I’m glad Nova Scotia is taking the fire risk seriously.
In addition to climate change, the risk is exacerbated by the shitty forestry practices allowed by the NS government. I hope they revisit those regulations soon - there are going to be lots more summers like this ahead.
Good forest managment wouldn’t protect Nova Scotia from an unprecedented drought. I agree that proper forest management is important and may decrease risk in parts of Nova Scotia, but I think it’s dangerous to focus on it in a scenario like the current one - an unprecedented drought.
Bad forest management (logging patterns, over-suppression of fires) creates regional problems, not wide-scale, global, burning of our forests. Unfortunately, even the best forest management practices of the past wouldn’t save the forests from what’s happening now due to climate change.
Why do I think it’s dangerous to focus on? Citing “bad forest management” is often used (especially by the right-wing) to distract from the real issue causing unprecedented levels of forest burning: human-caused climate change, led primarily by the burning of fossil fuels. I’d also posit that those same right-wing capitalists were (and are) the ones lobbying for more access to forests for clear-cutting, widespread use of herbicides, and screaming bloody murder when every single fire wasn’t immediately suppressed to protect their livelihood.
Our best method of forest management, controlled burns, as we’ve learned from the First Nations, is not enough, and isn’t effective if young, recovering forests reburn at the drop of a cigarette (https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eap.3023). Prescribed burning worked when forests didn’t burn for a long time and became risky and dangerous, so the ancestors (and now our modern forest managers, growing since the 1950s) would force them to burn in as safe a manner as possible, preventing a future, local disaster. But if young, fresh forests burn uncontrollably, there’s not much prescribed burns can do for us. Prescribed burns may still work in targeted areas, but it isn’t feasible to scale to Canada’s vast, forest wilderness.
Better logging practices would definitely help reduce wildfire danger regionally, but on a whole-province (let alone whole-country) scale the impact would be partial at best. Areas where healthy forests have been clear-cut, and herbicides have been used to “shape” monoculture new growth, are definitely more at risk and will put the areas around them somewhat more at risk. However, probably over 60% of Nova Scotia is considered natural forest, and the current drought and dryness of the vegetation has led to high fire risk across the board. (It’s also important to note that NS has started moving towards better practices in recent years, with clearcutting reduced from a decade ago and more focused on at-risk forests and selective cutting - though they may not be moving fast enough. Probably due to lobbying by logging companies whose product is about to burn anyway…)
To reduce wildfire risk we’re going to have to start exploring drastic, interventionalist methods of forest management, and there’s no telling which of them will work and what the consequences will be. Tree thinning, deadwood removal, massive fire break development, etc. are on the docket for managing our forests in the future. These are expensive, difficult to scale, intrusive, unnatural, and could drastically affect ecosystems. I foresee at least some of these being called out in the future as bad forest management due to some other ecological catastrophe they’ve fomented.
(Or we could work harder to stop/reverse climate change, and/or accept our forest-less sub-tropical-desert future.)
Maybe “bad forest management” is part of the problem, but the level and scale of dry forests we’re experiencing now far outweighs its effects. So we should be very careful going down the path of using it to blame on our current issues.
I agree with your sentiment. That’s why I listed climate change before mentioning forestry practices.
We aren’t in an either/or scenario. Nova Scotia needs to do more to limit GHG emissions. On top of improving public transit, using more efficient heating/cooling solutions, reducing GHG intensity of power generation, etc; Nova Scotia needs to reform forestry practices.
This article
isseems like a knee-jerk reaction to social media.I am originally from Manitoba, now living in rural BC. I can tell you that the outdoor culture is indeed stronger the more west you go.
But one thing I did not anticipate in cultural change moving out here is that everyone, even conservative types, takes outdoor wilderness stewardship very seriously. That includes hunting ethics, fire safety, and even etiquette when crossing streams on quads and motorbikes. And it seems like Nova Scotians just don’t have that culture, and that’s why the ban is necessary.
I won’t begrudge a province their culture, and I don’t really have an opinion on the ban on entering the woods (although I suspect it won’t really work), but this take that western Canadians somehow don’t understand how the bush works in Nova Scotia is really weird.
I’m gonna have to push back, big time. You might find a conservative or two that care about nature or the climate, but by and large they would absolutely burn it down to make a dollar. I genuinely don’t care about the lip service that might be paid because “we’re hunters, we care” or farmers saying the same shit, because look how they vote. I’m from Sask by the way, so plenty of experience talking to conservatives who hunt, fish, farm etc.
Alright, fair enough. maybe I keep my social circles more trimmed than I thought.
Really must see different people then me. Their assholes. I mean I’m not as far west but you did say the further west you go. Or like a typical Vancouver area person nothing east of Vancouver exists?
I’m in the Kootenays. Boondocking, hunting, fishing, hiking, quadding are all very very common. Almost everyone has some kind of outdoor thing they do.
And you’re right, there are jerks out there.
It’s just… different. Like even the most maga-like conservative far-right ppl don’t cross certain lines in the bush.
However, the jerks in Manitoba would ignore fire bans, not care about flicking cigarette butts into the bush, no spark arrestors, etc.
Here in bc, i find most people will respect those things as a given. And even with stuff I’ve never previously thought about, like staying out of areas that were burned down for a couple of years to leave it alone.
I’m from Nova Scotia and this is bullshit.
It’s a poor province without a lot of resources run by people who are way too happy to make and impose regulations to justify their positions.
A result of a young population who moved away for work and an aging population who are now in charge, managing the province like an home owner’s association.
Holy fucking strawman. Westerners bad amirite?
This guy can fuck off.
The culture of western Canada isn’t that different - we have a handful of Libertarian Karens with some mysterious funding/coordination backing them.
Its too bad there isn’t a screening and licensing to enter. Like I’m a non smoker, and understand the severe risk of any flame, so would never go into the bush and start a fire or throw a cigarette down, or ride my dirt bike in that area etc. But some people are just morons.
