Jump to content

Talk:Controlled burn

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): JecklesLarue.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:29, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Trevanco95.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:25, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

[edit]

The preferred term is 'prescribed fire', not 'controlled burn'. This was chiefly a political move in the wake of 'controlled burns' like the one which burned through Los Alamos.

The definition of the term 'prescribed fire' has been broadened considerably. I'll give a rewrite a shot. And provide references. Subversified 03:29, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone should add the arguements against controlled burning.12.17.189.77 17:03, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any? 70.108.139.153 16:59, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
ive balanced the article considerably by toning down the blatant "pro burning" point of view and adding some text supporting those who are concerned with too much burning that is not intelligently conceived. article still needs more attention including provision of a citation for the inlammatory unsourced sentence, which probably should be just summarily stricken Anlace 06:26, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rename?

[edit]

Should this article be renamed to a currently preferred term prescribed burn or prescribed fire? Dragomiloff 00:36, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest most people are going to look for 'controlled burn' and would find 'prescribed burn' an extra step/distraction. GeoffBenn 07:57, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Back burning

[edit]

The opening sentence equates "back burning" with prescribed burning: Prescribed or controlled burning (back burning)... But the rest of the opening and following section describe prescribed burning as a carefully planned way to improve forest health and reduce the risk of large wildfires. "Back burning", if I have it right, is done in fighting wildfires, to use up fuel in advance of an approaching wildfire, in hope to stop its advance. If that is right, then back burning is not done for "restoration", or planned as carefully as suggested here, or done to reduce the risk of future wildfires. I can see back burning as a type of controlled burning, but not a general synonym. Pfly 22:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Back burning is used in wildland fire fighting, but it is a type of ignition which is used in prescribed burning. If nothing else, the fire may be contained by setting a back burn downwind of the burn unit, and just inside the fire line. jh032774

A bushfire will run rapidy in the direction of the prevailing wind. A fire of any decent size will create an updraft by convection that sucks air into the fire from all sides. If the fire is large enough, then it is possible to light a fire in front of a large fire that will be sucked back towards the main fire by this convection effect instead of being pushed ahead of the main fire by the prevailing wind. Such fires can be used to assist in fighting large fires by removing the fuel load immediatley in the path of the main fire front. This is known as "back-burning". It is common in the Australian media for city bred reporters who have no idea what they are talking about to use the term back-burning when writing about what would more correctly be described as a controlled (or prescribed) hazard or fuel load reduction burn. Rebboc (talk) 04:35, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could the article please differentiate between "back burning" and 'hazard reduction', which is done in the cooler months. I agree that too many people confuse the terms and would like someone to clarify this, please. Cgoodwin (talk) 03:38, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any enthusiasm for removing the back burning section entirely from this page, possibly creating a new page for it? Other than the fact that they both involve putting fire on the ground, backfiring/burning out and prescribed fires have little in common. One is a pure suppression tactic, and resource benefits are an afterthought. The other is purely about management; resource benefits and risk reduction are the main goal. It would almost make more sense to discuss mechanical thinning in this article than to discuss backfiring.

These two practices are already too frequently confused and grouping them together in one article adds to the confusion.Onefireuser (talk) 23:04, 17 May 2013 (UTC)Onefireuser[reply]

Sounds reasonable to me... Thanks, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 01:49, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Me too, we could add a hatnote at the top of the page to help redirect readers. Onefireuser, I wold love to help, I've got some good resources, and have applied the drip torch a few times. The Interior (Talk) 18:57, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some seeds, such as sequoia, remain dormant until fire breaks down the seed coating.

[edit]

This is wrong. The seeds do not remain dormant. The cones are serotinous and are coated with a waxy resin. The seeds themselves are in the cone and are not coated. Changing wording. Schonchin (talk) 19:33, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Controlled burn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:04, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Controlled burn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:45, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Controlled burn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:42, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Expanding the "use" section

[edit]

Controlled burns have their place in more than just forests, agriculture and shrublands. Perhaps to bolster the information contained on this page it would pertinent to add more ecosystems and how prescribed fire is used within them. Similar to how the 'Fire Ecology' page is set up. These could include grasslands, savannas, wetlands, etc.

Also, I think it is important to expand on the idea of controversy surrounding the practice as a whole, rather than just its use in agriculture. Perhaps talking about the clean air revival and the scholarly articles they cite against the use of prescribed fire would give the other side of the argument.


Trevanco95 (talk) 03:52, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have a hunch that you no longer post but I'd like any experienced "Wikipedian" to let me know if this is a worthwhile suggest to glom onto. Of course my instructor will let me know what they think but if I can get a pulse on where this Talk page is I can get a start on some concrete changes. That would be appreciated. Thanks.

JecklesLarue (talk) 06:54, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Evaluation

[edit]

The lead section is concise and provides adequate information to frame the rest of the content on the page. However, I would recommend adding a source for the statement about the cones of Lodgepole Pine and Sequoia being affected by fire.

The overall structure of the article is good but could use a bolstering of information. Statements are made with little supporting information that could help explain a point further. For example, an explanation could be used for the sentence about indigenous peoples in North America and Australia using controlled burns. Why did they do this?

