Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by billclerico 1769 days ago
This used to be true, but really no longer is with modern logging practices and regulation
2 comments

Loggers can be directly behind some fires also.

Is well known that loggers in the south of Europe had been caught starting wildfires with the goal to buy the logs cheaper later (still suitable for paper pulp) or to have an excuse to steal the oldest trees that were perfectly viable but slightly charred. The practice stopped by new laws regulating the sell of burnt wood, but it was popular once (and can be still active in other parts of the planet).

Anything that could be claimed as an excuse type 'this tree was ill so it must be taken down' is a temptation for promoting wildfires.

And these survivor elder trees are necessary also. Some caterpillars are borers and kill trees in mass, creating a lot of extra fuel. Woodpeckers are among the only animals capable to remove larvae that dig deeper in the trunks. Respecting a few dead trees (here and there) where woodpeckers nest can reduce the final amount of fuel. More dense population of woodpeckers -> less larvae -> more trees surviving the attack -> less extensive patches of new dead wood ready to burn. Another reason to be very careful with the idea of a free unlimited pass to logging after wildfires.

Given human nature and economic imperatives, I think some skepticism is warranted.
Exactly, so we better do nothing at all and cower behind the maybes as the world literally burns down around us.
That would not be the right approach. What’s a maybe, or perhaps which maybe are you referring to, since there are several possible ones. (Suggest you include a sarcasm indicator if you’re being sarcastic.)

Just pointing out that since people are involved, it’s very reasonable to think that there are going to be bad actors acting badly along with any benefit that might come from this. In response to words that said bad actors are gone from the scene. Do you disagree?