4 ms·

Prescribed burning is resisted by folks for environmental reasons. The alternative is going in and cutting down trees and mulching brush which runs into the "we

Prescribed burning is resisted by folks for environmental reasons. The alternative is going in and cutting down trees and mulching brush which runs into the "we are damaging a natural environment" groups. An interesting counterpoint is to look at a managed forest in the northwest to get a feel for what companies that harvest wood do to manage fire risk.

vermontdevil 6y ago
Or southeast Georgia. They do burns every year. Because they do farm for southern pine so they have an interest in keeping fires under control.
ip26 6y ago
Most of the opposition I've heard from environmental groups centers around fear that logging interests are using thinning as a "foot in the door".
- ChuckMcM 6y ago
  I have heard those arguments as well. One wonders what we could go with a "Civilian Conservation Corps" which provided employment for the unemployed and addressed both forestry issues as well as infrastructure issues facing the nation. Of course that was one of FDR's most successful programs, and one which I feel could be applied here as well. The country needs both tradespeople and infrastructure maintenance in a big way and doing that by funding large engineering firms is extremely inefficient.
  - mythrwy 6y ago
    That is an excellent idea. For some people just getting the experience of going to a job (as well as a resume line) would really help them, and... we need some stuff done for sure in the US.
pvaldes 6y ago
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results There was humid areas with lakes and lots of animals in what is now the Prehistoric Sahara, burnt for pastures until desert There was lots of extinct species in what is now Australia, and it was more humid in the past. Arid, subdesert, desert again. Brazil has a huge stupidity problem, some new deserts ordered and in the way Indonesia idem, Russia has extensive wildfires in 2019, happily running towards the same path We don't even understand well the dynamics and ecology of soil, and all that we can parrot again and again is lets burn more, lets burn more, that will solve it all... we are not burning enough fast. We know that fallen trees are essential for many species of invertebrates and vertebrates, Not allowed anymore it seems. We must clean the area and turn nature into a cartoon. Being an arsonist is not only the perfect crime, it seems that is even the fastest way to became a local hero. We are even justifying and giving reasons to them
- schrodinger 6y ago
  > The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results No it’s not.
- Thetawaves 6y ago
  1) Fire is a necessary part of many forest ecosystems. 2) Forest fires have been controlled and contained for the last ~100 years on the west coast of America. 3) Forests are not being burned at anywhere close to the rate that they would naturally. 4) Fire is not the process by which these places became arid.
  - pvaldes 6y ago
    1) As I said before, fire is just a chapter in a bigger history The problem is that we can't survive just with this technique anymore, because we desperately need more forests in a "safety level of rainforest" or close to it, to have any chance to heal the climate. Unless we create a CO2 extracting machine, trees, plants and algae are still our best bet. This rhetoric of "lets manage ecosystems as they did in the roman empire", maybe could work 200 years ago but now we are in a different situation. 4) Places became arid in part because there is not topsoil anymore, so nobody can grow here enough fast, so there is not water storing creatures anymore. This happens often by past fires followed by rains that first mineralize the soil, then turn it into dust and then wash it down the streams in a mud flood. Removing mechanically the dry weeds, would have the same effects but without the counterparts.

vermontdevil 6y ago

Or southeast Georgia. They do burns every year. Because they do farm for southern pine so they have an interest in keeping fires under control.

ip26 6y ago

Most of the opposition I've heard from environmental groups centers around fear that logging interests are using thinning as a "foot in the door".

ChuckMcM 6y ago
I have heard those arguments as well. One wonders what we could go with a "Civilian Conservation Corps" which provided employment for the unemployed and addressed both forestry issues as well as infrastructure issues facing the nation. Of course that was one of FDR's most successful programs, and one which I feel could be applied here as well. The country needs both tradespeople and infrastructure maintenance in a big way and doing that by funding large engineering firms is extremely inefficient.
- mythrwy 6y ago
  That is an excellent idea. For some people just getting the experience of going to a job (as well as a resume line) would really help them, and... we need some stuff done for sure in the US.

pvaldes 6y ago

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results There was humid areas with lakes and lots of animals in what is now the Prehistoric Sahara, burnt for pastures until desert There was lots of extinct species in what is now Australia, and it was more humid in the past. Arid, subdesert, desert again. Brazil has a huge stupidity problem, some new deserts ordered and in the way Indonesia idem, Russia has extensive wildfires in 2019, happily running towards the same path We don't even understand well the dynamics and ecology of soil, and all that we can parrot again and again is lets burn more, lets burn more, that will solve it all... we are not burning enough fast. We know that fallen trees are essential for many species of invertebrates and vertebrates, Not allowed anymore it seems. We must clean the area and turn nature into a cartoon. Being an arsonist is not only the perfect crime, it seems that is even the fastest way to became a local hero. We are even justifying and giving reasons to them

schrodinger 6y ago
> The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results No it’s not.
Thetawaves 6y ago
1) Fire is a necessary part of many forest ecosystems. 2) Forest fires have been controlled and contained for the last ~100 years on the west coast of America. 3) Forests are not being burned at anywhere close to the rate that they would naturally. 4) Fire is not the process by which these places became arid.
- pvaldes 6y ago
  1) As I said before, fire is just a chapter in a bigger history The problem is that we can't survive just with this technique anymore, because we desperately need more forests in a "safety level of rainforest" or close to it, to have any chance to heal the climate. Unless we create a CO2 extracting machine, trees, plants and algae are still our best bet. This rhetoric of "lets manage ecosystems as they did in the roman empire", maybe could work 200 years ago but now we are in a different situation. 4) Places became arid in part because there is not topsoil anymore, so nobody can grow here enough fast, so there is not water storing creatures anymore. This happens often by past fires followed by rains that first mineralize the soil, then turn it into dust and then wash it down the streams in a mud flood. Removing mechanically the dry weeds, would have the same effects but without the counterparts.