this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2025
35 points (97.3% liked)

Canada

10426 readers
419 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 10 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (3 children)

The wildfires are happening for multiple reasons not just global warming. Our forests literally evolved to burn down and we have been stopping that for decades. Just building up deadfall and dead trees throw in drier weather and boom. We should have been doing controlled burns. And yes I know climate change is having an effect on the fires but it is not the only reason we are here.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 9 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Always have been. The difference is that more severe wildfires happen more frequently. The 6th IPCC report from 2021 (we are now on the 7th and the 8th is being prepared) had this nice figure (page 18) that showed this for extreme temperatures, floods and droughts:

collapsed inline media

If you don't immediately understand what this means, ask your insurance broker.

[–] krunklom@lemmy.zip 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I'm not arguing against you but it does scan that if years of deadfall have been accumulating there would be more severe fires more frequently than if shit was left alone.

Doesn't mean climate change isn't contributing.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 5 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Sure, but I would reverse the order. Things like accumulating deadfall, droughts, lumber monocultures can be related to the start and maintainance of fires. Without climate change these would happen at a certain rate. Climate change accelerates and intensifies the effects of all of it. Like, people get sick from all sorts of things, but if you're also an overweight smoker that doesn't exercise, each time you get sick is going to be more of a nail-biter than if you were in general good health. Like, yes, the street meat you just ate can't be good for you, but if you were generally healthy it wouldn't be as much of a danger of being catastrophic.

[–] krunklom@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 days ago

No argument from me.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I'm not even sure if controled burns are the best option long term, it still releases a ton of carbon and particulate matter. It might be better to make artificial peat lands and sink organic materials into them, acting as a carbon sink. Or maybe even remove the deadfall for other purposes.

[–] piccolo@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 days ago

Wild fires are a sign of a healthy forest. It burns all of the brush allowing new growth. Many plant species have evolved for their lifecycle to require being exposed to fires to germinate.

[–] Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago

We should be putting all of the money towards fire smarting around communities, and then fighting fires that threaten communities.

Thin the forests for a few hundred meters around each community every 10 years, remove the deadfall, cut low hanging branches.

Let fires burn in the wilderness until it gets within a certain distance and then go full throttle to stop it from hitting any infrastructure, even it it means just letting it burn around the community.