Sac Bee article?
The fire has already struck its first, harsh blow at Lake Tahoe, carried on the ash drifting onto the lake's waters, said UC Davis' Reuter. The ash contains tiny particles that can remain suspended in the water, lowering visibility.

The fire's fallout also carries nitrogen and phosphorous, the same chemicals used in fertilizer.

"Those same nutrients make microscopic algae in the lake grow," another key contributor to declining clarity, said Reuter.

The second blow to Lake Tahoe will hammer away slowly, over time, depending partly on how the full winter snow season and spring snowmelt unfold.

The underlying culprits will be similar -- minute specks of soil and ash washed into the lake, some remaining suspended and others fostering algal growth.

Those same troublesome factors -- particles, nitrogen and phosphorous -- have been clouding Tahoe for decades . . .

Did you not see the toilet bowl ring of black ash on the shore in the picture?
http://www.sacbee.com/994/story/243749.html

 

Interesting live camera view of the fire area brought to you by Caltrans.
http://video.dot.ca.gov/
Just click on the "50 at Myers" link.
Since the highway is closed, Caltrans panned the camera west toward the fire.
(of course at night you may not see much . . . unless the fire flairs up.)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MarinJohn @ Jun 27 2007, 03:45 PM) [snapback]468994[/snapback]</div>

<sigh> Ann Colter, she could whip me, beat me & make me write bad checks what a hottie..

 

The Tahoe Regional Planning Agency and USDA-Forest Service have a good handle on management of the Tahoe Basin. There are poor controls on nitrogen inputs to the Lake from vehicle exhaust.

Fire is an integral and necessary part of healthy Sierra Nevada ecosystems. Fire suppression over the last 100 years has allowed wood debris on the forest floor and shade-tolerant trees to accumulate fuel to catastrophic potential levels. Proactive and rigorous prescribed fire is needed everywhere in the Sierra Nevada, more so at lower elevations.

South Lake Tahoe is a poor example of mountain development. Many residences were constructed in the 1940-1960s, often with wood siding and wood shake roofs. The Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project (SNEP) clearly identified fire potentials at all elevations. As elsewhere in western North America, urban impact conflicts with wildland ecosystems. Too often residents are in denial and can only see things from a "Bambi" perspective.

The Angora fire is not a disaster, it is an expected recycling of nutrients. You can burn now, or you can burn later, but you are going to burn. The South Lake Tahoe fire is no different than flooding in Texas or the Mississippi River Valley - you must live and build appropriate to the constraints of the topography and ecosystem.

With observed climate change (higher atmospheric freezing levels, more precipitation in the form of rain and less in the form of snow), increasing human pressure and over 100 years of fire suppression, there will be more wildland fires in western North America - every year.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(skruse @ Jun 28 2007, 12:04 PM) [snapback]469483[/snapback]</div>

You mean Bush's Healthy Forest Initiative, which promotes cutting down mature trees, isn't going to do much to protect our homes and more effectively manage these naturally occurring, beneficial fires?!?!?! Gasp!