4 ms·
But they did allow controlled burns, thats what his link says. So you created a strawman in the scientists. The 1964 Wilderness Act, Tall Timbers Research Conf
by sharkmerry 8y ago
But they did allow controlled burns, thats what his link says. So you created a strawman in the scientists.
The 1964
Wilderness Act, Tall Timbers Research Conferences, and Southern Forest Fire Lab
research demonstrated the positive benefits derived from natural and prescribed fire.
As a result, national fire policy began to evolve to address both the economic and
ecological benefits of not aggressively controlling, and even using, fire. In February
1967, the USDA Forest Service permitted leeway for early- and late-season fires. In
1968, the National Park Service changed its policy to recognize the natural role of
fire, allow natural ignitions to run their course under prescribed conditions, and use
prescribed fires to meet management objectives.
- arminiusreturns 8y agoI never said they didn't allow control burns at all either. They were stopping them too soon, doing them too little, etc. Which is why I said they stopped listening to locals for input on those policies, not that they stopped them completely. So no, I did no such thing, and in fact, it is you who created the strawman. That seems to be the theme of the day today, because I'm starting to sound like a broken record.
- sharkmerry 8y agoYour comment above mine says this " I said they stopped listening to locals for advice about, primarily, the control burns, and the needs for forest thinning." It doesnt say the need for MORE forest thining. Its says needs for forest thinning, which implies it wasnt happening