"Are you talking out by 10 or fire ecology." I am referring to the many discussions I have had with my father during hiking and camping trips about forest ecology and the role of natural fires in it. I am not knowledgeable enough in what policy at what level covers what. But in general the NFS understands that fire is an important part of forest ecology and whenever they can they will let a natural fire progress naturally.
As I have said three times, the problems comes when there are other entities that do not want to see their houses/cows/lumber sales/etc burned that the NFS can not let the fires burn out. They will also fight fires in areas - do to the previous (early 20th century) policy of fighting all fires all the time as fast as possible and other factors have created situations - where a fire would burn too hot and entirely destroy the forest. They would rather manually remove the build up in those area until a future fire would burn naturally, but of course that takes man power which takes money. I am sure this is oversimplified and there are many other factors, but I believe the NSF has a good understanding of fire and forest health and work towards that goal whenever they can ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Enterprise web applications, build robust, secure scalable apps today - Try it now ColdFusion Today ColdFusion 8 beta - Build next generation apps Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:241242 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
