Parked on East Camino Cielo road last Thursday evening, near La Cumbre Peak, Santa Barbara surveyor Jacob Hecter watched stiff winds shoot spires of flame into the sky above the Goleta hills. Squinting into the sun, he asked a question with which many Californians can doubtless identify: does the fact that it’s early July and the state has already been besieged by 1,783 separate fires, including the Gap Fire and the massive Big Sur conflagration have something to do with climate change?
The answer is yes and no, say climate scientists. The current onslaught of wildfire “is what we’ve been projecting to happen, both in short-term fire forecasts and the longer term patterns that can be linked to global climate change,” said Ron Neilson, a professor at Oregon State University and bioclimatologist with the USDA Forest Service. Neilson, who for the last fifteen years has also worked for the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), cautioned that “with any single event you can’t say unequivocally that it’s climate change, or that it’s natural variability.” However, he said, “What I would tell people is that what they’re experiencing is very consistent with global warming.”
Wildfires in the western U.S. now occur more frequently, last longer, and cover more ground than they did in the past. A 2006 study published in Science found that since 1986, the number of major wildfires has increased by 400 percent, and the amount of land these fires burned increased by 600 percent, compared to the period from 1970 to 1986.
Until recently it was often assumed that spiking population growth and expanding land use patterns were mainly to blame for any increase in the number of big fires. But the Science study, which was conducted by researchers at the Scripps Institute and the UC Merced, concluded that these factors have had “relatively little effect.” Instead, the authors wrote, the change has come about mainly because summers have gotten longer, hotter, and drier. “The transition has been marked by a shift toward unusually warm springs, longer summer dry seasons, drier vegetation, and longer fire seasons.”
To date, the Science study is the most comprehensive look at past fire-patterns, but since its publication it has been buttressed by a steady stream of surveys and climate models indicating that global warming is making wildfires in the West more common and more severe. These projections tend to cite the same chief causes — hotter, drier weather lasting for longer periods. A new report conducted by the U.S. Climate Change Science Program — a federal agency directed by President Bush — and issued to Congress by the USDA, warns that arid areas (such as Santa Barbara) are “90-95 percent likely” to experience increases in fire risk in coming decades due to global warming. The report notes that over the course of the 20th century the global average temperature rose by 1 degree Fahrenheit. During the 21st, it’s projected to rise 3-10 degrees.
Not all of the connections between climate change and fire risk are immediately obvious. For example, climate models show that in coming decades rain will increasingly appear in the form of downpours, and the oscillation between wet and dry periods will lengthen. The implication this has for ecosystems — and their vulnerability to fire — is not good, because during prolonged periods of heavy rain, undergrowth is allowed to store up water and put on leafage. The problem, Neilson said, is that when that’s followed by a period of drought, the chances for a big fire are multiplied.
“If you think about what happens to an ecosystem if it goes wet-dry-wet-dry for years, it just kind of putters along,” Neilson said. “It finds an equilibrium. But if you take exactly the same years and rearrange them so they go wet-wet-wet followed by dry-dry-dry, the ecosystem grows and puts on more and more leaf area. And then you start having dry years, and you have way more leaf area than can be supported by the available water. So the whole ecosystem dries out, and either it dies, gets attacked by insects, or gets hit by fire.” According to Neilson, Santa Barbara is less vulnerable to this phenomenon than other, more forested parts of the West; nevertheless, he said, it’s still a significant threat.
Another unfortunate aspect of the interaction between climate change and wildfires is the fact that the latter are responsible for a huge proportion of annual carbon emissions — up to forty percent in the U.S. — and this, in turn, fuels the former. As a recent article in New Scientist put it, “If climate change is increasing wildfire, these new sources of carbon emissions will accelerate the buildup of greenhouse gases and could provide a feed-forward acceleration of global warming.”
This year’s fire forecast — it can be accessed on the U.S. Forest Service website — is one of the worst in recent memory. California is expected to be especially hard hit. “This is one of the most intense fire periods we’ve forecast in the last half a dozen years,” Neilson said, “and the interesting thing is that we don’t even forecast lightening, which touched off most of the California fires.”
In a sense it doesn’t seem to matter how closely conflagrations like the Gap Fire can be linked to climate change. What is relevant is that big wildfires are more likely because there’s less rain and snowmelt than there used to be, and hotter average temperatures, and both of these developments will worsen as global warming intensifies. That seems to be the take home message most climate scientists are trying to impart, and they appear to have a receptive audience in the public. As he surveyed the blaze from his perch near La Cumbre Peak Thursday evening, Hecter was philosophical about its possible connection to climate change. “Whether that’s global warming or not, it’s ugly,” he said. “And it’s only July.”
Double-clicking on any word or phrase in this story will open a reference window with definitions and links to other reference material.

