3 ms·

Interesting. From what I read about a while back, these wildfires didn't use to be so bad when there were more resources allocated to controlled burnoffs. Why d

• war1025 7y ago
  Probably typical short-sighted "these fires haven't been too bad, so lets save some money here by cutting this obvious waste" type of thinking. Preventative maintenance looks like a waste of resources until you don't do it.
• candiodari 7y ago
  E.g. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-13/is-the-prescribed-burn-window-closing-in-australia/10236048 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-13/is-the-prescribed-bur... https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/nov/12/is-there-really-a-green-conspiracy-to-stop-bushfire-hazard-reduction https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/nov/12/is-th... There are 2 political arguments against "controlled burnoffs", and one much more practical argument against them: 1) it damages the environment, destroys nature and ecological systems. it kills animals and plants. Lots of them. It's bad for biodiversity. Fire dept response: it does, but less than the fires that are prevented would. 2) Budget cuts. 3) controlled burning is normally done after winter (when firemen would have to do them in the dark or make them smaller), but before the dry season gets too dry and the risk of fires spreading too far becomes to great. This period has become shorter and shorter in recent times, due to climate change.