Fri, 23 Aug 2002 11:35:43 -0600
You are indeed correct. "Fire Management" strategies arise only because
of the human impact of forest fires. And they have proven only
semi-successful. Bush's solution is the one which best fits his
policies, i.e. his desire to help big business (in this case, the lumber
companies), while simultaneously trying to convince the public that he's
doing the right thing, and that he is "green".
He's about as green as my blood.
[mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of ninas
Sent: August 23, 2002 8:34 AM
To: Janice Coleman; firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: Re: [Powderworks] dumya
ok - yeah and he's getting tons of praise for it?!
now maybe i'm mistaken here (you enviromental management/science folk
may be 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 the 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 nature, but...
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 - that's obvious!
on 8/23/02 9:16 AM, Janice Coleman at email@example.com wrote:
> For all you activists out there, in case you haven't heard, our
> wonderful 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.
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
> Powderworks mailing list
Powderworks mailing list