Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

barbie
Lv 5
barbie asked in News & EventsCurrent Events · 1 decade ago

Why don't Californians prepare?

Californians should be made to build their homes as fire proof as they can. If they want to live in an area prone to these fires, then why should the rest of the country pay for them to rebuild the same structures? There are plenty of ways to build so the homes won't burn. It's not fair to the rest of the country to shoulder the expense.

I say, rebuild once and then let them pay out of their own pocket after that.

13 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    California has some of the strictest fire codes in the nation. The biggest issue we have over here is that people simply do not maintain a 'buffer zone' around their homes. Without this buffer zone all of the fireproofing on the exterior is useless because the radiant heat from the fire will ignite the curtains and other interior furnishings.

    Other issues are poor city planning. Most of the homes that burn are on cul-de-sacs where the firefighters risk getting trapped if they stay to protect the houses. City planners should require a minimum of two exits for any road near the city/wilderness interface.

    .

    Source(s): Drove through the smoke from the station fire in order to get to work today.
  • 1 decade ago

    As Mike said, California actually has very strict fire regulations for building of homes, but if you build in a canyon area where there is a lot of natural brush (you build there for the beauty of the surroundings by the way), you can't protect that home unless you also build in a buffer zone.

    However, some of these homes were built long before any fire codes were in place, so they don't have the stucco or stone exterior and tile roofs that help to prevent embers from starting a fire on the roof. Once the fire gets hot enough though, no amount of fireproofing will keep it out, unless your draperies and carpet are made of concrete too!

    However, I agree that the rest of the country, or even other Californians should not HAVE to foot the bill for those who continuously build and rebuild in these areas. That is why you have insurance on your home to cover your costs of rebuilding should something like this happen. And there are many areas in California where you can't get fire insurance for your home, simply because the insurance companies won't write it for fire prone areas.

    BTW, I also don't think the rest of the country should HAVE to foot the bill for those who continue to build where there are annual hurricanes, tornadoes or flooding.

  • 1 decade ago

    What are you talking about? Do you say the same thing about people with homes in Tornado alley or in the hurricane zones? A natural disaster is a natural disaster and they occur all across the country. You do as much to prepare as you can but that's it. As far as these California fires go, most of them start in remote areas and get fueled by dry brush, heat and wind. If the stupid smokers and litter bugs didn't pollute California with their trash, these fires might not be so common. My in-laws lost their home in the Laguna Beach fires in the early 90's due to an arsonist. Did they ask for it? No. Stop being so selfish. God forbid you ever become victim to a disaster such as this. Perhaps you might have some sympathy and stop whining about whatever money you need to pay.

  • 1 decade ago

    You have a point there. It is especially bothersome if someone either set the fire(s) or it was the result of carelessness and negligence (throwing out a lit cigarette - how stupid do you have to be - never a good idea - not ok).

    Considering resources are limited and by doing what they do - it robs others of much needed resources - I'm inclined to agree.

    I don't understand why people stick around as long as they do. They not only put themselves at risk but the personnel looking after the fires as well. There is no excuse. Get out when you are told. Worst case - you didn't have to leave but at least you were safe.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    Have you every lived in California? Its one of the most expensive states to live in. The fire codes are very strict here. If your house got burned down I know you wouldn'tt want to pay out of pocket. Getting your home burned down is a very tragic loss both emotionally and financially. Think before you ask.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    What will be left after all those fires, is land. California went from wipe-out on waves to wipe-out from fires. They seem to be selling everything because they are obviously falling down.

  • 1 decade ago

    Surely an answer for the risk involved here is =enforceable zoning regulations=.

    build =only= where there is clear room away from the wooded areas.

    ,

  • 1 decade ago

    i didn't know the public paid to rebuild burned down private homes

    i thought that's what home owners insurance was for

  • Pheemz
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    They do.

    Thing is, with fires of the size and intensity of the wildfires that plague California, Australia and other places there is no preparing.

  • 1 decade ago

    Responsible logging could also help reduce the damage to occupied areas. Just think of all that quality wood turned to ash. A good harvest every year could help generate more income for the state too.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.