need to add title here

The Age of Megafires

September 6, 2009 4:20 PM

Global warming is increasing the intensity and number of forest fires across the American West. Scott Pelley goes to the fire line to report.

Recent Segments
Scroll Left Scroll Right
Add a Comment See all 37 Comments
by ssiadmin October 26, 2009 5:33 PM EDT
We have reached the Threshold and point of no return. We do need to do something now, right now. I am a director of a documentary on a project by Global Response Group based in Vancouver BC Canada that has something that can provide early detection, containment, control and will be able to combat even the largest of fires quickly with effective results. Interesting to watch them get into position with some big names involved.
Reply to this comment
by xghafla September 13, 2009 2:29 PM EDT
What a pity that America still does not realize that this terror they create outside of their country coming back to their own back yard.
Reply to this comment
by origtartuffe September 11, 2009 6:17 PM EDT
The programmer needs to clean this up.
Reply to this comment
by jaltonm September 10, 2009 5:36 PM EDT
The bearded "scientist" had no rings that indicated megafires in the past.

I think it's more because those trees DIDN'T SURVIVE TO PROVIDE THIS GUY TREE RINGS IN THE 20TH CENTURY!

Then it's total conjecture that "half the forests will be gone within a century." Talk about blowing smoke! He provided no evidence to back this up, as it is totally preposterous.

Some comments made above about the restrictions on prescribed burns are absolutely right. Even the native Americans did controlled burns 200 years ago. The forests should NOT be "preserved", they should be MANAGED. If you cannot stand smoke, go back to the northeast and live there.
Reply to this comment
by callendoudna September 8, 2009 9:47 AM EDT
I'm an unrepentant Republican and we've just had one of the coolest summers on record, tying with 1902. Nevertheless, I will make this suggestion: Hydrogen. Hydrogen can be burned just like natural gas in power plants, cookstoves and cars. I don't mean hydrogen fuel cell cars--which would be horribly expensive. (Fuel cells would require platinum plates in every car.) I mean hydrogen instead of gasoline. Burn hydrogen and you will get water. The water would build up in the sinks of the Great Basin and restore Lake Bonneville which covered western Utah and Lake Lahontan which covered northern Nevada. This would increase rainfall in the region. (It would also turn Las Vegas into an inland Miami and a canal across California would turn Salt Lake City into a seaport--but that's all future.) Hydrogen can be made by running electric current--with platinum electrodes--through seawater. The electricity can be generated by otherwise impractical intermitant sources like waves, tides, wind, or solar. One way to avoid having to buy a different car for every fuel would be steam cars. A steam engine will burn any fuel and a steam car can have two gas tanks: one for all manner of pumpable liquids (gasoline, ethanol, bio-diessel, ect--and a steam engine doesn't care if you mix fuels) and a second tank for compressed gasses (propane, methane, hydrogen, ect.) You could also pop the hood and shovel in coal, firewood, rags, and newspapers. Before you go criticizing steamers you may want to: 1) Consider some of the advances in technology in the last hundred years and ask yourself where cars, telephones, and microwave ovens were a hundred years ago. 2) Google "Doble Steamer". Not "double steamer", "Doble Steamer" http://www.damninteresting.com/the-last-great-steam-car
Reply to this comment
by stever518 September 7, 2009 8:38 PM EDT
I'd be curious as to what fires in other parts of the globe have been. This was totally left out of the story. There were two reasons for the fires presented: global warming and controlled burning. The story did not balance the two by investigating other parts of the globe. Russia has extensive forest land at the same latitude. What about their forests?
Reply to this comment
by doncordier September 7, 2009 1:08 PM EDT
I am a former professional firefighter with a local county entity in Southern California.

I viewed with great interest the feature titled? The Age of Megafires? on Sunday evening due to my experience and knowledge.

While ?Global Warming? may or may not be occurring (much evidence contradicts the claims of Global Warming believers of which I am not one), the main factor (the primary reason) was not discussed or even introduced!

That reason is due to the actions of a myriad of environmental groups being successful by either threatening or actually bringing legal actions (law suites) to stop most (virtually all) clearing of underbrush and removal or harvesting of dead trees within all but private owned forests.

In nearly all cases, the environmental groups have been successful in their actions. This is most often due to a fear by politicians to opposing these threats and claims for fear of large reprisal from the environmental groups when time for re-election arrives. This is the same situation whether involving local, state and/or federal agencies where it is very undesirable to be threatened, or worse, to actually to become defendants in these actions.

Until this fact is addressed and some common sense comes to the surface, we will continue to experience fires that are larger and more difficult to control and eventually extinguish.

The impact on human and animal life alone is immense not to mention the terrible losses in personal property and valuable forests and is in direct contradiction to the stated desires of these environmental groups.

This is a classic example of ?Stage One Thinking? in that they (the so-called environmentalists) have given no thought or nor any concern whatsoever to the consequences of their actions.

