|
|
| OUR NATION'S PARKS A Forum with Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt May 23, 1997 |
|---|
Return to this forum's top page
Questions Sec. Babbitt answered in this forum:
Should cars be banned from national parks? How should forest fires be handled? Why are visits to the Grand Teton or the Grand Canyon so expensive? Does the federal government give mining companies sweetheart deals? Could special tax incentives provide money for the parks? Does the federal government promote clearcutting forests? What was Sec. Babbitt's best experience being part of a National Park Service firefighter? Viewer Comments
NewsHour Backgrounders
March 9, 1997:
Interesting coalitions have developed around the fight for rights to the water flowing down the Animus and the La Plata rivers in Colorado.
March 3, 1997:
Spencer Michels reports on efforts to rebuilt Yosemite National Parks after this year's devastating floods.
April 30, 1996:
Tom Bearden reports on efforts to restore the Colorado River's eco-system by flooding it.
Browse the NewsHour's index of environmental issues.
Outside Links
National Park Service
History of the National Park Service
Interior Sec. Bruce Babbitt
Department of the Interior
Jeanie Myer of Richmond, VA, asks: What is the department's policy on forest fires? I know that some forests need them, but they interrupt tourism and camping expeditions. How should we allow mother nature to take her course, while controlling the environment so that visitors can have their fun?
Secretary Babbitt responds:
You raise some good points, Jeanie. And I’ll agree with most of what you say. We've had some awful fires out vast in the past five years: fires that have raged out of control, destroyed homes and killed firefighters in the process. And doubtless you've heard the debate about whether we should be aggressively putting these fires out, or letting them burn.
I have a personal interest in this issue. Since I was 17, I've been a wildland firefighter myself. At first, it was just a summer job, but when I became an adult I kept getting out there because of my personal desire to be connected to the landscape and to help keep that landscape healthy. About a month ago, I gave a speech in Boise, Idaho, in which I laid out what I thought the federal government should do regarding that great debate over burn or don't burn. What I said is that the debate it stagnant because it isn't enough just to make that decision; you have to go farther. we should still let some fires burn, so we can reduce dangerous levels of fuels that have built up, but there are many fires that we must aggressively fight because of threats to people and property. But you need to add another piece on that: you actually need to light some fires--at times when they won't interfere with your camping outings--to further reduce those fuel loads. If we can put together an aggressive program of what are known as prescribed fires, we can lessen the number and severity of natural fires, and help the land and save lives and property in the bargain.
We can never eliminate fire from the landscape. We were foolish to try. It we put a fire out right away, the next one is likely to be worse. We can, however, use prescribed fire in a way that doesn't interfere with other uses of the forests--so you and I can both get out into the woods.
Continue to the next question...
Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station. PBS Online Privacy Policy
Copyright ©1996- MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved.
