Exploding targets under scrutiny after devastating fire

WENATCHEE, Wash. (AP) - While dozens of wildfires were burning out of control in north central Washington last summer, two people decided to do some target shooting in the dry, grassy hills above Alta Lake. They set up an exploding target and fired at it, causing a loud boom and a huge smoke-like cloud.
The outing resulted in the Goat Fire, which would burn 73,378 acres, the Wenatchee World reported.
U.S. Forest Service officials have not said whether their investigators believe the fire was caused by the target or a bullet striking something else.
There's plenty of disagreement about whether targets that explode can start fires. Some think they're dangerous and should be banned; others say they're no danger.
But as exploding targets become more popular they are more often linked to wildfires. The devices have been blamed for starting at least two dozen fires across the West last summer, the newspaper reported.
Fire officials last summer said that two other smaller fires in north central Washington - a 120-acre blaze near Entiat and a quarter-acre fire near Cashmere - were started by people shooting at exploding targets.
Kelsey Hilderbrand, owner of High Mountain Hunting Supply in Wenatchee, sells one brand of exploding targets, Tannerite, for between $4.95 and $9 apiece.
"They're very popular, and they're a lot of fun," he said, adding that he has used them and that the targets have never started a fire.
"They are not a heat-related explosion, so there's no way to have an ignition-based system," Hilderbrand told the Wenatchee World
Others disagree.
"There's no question they start fires," said Bill Gabbert, a former wildland firefighter and fire investigator in Southern California who produces the online magazine, Wildfire Today.
Gabbert believes they are a growing danger because more and more people are starting to use them.
"I think we need to figure out a way to ban the use of exploding target," he said, adding, "I'm convinced they are too dangerous to use."
Exploding targets are a mixture of an oxidizer - usually ammonium nitrate - and a fuel, such as aluminum.
The U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives does not regulate the sale and distribution of these powder chemicals, even when they're sold as kits designed to become explosives, according to its May 2012 newsletter.
Once mixed, someone must have a federal explosives permit to transport them, the newspaper reported. Sportsmen generally mix them onsite before using them as targets.
In Washington state, exploding targets are illegal to use on state land, said Larry Raedel, chief of law enforcement for the state Department of Natural Resources.
"We don't allow any explosive or incendiary devices," he said, including Tannerite, an exploding target which, its manufacturers claim, does not ignite fires.
The question isn't so simple on federal lands.
"We don't have anything that specifically addresses explosive ammunition," said Tom Knappenberger, regional spokesman for the U.S. Forest Service.
In California, Sgt. Bob Epps, bomb squad commander for the Riverside County Sheriff's hazardous device team, said his officers are charging businesses and sportsmen for possession of these chemicals, even unmixed.
Retail stores in his county have been told they have 30 days to return their inventory of binary explosives, or they can be charged with a felony under California law that bans the devices.
"We understand that this has not been tightly regulated," he told the newspaper.
Epps said he believes the explosives could cause serious injury, although he hasn't had any incidents in his jurisdiction.
John Maclean, who has written several books on fatal wildfires, said he's concerned about the danger that exploding targets pose to firefighters.
In northeastern Pennsylvania, two game commissioners were investigating a fire caused by exploding targets when an unexploded target suddenly exploded. They checked into a local hospital with temporary blindness and hearing loss, and went back to work the next day, the Wenatchee World reported.
"It's a growing problem, and it's going to get worse," Maclean said.
Local sportsmen say the real issue should focus on whether people are acting recklessly. Hilderbrand said the issue rests with the individual responsibility of the target shooter.
The outing resulted in the Goat Fire, which would burn 73,378 acres, the Wenatchee World reported.
U.S. Forest Service officials have not said whether their investigators believe the fire was caused by the target or a bullet striking something else.
There's plenty of disagreement about whether targets that explode can start fires. Some think they're dangerous and should be banned; others say they're no danger.
But as exploding targets become more popular they are more often linked to wildfires. The devices have been blamed for starting at least two dozen fires across the West last summer, the newspaper reported.
Fire officials last summer said that two other smaller fires in north central Washington - a 120-acre blaze near Entiat and a quarter-acre fire near Cashmere - were started by people shooting at exploding targets.
Kelsey Hilderbrand, owner of High Mountain Hunting Supply in Wenatchee, sells one brand of exploding targets, Tannerite, for between $4.95 and $9 apiece.
"They're very popular, and they're a lot of fun," he said, adding that he has used them and that the targets have never started a fire.
"They are not a heat-related explosion, so there's no way to have an ignition-based system," Hilderbrand told the Wenatchee World
Others disagree.
