The How, Who, What, and Where with Editor Char Miller

Image

In Burn Scars, award-winning teacher and writer Char Miller assembles a collection of primary sources focused on debates over “light burning” (as prescribed or controlled burning was called). These historic documents show that not only was fire suppression a controversial approach, it was also driven by explicitly racist and colonial beliefs.

The primary sources in Burn Scars are varied and extensive. We’ve discussed how the project unfolds in a way that allows the documents to be in dialogue with one another. How did you select the documents and how did you approach sequencing the pieces in the book?

Part of the process of selecting documents was complicated by the fact that there are so many of them to select from! That tells you something about how much fire—its presence and its threat—mattered to settler society. The Spanish and later American settler-colonists needed fire under control (or most of them did) to ensure that the communities, whether religious or economically driven—could function as they wished. The chronological facts then shaped the order in which these texts appeared, and also why some made it into the book and others did not. As for the latter choices, I wanted to make certain that different voices and approaches were included (and I tried to avoid the echo-chamber that many proponents of fire suppression, for example, inhabited—we have our own problems with that situation).

Yet there were two other guiding principles that structured the book. The first was the absolute necessity of amplifying contemporary Indigenous fire managers and, following the smart suggestion of OSU Press editor Kim Hogeland, bookending the text so that the first document and the last section contain the insights of those working with fire in the present. The second principle depended on the first. I knew there were settlers and western-trained scientists—some of whom were women—who disagreed with the Forest Service–inspired paradigm of fire suppression, and that some of them came to this position due to their understanding the historic record of Indigenous fire management. Putting them into the book seemed essential to broaden our understanding of fire’s complicated cultural context.

As a teacher, writer, and historian, who do you think will benefit from the content featured in Burn Scars and why? What are the key takeaways for students, scholars, and interested readers?

Burn Scars was conceived during the brutal 2020 and 2021 fire seasons which, not incidentally, coincided with the pandemic. My campus was in a three-semester lockdown, I was constantly thinking about my students, who were scattered around the world, and wondered if there was something I might work on that might help them and me understand some of the challenges we face when the air turns acrid and the sky burnt-orange. I began to collect the material that turned into Burn Scars, tested some of the texts in my Zoom classes, gave a number of online talks to forest-related organizations, and the response was strong: people wanted to know about the origins of contemporary fire management. How did the debates of the past shape current decisions? What decisions did Indigenous and non-Indigenous fire mangers make back in the day (and on what basis)? How do those choices shape our current situation? We should all know more about these links between past and present actions, which is especially true for those living in fire zones, and Burn Scars offers that guiding context. So, yes: It is eminently teachable!

What are the lessons or next steps that should be considered in fire management as we continue to think about “light burning” and how it should or should not be used?

We need every tool at our disposal to help mitigate and adapt to fire’s presence on the land. Lots of places, including portions of the US West, are fire starved. But some areas, like Southern California, are not, and that region is home to well over 20 million people, so where and how you return fire to its ecosystems matters enormously. Everywhere must manage cultural and prescribed fires with intention: What are the desired outcomes? How might they be achieved with fire (or, in some cases with fire in combination with defensible clearing and/or other interventions)? These decisions must also pay attention to the ecosystems and the specific sites; there is no-one-size-fits-all approach to utilizing, managing, and where necessary fighting fire.

With recent attention focused on the mega fires in California and the growing forest fires throughout the American West, where will additional resources and education be needed?

Start with education (what teacher wouldn’t say that!). But if we want to build a broad consensus for returning fire to the land, carefully and deliberately, then we must communicate why it is essential to contemporary landscape management, how it regenerates cultural resources and watersheds and revives forests and other ecosystems. As many critics of the Forest Service’s fire suppression policies have long argued, managing with fire can be a lot more effective and efficient, as well as socially beneficial and biologically savvy, than trying to suppress its every outbreak.

Burn Scars: A Documentary History of Fire Suppression, from Colonial Origins to Resurgence of Cultural Burning is now available to order.