Arguments Against Controlled Burns

Words: 691
Pages: 3

Argument : Against Controlled Burns

Controlled burns. Controlled burns are one of those topics that we have multiple different opinios about. You’ll see people who are passionate about it, those who despise it, and those who are netural about it. In my opinion controlled burns does more bad than good. Yes controlled burns are indeed important and yes they do help the environment in some ways but they also hurt the environment in many ways. The amount of negatives that counld happen with controlled burns baffels me. Something that’s supposed to help the environment shouldn’t be able to affect it this badly.

Back in 2012 Walter B. Jones a member of congress adressed a letter to Kristin Bail a supervisor who was overlooking the “prescribed fire” located in eastern north carolinia. In that same letter Walter B. Jones expressed his
…show more content…
Controlled fires also affects the lifestyle of others besides the environment. Regruading the letter that congressmen Walter B. Jones wrote to Kristen Bail, he also addresses that “...fire is negatively affecting tourism...citizens are suffering from the ill effects of the smoke and ash…others are wondering if the significant cost that taxpayers are now paying to fight the fire could have been advoided through better Forest Service planning.” Another downside to controlled fires is that when out of control they can destroy people’s houses and take their lives if not caredul. When controlled fires do go out of control taxpayers are the ones paying to help fight the fire. The costs can total up to a couple million to a couple billion depending on the size of the fire. That money could have gone to a more important cause but instead it went to soemthing that was supposed to help the environment and not kill it. This is just some of many pieces of evidence that helps the claim that controlled fires aren’t as good as they should