"There's no question they start fires," said Bill Gabbert, a former wildland firefighter and fire investigator in Southern California who produces the online magazine, Wildfire Today.
Gabbert believes they are a growing danger because more and more people are starting to use them.
"I think we need to figure out a way to ban the use of exploding target," he said, adding, "I'm convinced they are too dangerous to use."
Exploding targets are a mixture of an oxidizer - usually ammonium nitrate - and a fuel, such as aluminum.
The U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives does not regulate the sale and distribution of these powder chemicals, even when they're sold as kits designed to become explosives, according to its May 2012 newsletter.
Once mixed, someone must have a federal explosives permit to transport them, the newspaper reported. Sportsmen generally mix them onsite before using them as targets.
In Washington state, exploding targets are illegal to use on state land, said Larry Raedel, chief of law enforcement for the state Department of Natural Resources.
"We don't allow any explosive or incendiary devices," he said, including Tannerite, an exploding target which, its manufacturers claim, does not ignite fires.
The question isn't so simple on federal lands.
"We don't have anything that specifically addresses explosive ammunition," said Tom Knappenberger, regional spokesman for the U.S. Forest Service.
In California, Sgt. Bob Epps, bomb squad commander for the Riverside County Sheriff's hazardous device team, said his officers are charging businesses and sportsmen for possession of these chemicals, even unmixed.
Retail stores in his county have been told they have 30 days to return their inventory of binary explosives, or they can be charged with a felony under California law that bans the devices.
"We understand that this has not been tightly regulated," he told the newspaper.
Epps said he believes the explosives could cause serious injury, although he hasn't had any incidents in his jurisdiction.
John Maclean, who has written several books on fatal wildfires, said he's concerned about the danger that exploding targets pose to firefighters.
In northeastern Pennsylvania, two game commissioners were investigating a fire caused by exploding targets when an unexploded target suddenly exploded. They checked into a local hospital with temporary blindness and hearing loss, and went back to work the next day, the Wenatchee World reported.
"It's a growing problem, and it's going to get worse," Maclean said.
Local sportsmen say the real issue should focus on whether people are acting recklessly. Hilderbrand said the issue rests with the individual responsibility of the target shooter.
KOMO, nice guilt by association: the picture of firefighters at the Table Mountain/Taylor Bridge fire, which was caused by sparks from a WELDER. I guess I should be grateful it wasn't a Sandy Hook picture.
@Watcher3Â
OMG, you're right, that IS the wrong picture!! Thank you for pointing that out. (I would have noticed it myself, but my tin foil hat is at the cleaners right now.) Well, clearly, this completely absolves whoever started the fire. And it also demonstrates that exploding targets are perfectly safe.
You shoould receive your Red Herring Award in the mail within 3 to 5 days.
@Central @Watcher3 I never said they were safe - clearly they need to be used with care - I am just saying that associating this topic with what was a HUGE fire is misleading. They could have just said "firefighters fighting a brush fire, file photo". Where is their journalistic integrity?
@Watcher3Â
Journalistic integrity? You do realize this is KOMO, don't you?  ;-)
Love the multiple anti gun stories. Guess we will forget about camp fires, lit cigarettes, vehicles oh and God for his lightening for starting most forest fires.
@Common Sense No, we'll all squak about those, minus the lightning (...an act of weather conditions, not a deity...). But these wildfires were started by other man-made conditions. Campfires, tossed cigarettes, and arson have created some of the worst wildfires in history, no doubt about it.Â
@Hadrian @Common Sense Logic...it confuses them every time...
All we have to do is ban stupid people, and the world will be just fine. Hmm Dry grass, exploding targets, bullets, sparks, maybe a fire??? Should we maybe have some water or fire extinguisher on hand. Seriously how do we start a ban for stupid people, ohhhh thats right, have to get thier leader out of office first....
Say what you like, but it is a simple case of a few dim bulbs making hassles for reasonable people. Dim bulbs on both sides of the issue, mind you.
Still never fails to amaze me the sheer stupidity of people. An exploding target in a dry grassy field? Dumb dumb and dumb all over again. What ever happened to shooting sodas and fruit? Maybe I'm old fashioned in that respect.
NO matter what - if an action destroys property, starts a fire or - they must be held financially responsible.
This comment has been deleted
@Sissy I'm tired of people that cannot spell out words and use numerals instead.
