barbm,

That just breaks your heart doesn’t it?

45caliber,

You are so right. It seems like yesterday we were having fires down here in Florida. It was like the world was on fire. One person I heard of said they hadn’t been worried about their house burning because it was a cement block house with a metal roof, then when they got to go back in to see their place it was gutted. It seems the fire got so hot outside the house that the curtains and lamp shade on the lamp caught fire on the inside of the house and everything was a total loss ! We were surrounded by fires for the whole summer. Who ever thought that Florida could have a drought ? When we did get a little rain there was so much lightening that more fires started, then there was an area in our town that was muck, and it caught fire so now we had fires that they couldn’t put out till they burned out, that was a real bummer cause that fire burned for a couple years. It just smoldered and smoked and it was awful ! My heart is with all those that are suffering with the fires, I know what that is like. Even if you are in an area that isn’t burning you will still suffer from the smoke and the nights are the worst because that is when the wind dies down and the smoke settles on the houses. Makes it real hard to breath !

You are exactly right. No money for fire to protect us. Just handouts to the people that sit on their bottoms and collect whatever they can.

barbm,

Go ahead and play the race card Woopy did so the game is on! I have never seen anyone play the race card like Obama ! Are there places set up for donations? Obama is promising everything to these poor people hit by the tornados but wait till they find that it doesn’t show up because there is no money Obama sent it all to other countries !

ScienceDaily (Mar. 28, 2011) — Texas Agrilife Research fire and brush control studies in the Rolling Plains on a working ranch-scale showed the benefits and limitations of managed fires for reducing mesquite encroachment while sustaining livestock production.
Dr. Richard Teague, AgriLife Research rangeland ecology and management scientist, along with colleagues Dr. Jim Ansley, brush ecologist, and Dr. Bill Pinchak, animal nutritionist, spent more than 10 years trying to determine how effective prescribed fire could be in reducing mesquite and cactus on the Waggoner Ranch south of Vernon.

Three major conclusions of the study were:fire is effective only at low levels of mesquite encroachment; 12 percent of the unit must be burned each year; and stocking rates should be light — 12 percent lower than the “moderate”Natural Resources Conservation Service level for the range type and range condition, Teague said.

To determine the potential of fire to reduce brush and prickly pear and how to manage the fire for maximum effectiveness, they looked at: effect of brush abundance on forage production and composition; how quickly the brush and cactus increased; treatment longevity; effect of grazing management on grass production and animal performance; and economic returns.

To ensure effective burns, it is necessary to have approximately 2,000 pounds of fuel per acre for each burn, Teague said. In an area where plant growth and rainfall vary each year, it’s most important to choose a stocking rate that allows for sufficient buildup of fuel.

Rotational grazing systems provide sufficient grass fuel and continuity of fuel for the fire to be effective and for adequate post-fire grass recovery, he said.

With three experimental treatments and two replications covering an area of about 34,000 acres, the study was started in 1995 with Hereford cow-calf herds of the same age composition at moderate stocking rates. Treatment areas ranged from 3,000-5,000 acres and three rotational grazing systems were compared under continuous grazing.

“Fire is by far the least expensive means of reducing brush, and it should be used whenever possible to minimize the use of more expensive treatments,” Teague said. “But our study suggests that fire can be used only for maintenance of low mesquite cover.”

The mesquite cover studied doubled to 40 percent coverage in seven years — more than expected — and resulted in a significant decrease in forage production, Teague said.

“At that rate of increase of mesquite, if a manager starts using fire at greater than 15 percent brush cover in the first area to be treated, by the time four to five years have elapsed the brush cover would have increased to 30 to 40 percent in the areas still to be burned,” he said. “This is far too high for fire to be effective.”

Teague said for lowest-cost brush reduction, burning must be done regularly at six to seven year intervals.

“At levels of mesquite above 15 to 20 percent, something more expensive like root-killing herbicides is needed to restore the productivity of the rangeland,” he said. “Where mesquite cover is low enough to use fire effectively, the use of fire as a follow-up to herbicide treatment would be economically superior to using herbicide with no follow-up burn.”

If the mesquite cover is 30 percent or higher, forage and fuel levels are reduced so fire is less effective in reducing mesquite, Teague said. Also, with this amount of mesquite, winter grass becomes more abundant than summer grass. And because winter grasses are usually green at that time, the winter fire effectiveness is further reduced.

“This can be offset partially by burning in late summer, since summer fires are more effective in reducing both mesquite and prickly pear, and in summer, the winter grasses are dry and provide excellent fuels,” Teague said.

Using a rotational grazing strategy to rest areas for an entire growing season allowed the best fuel load for the precipitation received and improved the litter and grass cover, he said. This reduced soil temperature, runoff and erosion, and increased soil carbon. Post-fire deferment also is needed to ensure adequate recovery of palatable grasses and litter cover.

Ranchers know that failure to maintain low levels of mesquite populations in pastures results in decreased livestock carrying capacity and increases the dependence on more expensive restoration practices, as well as increases the ecological impact, Teague said.

“With fire being so much less expensive than alternative treatments, our economic assessments indicate that stocking rates can be lowered by 25 percent and still be economically competitive with alternative brush treatments as long as fire is used regularly,” he said.