Regarding the reading, there are serious reasons to stop or replace the common practice of " let it burn" which is used in case of natural forest fires, especially after the Yellowstone park fires. In contrast, the professor believes that this fire is a natural part of the ecosystem, therefor she refuted the author's reasons due to three concrete pieces of evidences.
First, the " let it burn'" practice should be replace because the Yellowstone fires caused a tremendous damage to the whole park including the park trees and vegetation and leaving almost one third of the Yellowstone land scorched, based on the what the reading claims. In contrast, the professor states that the fires create diversity and an ideal habitat for other vegetation to grow and thrive, she gave an example of small planets that need an open, un shaded place to grow. In addition the professor explains that some seeds need a very high temperature to start the germination process and the fires provide this critical steps for these seeds.
Second, the reading states that the park wildlife was severely affected by the fires as well. Quiet the reverse, the professor mentions that the wildlife did recover from the fires, beside the fact that the fire create a new opportunity for other small animals like the rabbit to thrive, she added that smaller animal predator also get the advantage of the new habitat after the fires.
Finally, according to the reading, the local economy was negatively affected after the cease of tourist activity due to the park fires that last for several months. The professor casts doubt on this issue by saying that this fires happen only once and because of many other factors that all worked together to feed the fire and make it worse, the fire result was so massive. In addition the professor asserts that since 1988 Yellowstone did not witness any fire, and that tourist trips return to normal after that.
Regarding the
reading
, there are serious reasons to
stop
or replace the common practice of
"
;
let
it
burn"
; which is
used
in case of natural forest
fires
,
especially
after the Yellowstone
park
fires
.
In contrast
, the
professor
believes that this
fire
is a natural part of the ecosystem, therefor she refuted the author's reasons due to three concrete pieces of evidences.
First
, the
"
;
let
it burn'
"
; practice should be
replace
because
the Yellowstone
fires
caused
a tremendous damage
to the whole
park
including the
park
trees and vegetation and leaving almost one third of the Yellowstone land scorched, based on the what the
reading
claims.
In contrast
, the
professor
states that the
fires
create diversity and an ideal habitat for other vegetation to grow and thrive, she gave an example of
small
planets that need an open,
un
shaded place to grow. In
addition
the
professor
explains
that
some
seeds need a
very
high temperature to
start
the germination process and the
fires
provide this critical steps for these seeds.
Second, the
reading
states that the
park
wildlife was
severely
affected
by the
fires
as well
. Quiet the reverse, the
professor
mentions that the wildlife did recover from the
fires
, beside the fact that the
fire
create a new opportunity for other
small
animals like the rabbit to thrive, she
added
that smaller animal predator
also
get
the advantage of the new habitat after the fires.
Finally
, according to the
reading
, the local economy was
negatively
affected
after the cease of tourist activity due to the
park
fires
that last for several months. The
professor
casts doubt on this issue by saying that this
fires
happen
only
once and
because
of
many
other factors that all worked together to feed the
fire
and
make
it worse, the
fire
result was
so
massive. In
addition
the
professor
asserts that since 1988 Yellowstone did not witness any
fire
, and that tourist trips return to normal after that.