Thing which explodes = probably dangerous in the wrong hands. Morons who decide to do this during existing nearby horrible wildfires and in an area of dry grass and heat = responsible for resulting fire. If I light a firework inside my neighbor's shed and it catches fire, I'm responsible for the damage and costs. Â Is the firework probably "safe" if used properly on pavement out in the open? Yes. Complete and utter socket rience*. :p
Best idea would be next time have your friend hold the exploding target while you shoot at it.Â
(*actually I'm a chemist and handle potentially dangerous chemicals all day, and am legally able to do so. I'd never want to think about some knuckledragger from them thar hills mixing this with that and playing around)
@Hadrian Very well said.
More idiots with guns. What's new. Just remember that we all paid to put that fire out.Â
@lakeview Dimwit with a keyboard ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
@lakeview Hopefully YOU paid extra. We can call it the "lakeview name calling fee" seeing as how it's the one thing you excel at in this forum. Calling names like a child. Carry on.
@Harley-H.S.C.@lakeview"Hopefully YOU paid extra."
Typical - YOU want someone ELSE to pay YOUR share of the costs...
@What-the-Heck@OrcasThunder "you completely missed the point."
And that was...?
That gun owners somehow are exempt from paying for their actions and the damage s they cause?Â
Some people might orgasm over exploding M-80's tossed off an overpass at the cars below - and you wouldn't hold them responsible for paying for the damage if that causes a wreck, or if some-one dies from a heart attack...you would say that they are "entitled" to have "fun" anyway they want to.
That's the kind of mentality you seem to be attracted to - risk everything, and damn the cost to those who have to clean up the mess.
@OrcasThunder Typical - you completely missed the point.
@Harley-H.S.C. @lakeview Way to take the high road...
lol,  "There's no question they start fires," said Bill Gabbert the continues  "I think we need to figure out a way to ban the use of exploding target," he said, adding, "I'm convinced they are too dangerous to use."  Bill Gabbert where is your facts before calling people to action?  I do believe though that it is big possibility that since Exponential Reaction does cause heat through Friction and Expansion and that the bullet is also heated while traveling through the target and barrel, plus a perfect dry hot climate then a fire happens. All the factors needed for Spontaneous Combustion are really high.  Think exploding empty 50 gal barrels blowing peoples heads off or Flour Bomb explosion.  The Radiant Heat flash could ignite dry fuels in an secondary reaction.  SCIENCE.  Â
@Zaga So the fireball these targets produce when hit is just my imagination? Have a look at king 5's story as they have a nice pic of one of these going off and unless I'm mistaken, it clearly shows flame...
The issue here is 'if used properly'. The ones that were used that started the fires mentioned in the article, were not used properly.
This comment has been deleted
@what?  The fire ball is not your imagination.  A hot glowing body of ignited gas that is generated by something on fire is a flame.  Its just Science.  Why don't they just quote scientific facts. Instead of saying things like I am convinced and show people a video.  We still don't know if the bullet that just got thrust out of the barrel by a hot/burning explosive charge was thing this caused the fires or the Target itself or a combination of interactions between the two.   Its a issue of who the hell goes out in perfect wildfire conditions and thinks it a good idea to shoot.   I guess it tops the cake when they also use an "Exploding Target"  too.  Just like if someone uses a "Assault Rifle" the Rifle is the not problem the person using it is,  people want to Ban those too.  Â
well goll durn, whens I be shootin', th only thang better n the gunz firin' is ifn' I kin 'splode sumthin' whiles i's shootin'!!!!!
YEEEEEEE HAAAAWWWWWWW! Y KAINT STOP MAH RAHT TA SPLODE THINGS WHEN I'M SHOOTIN THINGS
@SwampThing  Dimwit ,,,,,,,,,,,,
@Snoop @SwampThing Naaaa, he's just a prejudiced city dweller.
@Snoop @SwampThing DON'T BE A-HATIN' B-CUZ AH LIKES MY SHOOTIN TA HAVE SOME 'SPLODIN' ALSO, OK GUY? THIS IS MAH 'MURRICA TOO BUDDY AND DON CHEW FORGIT IT! DON TREAD ON ME!
@SwampThing @Snoop Get too close to that last propane tank you shot up did we?
There are ALREADY burn bans in place. Â Just prosecute under existing laws without creating new ones that only apply to a few people. Â Quit wasting OUR money!
@NWFreeman Exactly! It's already illegal to use fireworks in most forest lands so just class them as fireworks..which is really what they are more or less.
No need to ban these perfectly safe devices. Just restrict where you can use them - like only inside your own house.
@Central These targets can be shot with bb guns or even arrows. They are no more dangerous than fire works ,,, but then you liberal sparkler twirlers wont ban those will you?
