The Flames of Nemesis
I've lived in California for thirty years near -- but not in -- the coastal Santa Monica mountains next to Malibu. With regularity the fall fire season comes.
The hot, dry "devil" winds howl in from the deserts into the canyons like the mistral in the south of France or the sirocco in north Africa. By October it usually hasn't rained for at least six months, so the chaparral shrubs that cover the mountains are dessicated, devoid of moisture like hay. The mountains that were green as a golf course in March are now dull gray and brown. Looking up in the sky, you see the Canadian geese migrating south -- and the bright yellow fire-fighting planes flying the other direction because someone has thrown a cigarette into the bushes, a power line has gone down in the wind or an arsonist has fulfilled his fantasy.
This year is no different, only worse. The winds persisted for days, some reaching hurricane force at more than 70 miles per hour. And, no doubt, the climate disarray from global warming has made it worse. Two years ago we had an unusual deluge of rainfall that caused a burst of wildflowers and grasses that, by now dried out by drought, only add more fuel for the flames.
Why, then, would people build houses on these perennially vulnerable hilltops and canyons? Every year as the plumes of smoke reach high into the sky, raining ash and darkening the daytime, we ask this question but never listen to the answer.
That's because a real answer undermines the whole improbable idea of southern California, a contrivance of the petroleum age and vanishing water resources.
John Steinbeck, the Nobel author known for his California stories, put down our native Indians, the Chumash, for being nutgatherers who didn't have the stuff of civilization that, for example, the Maya or Aztec did. But that is because, by necessity, they lived by the wisdom of natural limits. There was simply not enough water, and too many regular fires, to sustain a large population. The Chumash name for what is the LA area today was "the valley of smoke."
There were only a few thousands of them, not a huge civilization like the Maya's, because they lived in the environmental conditions of Mayan demise, after the demise! Even the Spaniards only built a few missions up and down the coast.
Long story short, all this was ignored in the optimistic American century. Water was brought down in huge pharoanic-scale canals from rivers far to the east and from the snow melt up north. Cheap energy from the petroleum age stimulated sprawl reaching into the wilderness as Los Angeles and San Diego became a vast space of flows instead of places, commuters crisscrossing immense arid tracts to get from home to work and shopping and back.
Even as developers pushed the sprawl into the danger zones, Californians famously rejected increased taxes to pay not only for protecting themselves from the flames licking at their folly, but investing in mass transit or water infrastructure.
(I remember the year Arnold Schwarzenegger was first elected governor in the recall. I was speaking to a group of businessmen in Orange County as flames crowned the surrounding mountains from yet another fire. I predicted with confidence that Schwarzenegger would reverse his position on the issue that made him popular -- cutting the car tax -- because those taxes went directly to firefighting. I couldn't have been more wrong. In 2007, more fires, but still no more taxes for the firefighters.)
All this has led some wags to rightly call California a plundered paradise. How many disastrous fires of this sort does it take to get the message through? When will we learn that building homes in fire-prone zones is an American delusion, not a dream.
The fires only signify a larger reality. The southern California region cannot sustain a population of 20 million people, still exploding with the great influx of Mexican peasants migrating northward. There is not enough water for that many people, as we are finding out. And how will we get around these vast spaces as the petroleum age winds down?
To be sure, it is easy to be irrationally apocalyptic when flames line the horizon; it is easy in such a time to imagine that California will one day look like one of those paintings in the museum of goatherders frolicking in the ruins of ancient Rome.
But I fear that is where it is all headed. Already the politicians are vowing to "rebuild" as if this were some terrorist attack like 9/11 instead of a self-inflicted wound. Though politically incorrect, it might be wiser to remind dreaming Californians that hubris invites the flames of nemesis.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Fire-proof homes can be built. They may not look as "pretty" but they would be safe. Don't people there have enough money to do that, along with air filtration systems, so that it wouldn't matter if a fire swept through?
If I had the money, that's what I would do where I live. But, we don't have the fires they do.
This is going on all over. The Midwest got hit with a biblical-scale flood 14 years ago, and it was made far worse than it would have been due to the decades-long practice of draining the swamps and wetlands that would have siphoned off much of the excess rainwater.
This is the kind of thing that I recall was just dismissed with the phrase "well, that's progress" when I was growing up, but Nature will always have the last laugh. And take note: Nature can have a very cruel sense of humor. Unfortunately, I don't think it will stop until enough mega-disasters happen to make our nature-destroying civilization break down altogether. I'm selfish enough to be tempted to hope it happens after I'm dead, but a belief in reincarnation can be a real pain in the butt.
I notice that many commenters are aware that population is a worldwide issue. A Professor from San Diego wrote a book about population problems and if I remember correctly he did mention the dangers of fires in highly populated areas. The firefighters are working very hard to keep the fires away from population centers.
