Zero tolerance is playing with fire

The government's ongoing ban on burning in the North flies in the face of scientific evidence that shows controlled burns such as those initiated by highland villagers lead to healthier forests and lessen the chances for devastating out of control conflagrations

Published: 17 Feb 2013 at 00.00
Newspaper section: News

A zero-tolerance burning policy for the North has been declared, but we should step back and consider the pros and cons before proceeding with it. It's not very fashionable in the dry northern region to advocate forest fires these days, and that's not my aim. What I'm saying is that we should concentrate on fuel management.

NO SMOKE WITHOUT THE FIRE: Smoke from a burning forest fills the sky in Chiang Mai province, a common sight in the dry season.

With summertime comes low atmospheric pressure, especially during March and April. In the past five years, the greenhouse effect and the annual smoke screen that results from the "burning season" have become bitter issues. Much as I would like to avoid adding fuel to the fire (pardon the pun), I would like to present some food for thought.

This article is older than 60 days, which we reserve for our premium members only.You can subscribe to our premium member subscription, here.

Forum

Your comments

whatajoke
Post : 1,748
Send message

Discussion 2 : 17 Feb 2013 at 14.172
Post this to my Facebook
You need to take a philosophical viewpoint, human habitation might accelerate burning but the burning has always been part of a natural process in a region where it rains for six months then is dry for six months, producing plenty of dead leaves. The smog results in march from lack of wind, trapping smoke in the ping valley and low humidity to bond the particles. Futhermore, try telling a poor farmer not to burn off the chaf from his rice field, or a pool hilltriber not to harvest lucrative mushrooms from the ashes. Best you can do is stay indoors for a few weeks, rest of the time Chiang Mai has cleaner air than Bangkok.
Like dislike 0 people liked / 0 people disliked this comment
Anon_tha
Post : 1
Send message

Discussion 1 : 17 Feb 2013 at 12.371
Post this to my Facebook
While controlled burning may prevent large forest fires, I feel the article is misleading. Smoke is caused by incomplete combustion, dry wood and leave produce little smoke if burned properly and not allowed to smolder, creating large amounts of smoke until hot and dry enough to ignite. Complete burning of wood leaves mineral ash, while maybe be good for soil, its not the source of rich soil which is largely organic. Organics are burned and so dont enrich the soil, only minerals remain.
Research shows wood smoke contains large amounts of cancer causing (carcinogens) and the particle size allows deep penetration into the lungs remain air-bor
Like dislike 2 people liked / 0 people disliked this comment

Zero tolerance is playing with fire | Bangkok Post: opinion