@Snoop @CentralÂ
LIBERAL?!?!  Who you callin' LIBERAL?!?! Why, them's fightin' words! I challenge you to a duel. <slap, slap>. Explodin' targets at 20 paces. I gets to go first, seein's as y'all lobbed the first insult. <apologies to Yosemite Sam>
(And just so you know, I've already started a petition to ban sparklers. Those things scare the bejeezez outa me.)
"I think we need to figure out a way to ban the use of exploding target," he said, adding, "I'm convinced they are too dangerous to use." One man's opinion, and the solution? BAN THEM!!! What ever happened to rational thought? Just like guns, irrational, scared little sheep call for their removal from our society, but cry when they are victimized in a crime because no one was there to defend them in time. Is it possible that exploding targets cause fires? Yes. Would logic dictate, that if you want to use an exploding target, you do so in a low fire risk area? Yes. Does BANNING everything that you think could POSSIBLY be bad make sense? Hell no. Grow up people, and use the brains God gave you for crying out loud. At the rate everything is being banned or regulated in our country, soon, we'll have to get a permit to go to the bathroom.
@Harley-H.S.C. I don't consider myself an "irrational, scared little sheep", but I would like to see explosive targets banned because I'm the one who pays for their misuse.  The people who caused the Goat Fire haven't been caught and likely couldn't pay for the entire cost of fighting that fire if they were, so it's taxpayers who get stuck with the bill.
Having said that, I think it's only "scared little sheep" who worry about needing permits to go to the bathroom.
@Harley-H.S.C.  You noticed that too ,,, wish others could see how much we are being "regulated " in the sake of safety.
@Snoop@Harley-H.S.C.
"wish others could see how much we are being "regulated " in the sake of safety."
Your "fun" does not entitle you to harm the property or lives of others.
Considering the amount of damage and cost to taxpayers, plus the risk of injury or death of those fighting the fires, perhaps the stupidity of those who used these to start fires DOES justify prohibiting them!Â
@Snoop @OrcasThunder Yawn...actually, I voted "No"...stop projecting your own behavior, it doesn't become even you.
@OrcasThunder  Your silly comparisons amaze me ,,, your fun of smoking pot doesn't "entitle" you to drive impaired and causing injury or death to innocent people. Whenever you guys cause traffic accidents you waste tax payers money by making police and fire personnel respond to your negligence. And you guys couldn't wait to legalize a substance that was previously"BANNED". Bet you cant see your hypocrisy.
@Harley-H.S.C."What ever happened to rational thought?"
Indeed - shooting at these in tinder dry grass, where's the "rational thought" in that?Â
Doing that is just like leaving a fire burning in a campfire, or tossing a lit cigarette out of a moving car...arson, pure and simple.Â
@OrcasThunder @Harley-H.S.C. So - what experience and knowledge do you have of the chemistry of exploding targets, that allows you to have a "rational thought" on the subject?
@OrcasThunder  Another "I have A FRIEND" story ,,, I also have a friend who read your stupid comment about how qualified you are on fires simply because you pay taxes. My friend thinks your an idiot.
@RN1 "I didn't say you don't have the right to express your opinion"
Actually, the words "So - what experience and knowledge do you have of the chemistry of exploding targets, that allows you to have a "rational thought" on the subject?"pretty much imply that you are.
You say that you make these targets as a hobby...how do I know that you are telling the truth - and yet I am not challenging you when you make that claim. By your "logic" I seem to have that right.
@RN1@OrcasThunder@Harley-H.S.C."Perhaps your temper is why you are against guns"
Why do you think I am "against guns"? Because I don't want dangerous people having them?Â
Don't make assumptions when you don't know what you are talking about.
@OrcasThunder @RN1 Nope. That why we do it in April - the grass is green / wet enough that fires are not a huge concern. That is why I wrote above about education and such, not simply banning them because of the potential for problems; that way lies madness.
@OrcasThunder @RN1 @Harley-H.S.C. I didn't say you don't have the right to express your opinion. I was questioning the weight a reader should give your opinion. I trust you understand the difference.Â
My, my, profanity. Tsk, tsk. Perhaps your temper is why you are against guns - you don't trust yourself with them, and project that lack of self-control onto others.
@RN1"One of the things I do recreationally is make explosive targets."
So? Do you set them out in dry grass? If not, fine - have fun blowing whatever you want. If yes, stupidity is the problem.
