Wildfire: Easterbrook took on an issue of huge environmental significance last week: wildfires in the West. This is good for two reasons: first, people who wants to "save the environment" can do a hell of a lot more good by getting their minds off foolishness like global warming and think about real-world problems and solutions; second, if they decide to do so, Easterbrook has the cred among the liberal opinion-setters (or, er, did have) to move policy on this issue.

Easterbrook agrees that fire is part of the natural forest cycle, and that surpressing it, without managing the resulting fuel load, is the worst course. It is also the "green" course. Environmental organizations believe the only thing worse that the fires is logging and the kind of selective, "smart" clearing Bush has proposed. Speaking of which, Easterbrook says:

Note that, since it is fashionable to deride George W. Bush's environmental policies, the president's "healthy forest" initiative, unveiled months ago, contains many provisions aimed at exactly the sort of pragmatic management that would reduce wildfires. The "healthy forest" bill was blocked in the Senate by Democrats and enviro lobbyists, who expressed horror at the thought of artificial intervention in the forest. Wednesday, as San Diego burned, the Senate passed the legislation 97-1. Bush's plan is far from perfect, but will move forest management back toward realism.

Note that Easterbrook's not entirely sold on the president's "far from perfect" program, but also that he's, wisely, willing to take half a loaf at this point. The enviro lobby should follow his lead.

We covered this issue a bit this summer, particularly in a post wherein I said:

Like it or not, humans are part of the environment, and we're going to have some kind of effect. We can manage that effect, in a sort of ecological compromise that approximates a healthy, low-fuel level forest; or we can worship at the altar of Gaia and get the results that the last couple of years have brought to Arizona. As with the anti-war crowd, the anti-managed environment crowd sees lots of evil in current policies but has no plan to defend against the consequences of the surrender they advocate.

I'm cautiously optimistic that we're seeing the death throes of the crowd that would defenestrate cause-and-effect reasoning and effective resource management in favor of the new-age mythology of nature that passes for enlightened enviro policy on the left. By the way, the link to Smithsonian's excellent reporting on wildfires and forest management in my July post is still active, if you missed it before.