Yana Valachovic is trying to soften the blow
With help from Alex Nieves and Jeremy B. White
FIGHTING FIRE WITH LANDSCAPING: Yana Valachovic is at the forefront of trying to get Californians to adapt to fire.
Valachovic, a University of California fire researcher and adviser to two fire-prone Northern California counties, turns into a detective when she visits the aftermath of a wildfire-turned-urban-conflagration, looking for clues on how the fire spread and the ripple effects of small actions people took to protect their property, from new vents to paved entryways.
She's now pushing for tighter landscaping rules within the first five feet of a home as part of a working group at the state Board of Forestry, which is picking the previously paused rules back up after a directive from Gov. Gavin Newsom last month.
She toured the Eaton and Pacific Palisades fire footprints in January and wasn't particularly heartened by what she saw. POLITICO caught up with her to talk about her observations and the heavy task of climate adaptation.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Were these fires any different than past fires?
Eaton and Palisades had a lot of wind driving the fire behavior, and that's similar to the Tubbs Fire, the Camp Fire, the Marshall Fire, all of which took in its path a lot of homes.
I didn't anticipate that there would be as many [firefighting] resources already pre-staged in advance of the weather event. I saw many details that indicate that people had been at the home at some point and tried to do something to prevent fire spread to the structure, or did some amount of suppression, and there was way more of that than I've seen in other fires.
What did you see exactly?
The clues are pretty prominent. I would see evidence that someone had moved a doormat that might have showed signs of ignition away from the structure. I saw dozens of gates that had been cut, kicked, lifted off their hinges and then the gate thrown off and away from the property.
You can also see signs of community members and residents trying to do things, so buckets left in the yard, or a hose reel from a pump that someone may have had and they were pumping water out of their pool. It shows that set of desperate actions and choices that people were having to make before they left.
Did you see any examples of home hardening that made a difference?
I'm trying to put it in a positive light. I think people did things for other reasons that have co-benefits associated with fire. Having your roof up-to-date and well-maintained is really important. I saw examples where people replaced their windows [with] tempered glass that has three times the heat resistant properties. I did see a few examples where folks had done some retrofitting to their vents. A new best practice is to upgrade to some vents that meet standards related to both flame and heat resistance, or as an interim step to add an additional layer of smaller metal mesh screening.
The zone zero rules, which would ban flammable material within five feet of a structure in fire-prone areas, are back on the agenda. Will they go through this time, and why?
I think the time is right. I think there's a lot of interest broadly in changing fire vulnerabilities and trying to help Californians navigate through this new reality of the much higher likelihood of a fire exposure than we've experienced historically, and to help in the insurance space, because if we can reduce some of the hazard, then that will lower the risk and increase the likelihood of a better outcome.
California's politicians have been under political heat for overregulation, not underregulation, in light of the fires. Is adding requirements a smart move?
I think the biggest thing is you can't unknow something. And we have very strong evidence that what's in the first five feet really impacts whether a building's going to survive or not when you have a wildfire with wind behind it. We can't unknow that, and if politicians do nothing in regard to that, I think that's untenable for them.
How do you address concerns about costs?
There's a lot that's in the DIY space that's possible. I think the question really is, how do you refinish around the house to meet your aesthetic standards? And that is, to me, where the cost mostly lies.
What I think homeowners want to see is that when they come home, there's some beauty, there's some color. Maybe you don't want to see your foundations, but that is this kind of softening between the street and the structure. And I think that can be still done visually by pulling those plants a little farther away from the house.
These retrofits and new landscaping are some of California's most prominent physical examples of climate adaptation. How do you bring people along?
I think we need to lead with an empathetic heart, but also be honest about communicating what's at risk and what the possibilities are and how we can make a difference to adapt to the fire environment that we're in.
Smokey Bear is for forest fires. Do you have a nomination for a new mascot for this era of wildfire education?
Maybe a red-tailed hawk? They have exceptional eyesight — maybe we could say visionary — and they are adaptable and thrive in many habitats. In this moment we need to think and live differently. — CvK
NEW NEWSLETTER: Are you a transportation nerd curious about the future of autonomous vehicles? A fire techie monitoring Silicon Valley's influence in Washington, D.C.? Or just a friendly POLITICO fan? You'll love our new sister newsletter, POLITICO Pro Technology: California Decoded. You can subscribe here.
