Fire as an Alternative to TV

I dont want to make too much of the making of and sitting by campfires mainly because it is something that most people who go camping have probably experienced for themselves,and that sitting by a good camp fire is vastly superior to watching TV.  Still, it is something that needs to be said. And I have some theories about why a campfire is better than TV and I will share them with you.  Feel free to disagree.
First of all, the obvious - fire is entertaining in and of itself.  There is drama in a fire.  One knows the plot well enough but never the details.  Wood, at first reluctant to burn for a variety of reasons like wind, lack of kindling, moisture, etc. eventually is made to burn.  Then the fire burns, produces coals and maintenance of the fire becomes easy, one simply throws more wood on the fire and at some point becomes tired of the process and lets the fire die for lack of fuel or actively snuffs it out.  This is the plot of the entertainment known as fire. And there are many variations on it.
The primary reason I prefer fire over TV is that fire has no political or social agenda.  It does what it does. It burns according to various basic rules and thus is educational about the laws of thermodynamics.  Not that looking at fires is what inspired thermodynamicists to come up with their theories, but looking at fires does give one a sense of how fire works and that in itself may give rise to many useful metaphors.  TV on the other hand is almost entirely agenda driven.  Someone is selling you something constantly, obviously through commercials but also in the content that the commercials enable.  Implicit in all story telling is a viewpoint, a lesson, a moral.  Even if nothing obviously new is being communicated, the very fact that the TV portrays some activity is some kind of endorsement for it or a polemic against it.  If you dont agree with the lifestyle choices of the people portrayed on TV then TV watching is a chore.  So fire, much better.
Finally, sitting by a fire with other people is a social affair and as such, becomes a lab experiment in social dynamics.  For one thing, the progress of the fire needs to be managed and as someone once famously said, no two people can ever agree on the right way to poke a fire.  If more than one person wants to manage the fire, a struggle invariably ensues, covertly or overtly.  Words will be said about the management of the fire and a winner in the struggle will emerge.
Enough for now, I have found that the internet has lots of campfire pictures.  I will comment on some of them in future posts since the pictures raise specific points such as preferred ways to arrange the logs, what to wear to a campfire, safety issues around the campfire, what to talk about at a campfire, how to cook on a campfire and more.

Read More..

Fire Good Fire Bad and Whatever Happened to Pyrodiversity

I recently bought a book called California Indians and Their Environment. California Indians unlike most of the other Indians in what is now the US had never developed any agricultural technologies.  Instead, California Indians made their living exclusively off plants growing wild in their environment.  However, Indians managed their environment by burning practices that encouraged their food and medicinal plants to thrive.
Enter the Europeans.
Fire, an environmental management tool for the Indians was a threat to property for the Europeans.  The use of fires intentionally set  by the Indians, what are now called prescribed fires was outlawed by the Europeans. I imagine that the dwellings of Indians were subject to fire damage just like the dwellings of the Europeans but given  that the Indians set fires to manage the vegetation in their territory did not build dwellings where they would get burned down.  In addition, Indian dwelling may have been more temporary or movable and therefore more disposable or more easily relocated if a prescribed burn was called for.

I have never seen the reasons for antipathy to fire spelled out anywhere in text, but the idea that fire is bad seems almost self evident probably at least in part because of a massive public relations campaign by the department of Agriculture.  The appeals were mostly emotional and aimed at a population that probably had very little contact with forests on a day to day basis. The reasons for preventing forest fires are primarily economical and have little to do with ecological concerns.  Fire is a natural phenomenon and ecosystems have adapted to fire and in many cases depend on fire to keep the ecosystem in balance.  Not so in National Forests managed by the Department of Agriculture.  National forests produce lumber.  The lumber is sold to lumber companies and the Department of Agriculture collects money when the trees are cut down.  Trees that go up in smoke dont produce any revenue and whether by training or by natural disposition, most people, myself included dont like the look of burned over forest. 
The National Park people on the other hand dont sell any lumber and so they can afford to let forest fires burn.  No revenues are lost as a consequence.  Perhaps park attendance goes down during a forest fire but quickly picks up again afterward.  National parks even do prescribed burns since some trees like the giant Sequoias dont reproduce unless the ground is burned over.
But back to the Department of Agriculture anti fire campaign.  While the motivation to prevent forest fires was primarily financial, the advertising campaign instead focused on the fact that forest fires could potentially kill cute baby deer and bears, and so Smokey the Bear was created.

OK, so fire wastes resources, not to mention displacing or possibly orphaning young deer.

Heres the orphaned deer theme again.  no mention of wasted resources this time.

And again, this time, who knows, might be Smokeys nephew thats getting bandaged up there.  Smokey wants to know WHY?