@RN1 @OrcasThunder @Harley-H.S.C. Â
More to the point, where the hell do YOU get the f***ing RIGHT to question MY RIGHT to express an opinion on ANY topic?Â
@OrcasThunder @RN1 @Harley-H.S.C. Not stupidity. Experience. One of the things I do recreationally is make explosive targets. Typically we make about a ton in April. No, we don't set it off all at once, yes, it's done legally in accordance with all applicable state and federal laws. Most of the time the biggest problem in setting off gasoline-fueled fireballs is that the explosives put out the road flares, so we have to use a bunch of them. Some of the shooters are good enough that the 4" targets at 700 yards are not that much of a challenge, so we hang some from tree-branches or clotheslines to swing in the wind. They are more fun than paper because you can "poach" them from another shooter, so they are watching the target through their scope when they hear your shot, then watch your bullet blow up "their" target. You also get a very visceral THUMP from a pound of explosives going off 25 yards away.Â
Over the years I've helped produce and set off somewhere north of 15,000 pounds of explosives, NOT counting my army days, where I was trained (among other things) in demolitions and minefield work. The biggest problem we've ever had with fires was NOT from explosives, but from tracers. Been there, doused that. Another problem can be catalytic converters on cars driving off-road in dry grass catching things on fire; been there, doused THAT, too.
@RN1@OrcasThunder@Harley-H.S.C."So - what experience and knowledge do you have of the chemistry of exploding targets"
Some...in the Army.
But I have a greater range of experience on the flip side - dealing with brush fires - that more than qualifies me for commenting on the issue. I also pay taxes which cover some of the costs in fighting these fores - which ALSO qualifies me to comment on the issue. I also have a friend who lost some buildings due to forest fire, which ALSO qualifies me to comment on the issue.
RN1, if that's the best stupidity that you can come up with today, turn off the computer and read a book.
@OrcasThunder @Harley-H.S.C. Did you bother to read the rest of my comment? My comment isn't about whether it was stupid to use one of these targets in dry grass, because that's a given. It's the kneejerk "ban it" reaction that I speak out against.
@OrcasThunder  Sooo ,,,, what does the 2nd amendment have to do with "drugs". I don't see where that comment has anything to do with guns or exploding targets. The legal expert "lakeview"seems to think the 2nd doesn't guarantee the right to shoot those targets ,,, I simply said it doesn't ban them either.
@OrcasThunder@RN1@Harley-H.S.C."Actually, most people watch to see the different patterns the fireworks makes."
So you speak for the entire population do you orca? Oh, wait I see, you only speak for MOST of us.
@OrcasThunder @RN1 @Harley-H.S.C. Saw a blurb on a whole herd of fires in Utah last year. At first, they through it was target shooters using the Tannerite explosive targets. They were sort-right, sorta-wrong. It was the shooters, but NOT the targets. It was the catalytic converters getting too hot and lighting the dry grass on fire as they drove over. That sort of investigative conclusion sort of leads to a rather different regulation than you might at first suppose.Â
As to going to a regular range, many of them don't allow another but paper. And, "public Lands" are called that for a reason. That said, I'd agree that people DO need to be careful, educated, and clean up after themselves, and that applies to people of ALL parties (and no party), age, gender, background, and calling.
@RN1@OrcasThunder@Harley-H.S.C."Why do people watch fireworks?"
Actually, most people watch to see the different patterns the fireworks makes. Are you saying that these targets do that?Â
The point is, these were used in a fire sensitive area, and caused fires that cost OTHER PEOPLE money. Go to a designated firing range to use these and you won't get a complaint from me. Of course, you might get a few from the REAL shooters who want to test their skills...
@OrcasThunder @Harley-H.S.C. Why do people watch fireworks? They go BOOM, and they are fun to watch. Shooting exploding targets makes them go BOOM, and it's a lot more fun to watch than seeing a small hole appear in paper at 400 yards. Tracers are a bigger fire hazard than exploding targets.
@SnoopIt also doesn't "prohibit or ban" drugs.
So what's your point?
@Harley-H.S.C.@OrcasThunder
"Did you bother to read the rest of my comment?"
Yes.
 "BAN THEM!!!"
Comparing these to guns is useless and simplistic - they simply do not reach the level of "firearms"...and in this economy, who has $5 or so to waste on something that will self destruct when you shoot at it? Are these the same people who whine about the price of gas, or groceries, or anything where the price is impacted by the unions?
As a "target", what do these prove? You don't get to read a score off of them, and they aren't moving so where is the challenge? And the government DOES ban fireworks, except for specific times of the year, so what's the problem with banning these explosives in fire sensitive areas?
Dear "lakeview" ,,, that 2nd Amendment also doesnt "prohibit or ban" it either now does it ?
@Harley-H.S.C. @OrcasThunder I'm sorry, but I truly fail to see how banning explosive targets is a big deal for anyone. Yeah, some drunk idiots won't have as much fun shooting their guns off, but I really don't care. The 2nd Amendment doesn't give anyone the right to shoot their guns at exploding targets.Â