Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Flamming rabbit spreads wildfire
Yes the tittle does describe what actually happened. They were doing a controlled burn in Saskatchewan. They set a rabbit on fire and it ran and spread the fire. 
It seems to me that their controlled burn was not very controlled if they set an animal on fire.
The news broadcast ends by saying no one was hurt. What about the rabbit. I don't think it survived the fire.

Maybe they need to think over controlled burns of grassland. The grasses are home to a lot of very tiny wildlife. I am sure the rabbit was not the only one who was harmed.  I wonder if the rabbits have babies already and what about the ground nesting birds? Is the burning really necessary? If it is then they need to think about when and how to do it so animals are not killed in the process. Things could have ended much worse if the fire had gotten away from them. Remember how bad the Fort McMurray fire was. However it started it spread uncontrollably.
[Image: IMG_9091.JPG]

What a cruel and dreadful thing to do! I don't even care for what purpose! The end does not justify the means. They set a rabbit on fire basically because humans were too lily-livered to set the "controlled burn" themselves so sacrificed an innocent little animal instead in the most painful and terrible end to its life.
The rabbit was caught in the controlled burn and then spread the fire outside of the burn area.
The problem is that they are careless and accidentally set animals on fire. If they are going to set grassland on fire they need to be careful that there are no animals in the area to get hurt. They could send dogs in to clear the burn area before they set the fire.

This is not a unique incident.

This is the reason why they do controlled burns.

I understand why it is good to let a small fire clear an area, but I think they need to be more careful of the wildlife in the area.
It is cruel to set an animal on fire even if that was not what you intended to do.

There can be a responsible approach to controlled burns.

I suspect they were a little less careful in Saskatchewan and a rabbit was killed and the fire was spread. Done responsibly the fire would not have spread and wildlife wouldn't have been harmed.
[Image: IMG_9091.JPG]

I think I misunderstood what had happened. The page was loading very slowly the other night and I jumped to the conclusion that they had done this deliberately. But still, yes they should have more care when setting fires.

Sending dogs in to flush out wildlife first  isn't such a bad idea.
They are supposed to do the burns before the animals wake up from hibernation. It should have been done last month.
Nature does "controlled" burns. Lightening would start a fire then the rains would put it out. If the cycle is working properly then it is healthy for the ecosystem and no one gets hurt.

We messed things up by preventing small fires and letting underbrush and dead plant material pile up. When a forest with a lot of dead wood catches fire it can burn hotter and deeper and destroy an area.

Now we are back to having smaller fires, we need to work on our timing so that no one gets hurt.
[Image: IMG_9091.JPG]


Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
Created by Zyggy's Web Design