The large Greenwood fire in Lake County is a lesson in how nature works despite the best efforts by human management. The critique of the Hayes family property is specious ("Big landowner feels heat for Greenwood fire," Aug. 26). While 12,000 acres seems large, it is minimal as you consider the scale of the upstate forest fire. Other than clear-cutting a safe zone around structures, wildfire will still burn through timbered land and forest-floor slash and other vegetation will not slow down its progress. A nearly single species forest allows the spruce budworm to ravage the land as it easily spreads. This same scenario is being repeated in the western U.S. as the pine bark beetle has devastated hundreds of millions of acres of pine trees.

The solution here? Periodic controlled burns and targeted logging can create a patchwork of mixed species and age-class differences. This also has the benefit to wildlife as a multi-age forest provides diverse food sources.

We can never "preserve" nature in a static postcard condition. Ecological succession is a reality and we need to understand it and work with the natural phenomenon. If we don't, nature will do it for us.

Joe Polunc, Waconia

•••

One might question why the U.S. Forest Service does not practice what it preaches. "Big landowner feels heat for Greenwood fire" is a very one-sided article and portrays those private owners as irresponsible property managers. Please share with all how many acres are owned by the state and federal government in the Superior National Forest. Please explain what percentage of dead trees state agencies have cut down and chipped up. They are great at giving suggestions yet poor at managing our renewable resource. It is time for their hands to be untied and the responsibility of our forest management be squarely put in their laps. There has been too much interference by environmentalists and lawyers and politicians.

I own land not far from the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness that was torched by the Ham Lake fire. I was not compensated for our losses due to government's inability to keep the forest healthy. If you think the Greenwood fire is bad, you have yet to experience when many more thousands of acres in the BWCA ignites. God save us all, but it is inevitable unless logging is resumed as soon as possible. A forest is a living breathing wonder but when it dies, it is a huge liability.

When's the last time you passed a vacant field and heard the song of a meadowlark or a bobolink? Do you remember when it was common to hear and see them? Are you aware that there is a vacant lot right here in Maplewood that has not only nesting meadowlarks and bobolinks but at least a couple other dozen grassland birds, including the endangered Henslow's sparrow? ("A vacant lot, a golf course, an outcry," Aug. 26.) This rare grassland may be lost to us and to the birds who live there. Kudos to Maplewood Mayor Marylee Abrams, who wants the county to wait upon the ecology report by the firm they hired to complete a natural resources study. That report will not be completed until sometime later this year. Abrams indicates that the report will definitely influence her and the city's position on what happens to this vacant field that isn't "vacant" at all. Let's hope it will be added to Battle Creek Regional Park where everyone can enjoy the wildlife it supports.

Linda Kellar, Lake Elmo

•••

By now I imagine the Star Tribune has heard from many people on this — birds did not survive "five" extinctions ("Birds are veterans of mass extinction," Aug. 25). They have survived one. They did not exist as a life form in the prior events. Furthermore, had they been around at the other extinctions, they may not have survived them. The way the author phrases their survival — "Modern bird species, like those you see in your yard, stem from that 1% of life that survived all five events" — would also imply that humans have also survived five extinctions, because we too come from that 1%, which is as incorrect as saying birds have.

The headline "Birds are veterans of mass extinction" is very misleading, as well as being a very unscientific statement.

Recent volumes that might help in this matter are "The Ends of the World: Volcanic Apocalypses, Lethal Oceans, and Our Quest to Understand Earth's Past Mass Extinctions" by Peter Brannen, as well as "The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History" by Elizabeth Kolbert.

Both do admirable jobs at grappling with the geology and science behind the extinction events.

Bob Reilly, Minneapolis

A recent letter claims that building the Southwest light-rail line "would increase greenhouse gas emissions compared to the no-build option" according to its final environmental impact statement (EIS) and puts the Twin Cities on the wrong side of the campaign for cleaner power (Readers Write, Aug. 26). This is misleading.

While the final EIS predicts a "temporary increase in greenhouse gases from the construction equipment and vehicles," it also finds a long-term impact of "net greenhouse-gas emissions reduction in the region and beneficial [greenhouse gas] and climate change effects." He also implies that the transition to electric vehicles will outpace the transition to renewable sources of electricity, which seems doubtful.

Richard Adair, Minneapolis

I write to commend retired Hennepin County public defender Richard Carlson for his commentary of Aug. 26 ("Pass the amendment and jettison bad cops," Opinion Exchange). I often disagree with his conclusions, as I do this time. I do, however, commend his intellectual honesty.

Attorneys are trained to evaluate the facts. However, when they are in advocate mode they only acknowledge the facts that support their position. Carlson explains his support for the public safety amendment while also acknowledging its shortcomings.

Advocates for the amendment usually ignore or gloss over the current consequences of a demoralized and depleted Minneapolis Police Department on the increase of violent crime in the city. Carlson does not. Still, he is ready to bet on the need for the ambiguous public safety charter amendment as necessary to resolve the seemingly intractable problems in the MPD. We disagree, but with integrity.

Gregory Scott Hestness, Minneapolis

•••

The article "Second attorney asks to ban livestream for trial in George Floyd killing" brought up some interesting points between the potential consequences of livestreaming a high-profile court case, as we learned in the trial of Derek Chauvin. Leita Walker and Emmy Parsons in Bloomberg Law News in March noted that audiovisual coverage is not allowed during the guilt/innocence phase of criminal trials, according to Minnesota court rules. However, due to the pandemic, spectators were not allowed, which meant livestreaming was.

Livestreaming allows for fair trials open to the public, as required in the Constitution. While it is crucial to have the witnesses feel safe enough to testify, not livestreaming the trial of the officers who contributed to the brutality and death in this case is an injustice to the integrity of the legal process. Police accountability is an issue, given that prior to Floyd's death, only one officer in Minnesota history had been held accountable and convicted of murder. The public should be allowed to see that the offenders are held responsible for their actions and are fairly dealt with, because police historically have been free from such accountability.

Molly Clarke, Minneapolis