Colorado Wildfires Out Of Control!
how's that forest management program of "go natural" working out? 6500 people and counting evacuated on the North side of Colorado Springs, Royal Gorge ablaze 50 miles to the south of Springs. Low humidity and wind
How about you don't build a house in the middle of a forest, in a state known for it's wildfires?
Wildfires ARE completely natural and have been happening since there were trees in arid climates, it's part of how nature recycles and balances itself, and starts anew.
Planned,controlled burns are a regular occurrence here, because it's nature's way of clearing out the dead or dying forests.
In 20 years, there will be a lot of fresh growth and new trees, free of the pine beetle problem for awhile, and hopefully with more diversity than single lodgepole pines or other similar species that the pine beetles thrive on, allowing them to jump easily from tree to tree and thrive.
I'm NOT happy this is happening, and in no way do I want to come across like that. I have friends in the immediate area and feel terrible for anyone affected.
But that said... Colorado IS a high plains desert, where there's little humidity and plenty of lightning year after year, this is nothing new. If you're going to intentionally build your house in a potential wildfire area, flood area, etc, you'd better make sure your homeowner's insurance premiums are paid up when summer comes around.
This leads into a good, real-life question for objectivsists, which might be too off-topic for this thread. Perhaps something to pose to Peikoff:
While I believe in little to no gov't regulations - how to we ensure that private or corporate interests wouldn't buy up all those forests and cut it all down for profit or gain, or maintain it as well or better than the private sector?
The typical response is that corporate interests wouldn't benefit from destroying those natural areas - but they could, by mining, logging, building strip malls, etc.
I lean towards asking real-life questions about objectivism and how it could really apply to our world today - and this is one of those topics that always leaves me a little unsure.
http://www.pewstates.org/projects/statel...
In Colorado, the environmentalists had so brainwashed federal forestry programs that they refused to continue the policy of spraying for insects. Within 5 years Colorado forests have been devastated by beetle kill. Private companies then asked to come into these dead forests due to the beetle kill and harvest the deadwood. apparently, beetles make interesting pattern on the trunks of trees. They wanted to pay for the dead trees! The federal govt said no. They wanted the forests to "naturally" rejuvenate. Just driving through areas near Breckenridge, aspen and seeing all these dead stands-it's awful. Same as looking at a burned forest. and it is primed for wildfire! Dangerous not only to nearby human developments but the wildlife as well. and it could have been prevented. Last summer we were in Yellowstone, and driving through the sections where the big fire in the 80's happened-how does it look? Terrible! Sure the forest struggles to come back but it takes decades and decades-and needn't have been so huge-if they had properly managed the forests in the first place.
I'm one of those man over nature kinda people :)
My question was rhetorical, and meant to spark commentary. Do we, as a society, have an obligation to protect our natural wonders? Will it happen 'naturally' without regulation, or would it lead to wide-spread destruction and loss of an important natural resource? Again, rhetorical questions.
I've witnessed the desruction in CO. I took a drive up Swan Drive last year, near Dillon, up to Sapphire Trail, and it was heartbreaking.
http://objectivistanswers.com/questions/...