3 ms·
> have. But as fires have demonstrated this year... fires are going to happen. Lightning, gender reveals, a broken muffler... Something will provide the spark.
by nebulous1 6y ago
> have. But as fires have demonstrated this year... fires are going to happen. Lightning, gender reveals, a broken muffler... Something will provide the spark.
I've seen this sentiment in other replies also. To me it implies that you're saying that fires are being started at near the maximal rate allowed by the forest conditions, so that increased sparks are ultimately meaningless. Is this the case?
- DuskStar 6y agoI do not believe that fires are being started at anywhere near the maximal rate allowed by forest conditions. I DO believe that having vastly more fires started (on the order of 100x or more) would reduce the overall deaths and ecological damage, though. (Having more fires more often makes each fire smaller and less intense, which massively decreases the risk to life) To the best of my knowledge, this belief is shared by most modern forestry experts.