Did someone forward you this newsletter? Sign up here!
SPEAKING OF FIRE: Katie Porter immediately staked some ground on the property insurance problem in her first campaign event after she announced her candidacy for California governor in 2026.
Speaking at a big Democratic club in Orange County on Thursday, Porter said 'the next governor is going to have to head-on tackle the home insurance problem.'
One of her big ideas: getting the state involved as a backstop.
'I do think that the state may have a role in thinking about wildfire risk,' Porter said in response to a moderator's question. 'Reinsurance, insuring the insurer, that is a way that California could come into some of this.'
She added a word of caution about 'learning lessons' from other government backstops, noting that the federal government's National Flood Insurance Program isn't solvent. She also mentioned incentivizing home hardening and recruiting more firefighters to make California a more enticing place for insurance companies.
'We also need to think about bigger umbrella ways to bring in private insurers and keep them here at a rate that makes homeowners insurance affordable,' she said. — CvK, JBW
AND DON'T FORGET THE CURRENT COMMISSIONER: Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara provisionally approved a 22 percent emergency rate hike for State Farm today.
The state's largest insurer, with 16 percent of the market, had asked for the emergency hike to stave off a credit downgrade after the Los Angeles fires, which it called the costliest disaster in its history. The company has been in deep financial trouble for years, fueling its 2023 decision to stop writing new policies in California.
State Farm executives have said that the emergency rate hike wouldn't be enough for the company to start writing new policies again, but that it was probably enough to avoid non-renewals through 2025.
Lara scheduled a full rate hearing for April 8, at which State Farm will have to justify its request with more data or else issue refunds. — CvK
BUYER'S REMORSE: Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly is ditching his Tesla.
The Democrat announced the move today in a post on X, just days after Trump turned the White House lawn into a Tesla showroom to support Elon Musk as the company's stock plummets.
Kelly in a one-minute video said he couldn't drive the car without thinking about the damage Musk's Department of Government Efficiency — tasked with slashing federal spending — has done to the government, including the firing of veterans. Kelly is a retired U.S. Navy captain.
'Elon Musk kind of turned out to be an asshole, and I don't want to drive a car built and designed by an asshole,' Kelly said.
Trump and his conservative allies like Sean Hannity are trying to boost Tesla, which faces international protests amid Musk's involvement in right-wing politics. U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said Friday that she's opening an investigation into cases of vandalism at Tesla dealerships.
Democrats want their own investigation. Four senators, including California's Adam Schiff, sent a letter to the U.S. Office of Government Ethics on Thursday asking it to probe the White House lawn episode. — AN
— California snowpack is still below average, despite this week's storm.
— KCRW's Good Food podcast dives into how climate change is upending California's iconic Dungeness crab fishery.
— Assemblymember Tasha Boerner wants to go to the ballot to refocus the California Public Utilities Commission on affordability.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
2 days ago
- USA Today
A fog-free San Francisco? Scientists ponder California's climate future
A fog-free San Francisco? Scientists ponder California's climate future Nearly 70% of Californians live in coastal counties, which figure to be most impacted by diminished fog. Show Caption Hide Caption Climate change is now impacting where Americans choose to live Many U.S. locales have reached a climate change "tipping point." Populations are declining as flooding becomes unbearable. SAN FRANCISCO – As most of the U.S. sweltered in mid-July 2022 − when temperatures in many major cities reached the high 90s and even triple digits − a national weather map showed San Francisco topping out at 65 degrees. It was just a typical foggy summer day in the city by the bay, which averaged 62 degrees that month, about the same as the next two Julys. Now the advent of climate change raises the question of whether summertime visitors will stop rushing out to buy sweatshirts upon arrival and instead feel perfectly comfortable in shorts and T-shirts. The future of San Francisco's iconic fog has been debated in media stories during recent years, and some experts note a diminished cloud cover along the California coast that could lead to a warming trend. But few if any detect signs that San Francisco's summer chill is going away like the once-celebrated Fog City Diner, which shut down at the end of May. 'From the data, I can't foresee it any time soon,'' said Rachel Clemesha, a project scientist with the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California-San Diego who studies the state's coastal climate. 