Wildfires, global warming, and land use
October 25th, 2007 by Jim JustU.S. Forest Service Chief Gail Kimbell warns that we’re likely to see more disasters like the Southern California wildfires due to a combination of global warming and sprawl. 
In Oregon as in California, we’ve given up on land use planning as a way to reduce fire risk in such a fire-prone region. San Diego, at least, has banned wood shingle roofs. Riverside County is thinking of establishing a fire hazard zone, similar to the 100-year floodplain, that would prohibit development. In Oregon, we do neither.
Meanwhile, Oregon is choosing between Measure 37, which would allow subdivisions regardless of location or hazard; or Measure 49, which would allow tens of thousands of new houses but in a more scattered pattern, again without regard to location or hazard.
We aren’t just seeing bad wildfires, we are seeing record-shattering wildfires. We’re showing warming and earlier springs tying in with large forest fire frequencies. People may think climate change and the ecological responses are 50 to 100 years away. But it’s not 50 to 100 years away–it’s happening now in forest ecosystems through fire.
One thing for which land use planning is well-suited is mapping out hazards and helping to avoid them. But once the houses are there, it’s too late.
Update: Mark R. points out that Lane County bans wood shingle or shake roofs in its F2 zone. I should also report that I was negligent in not noting that DLCD’s administrative rules require “fire retardant” roofs in forest zones. These rules, however, don’t apply in rural residential zones or to development on “nonresource” lands. Oregon’s building codes do not ban or restrict the use of wood shingle or shake roofs.