Creek Fire silence and recreation area closures. Do better, Sierra National Forest
The Sierra National Forest has a management problem.
As in, its management of 1.3 million acres on the western slope of the Sierra Nevada between Yosemite and Kings Canyon national parks has become a problem for those who live, work and recreate there.
Seven months after nearly 30% of the Sierra National Forest burned in the Creek Fire, officials have yet to open up about what caused the largest single-source wildfire in California history — or explain how the 380,000-acre blaze got out of control despite early containment.
At the same time, Forest Supervisor Dean Gould appears only too willing to close significant portions of the forest to public use, including many popular campgrounds, roads and trails. Backed by the threat of heavy fines and possible jail time.
Closed mouths and closed-down forest recreation areas. Keeping the public in the dark and behind locked gates.
“The job of Forest Service managers,” reads a statement on the Sierra National Forest website, “is to help people share and enjoy the forest, while conserving the environment for generations to come.”
Help people share and enjoy the forest? Not when Gould orders the closures of 33 recreation sites in the Bass Lake and High Sierra ranger districts, along with more than 150 trails and three roads.
The current forest closures are effective through April 21 and include many areas that would normally receive heavy springtime usage. But now, violators risk a $5,000 fine ($10,000 for organizations) and up to six months “imprisonment.”
Conserve the environment for generations? The price tag to fight the fire, rebuild property and repair infrastructure will exceed $500 million. Not including the untold damage done to air and water quality, forest ecology and Southern California Edison’s hydroelectric power operation.
On this scorecard, Sierra National Forest managers are 0 for 2. And I’m not the only one who feels that way.
“I wish the Forest Service would come out with an official explanation for the fire — people deserve to know what happened,” said a longtime Forest Service employee, whose identity I’m protecting for fear of repercussions.
“We owe it to the public to say what’s up, and we owe it to the public to reopen the forest.”
Tying up Creek Fire loose ends
At this point, any explanation for the Creek Fire is sure to be greeted with some degree of skepticism. Unless, of course, the investigation confirms the existence of an illegal marijuana garden in Big Creek Canyon.
After hiking into the origin zone in February, I can’t say for certain. But the inexplicable eradication (via bulldozer blade) of what may have been a pot garden, along with surveyor’s tape marking a steep path to a year-round creek, only raises more questions.
Days after the Creek Fire, a mysterious photo circulated among foothill and mountain residents (it was also sent to Fresno County Supervisor Nathan Magsig and Sheriff Margaret Mims) that depicts two law enforcement officers making an arrest.
The LEOs have their backs to the camera, and both their heads are partially cropped. Between them, facing the camera, is a Latino male with a gap-toothed grin wearing a navy Fox racing shirt and gold necklace. This, according to the original Facebook post, is the individual who started the Creek Fire after setting a pot garden ablaze.
Even though the photo doesn’t appear to be copied and pasted (a Google image search returned no matches), local authorities say there have been no arrests pertaining to the Creek Fire or any pot gardens in the vicinity. Nor, if you examine it closely, do the LEOs uniforms and patches match those worn by Fresno and Madera county sheriff’s deputies or Department of Fish and Wildlife wardens.
Another loose end is a screenshot, taken during a public briefing on Facebook in December, showing the cover page of what’s labeled as a “cost share agreement for the Creek Fire incident” between the Sierra National Forest and Cal Fire. The fire’s cause is listed as “lightning.”
“It disappeared just after I took the screenshot,” Dickie Brand of Fresno said.
Lightning no longer a plausible cause
Asked for an explanation, Forest Service officials attributed the mixup to “a clerical error” and reiterated the fire’s cause has yet to be determined and remains under investigation.
For how long, we can only guess. A Camp Sierra cabin owner who has been interviewed multiple times by Creek Fire investigators told me her last contact with them occurred in October.
Besides, lightning is no longer a plausible explanation. When the Creek Fire ignited Sept. 4, 2020, the most recent lightning activity in the vicinity occurred in mid August, according to satellite imagery. In a place like Big Creek Canyon, where the mix of hot and cool air combine to produce the same winds that make Huntington Lake such a great place to sail, there’s virtually zero chance an ember could’ve smoldered that long.
“If there was an ember down there, it wouldn’t have taken 18 days to take off,” Auberry logger Tim Messer said. “It would’ve gone up right away because of the wind.”
To be fair, the Sierra National Forest has gone through a lot recently. A massive tree die-off in 2016 was followed by significant snow, rain and wind in 2017 that resulted in thousands of toppled trees. Then along came the Creek Fire, one of the most aggressive and devastating wildfires that people who study such things for a living have ever seen.
However, the answer can’t just be closed mouths and more months of forest closures. Or else it’ll be fair to ask whether our branch of the Forest Service has failed in its mission.
This story was originally published April 13, 2021 at 5:00 AM with the headline "Creek Fire silence and recreation area closures. Do better, Sierra National Forest."
