Kat Anderson On Fire Burning

Shepherd Krech argues that the Indian’s practices lacked scientific reasoning and their methods of wildland management were based merely on necessity and inner beliefs rather than an aim towards conservation ideals. Additionally, based on empirical evidence of ecosystem degradation, he questions the value of fire as a management tool and undermines the Native Americans’ ecological impact on the ecosystem. On the other hand, Kat Anderson argues that Indians cared about the land rather than managing it. They worked together with nature by utilizing sustainable harvesting and gathering strategies along with the use of fire for subsistence to create a cycle that allowed for landscape use and its regeneration. Although Indians did not have scientific understanding of ecosystem dynamics nor previous experience on landscape management practices, I still find Kat Anderson’s argument …show more content…
The Indians had no previous experience or scientific knowledge on how to manage or control fire burning, and the extent to which burning land would affect the biodiversity was unknown. Yet, despite the collateral damage caused by the exploration of fire burning, the Indians managed to enhance the ecological effects of natural fire in a way that it encouraged ecosystem subsistence in the long term. For example, it was used to prevent pathogens infestation that could have wiped out the population of oak trees, and it promoted maximum vegetation diversity and preservation of native plants by eliminating weeds and other invasive species. In spite of the lack of knowledge of ecological dynamics, thanks to the Indian’s deep understanding of nature due to their harmonic relationship with the ecosystem, fire become an essential management tool that shaped ecosystems in the long