This time, no orphaned animals, but the implication is clearly that those two cubs would be in a heap of trouble if there were to be a fire.  Smokey meanwhile is taking a break from shoveling dirt on top of camp fires to read a fan letter.  In the background, city dwellers recreate on a lake in the woods at a forest service campground in an environment of statuesque ponderosas unmarred by fire.

And for the children, a reminder that theres lots of critters that would be indisposed by forest fires, the advertising campaign bleeding out into the culture at large via childrens books.

And finally, WWII poster.  Needs an update there with Putin and Osama.

Read More..

Yurt Report Fire Test

Another update on the yurt.  As my shop mate Tim said, I liked it better when you were building boats.  Still, yurts is what you get for now.  This report is on the fire test, that is, on a test of whether I could build a fire in the yurt without choking on the smoke. 
But first, some outside views of the sixteen foot yurt with a skin on it.  This skin consists of big plastic banners that have done their duty.  They consist of a fabric substrate that is then coated with some sort of plastic.  On this, the graphic is printed. And when the date for the advertisement expires, they are tossed or handed off to some recycler. I got these from my friend Tim who got them from a neighbor. So yes, theyre  recycled.

I dont know why, but this particular skin gives the yurt a decided third world look.  Maybe its the ragged edge on the roof and the dirt on the white banner and the advertisement on the outside.  Looks like a place where you could buy used motor oil.

With just the white wall showing, the place looks a little more dignified.  Ropes that hold the roof and the wall in place courtesy of a friend who sold his sailboat.  Also ropes abandoned by fishing boats and washed ashore at Point Reyes National Seashore.

As I said, this is a test, the 16 foot yurt being a prototype for all aspects of the yurt technology. So far the test of the banners as a covering material has gone on for about a year.  I have already been using the banners as a cover for my kayaks.  What I found out is that the plastic deteriorates within a year, probably at the same rate as those ubiquitous blue tarps sold everywhere.   So I would probably use these plastic sheets only for temporary installations.  The amount of work to do a good job on covers isnt worth it given the short life of this stuff.  Still, for prototyping, they are just fine.  Beside the short lifetime of the banners, another major shortcoming is that they are heavy and stiff, especially in cold weather and getting them installed is quite a chore, especially for the roof.  The walls are not a problem.  There the stiffness is an asset. Plus you have to not be put off by whatever commercial message is printed on the banners. 
And now for the fire test.

The fire in progress with a bucket of water standing by just in case.

Here it is, the fire.  While the fire got going the yurt filled up with a good deal of smoke because the fire wasnt creating enough heat to generate a good updraft that would pull the smoke out of the smoke hole.  But once it burned nice and hot, the smoke was minimal, but that was with the door open.  I will have to do more testing, but I would say that with the door closed, you wouldnt really want a fire inside.  But then, having a fire would hardly be of much benefit. 
Also, this yurt is quite tall with 64 inch high walls and the smoke hole at about 10 feet elevation.  So this is a fair size space to dissipate the smoke. So for now, recommendations are, keep the sticks small to minimize smoke.  Get the fire going good and hot before you invite anyone inside the yurt, ideally, you would build up a good bed of embers first so any new wood on the fire would burn quickly without a lot of smoke.
Or get a stove. I ordered one and will report on that soon as I get it.

Shortly after sunset with some color remaining in the sky and the San Francisco skyline in the background and the tail end of Alameda in the foreground just past the yurt. 

Pretty much the same shot as the one before but with the sky just a bit darker and the yurt lit up just a little more. Either I stoked the fire or the sky got darker and the camera gave the whole picture a little more exposure.  In any case, the yurt is positively glowing.

Read More..

Wood and Canvas Canoe Restoration Impending

I am about to launch into another wood and canvas canoe restoration, assuming the owner is willing to spend the money.  A new one of these kinds of canoes is about $4000, so anything less than $2000 for a restoration is probably a good deal.  Perhaps you would pay more if the boat was an heirloom and you have some emotional connection with it.
This boat looks like a good candidate.  The hull is in fairly good shape. It needs some varnish stripping, some new planking, new skin, paint, interior varnish, outwales, gunwale caps, thwarts and seat restoration and seat hardware. And after all that was replaced or fixed, the boat would once again look spiffy. And of course it would have that old-timey wood, paint and brass, handmade look.

The canoe minus its canvas skin.  Planking is white cedar over white cedar ribs.

A view of the top of the canoe, partially decked in mahogany.

Interior view showing ribs and assortment of rotted wood trim. 

Closeup on the rotted trim.  The curved piece at the top left is one of the exterior stems.

Read More..