4 ms·
I'm not taking it as an attack at all. The people who hated controlled burns for racist reasons (such as calling people "primitives") were being incredibly stup
by alexb_ 3y ago
I'm not taking it as an attack at all. The people who hated controlled burns for racist reasons (such as calling people "primitives") were being incredibly stupid. I am not denying that at all, that should be obvious. The point is, that in and of itself is not a reason to do controlled burns. The reason we do controlled burns is that they control wildfires, help make more of the state inhabitable, etc - we don't do it because it's the opposite of what racists did.
- throwawaymaths 3y agomoreover people have been calling for controlled burns for decades (if anything, typically republicans). It's hard to believe at this point what's holding it back is racism.
- mrcrumb1 3y agoThe regulations that ban the practices is the racism here
- primitivesuave 3y agoPart of what's holding it back is expensive multi-year environmental reviews for logging projects. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=li_Rv4t2htc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=li_Rv4t2htc
- w7b7s7 3y agoYes, selective logging and controlled burns have to be paired if the forest has ever been clear cut. Where I live (Santa Cruz Mountains) the vast old growth redwood trees were extensively logged (via clear cutting) into the early-to-mid 20th Century. Then widespread logging just stopped. And for at least the past 50-60 years there has been intense hostility to logging. Everywhere, doesn't matter if public or private land. The redwood groves that have grown back are all extremely densely packed, relatively small diameter trees mixed in with tan and coast live oaks and lots of smaller shrubbery. Lots of low branches on all trees. Lots of redwood needles and dead tan oak and coast live oak leaves laying thick on the forest floor. Perfect tinder. About 3 years ago a lightening storm sparked a fire that burned hundreds of thousands of acres. Controlled burns would have helped remove the forest duff. But the trees themselves are perfectly set up to respond to fire, unlike in an old growth forest.
- mrcrumb1 3y agoThe point of bringing it up is because one of the natural questions is "why did we stop doing controlled burns?". If you don't address this, people will think there was a good reason when, in this case, it doesn't seem like there was.
- Zetice 3y agoThis article is not written as a way to explain to the world the fact that California will begin backing intentional burns, it's written to explain why that wasn't already the case from a historical perspective.