'There are years when there's more or less cloud cover. The last couple of years have been within that range. It is a very foggy place, so it would be very dramatic to get you a fog-free city.'' Data on decreasing fog along coast is 'spotty' Clemesha said some decrease has been confirmed in Southern California in what residents there call the marine layer, mostly in highly urbanized areas, but nothing that applies statewide. Peter Weiss, a faculty researcher and lecturer at the UC-Santa Cruz department of environmental sciences, said that despite a growing narrative of waning fog along the California coast, the data to support it is 'very spotty,'' with few academic studies in the last decade. The reasons include the fog's unpredictability – Weiss calls it an 'ephemeral phenomenon'' – and the lack of a standard way to measure it. Some studies, such as the landmark analysis by James Johnstone and Todd Dawson in 2010, rely on airport visibility records. Others use satellite images to determine the extent of the cloud cover, and others yet believe water content is a more valuable gauge. The airport records are the most extensive, going back to 1950, and Weiss said from that year until 2012 they revealed a 5% decrease in fogginess. 'Nobody's quite sure why,'' he said. 'It probably has to do with the ocean's sea-surface temperature, and that goes through various phases. Overall, there's warming due to global warming, but it's episodic. There appears to be some pattern with less fog after the warmer sea-surface temperatures, but this is still an area of research.'' Many California residents, ecosystems would be affected While the scientific community endeavors to figure out the long-range impact of climate change on California's coastal fog, there's a strong consensus that diminished cloud cover would have a harmful effect. Nearly 27 million of California's 39 million residents – close to 70% – live in coastal counties, by far the largest total in the nation, and they generate 80% of the state's gross domestic product. Their lives are certain to be impacted, as would be the state's powerhouse agriculture industry, which totals close to $60 billion a year in revenue. Species such as the widely admired coastal redwoods, which get up to 40% of their yearly water intake from fog, could be threatened if that resource dwindled. Daniel Fernandez, an environmental sciences professor at Cal State Monterey Bay, is part of a group seeking a grant from a private foundation to study how climate change may alter fog and affect various ecosystems. 'You could have significant die-off of species that are dependent on the fog at locations where it gets reduced,'' he said. 'It would also change how people live. When you look a fog zones, you don't need air conditioning. There are a lot of things we don't need that we take for granted. Those things could all change.'' It can feel like living in a cloud The fog, more prevalent in the summer, is created when warm and moist air sweeps over cold waters, which are churned off the California coast by strong winds in what's known as upwelling. The marine cover can be light enough to simply cool down a warm day and thick enough to wet residents' hair and obscure their eyeglasses, giving the impression they're living in a cloud. Some years the fog is thicker than others, but it tends to be more extensive in Northern California than the state's southern coast because of the differences in their ocean temperature (colder in the north), latitude and topography. Ian Faloona, a professor of land, air and water resources at UC Davis, said he and a colleague conducted a study using regional climate models and found a downward trend in cloudiness along the coast, but agrees the overall evidence 'is not going to hit you over the head.'' He compares that to the abundant data indicating California in general is warming quickly, about 1 degree Celsius – 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit – per decade. Even San Francisco is heating up a bit, though not nearly as fast: Its average summer temperature has risen by 1.6 degrees Fahrenheit since 1970, according to the independent research group Climate Central. Two different perspectives on what the future holds But climate scientists are split over whether the increased heat will lead to less fog because the air over the ocean won't be cold enough to condense, or whether stronger winds will atone for that factor. 'Under climate change, we know the land is warming much faster than the ocean, so that temperature difference across the land and ocean interface is increasing, which could drive stronger winds, which could help preserve this cloudiness,'' Faloona said. 'So there are two arguments you could make about what we theoretically think should happen, and which one's winning out I think is still an open scientific question.'' Sara Baguskas, an assistant professor at San Francisco State University with a specialty in coastal fog, said the lack of conclusive evidence that it's ebbing should not induce complacency but rather stimulate funding to study and predict its patterns. She's among the climate researchers who have heard from longtime coastal residents saying the marine layer has subsided over the years. 'So it's not unreasonable to be concerned about coastal fog declining in the future, but it diminishing completely is unlikely,'' she said. 'No coastal fog in California is a scary thought for both people and ecosystems.''
