TPO 20 integrated let it burn policy affects the parks in three ways first it damages the trees and vegetation in parks second it kills wildlife third it has a negative affect on the local economy

The article states that "let it burn" is a profitable method for refining forsests and parks sharing an example of Yellowstone. The lecturer not only completely overthrows this
contention but also rejects all the author's three explanations. In the following, these justifications will be discussed thoroughly.

First of all, the reading asserts that Yellowstone's fire ruined scores of park's trees and vegetation drastically. However, the professor insists that this creative policy is appropriate fundamentally in this case, mainly because it caused colonization of new plants. Additionally, more diverse plants had the opportunity to grow thanks to the fire, for example, smaller plants which needed unshaded areas to grow.

Secondly, the essay claims that this fire affected the park's wildlife insomuch as many mammals ran away and other small creatures, like birds, died owing to the fire. Nevertheless, the educator upholds that this fire caused a recovery in the animals' populations. Some animals, which did not have the opportunity to live, are now able to survive in the park due to the replacement of small plants. These animals include rabbits and hares. Moreover, this phenomenon strengthened the food chain in that location.

Tertiary, the passage says that the fire influenced the attractiveness of the park in terms of tourism negatively which caused a decrease in the local economy. The teacher on the other hand thinks that a reduction in the local economy acceptable providing that this kind of fire happens every year. Nonetheless, the situations in that year were exceptional; low rainfall and strong winds caused massive damage to the park. The park has never experienced this fire since 1988, and the tourism is doing fine afterwards.