NMOC Re: [Powderworks] dumya
Fri, 23 Aug 2002 09:54:28 -0500
actually, a tremendous amount of reseach has shown that because of the way
that european invaders completely altered the flora and fauna of the north
american continent and because of the flawed ways in which forest fires
have been fought here for the last 100 or so years, the biome has changed
considerably such that the density and overgrowth in many of these
forests, particularly the ponderosa pine, has made this solution the best
proposed in a long time - not only to reduce the number of fires in the
long-term, but also to bring the balance back to its more natural state.
even us greens must face the scientific facts when they fly in the face of
our passions for nature. president clinton was also in favor of this
solution, if that somehow matters to anyone. amazingly, this is one
policy of bush's that actually is *not* a consequence of him being whored
out by big business. let's just hope he knows when it's time to stop.
i don't have the expertise to get into this more but professor warren
covington at northern arizona university has been a leader in this
groundbreaking work - check out some of his papers if interested.
p.s. i apologize for continuing this NMOC conversation on the list - i
will only respond (if i respond) to this thread off-list.
On Fri, 23 Aug 2002, Janice Coleman wrote:
|Yes, you are right. Funny, I was a marine biology major in college,
|couldn't get a job in it, and now I am an interior designer!
|Anyway, natural forest fires are necessary and beneficial. Bush is looking
|at the number of fires that happened this year. The reasons for the number
|are because of the drought. But, also the two biggest fires were set by
|humans. So, his answer is to punish the wilderness. He doesn't understand
|or care to. It also doesn't help that he probably has the logging companies
|supporting his campaign (just like the oil giants).
|>From: ninas <ninajill73@Hotmail.com>
|>To: Janice Coleman <firstname.lastname@example.org>,<email@example.com>
|>Subject: Re: [Powderworks] dumya
|>Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 10:34:06 -0400
|>ok - yeah and he's getting tons of praise for it?!
|>now maybe i'm mistaken here (you enviromental management/science folk may
|>able to help me - i'm just a lowly designer who only took a handful of
|>environmental courses in college), but aren't forest fires beneficial and
|>part of the natural cycle of forest ecosystems?? it was my understanding
|>that forests need to burn every so often so it can replenish and provide
|>ground with nutrients. am i wrong here? if we prevent forest fires all
|>together (and meddle with the ecosystem), are we putting forests in more
|>danger down the line? i understand that blazing-out-of-control fires,
|>spawned on by people is not the kid of 'natural' fires that happen in
|>really, please, educate me because bush's plan seems really flawed from a
|>science stand-point. i wont even get into the flawed altruistic reasons -
|>on 8/23/02 9:16 AM, Janice Coleman at firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
|> > For all you activists out there, in case you haven't heard, our
|> > U.S. "president", George "dumya" Bush, has decided that the solution for
|> > preventing forest fires is to cut down the trees!
|> > Somehow, that doesn't surprise me.
|> > Janice
|> > _________________________________________________________________
|> > Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
|> > _______________________________________________
|> > Powderworks mailing list
|> > Powderworks@cs.colorado.edu
|> > http://www.cs.colorado.edu/mailman/listinfo/powderworks
|Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
|Powderworks mailing list