← back · transcript · hYb-avnaJ-E · view dossier

Transcript

Occupy wildfires: the story of the 1% | Jessica Haas | TEDxBozeman

Translator: Katelyn Nicholson
Reviewer: Denise RQ This part should be easy
because my worst fear already came true. It happened when I was only 7 years old. It was a warm summer in northern New York. In the middle of the night,
the smoke alarms went off. My house was on fire, but my family had a plan for this,
I did what I was taught. I got up, and I felt the door,
and it was cool so I opened it and looked down
the hallway, and there was no smoke. I ran down it; I ran out the front door
over to the big maple tree. That was our meeting spot. And now I know how afraid I was because even though my bedroom
was the furthest from the front door, I was the first person
to the meeting spot. But soon enough, my sisters and my parents
came bursting out of the house, and I expected to see flames
bursting out behind them. But they never came, it was a false alarm. No matter how many times
my parents tried to reassure me that my house wasn't on fire, there was no way
I was going back in there. Instead I pitched a tent in my backyard, and I decided that I was going to sleep
out there for the rest of my life. And I don't know how long I lasted; maybe, a couple of days,
maybe a couple of weeks, but I do know that this is when I first fell in love
with the wildlands. Because it became a sanctuary
for me against my biggest fear. And now, fast forward 12 years: I left
northern New York for the first time. I got on a bus
to Yellowstone National Park to work for the summer. 72 hours on a Greyhound bus,
can be a very harrowing experience. So you can only imagine
my disappointment when I get off the bus to see
that over 50% of my sanctuary had, of all things, burned down in 1988. And even though more than a decade
had passed since that fire, all I could see was dead black trees. But throughout that summer,
I started to realize that my fear of structure fires
really has no place in the wildlands because fire hadn't destroyed
these areas, fire had saved them. Fire creates the type of ecosystems
that provide us with clean drinking water and our favorite hunting spots. Now, fast forward another 15 years, I've been working in fire management
for about 10 years now. I'm starting to realize most people must have
the same fear of fire that I used to have because for over a century,
the status quo for fire management has been to put the fires out. 97-99% of all fires
are successfully suppressed. But that one to three percent
that got away? They're in a category on their own. I like to call these fires the 1%. Similar to Wall street,
the 1% of wildfires have all the wealth. They consume about
90% of the fire budget, and they are accountable for
97% of all acres burned. These are the ones that we read about
in the newspapers all the time. With headlines like,
"Extreme fire is raging out of control." Sometimes when things get really,
really bad, this happens. I can tell you that there is
nothing more terrifying than the thought of this coming at me. [Sharknado]
Jessica Hass: No. (Laughter) But these fires are also associated
with extremely high losses. Losses to our clean drinking water, losses
to our homes, and irreplaceable losses. In the past decade, an average of 18 firefighters
have died every year fighting these fires. And now here's the kicker: we, both society and the fire management
community created the one percent. By building in the fire-prone areas
that we so much love, we created the conditions
for the 1% to cause harm. And by suppressing the 99%,
by being afraid of them, we created the landscape conditions
for the 1% to thrive. Historically, fires burn all the time; every year, when conditions were mild, whether we set them on fire,
or whether lightning did. And they consume fuels. But these are the kinds of fires
that are really easy to put out. See, these are the 99%. And when we get rid of them,
fuel starts to build up. And then when we get hot,
dry, windy summers, the conditions are right
for the 1% to breakout. And once that happens, all the firefighters and airplanes
in the world can't stop them. We first learned this way back in 1910. Despite firefighters' efforts, over 3 million acres burned across
northern Montana and northern Idaho. It killed almost 100 people
and burned down five towns. And while this was a rare event, we're starting to see events
like this year after year. And while we can't prevent fires or stop these fires from happening
once they break out, we can prevent them
from starting in the first place. And I'm not talking about
Smokey the Bear fire prevention here. No, what I'm talking about really
is using that 99% to limit the 1%. Fire is self-limiting so if we let
some of these fires burn this year, they will make it a lot harder for
that 1% to get up and going next year. But that sounds
like kind of a risky idea right? Well that's where I come into play. I'm a risk analyst for the wildlands, and similar to how your risk manager
might try to decrease losses of money to your stock portfolio, I try to decrease losses
of homes and lives to wildfires. And currently our losses are increasing. If we want to change that,
we're going to have to do something. And the best thing that we can do Is to start to eliminate the chances of
that 1% from happening in the first place. And now with advances
in computer simulation modeling, we can predict where in the landscape
that 1% fires are most likely to occur. Let's look at Yellowstone National Park. These red areas have
the highest chance of a 1% fire, the green areas, less so. Now look around the lake. See those black circles?
Those are the most recent fires. See how green everything is
underneath them? They are reducing the odds
of that 1% fire from happening. Here are the fires from 1988. Even 30 years later, they are still
having an impact on the landscape. And now, if we start letting the 99% burn, we have similar tools that can allow us
to figure out where they are going to in the next month or two. If the outcome is bad, we'll probably
have to put those fires out. But if it is not so bad, we need
to start letting them burn a little bit so we can start changing
those red spots back into green spots. And our second part of our losses here
deals with our assets. And this is our homes. Here are those odds
for the state of Montana. These black dots are the homes. We are literally moths
drawn to a flame here. And Gallatin county is one of the fastest
growing counties in the country, so this is only going to get worse if we don't start doing
something about it. But at least we don't live over
in the Bitterroot. (Laughter) A homeowner who decides to live
in the wildlands can do a couple of things to try to reduce the chance
that their home's going to burn down. They can build
with fire-resistant materials, and they can create
what is called 'defensible space', which means it is going to
be easier for a firefighter to get in there and defend that house. Let's looks at this picture.
Do you see these green trees? These houses didn't burn down
because a 1% fire raged through them; they burned down because an ember from
a nearby wildfire landed on a wooden roof or on a wood pile next to them. These are the kinds of losses
that we can stop. And in Montana, 64% of all
of our homes are in the wildlands. well in the range of an ember
landing on a roof. But unfortunately, people tend to be
reactive rather than proactive. If we don't have a wildfire
in our backyard, we don't really think about it. And this is a big problem
because the time to adjust to this issue isn't when the 1% fire like this
is knocking at your door. By then, it's too late; it is going to be
way too dangerous for us to get firefighters in there
and try to save the house. But the beauty of risk assessments is that they can be performed
way before the fire breaks out. So we can be proactive. And now I know
what a lot of you guys might be thinking, "Hey I live downtown,
so this isn't my problem." But, that's not true. I mean we all love
these landscapes right? We certainly all need the resources
that come from them. So the solution to this problem
is going to involve everybody, because once we have
more fire on the ground, that means there is going to be
more smoke in the air. Maybe your favorite hiking trail
or hunting spot will be closed for a little while. But we need to remember
that more smoke in the air this year means probably less smoke next year. We are going to have
to start asking ourselves some pretty hard questions here. So let me ask you: is clean air this year
worth dirty-drinking water next year? Is saving a timber stand worth losing
a keystone species from our ecosystem? Now is your house
worth the life of a firefighter? These are the hard questions. These are the tradeoffs we need
to be thinking about. And I'm certain when we start
looking at these tradeoffs, we are going to stop fearing fire as a disaster that plagues
our communities. We are going to start using it
as a tool that can save them. Thank you. (Applause)