Controlled Burns (prescribed burning) use to be a common practice.
Not only did it help prevent fires from breaking out but it also reduced the fuel for those fires to spread.

Controlled Burns used to be very precise in their execution.
Big trees would not burn, brush and grasses would burn around them.

At some point this careful planning was changed and everything was burnt.
There are video examples of how it use to be done and how it was done.

Now with the Green Scam, controlled burns are banned.
Meaning all that brush and fuel remains in wait for a spark to burn it.
More fuel, more spread and less control.

So why are we seeing all these huge fires in recent years?
It's not "global warming", it's the green scam!

The green scam doesn't allow for proper land management.
It says a newt is more important than a forest and a city.

The green scam claims controlled burns are too polluting,
while curving the narrative of forest fires as a tragedy to further it's agenda.

We have the knowledge to perform clean and safe controlled burns.
The Green Scam disallows it and places illogical regulations on it.

This post was edited by Mondain on Jan 8 2025 03:23pm

Firebreaks were a practice learned by early settlers to help prevent the spread of natural forest fires.
Large lanes of forest were cut down and logged to create firebreaks.

Here is an old poster depicting farmers performing a controlled burn and making a fire break via plow.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_wildfire_suppression_in_the_United_States
Even the native Americans knew that proper land management was important.


In addition to controlled burns & fire breaks.
There use to be funding and employment for persons to walk through the woods with a water tank on their back.
They would spray water on any potential fires that broke out.

That funding was removed and given to green scams.

Your OP is misleading.

Controlled Burns do not pollute. Wood is a renewable resource. It emits the same amount of energy from slow rot of decay as it would be burned in a stove.

You didn't read my post, you're agreeing with it.

Yeah... that's true of literally everything. It's the first law of thermodynamics. The types of energy and their effect on the environment vary wildly between a tree burnt and one that decomposes though, obviously.

It benefits those backing the green scam for forests & homes to burn.
Because then people cry for more green scam.

Meanwhile it was the green scam that caused the tragedy.
And those backers know this because historically there are techniques that worked to prevent fires.

The green scam took those techniques out of the public view,
regulated it and de-incentivized performing good land management practices.

This post was edited by Mondain on Jan 8 2025 04:28pm

Yes, but in regards to burning wood, there is no benefit from banning burns from an emissions perspective. Banning trash fires on rural properties is good though

Controlled burns are great for the environment, because when done right they prevent large forest fires. Burning wood does cause harmful emissions though, burning anything does.

This is as I described in the OP.

History past to present.
1. Controlled burns use to keep large trees standing, while removing brush/grass etc.
2. Controlled burns changed and large trees burned
3. Controlled burns Banned
4. wide spread uncontrollable fires

This post was edited by Mondain on Jan 8 2025 04:39pm

Where do you live that controlled burns are banned? They're not done nearly enough, and poor forest management is responsible for most large fires but I don't know of anywhere that has a problem with forest fires that controlled burns are banned.