Los Angeles Times
4 days ago
- Los Angeles Times
California tsunami: Here's where damage and casualties could be the worst
Tsunamis pose a risk to the entire California coast. But should a major one strike, how bad could it be? A single tsunami likely won't cause the worst-case scenario for every region. But in total, more than 680,000 Californians are in a tsunami hazard area during the daytime. And in all, $12.6 billion in damage is possible across California's 20 coastal and bayside counties — a figure that doesn't include damage to ports, harbors, roads, essential facilities or other infrastructure. There are two main types of scenarios for a tsunami. The first, a 'distant-source' tsunami, comes from far away, like one spawned by a major earthquake in Alaska. That would provide an extensive warning — six hours for L.A. and five hours for San Francisco — but could produce the highest level of inundation for large swaths of the state. Then there are 'near-source' tsunamis, which can wash ashore in as little as 10 minutes following a nearby earthquake — leaving little time for a notice or evacuation. Here are some scenarios for different parts of California. Unless otherwise mentioned, figures are from the California Tsunami Program, which is run by the California Governor's Office of Emergency Services and the California Geological Survey. Distant-source tsunami: More than 350 people could die or be injured along the Southern California coast if people wait to evacuate half an hour after an official evacuation warning is given. That includes about 200 casualties in Los Angeles County, roughly 80 in San Diego County, 60 in Orange County and about a dozen in Ventura County. A hypothetical magnitude 9.3 earthquake from Alaska — similar in scale to the monstrous 1964 tsunami-generating temblor — would offer six hours of warning; large temblors from Chile could provide 13 hours of warning. The maximum projected distant-source tsunami could bring waves of 15 feet above the mean sea level to Marina del Rey, the Santa Monica Pier, Naples and Alamitos Bay; 14 feet elsewhere in other parts of Long Beach; 10 feet at Manhattan Beach, San Pedro and the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach; 9 feet in Malibu, Redondo Beach and Palos Verdes Hills; and 8 feet at Leo Carrillo State Beach. Those estimates were issued by the California Geological Survey and published in the city of Los Angeles' hazard mitigation plan. Damage estimate from distant-source tsunami: More than $1.4 billion. Near-source tsunami: Los Angeles could see a tsunami move from its source to coastal areas in as few as 10 or 15 minutes, the city's tsunami plan warns. According to public documents, depending on the fault that ruptures, or where an underwater landslide is triggered, there could be locally generated tsunami heights of 30 feet in Avalon on Catalina Island; 24 feet at Palos Verdes Hills; 18 feet in Two Harbors; 11 feet in Redondo Beach; 9 feet in Malibu; 8 feet in Long Beach and the Santa Monica Pier; 7 feet in Manhattan Beach and San Pedro; 5 feet in Marina del Rey; and 4 feet at Leo Carrillo State Beach. In the city of Los Angeles, officials say that the most catastrophic scenario would involve an underwater landslide triggered by an earthquake, because 'we wouldn't know that that landslide would occur until the wave arrives,' said Jon Brown, assistant general manager for the city's Emergency Management Department. Other L.A. County areas with considerable vulnerability include the ports, as well as San Pedro and Long Beach. The city of Los Angeles has an estimated 23,000 residents in the tsunami hazard area. In Long Beach, the number is 31,000. Distant-source tsunami: More than 230 people could die or be injured if people wait half an hour to evacuate after an official warning is given. Santa Cruz County could see more than 130 casualties; San Luis Obispo County, about 80. The estimated potential casualty tolls could be 16 in Monterey County and seven in Santa Barbara County. Damage estimate from distant-source tsunami: More than $3.5 billion. Near-source tsunami: Santa Cruz and Monterey counties could see a tsunami within minutes following quake-triggered underwater landslides, documents from both counties say. 'Even a moderate earthquake could cause a local-source tsunami from submarine landsliding in Monterey Bay,' public documents say. A near-source tsunami could bring waves of up to 15 feet above the mean sea level in the city of Marina, 9 feet at the Salinas River; 8 feet at the Pajaro River and Sand City, just northeast of Monterey, and 6 feet at Moss Landing, according to data published in Monterey County's hazard mitigation plan. Such devastation would not be unprecedented. A large earthquake in the Santa Barbara area in 1812 resulted in a tsunami 'that wiped out many coastal villages and destroyed ships in the harbor,' according to the U.S. Geological Survey. And 7-foot waves resulted from a tsunami in 1927, generated by an earthquake about 5 miles west of the Santa Barbara County coast, according to the