Frankly, as the ?winners? of these legal actions are paid by the defendants (in this case, YOU the taxpayers) and stand to earn untold large sums of money, they will neither consider or care of the real impact of their actions.
Reply to this comment
by thurston2001 September 7, 2009 12:59 PM EDT
One thing for sure is the right wing anti-global warming types are incapable of admitting they are wrong about anything, ever.
Reply to this comment
by derekcranex September 7, 2009 8:53 AM EDT
The "Age of Megafires" is a 90% fabrication. Stahl did hint at the real problem at the beginning of the segment -- environmentalist efforts to prevent the removal of brush and dead wood- but followed up with a more in-depth report which blames global warming for the conflagration. No mention that the area is naturally hot and dry in the summer or that an arsonist is believed to have started the fire -- no, it's global warming! May I suggest that 60 Minutes follow this story with an investigation on efforts of the Sierra Club, WWF, and others to keep the forests as "natural as possible." derekcrane
Reply to this comment
by cmoen2006 September 7, 2009 5:35 AM EDT
WOW. Intellectually dishonest and reprehensehible. A crystal clear example of the global warming gang jamming their guilt on us. The question of how many mega fires there were BEFORE the birth of christ were left unanswered. Just how many of them worked around the clock 24hours a day back then to put of unabated fires then? OOOOPs. And... how many within the last 200 years were arson or man-made? OOOOPs. You didnt even mention that? Unbiased journalism? Perhaps we should all kills ourselves to save the planet.

Look, I dont care that the scientific community waffles on whether eggs are good for you... or more importanly, their bogus that claim that in the '70s we were headed for an ice age (lets not forget, scientist dont get grants to investigate everything is ok) BUT if you want to make the pretentious case that humans are ******* up the planet, at least be honest.

Ive have watched my last 60 minutes episode. Something Ive done over my last 20 years. You should be ashamed. This is the first response I have ever been compelled to write.
Reply to this comment
by l0cf022 September 7, 2009 12:11 AM EDT
I was a hotshot (Sitgreaves National Forest) in the early '70's. The decison by the U.S. Forest Service early in the 20th century has contributed in part to the development of megafires. No argument by me. What I do disagree with in the presentation on CBS was the complete ignoring of the decision in the early 70's to do away with controlled burning. Removal of the slash, duff and undergrowth, prior to then had done a significant job in reducing large conflagrations. In the early 1970's, it was decreed by politicians to stop doing controlled burns because it was effecting the air quality in population areas (In my case, Phoenix). The Western ecosystem is based on periodic burn. A significant amount of the flora reproduces only after being burned. Fire is a natural part of the ecology. We can't allow uncontrolled burning (like Yellowstone) but we must allow controlled burning to clear out the trash so we won't have megafires. Finally, thanks to commentor Bern Hyde who gave me the historical origin of the hotshot's basic tool, the Pulaski.
Reply to this comment
by doug_chapman September 7, 2009 12:07 AM EDT
Clearly the data shows warming, but man is not the cause. Solar activity is the cause, and we cannot control the sun.
See this link:
http://www.oism.org/pproject/GWReview_OISM300.pdf
This is a report which uses actual data to show that Carbon Dioxide is not causing the warming. We are about to do much harm to our economy based on faulty science.
Science is not a popularity contest. Galaleo showed that when popular views were that the earth was flat!
Let us all find the scientific proof, not hunches about carbon.
Reply to this comment
by treeman1944 September 6, 2009 11:33 PM EDT
Recent fires are the biggest in history? Only if history goes back only a couple decades.

Here in the central Oregon Coast Range, between 1848 and 1868, there were four fires that averaged a half million acres. During that same time, east of Salem, Ore. the Silverton Fire was nearly a million acres. Every tv news crew in the country reported on the Biscuit Fire in southwest Oregon in 2002; they said it was the biggest fire in history. It was a half million acres - from an historical standpoint, just an average fire.

People have lived in N. America for thousands of years and they actively and consciously managed the landscape. People (i.e., Indians) were removed and we put out the fires. The black oak is disappearing as is the ponderosa pine. The duff that was burned by the Indians has built up and only the white fir germinates. This fir provides ladder fuels and the artifical sequouia forest is ripe to burn. John Muir would not recognize the "ancient" sequoia forest he saw.

In eastern Oregon, the Indians set the forest afire before they left the high country. In this way, the next summer, the grass was lush for deer and elk. The fuels were burned so that, if ignited by lightning, there was little to burn.

Yes, the US Forest Service has a century of fire fighting. With the removal of fire there is no longer anything to keep fire sizes down. The forest has over grown and is over-crowded. It has been stressed due the land having exceeded its "carrying capacity".

