When the recent horrific wildfires swept through portions of Australia, killing hundreds and leaving thousands homeless, many were quick to say that the fires were a consequence of climate change.

This should have come as no surprise. To climate change advocates, everything is evidence that their theory is correct and nothing will disprove it.

Well, as more details emerge, those who suffered most from the fires are finding something else to blame: overzealous environmental advocates and their policies.

One man who lost his mother and brother in the fires lambasted the city council that imposed “green” policies:

“We’ve lost two people in my family because you d**kheads won’t cut trees down,” he said.”We wanted trees cut down on the side of the road … and you can’t even cut the grass for God’s sake.”

It’s almost a law of nature: whenever man tries to regulate nature for nature’s benefit, we almost inevitably make it worse. When we simply ignore nature and let things develop, well, naturally, nature takes care of itself quite nicely.
Fire is an important factor in the life of forests and wild lands. It scours away the old, making room for the new. Indeed, after the massive, devastating fires that wracked Yellowstone National Park in 1988, the forests bounced back healthier than ever, faster than anyone predicted.

In Australia, well-meaning busybodies sought to strike a balance between man and nature, hoping to minimize man’s effect on nature by integrating the two, keeping large swaths of nature to mingle with man.

And then fire wreaked havoc on man and nature indiscriminately. Along with old-growth trees, brush, and understory, the fire also purged the land of homes, cars, and people.

One wonders if the Australian public officials who pushed for their “green” policies have calculated the carbon footprint of the burned-up homes, cars, and people who paid the price for their meddling.