Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Eugene Robinson: A Good Idea, Up in Flames

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
marmar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-01-09 07:16 AM
Original message
Eugene Robinson: A Good Idea, Up in Flames
from Truthdig:



A Good Idea, Up in Flames
Posted on Aug 31, 2009

By Eugene Robinson


Los Angeles seemed like a good idea at the time. It was a good idea, actually—the setting is spectacular and the weather is perfect. No wonder millions of people decide to live there, and it’s only logical that some of them would build their homes in the canyon-creased hills that look out across the vast urban basin to the infinite sparkling sea.

But every year, some of those canyons will burn. It’s a cycle of destruction and renewal that will inexorably run its course unless humankind intervenes—which means that intervention is a good idea. That means not just moving heaven and earth to put out the fires that do start, but also doing everything possible to keep fires from starting in the first place.

Fire prevention and suppression were so successful that many of the canyons leading up Mount Wilson north of Pasadena hadn’t burned for 40 years or more—until now. And since these slopes haven’t recently been scoured by fire, they are choked with dry chaparral that is like a thicket of tinder, making the conflagration that began over the weekend much worse than it otherwise would have been. The huge “Station fire”—they give them names in Los Angeles—has so far claimed two firefighters’ lives, burned more than 20 homes and scorched at least 130 square miles.

Does this mean we never should have built Los Angeles, or that we never should have listened to Smokey the Bear? Of course not. But it does remind us of how much time and effort we spend dealing with the consequences of decisions that seemed like good ideas at the time.

And I haven’t even mentioned earthquakes.

This is no screed against Southern California. Perhaps an even better example of the burden of a good idea is New Orleans—which, truth be told, looked iffy from the start. The first French settlers realized how precarious the site was, with Lake Pontchartrain to the north and the Mississippi River to the south. Their concern was justified when a hurricane promptly swept in and blew the fledgling town away. ............(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090831_a_good_idea_up_in_flames/




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-01-09 07:23 AM
Response to Original message
1. Definition of Insanity Applies Here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-01-09 07:40 AM
Response to Original message
2. No, no, no. There is a difference.
Rich white people live in those hills, thus they must be rebuilt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
izquierdista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-01-09 08:06 AM
Response to Original message
3. A man's got to know his limitations
Fire suppression and the building of levees have one thing in common: man trying to conquer nature. It may work for a while, but the 40-year fire and the 100-year flood make a mockery of man's efforts. The better thing to do is live with the cycles of nature, be they fire or flood. Had New Orleans accepted all the clean fill generated in a hundred mile radius of the city and planned to use it to raise building pads in the city, after a few decades, the city might not be below sea level. Had Los Angeles planned burns every spring and reseeded the areas with low growing native plants, the chaparral might not rise to disastrous levels.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabatha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-01-09 08:51 AM
Response to Original message
4. If an area of chaparral has been left alone for 40 years
how is that fire suppression?

After a fire, it can take somewhere up to 30 years for chaparral to recover. There are many stands of chaparral that have survived for 100 years and have not burned - not because of fire suppression, but because nothing has sparked a fire to burn them.

I don't think that Eugene Robinson knows what he is talking about

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marmar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-01-09 08:53 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. I don't think that's what he was saying....perhaps you should re-read that paragraph.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabatha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-01-09 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. This is the sentence that makes no sense.
"Fire prevention and suppression were so successful that many of the canyons leading up Mount Wilson north of Pasadena hadn’t burned for 40 years or more—until now."

40 years can sometimes be too soon for a chaparral fire.

And if fire prevention means unnecessary fires from humans, then that is the responsible thing to do.

Too frequent fires are bad for chaparral, because if it cannot grow back in time, it is replaced by even more inflammable aliens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thereismore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-01-09 09:15 AM
Response to Original message
7. Eugene Robinson is one of my fave guests at Countdown. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 12:36 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC