Argumentative Essay On Prescribed Fire

434 Words2 Pages

There is a debate about using prescribed fires. Prescribed fires are fires that help reduce the catastrophic damage that wildfire creates. prescribed fires work most of the time, but they can be faulty at some points. That's why some people don't agree with using prescribed fires. Even though they sometimes don't work, they can be really helpful when they do work. Prescribed fires are very useful. They do many things to help like reduce hazardous fuels, help stop the spread of insects and diseases, recycles nutrients back into the soil and many more. These examples show that prescribed fires are helpful for the population. whether it be the animals or the people, they help in major ways. These help the animals in more ways than they help us, but if they help the animals, that means that they're well fed and that is good for everyone. They can also be helpful in other ways. For example, they help …show more content…

People who argue against prescribed fires say that it "produces to much smoke" or "there's a risk of the fire escaping". First of all, the smoke of a prescribed fire is way less than that of an uncontrolled fire. Second, the chance that the fire escapes is very slim, it usually never happens in controlled fires. Some people worry about the plant life and the soil as well, when there is no need. Usually the habitat is destroyed when an uncontrolled fire is happening, and the soil only gets effected it the fire is at a somewhat high intensity. In conclusion, prescribed fires help out a lot. they can make our everyday life better if we use them more for the good of all living things. If we didn't use them, we might not be able to enjoy such a future. We might have many more wildfires than we ever expected in the future if we don't use prescribed fires. They help out everything that is living on this planet, and they are the key for a nice, healthy

Open Document