Our discussion about prescribed fires in wilderness areas has so 
far overlooked the fact that before Europeans arrived on this continent, 
Native Americans were kindling understory fires in order to encourage an 
abundance of plants and animals that were useful to them.  Thus the 
forests that we "inherited" had been adapted to fire for centuries, 
perhaps as far back as the end of the last Ice Age.  The Forest Service 
practice of suppressing fires must have been a shock for many plants and 
animals.
	The aboriginal people of Australia also routinely set fires on 
that continent for at least 40,000 years.  The National Parks in 
Australia are reintroducing prescribed fires in order to keep their 
forests, which evolved with fire, healthy.
	This brings up the question of the impact of "man" on wilderness 
areas.  This phrase in the Wilderness Act must be interpreted to mean 
the mechanized or motorized impact of modern human beings.  Certainly we 
do not want to disqualify roadless areas for wilderness consideration 
because of the presence of petroglyphs, pottery, tools, or prehistoric 
masonry structures.  
	Another open question is whether we will ever be able to trust a 
government agency to do prescribed burns that would truly benefit the 
forest and would not be a cover for a salvage timber operation.  
Certainly the Forest Service's abysmal record in this regard should 
disqualify them from being put in charge of any prescribed burns for the 
foreseeable future.
	From a scientific standpoint, the best solution would be to 
select certain wilderness areas in various ecosystems where prescribed 
burns will be carried out, and to designate other wilderness areas in a 
similar assortment of ecosystems where prescribed burns will be 
prohibited but naturally occuring fires will be allowed to burn.  
Perhaps other wilderness areas should be designated where prescribed 
burns are not allowed, and naturally-occurring fires will be 
extinguished.  Then we must let the experiment run for 500 years in 
order to measure which method is more successful.  
	I wish to nominate the roadless areas in my region (the Dixie 
National Forest) for non-prescribed burn status.  I'll take my chances 
on a wildfire occurring here during my lifetime.  I'm being facetious, 
of course, because no one wants to breathe the smoke from a prescribed 
burn or have their favorite hiking area temporarily ruined.  But I moved 
to Escalante for the clean air, and it may be important to preserve 
clean air in some locations so that people with health conditions such 
as lung problems or Multiple Chemical Sensitivity can have a chance to 
recover.  (I have MCS.)
	Thank you for bringing up such an important topic.  I look 
forward to people's comments on my contributions.

	Tori Woodard
	Escalante Wilderness Project
	P.O. Box 652
	Escalante UT 84726
	(435) 826-4778


*********************
"The WILDNET listserve is a service of Wilderness Watch.  WILDNET is 
designed to enhance the Wilderness community's collective knowledge of 
issues impacting Wildernesses and Wild Rivers nationwide.  WILDNET is an 
interactive listserve.  By sharing information, ideas and strategies all 
of our efforts to keep Wilderness wild, quiet, and full of native 
biodiversity can be helped.  If you know of an organization or individual 
who should be part of this listserve, or if you want to unsubscribe, send 
a message to mailto:wild@wildernesswatch.org