rangeland fires.. good or bad?

Question

how do rangeland fires contribute to nature etc?
how are they bad for nature etc?

Answer 1

Controlled burns maybe the most controversial tool in conservation management practices.

The benefits include cutting down over abundant insect populations (grasshoppers, beetles, locust, etc.), inducing plant seed distribution, soil enhancement, and encouraging habitat life cycle behavior to name a few.

Some of the troubles with burns is there is no 100% certainty the burn will be completely contained (burns have "gone wild" in a number of western states causing serious property and habitat damage), invasive species may use the burn area to establish themselves, unexpected erosion issues can occur, and regrowth can sometimes be faulty or reduced.

I think the vast bulk of naturally occurring range fires should be allowed to burn themselves out. Controlled burns still need some better policies developed.

Fire management has been steadily improving over the last two decades, from the "stop ALL fires" mentality, but I still think we have alot to learn on how fires benefit nature and what our role is in letting fire provide the most positive impact on a variety of ecosystems..

Answer 2

Depending on the circumstances they can do both.

Long part of Native American land management fires can provide positive benefits to soils and result in healthy regrowth of herbaceous plants, many which are adapted to growing in such ecosystems.

The bad end comes from invasive species propogation. These newly burned areas can become excellent areas for invasive plant species to gain a strong hold and forever alter the range system. Potential short term damage to water quality (possible erosion and nutrient spikes).

Rangeland fires I would think are easier to control than fires in forested and chaparral ecosystems due to the fact that there is less fuel.

Answer 3

Methinks they must be Good. Afterall, there's ALWAYS been lightning storms- that have set the brush & grasses ablaze, and refertilized the land for the NEXT Springs crop of Green. THAT new green material- provides MORE food for all the many insects & animals that depend on such, as well as help to keep the Range "open" for the even LARGER animals to brouse. So from "Ma Nature's" point of view, a rangeland fire is a "short term pain- for a long term gain"... :)

Answer 4

The answers above cover most of the positive and negative aspects but one that I can think of:

Grazing animal select a limited range of plants to feed on. This gives undesirable plants and advantage and over time (especially with single species grazing, eg cattle)the undesirable plants predominate. A fire will eliminate all plants thereby retaining good diversity.

Answer 5

really hard question pros==
clear out dies eased trees plants
open clogged waterways[streams ponds]
can cause erosion that create new ponds-lakes wider rivers.
stimulates new growth for grass tender green plants.
==cons==
can kill animals wipe out species.
can cause washout an flood low areas that were not before.
can harm larger trees that are not destroyed already.
can push habitat away from their homes force them to rebuild.
some birds can take up to 1 year to build a nest that can kill
one generation same with other animals.

It's your call good?==bad?

Answer 6

range land fires contribute to the nature by giving new nutrients on the land and for the plants to grow there..it gives fertilisers that makes the plants healthy,one of the requirements of a plants in living...but range land fire are bad to nature because it kills some of the helpful organisms living in that place which assist the plants to live..it somehow destroys or disturbed the cycle Or chain in the ecosystem in that range land..