California Geological Survey. The USGS said there's evidence of deposits from underwater landslides offshore of Santa Barbara dating back over 160,000 years, which suggests that 'future earthquakes could cause large submarine landslides and devastating tsunamis.' Distant-source tsunami: More than 1,300 people could die or be injured if people wait half an hour to evacuate after an official warning is given. About 500 of them could be in San Francisco; about 300 apiece in San Mateo and Marin counties; nearly 200 in Alameda County and 33 in Contra Costa County. Just north of the region, in Mendocino County, five people could die or be injured in that scenario. A hypothetical tsunami-generating earthquake in Alaska could provide 5 hours of warning; one from Chile could provide 13 hours of warning. The maximum projected distant-source tsunami could result in tsunami of 32 feet above mean sea level in San Francisco's Ocean Beach; 31 feet in Pacifica in San Mateo County; 27 feet in Bolinas in Marin County; 18 feet in Alameda; 14 feet in Sausalito and San Francisco's Aquatic Park; 13 feet on Alcatraz Island; and 11 feet in Richmond and Treasure Island, according to the California Geological Survey. Damage estimate from distant-source tsunami: More than $6.5 billion. Near-source tsunami: In Northern California, a near-source tsunami could generate a tsunami of 9 feet above sea level in Bolinas; 8 feet in Pacifica; 7 feet in Sausalito; 6 feet at Ocean Beach; 5 feet in Alameda; and 4 feet at Alcatraz Island, Treasure Island, Aquatic Park, Redwood City and Richmond. Cascadia scenario: Given its proximity to the Cascadia subduction zone, Del Norte County — the state's northernmost coastal region — is perhaps more exposed to tsunami risk than any other part of California. If people wait 10 minutes after an earthquake to evacuate — the shaking itself would be the warning to flee — more than 3,150 are at risk of being killed or injured by tsunami in Del Norte County, and more than 720 would be at risk in neighboring Humboldt County. Flooding could reach up to 30 feet above the average high tide along the outer coast of Humboldt Bay and the Eureka area, and up to 50 feet toward Crescent City. 'A large quake generated by the Cascadia subduction zone could create waves twice as large as the 1964 event, especially in Crescent City,' Rick Wilson, a former head of the California Geological Survey tsunami program, said in a statement. Damage estimates: Del Norte County, which is home to Crescent City, could see more than $1 billion in damage. Humboldt County, home to Eureka, could see $22 million.
Yahoo
7 days ago
- Yahoo
Sonoma County officials warn of dangerous wildfire season outlook
(KRON) — Sonoma County officials are urging residents to prepare for a high-risk wildfire season. As temperatures rise through the summer and fall, high fuel loads and unfavorable windy weather conditions could combine to create a large wildfire. County officials wrote, 'Sonoma County is expected to experience warmer and drier-than-normal conditions from June through August, with only limited relief from the coastal marine layer.' Officials said extended periods of dry and high winds will lead to flash drought conditions. Flash droughts, characterized by prolonged periods of high temperatures and strong winds, cause rapid evaporation and drying vegetation. 'We're entering this fire season with conditions that demand heightened vigilance,' said Lynda Hopkins of the county Board of Supervisors. Cal Fire Division Chief Ben Nicholls with the Sonoma-Lake-Napa Unit said, 'The reports clearly show we need to be vigilant and prepared for an increased threat of large wildfires.' The 2017 Tubbs Fire ravaged Napa and Sonoma counties, destroying more than 5,500 homes and killing 22 people. On October 8, 2017, tens of thousands of people woke up to the sounds of sirens and crackling flames. It was a dark, uncomfortably warm night, met with ferocious winds. People were forced to abandon their homes within minutes. It took four months for firefighters to contain the blaze that blistered 36,000 acres. The National Weather Service created a new warning level in 2025, known as 'Particularly Dangerous Situation' (PDS), to indicate an unusually high risk of severe weather in association with extreme Red Flag Warnings. A PDS warning is used to highlight specific areas most vulnerable during a natural weather event. Heading into the second half of 2025, community members are encouraged to sign up for emergency alerts, maintain defensible space around their homes, and review evacuation routes. You can sign up for alerts and find fire preparedness resources at 'We can't prevent every wildfire, but we as a community can be better prepared to keep ourselves and loved ones safe,' said Jeff DuVall, director of the Sonoma County Department of Emergency Management. 'We've strengthened our alert systems, updated evacuation maps, and are working hard to ensure the public has timely, accurate information when it matters most.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
