Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> Forests shouldn't really

Forests naturally burn. In California (at least) trees have features specifically evolved to fit into an environment with periodic natural fires. There are written reports of fires in North America going back many hundreds of years, and I believe the natives experienced fires before that as well, as evidenced by cultural practices and oral history.

So you can either not manage the forests and avoid building into areas that would be affected by natural fires, or you can build into those areas but you do need to manage the forests.

Where do you get the idea that forests don’t need to be managed if we are to live in and around them? It seems like magical thinking to me.

Note that this is orthogonal to the effect a warming earth has on severity. Qualitatively, you needed to manage forests in North America 1,000 years ago, and you still need to manage them today.




So you can either not manage the forests and avoid building into areas that would be affected by natural fires

Yes, this is what I have in mind. If you want to live in a forest you need to assume you'll be on your own in the case of natural disasters and have some survival/escape plan. Building into/exploiting all available primeval land seems like a Bad Thing to me.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: