Custer State Park

So its the fourth largest fire. That comes from fire suppression. What does the great Penn State University say about fire in the forest, 2oak? See:
http://www.docs.dcnr.pa.gov/cs/groups/public/documents/document/dcnr_004096.pdf

"A history of wildfire suppression efforts, such as fighting every fire possible, has contributed to an accumulation of forest fuels and, thus, a higher risk of wildfires in some areas of the United States. In western forests where fuels have accumulated over time and do not rot because of dry conditions, fire is increasingly common."

So keep advocating total suppression and one of these days...

It's now 50 percent contained.

3oaks wrote:

Mortimer Brewster wrote:
It’s not all bad. Fire is actually beneficial to grasslands. It speeds nutrients to the soil and suppresses tree encroachment.

With that statement, it is very apparent you are not familiar with that part of SW South Dakota at all. :R

It is in the Black Hills of SD, not prairie grass lands. Picture mountains with thick forests of Black Pine and Oak trees and meadows. :@

Actually it is in both, the forest and the grassland. I am kind of familiar with this part of the state. ;)

The trees are Ponderosa pines in the forested areas.

Mortimer Brewster wrote:

Actually I have been there many times. Here is a picture I took in Custer State Park when I was last there in 2015. Those wacky buffalo must have eaten most of the trees. Now that i think about it, I'm fairly certain the buffalo in Custer State Park eat grass, not trees. I couldn't get the mountains in the shot, as they are about 400 miles to the west.

The mountains are roughly 10 miles north of where that shot was taken, depending on where it was taken. It is most definitely the south end of the "Southern Hills" as us locals call them.

dieseltruckdriver wrote:

Mortimer Brewster wrote:

I couldn't get the mountains in the shot, as they are about 400 miles to the west.

The mountains are roughly 10 miles north of where that shot was taken, depending on where it was taken. It is most definitely the south end of the "Southern Hills" as us locals call them.

That pic was taken within the Wildlife Loop and was indeed within the southern half of the State Park. Looking at the fire map, I’m fairly sure it was part of the area affected by the fire.
I tend to be literal and so I don’t consider there to be mountains in the area. This is probably due to the name Black Hills. FWIW, I will readily agree that there are some very mountain-like grades to the north.
I just saw they are forecasting 1-3 inches of snow for Saturday, so that should be a big help with the fire containment. Hopefully everyone will stay safe.

Mortimer Brewster wrote:

dieseltruckdriver wrote:

Mortimer Brewster wrote:

I couldn't get the mountains in the shot, as they are about 400 miles to the west.

The mountains are roughly 10 miles north of where that shot was taken, depending on where it was taken. It is most definitely the south end of the "Southern Hills" as us locals call them.

That pic was taken within the Wildlife Loop and was indeed within the southern half of the State Park. Looking at the fire map, I’m fairly sure it was part of the area affected by the fire.
I tend to be literal and so I don’t consider there to be mountains in the area. This is probably due to the name Black Hills. FWIW, I will readily agree that there are some very mountain-like grades to the north.
I just saw they are forecasting 1-3 inches of snow for Saturday, so that should be a big help with the fire containment. Hopefully everyone will stay safe.

We actually got some precipitation today, but more up north than in the south. There is more forecast for Saturday.
The Black Hills are indeed a mountain range, but much older than the Rocky Mountains, so have eroded over time. Exposed rock has been dated over 2 billion years old. I have read estimates (that are really just guesses IMO) that the peaks were probably well over 14,000 feet.
But yes, they are called the Hills, we don't like to brag. :)