Print friendly
E-mail story
Contact an Editor
iPod friendly
Comments
Bookmark This
Previous Month


Comments
Discussion Guidelines
Good article and references, it puts into writing what I know many of us have been thinking.
EastBeach (anonymous profile)
July 6, 2008 at 1:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't doubt the climate change science, and it is frightening, but looking specifically at the Gap Fire, it has been said that much of the chaparral involved is 50-something years old. Isn't the historical, natural fire cycle for chaparral about that long, anyway? (Don't infer from this that I think we should be just letting it burn unchecked. The firefighters are heroes!)
If you're looking for individual fires to hold up as evidence of climate change, more-compelling examples would be locations burning earlier in their cycle (or more often) than they used to. Probably such examples exist among the huge number of fires that have started this summer.
andyinsb (anonymous profile)
July 6, 2008 at 3:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If you feel so moved, please take a moment to go to
http://www.thanksgapfirefighters.com
and submit a message of gratitude for the firefighters who have been working this fire.
Thanks.
Bargs (anonymous profile)
July 6, 2008 at 4:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Everyone" knows its Bush's fault. Why not? He gets the blame for everything else...
RCMeltzer (anonymous profile)
July 6, 2008 at 8:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Bush - ? "...you can run but you can't hide..."
GoletaResident (anonymous profile)
July 6, 2008 at 9:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I have 2 Albino Great Danes, an Iguana and a wild Yak as pets and give them heavy doses of sleeping pills once a week so that they sleep all day and don't create too much heat from movement there by contributing to Global Warming. I'm doing my part to help Al Gore and the planet.
Have any of you Global Warming moonies bothered to actual do real research about this designer cause?
Are any of you aware that we just had a record cold winter,
Globally. Any one up on the latest stats on Greenland?
victoraschiro (anonymous profile)
July 7, 2008 at 1:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I found this website while desperately searching for timely reporting on the GAP fire. Family members live in the area and I wanted to know what actions were being taken, where the fire was burning, and hopefully, to find a MAP! I found it all here and it's made a difficult time more bearable. THANK YOU!
As an out-of-towner, I had no preconceived notions about the political viewpoints the Independent might have, and frankly, I didn't care. I cared about good reporting and dedication to providing timely information. (Having checked the local TV stations first, I was relieved to find any good info at all.)
Having read thru this article 3 times, I can only conclude that some people figure the mention of "President Bush" and "Climate Change" in the same article must constitute blaming him for something. Maybe it's upsetting to some to see that there is actually a "U.S. Climate Change Science Program" in the executive branch?
LindaR (anonymous profile)
July 7, 2008 at 2:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Oh please don't start blaming every weather event or disaster event on the Global Warming boogieman for political purposes. Don't even suggest it. Does hotter climate cause more chaparral growth? Does it cause people to light matches? Does it cause more lightening which is blamed for most of the other fires in the state? Fires did not just start happening during the industrial age.
It just so happens the temperatures during this fire were far less than the painted cave fires in 1990. Had it not been for the fact that the temperatures were cooler, we would have been in major trouble. During the next climate change cycle (global cooling), global warming will be blamed for the next global cooling cycle. Oh and of course the Church of Global Warming psychos will take credit for reversing the planets natural temperature cycles by using CFL's and forcing us to use no plastic bags at the grocery store. We are so God-like aren't we. Can we change the historical climate change cycles that have been occurring since before man arrived on the scene? Yes we can!
RForsyth (anonymous profile)
July 7, 2008 at 9:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
LindaR - my posting regarding it being Bush's fault was a tongue-in-cheek swipe at the Bush-haters (of which there are many in SB). He does sometimes seem to get the blame for everything, including happenings not the least bit under his control or power...
RCMeltzer (anonymous profile)
July 7, 2008 at 9:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Hi victorachiro, you should read up a bit more on global warming before you make any conclusions. Heat from movement is not an issue, and if last year's winter was the coldest on record that actually supports the climate change theory.
3domfighter (anonymous profile)
July 7, 2008 at 9:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Great piece and part of an excellent string of stories covering our community. The journalist poses a question and gets an appropriate science based answer. I am most definitely not prone to the Chicken Little modus that Gore uses, and neither was the author. I love the fact that we have journalists who pose questions.
Anyone with any education in physical science equal to that of a tenth grader knows changes occur over a broad span of geologic time. Often what we view as symptomatic issues, are merely hiccups, as big and scary and real as they appear to us who view them first hand.