Western forests are prone to insects and has led to the mountain pine beetle epidemic. Of course, logging to mimic what fire once did would do the trick but our politicans treat the forest as a political object. They simply do not have the political gumption to do what is right and put aside politics. They need to manage with biology. (I'm not holding my breath as I wait for this to happen.)

Southern California is a fire landscape. Of course, if you put out every fire for several decades, the vegetation will be changed. Fuels are going to build up and, given a spark at the right time and place, catastrophic fires will occur. It is just common sense.

While global climate change may be playing a role, people's changing of the landscape has played a much larger role. Put out fires, refuse to log -- a prescription for bugs and fire.
Reply to this comment
by BernHyde September 6, 2009 11:00 PM EDT
On a recent trip to Wallace Idaho we walked the trail outside of town built around the Pulaski crew that was fighting the 1910 fire that devastated over 3 million acres of western state forest. With smoke blowing all the way to the midwest. Prehaps the largest fire this century.
I'd suggest a walk on the trail as the forest today is unbelievably prestine. And a tribute to the effort of Ranger Edward Pulaski, who became a hero at a place called the War Eagle Mine, led men with prayers on their lips through a pitch-black darkness punctuated by exploding trees and waves of flames that arced across the night sky.

Where was global warming in 1910?

http://www.idahoforests.org/fires.htm
Reply to this comment
by pattymeltz1234 September 6, 2009 11:00 PM EDT
How come thry can't spray Monacoat on houses, just like they do in high rises, and any comercial building. They spray on a fireproof substance called Monacoat. I might save a house.
Reply to this comment
by ecobill43 September 6, 2009 10:51 PM EDT
Well, I am sure the Beck and Limbaugh radio Barney and Bailey freak show speech terrorists will deny global warming and call us Liberal or Communists. How the fringe groups can respect such ignorance in a civil so called society amazes me. University of Arizona did some research where they increase the temperature by three degrees in Colorado flower area and the area turned to a desert. We have insurance on our homes and less chance of a fire normally but we will not have insurance with climate change. I say, what if it is real, is it worth gambling with our childresn future or the next war with China over oil someday?
Reply to this comment
by ecobill43 September 6, 2009 10:51 PM EDT
Well, I am sure the Beck and Limbaugh radio Barney and Bailey freak show speech terrorists will deny global warming and call us Liberal or Communists. How the fringe groups can respect such ignorance in a civil so called society amazes me. University of Arizona did some research where they increase the temperature by three degrees in Colorado flower area and the area turned to a desert. We have insurance on our homes and less chance of a fire normally but we will not have insurance with climate change. I say, what if it is real, is it worth gambling with our childresn future or the next war with China over oil someday?
Reply to this comment
by ecobill43 September 6, 2009 10:50 PM EDT
Well, I am sure the Beck and Limbaugh radio Barney and Bailey freak show speech terrorists will deny global warming and call us Liberal or Communists. How the fringe groups can respect such ignorance in a civil so called society amazes me. University of Arizona did some research where they increase the temperature by three degrees in Colorado flower area and the area turned to a desert. We have insurance on our homes and less chance of a fire normally but we will not have insurance with climate change. I say, what if it is real, is it worth gambling with our childresn future or the next war with China over oil someday?
Reply to this comment
by ecobill43 September 6, 2009 10:50 PM EDT
Well, I am sure the Beck and Limbaugh radio Barney and Bailey freak show speech terrorists will deny global warming and call us Liberal or Communists. How the fringe groups can respect such ignorance in a civil so called society amazes me. University of Arizona did some research where they increase the temperature by three degrees in Colorado flower area and the area turned to a desert. We have insurance on our homes and less chance of a fire normally but we will not have insurance with climate change. I say, what if it is real, is it worth gambling with our childresn future or the next war with China over oil someday?
Reply to this comment
by ecobill43 September 6, 2009 10:49 PM EDT
Well, I am sure the Beck and Limbaugh radio Barney and Bailey freak show speech terrorists will deny global warming and call us Liberal or Communists. How the fringe groups can respect such ignorance in a civil so called society amazes me. University of Arizona did some research where they increase the temperature by three degrees in Colorado flower area and the area turned to a desert. We have insurance on our homes and less chance of a fire normally but we will not have insurance with climate change. I say, what if it is real, is it worth gambling with our childresn future or the next war with China over oil someday?
Reply to this comment
See all 37 Comments
  • Preview: Congo Gold Preview: Congo Gold

    0:35 November 25, 2009

  • Preview: Bob Ballard Preview: Bob Ballard

    1:49 November 25, 2009

  • Rooney on Thanksgiving Rooney on Thanksgiving

    2:16 November 22, 2009

  • 60 Minutes, 11.22.09 60 Minutes, 11.22.09

    43:21 November 22, 2009

  • James Cameron's Avatar James Cameron's Avatar

    12:43 November 22, 2009

  • Maziar Bahari: Witness Maziar Bahari: Witness

    11:53 November 22, 2009