Planet of Slums by Mike Davis
http://www
Damn politicians are grandstanding at the base closest to me right now, where Bush just landed.
Not that San Diegans want him here:
http://www
Californians are not alone in lacking long-range vision. Developers in Florida have built along the ocean communities sure to be ravaged by hurricanes. People are still living along the Mississipi and Ohio Rivers that flood with regularity. I'm not at all convinced the rest of America should be paying for these follies, or for the degrading of the natural American landscape in these areas. And, of course, Mad Prophet is right. Either we start self-limiting population practices, or someone or something else will do it for us.
Population density is not the problem with Southern California. Over-population itself is not the problem either. People have to live somewhere. (And the racist dig at Mexican peasants is quite uncalled for.) The problem is lifestyle. Many more people could live here safely and securely, if we didn't all have to drive large gas-guzzlers everywhere we go. New York City has a far higher population density, and is quite livable.
Population is a global problem. In America it doesn't matter whether you live in California or New York the problem is overpopulation. If there were one third as many people it would make a difference. Without any effort greenhouse gases would be cut by two thirds. You don't need to a rocket scientist to figure out the proplem is too many people everywhere.
They showed an experiment on TV with FOAM vs WATER on a wooden building. Fire charred the water laden section in no time but spared the side that had foam.
It would cost about $12k to equip fire trucks with this foam and of course there isn't enough money to do so.
Bush is visiting CA and I don't know WHY. He went to New Orleans about 8 times and its STILL a mess like it was. He'll come and look at CA then do nothing.
I responded basically the same on another post. I was not as eloquent and our comments are word limited. Just wanna say thank you for saying what desperately needs to be said.
I'm 57, born and raised in LA. I've seen at least 50 years of this crap. It's not fair to those of us who live in sensible places to see our beloved state go up in flames, with wasted resources, and injured firefighters, just so the rich can live on top of or right next to a foothill. I'm so disgusted.
All the wildlife, the flora and fauna, so many resources literally gone with the wind. I can't open my window because my computer and room will be covered with ashes. It's hotter and drier than normally due to the fire raising the temp.
Add to that the GAO report BushCo did nothing. Well, Dems haven't done much either, when they were in power. I'm just glad I'm not the only one calling out the tragic stupid stubbornness of the many who are gonna rebuild. And govt policies enabling/e
Oh yeah, Brownie says fault belongs to environmentalists who won't allow controlled burns. Well, people should not be living in or near FEDERAL forests. Or if they insist on it, they need to trim the natural kindling. They need to pay for all this!
Imagine firefighters risking their lives, climbing mountains with pick-axes, to save some dumb-asses house, who plans on building again. Great, now we all have to look forward to this again. And again. And again.
We have few pristine areas for the original inhabitants, the wild creatures and native plants. Now that's a tragedy.
Exactly why I have always opposed irrigation: it permits an unnaturally high carrying capacity. Ditto for anti-biotics.
Actually AMERICA is a plundered paradise.
The last billionaire out won't need to turn off the lights, he'll need his own flashlight to see the route.
Brilliant post! Having been born on Sunset Blvd. in 1953, I was fortunate to have grown up in SoCal in the '50's and '60's. The area's been going downhill ever since, and I got the hell out and moved to the beautiful Canadian prairies last year. Thanks anfractuous for your comment "Rome, at least, left splendid ruins", I agree 110%!
Columns of this type are a regular part of the cycle of disasters. Conflagration, followed by finger-pointing. Welcome to the history of the world. I find it curious that the author could not resist a dig at "Mexican peasants" flooding the area. As if, if it weren't for their crowding us we might get a handle on this water-shortage thing. Many people move to L.A. every year, and they're not all Mexican peasants.
Excellent post. I'm not ready to move though.
I wouldn't mind if a few million other people did though.
California indigenous people including the Chumash managed the landscape brilliantly. They used fire to suppress excess brush and to allow plants that were valuable to them, and to the wildlife to flourish. These fires were in part the results of two hundred years of European ignorance of proper landscape management. Of course global warming is playing a role and idiotic development in the hills is a factor as well.
I think this article can ring true for anyone living anywhere. I drive through the Chandler suburb of Phoeniz, AZ, and see fountains on every corner, that English gardening style and everywhere around is just dry, dusty desert. My city is sinking by roughly 3 cm a year which is horrible considered this could be avoided, much like the fires in Cali. Human beings have forgotten that they depend upon the earth for their existence, not politics or oil or money or opinions.
I love that Bush snapped to attention so quickly when it came to the rich suburbs of San Diego, but couldn't bring himself to sound interested when it came to the slums of New Orleans, and where did all those promises get him then? Where will they get California now? Are we so selfish and self-serving that we honestly believe this earth will put up with our abuse forever? Momma nature isn't going to allow us to take advantage of her forever.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