I was up at Rancho Dos Pueblos last night and met some of the firefighters, as the Schultes hosted and cooked for them. We are incredibly fortunate to have men like this in fire service, and families like the Schultes in our midst.
david3 (anonymous profile)
July 7, 2008 at 9:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Interesting points brought up here. As a paleoclimate researcher and SB native who moved to Oregon a decade ago, I immediately saw the impact that global warming potentially could have on west coast climate. Few would argue that a warmer Earth would permit unstable tropical air masses to move further north (and south) earlier in the season. These air masses are usually accompanied by lightning. On June 20 California experienced a lightning storm that produced over 800 local fires. While this is not unprecedented, it is very unusual this early in the season. Lightning fires are the most important cause of non-man made wildfire; and a clear boundary separates portions of the west that experience them, and those that do not. Early season lightning fires will almost certainly burn until the rain starts again in late fall. Any process that produces more intense, earlier, and more northward (or southward) reaching lightning storms will have a serious impact on fire frequency and cyclicity. Stronger El Nino/La Nina events will also contribute by allowing fuel to build up then become highly burnable. I'm in Carmel right now and am focused on the lightning-generated Basin Complex fire in Big Sur. The combination of high fuel loads and lightning has produces what looks to be an unstoppable monster. While this fire could have occurred whether warming was occurring or not, the PROBABILITY of these types of events in California increases dramatically as global temperature increases.
myersj1960 (anonymous profile)
July 7, 2008 at 11:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I knew that a self proclaimed "expert" would pop up and claim that global warming causes lightning. What caused it before the industrial age and in earth cooling cycles? Yes folks things happen unpredictably without pattern or precedence. It's called "w-e-a-t-h-e-r".
RForsyth (anonymous profile)
July 7, 2008 at 1:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)
And those high fuel loads in Big Sir? I think we can all agree that is man caused. Chop down a tree and see how high you would be strung up on the one sitting next to it by environmentalists.
RForsyth (anonymous profile)
July 7, 2008 at 1:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Heat from movement is not an issue, and if last year's winter was the coldest on record that actually supports the climate change theory."
3domfighter
Yes indeed, bravo! - it's good to hear that someone believes that climate change moves in BOTH directions. It gets hot then it gets cold, it gets hot, then it gets cold... a 1975 Newsweek doomsday article predicted the coming ice age. Now we are predicting the coming polar ice cap melt. When it starts getting cold again, the Global Warming psychos will claim credit for it and say I told you so, just watch.
I have a theory. Maybe we are just a wee bit closer to the sun now because we are sucking all the oil out of only one side of the planet (not allowed in the USA) which causes an eccentricity in the Earths orbit, much like if your tires are out of balance, and therefore our orbit around the sun has been altered and we are spinning closer to the sun. Why is this not just as valid a theory as Al Gores? OMG and the sky is falling - no, we are getting closer to the sky! Which has to create more heat because the sun is closer. Now I have to make a movie about my theory and all you gullible sheep will believe it wait no you won't, I'm not a liberal hero.
RForsyth (anonymous profile)
July 7, 2008 at 2:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Let me ask this. How much pollution is released from a fire the size of Gap or Zaca(9k and 240k acres, respectively)? Based on the amount of smoke going into the air for that long, one must assume it is a great amount. I always see all this talk about how we humans cause all of the damage to the environment with our cars/factories/etc.. lets see some numbers on how much damage a wildfire does.
Also, fires 100 years ago never had human help to be put out, thus letting them burn until they couldn't burn any longer. Im sure every square inch of this state has been burned several times over the last tens of thousands of years, yet the fires now are somehow linked to what humans have done our last 100 years???
DBD (anonymous profile)
July 7, 2008 at 2:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
That story should get him another 5 year grant so he can feed his family a little longer.
sbmo (anonymous profile)
July 7, 2008 at 5:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't even have to read the comments above -
Sad to see that someone dragged out the tired "Global Warning" tag to cover up for lack of proper clearing of forest land.
Write your congressman - offer to cut one down yourself.
Thank god Arnie brought property in the county - we're now the #1 fire. Wahoo! more media coverage.
BeachLivin (anonymous profile)
July 7, 2008 at 8:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Gosh how I miss SB!! We always used to laugh at the North County/South County political divide in the News-Suppress opeds. I even saved some of the commentaries because they were so funny! Who recalls Andrea Seastrand and Michael (vote "Mike" - he's RICH!!!)/Ariana Huffington - inept congressional reps in the Gingrich contract on America? Andrea said in the mid 90s - and this is really true - look it up although I may have gotten a word or two wrong - that California's floods, fires, and earthquakes were god's wrath for feminism, multiculturalism, and homosexuality.
But seriously, these are all valid points. Climate fluxuates. We are still going into an interglacial (look up Milankovitch cyclicity) - and no matter what anyone does, Earth is warming up. The question is one of magnitude and rate.
PS: the big buildup of fuel in the Santa Lucias is almost entirely due to sudden oak death of tan oaks combined with total fire suppression policies. Once this fuel is consumed, lightning fires would probably be beneficial. They'd be cooler and clear out the brush and deadwood w/o damaging mature trees. At least that's what appears to happen.
You are all lucky to live in such a wonderful place as SB. We miss it!
myersj1960 (anonymous profile)
July 8, 2008 at 11:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Post a comment