The various aspects of the topic are balanced well except for the controversy section. First off, I think controversy can be applied to the practice in general and not just its use in agriculture. Second, all the information already contained within it would still be applicable, but would now create a better idea of how controversy affects this practice as a whole. For these reasons I think it's deserving of its own main point.

As indicated in the article already, a citation is needed for the last sentence of the 4th paragraph under the 'Forest use' header because as it stands, it is a baseless claim.

My main point would be to add a more encompassing controversy section in order to remain neutral in the presentation of the perception surrounding this practice. Overall the article is well organized and informative. More citations are needed throughout and perhaps a simple reconstruction of the main points contained could help the article be as informative as possible.

Trevanco95 (talk) 06:53, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Controlled burn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:50, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Controlled burn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:25, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

serotinous grasses

[edit]

Please explain 'serotinous grasses' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:44B8:3102:BB00:2472:42A6:311F:DD70 (talk) 20:47, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Grouse Moors

[edit]

I added some clarification for the last section of the controversies section, but it appears that the reference link is dead. The Grouse Moors section has a reference (friends of the earth) that better explains the practice, but much of the discussion of environmental effects in the reference is not captured in the wiki article. Would it make sense to move the grouse moors section into the controversies section and further explain the controversies mentioned in the friends of the earth reference? Christophe102 (talk) 16:51, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I actually had the same idea. I am supposed to alter this article for a class so I think I am going to do this just for organization sake. DandelionShortbread (talk) 16:03, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Control of fire by early humans

[edit]

Control of fire by early humans states that By starting wildfires, they were able to increase land fertility and clear large amounts of brush and trees to make hunting easier.[1] I am considering editing this to By starting controlled burns, they were able to.... But I feel I should ask here first. Background: Developments related to landscape-scale fire management are happening in geology (patterns of fire-induced magnetic susceptibility on a landscape scale), cultural anthropology (charcoal enrichment on a landscape scale means people organizing culture around fire-regime acceleration), and soil science (dawning recognition of fire as a soil-forming factor in chernozems). As reliable sources come online to share this into the mainstream, a section on landscape-scale fire management by early humans is going to form up. But where? Support/concerns/opposed to moving forward to find a home for that anticipated content, any feedback is appreciated. Paleorthid (talk) 20:34, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that using "controlled burns" is more accurate than "wildfires. " Regarding placement of future information, for me at least, I would refer to the Control of fire by early humans page to better understand the historical context of fire use, and controlled burns to better understand the technical aspects (ecological impacts, modern techniques, etc.). So I would think that content related to fire use by early humans would be a better fit for the control of fire by early humans page. I am new to editing so I would be interested to see what others think as well. Christophe102 (talk) 22:39, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ McKenna, Ryan. "Fire and It's [sic] Value to Early Man". fubini.Swarthmore.edu. Retrieved 23 November 2017.

Wiki Education assignment: Applied Plant Ecology Winter 2022

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 January 2022 and 23 April 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Vettiver (article contribs).

Forest fire🌲🌲🔥

[edit]

Save the life and save the forest 🌹 2409:4054:308:1732:0:0:1E6:70A4 (talk) 02:07, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits

[edit]

i recently removed content about Florida's controlled burns, as it appears to link back to self published sources (Lulu)


https://www.google.com/books/edition/Ecological_Restoration_Wildfire_Ecology/k1V8DgAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA60&printsec=frontcover

https://www.google.com/books/edition/21st_Century_Homestead_Sustainable_Agric/s2HxCQAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA44&printsec=frontcover

it's possible that these two authors plagiarzed the Wiki itself, but I can't find any reliable sources for this and it's been cn tagged for over a decade now, so i decided to just remove it. sorry for any inconvenience. - Hunan201p (talk) 10:11, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Communicating Science

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 January 2023 and 8 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): DandelionShortbread (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Maeflowerbailey16 (talk) 14:14, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Communicating Science edits

[edit]

Hello!

I was tasked with editing this article for a class. My major changes will be changing sources to more scientific/ stronger sources, reorganizing sections, clearing out fluff, and minor tweaks here and there. There are a lot of unsupported claims in this article and it would take more than a semester to try and track down proper sources for every detail so I will just delete them.I welcome anyone to add more detail that gives more a global context since my education is mainly in US forestry. There are decades of scientific research out there that could be made more widely available by putting them in this wiki article. If you have more you would like to share, please do. DandelionShortbread (talk) 16:08, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend that, unless they are blatantly wrong, you don't simply delete unsourced claims but instead tag them with Wikipedia:Citation needed tags. That may trigger others into helping find sources. HiLo48 (talk) 00:35, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Practical Research Methodology 2024

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 3 January 2024 and 10 April 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): HFHaider (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Ragleaved.

— Assignment last updated by Ragleaved (talk) 17:51, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Controlled Burning in North America Edits

[edit]

Hi everyone,

I noticed that the information in this article tends to focus on Australian controlled burns. I will be added information related to controlled burning protocols and practices in North America as well as indigenous Canadian sources that I can find. Are there any tips to edit this article? Thank you for your insight. --HFHaider (talk) 18:20, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Controlled_burn&oldid=1252203689"