The cool thing about ButnBot, IMO, is the precision it brings to prescribed burns. It scorches everything in its path, but operators have complete control over that path — they can specifically target areas with a lot of type conversion to invasive grasses and leave area with native species alone.

I appreciate the info! Not trying to play the blame game, just push the conversation forward among boiling point readers (largely environmental folks). Certainly not trying to claim most/all enviros buy into pristine wild thinking. More coverage on timber on the way (I wrote that timber story BTW!)

Both are important issues — but are ones boiling point readers are already quite versed in ;)

That vision is one of active stewardship and a recognition of the fundamental connection between our developed lands and our wildlands

So, what does science say about how you *really* protect timber stocks? Acknowledge the wild on your timberlands (keep them ecologically healthy and therefore fire resistant) and acknowledge our responsibility in the wildlands (steward fire so mega-blazes from neighboring land don’t destroy stock)

When we drop this black and white thinking of “land we leave pristine” and “land we dominate,” we can more pragmatic conversations, acknowledging we need and use timber (but maybe could use less) and that we can still let nature thrive on these lands.

This false idea that we can isolate the “wild” areas we want to leave untouched from the areas where we exert our “full influence” — both our towns and timberlands — prevents us from talking about land we both take from (harvest timber) and give back to (protect species, do prescribed burning)