Proposal of social advertising of sustainable consolidation

Страницы: 1
Proposal of social advertising of sustainable consolidation, DRAFT

Hi, to all!

A post for our English-speaking readers.

I finished “in general” the English version of the proposal of the "Project of social advertising of sustainable consolidation, promoting the elimination of grass burning practice and explaining the negative consequences of grass burning  for the climate, nature, economy and human health “The grass burning is..” ".

The file in the attachment can be found in the bottom of the post.

I think that the redaction of somebody who knows English better than me (and at the same time who understands the importance of termination the practice of grass burning in the world) will be important.

So, let’s do it together. Let me know please who may and what to help me a bit with redaction of this text.

When the proposal became better I’ll publish it in a separate thread on the forum of the forest and wildfire fighting volunteers (so, just here) and put it on the website of the Campaign “Just stop the grass burning!” (

Importantly, in the beginner of the proposal I wrote the division “About the ISEU Public Campaign “Just stop the grass burning!”

I think that if the English version of the proposal will be offered to another countries, we should explain firstly the main objectives and sense of the Public Campaign “Just stop the grass burning!”.

The attitude to the grass burning and prescribe burning practice is very different in Russia and those other countries who use dry vegetation burning practice intensively.

In Russia the most of people already knows that any form of dry vegetation burning gives a lot of negative consequences for the climate, nature, people health and economy. So, we don’t need to explain these things to people, it is obviously or quasi obviously in the Russian society.. And it is it obviously for sure among the most environmentalists, wildfire-fighters volunteers, who personally work against the wildfires problem in Russia.

In Canada, USA, Portugal, Greece, Spain, Australia, Argentina, etc… all countries  who use prescribed burning practice very intensively (and who have catastrophic wildfires every year by this reason)  – it is not obviously at all, in  contrary, in those countries society believes that prescribe burning  is useful and safety practice, and  the illegal unauthorized grass burning – does not important …

The reason of it that the scientific paradigm of the prescribed burning benefit and safety exists in the world. (A paradigm - is a well-established scientific concept, which is not questioned in society, over which scientists and all other people do not think critically and do not ask question – is it true?.).

I wrote in more details in the text of proposal.

So, this division – is important. It will be applied in this proposal (as explanation  of the idea and the reasons of the Campaign and importance of the proposed social advertising );  and, at the same time, I will use it later to make the English presentation of the Campaign on its website… to lunch by this way the international work of the Campaign “Just stop the grass burning!”.

It will be hard way… but we must.

A criticism, ideas and recommendations related with the proposal are welcomed.

Наталья Новоселова

Международный Социально-экологический Союз

I've changed the text of the proposal (grammar, sense a bit). The final version of the proposal you can find in this post of the forum (look the latest version, now it is !v2_GrassBurningIS_23oct2018.docx)

Also the division  About the ISEU Public Campaign “Just stop the grass burning!” I’ve already uploaded on the website of the campaign. So, it’s here:

This division will be changed. I am in the process of developing the strategy of work with the stated objectives. So, some other things should be put in this text which is the “concept of the campaign” or our position which then we will promote in consideration on in others countries.

I think I have to put there some logical arguments:  how the  prescribed burning can be related with the frequency and strength of the wildfires in the country; why the prescribed burning is harmful for any natural ecosystems (so, when people burn in the wild forest, this forest is not WILD anymore); why burning is harmful for soils and agriculture.

Also I need to search the scientific literature.  I want to show that there are no any scientific research focusing on the total impact of dry vegetation burning on soil, native ecosystems, climate, strength and frequency of wildfires, people’s health and economy. So, this topic was not studied. In spite of that people use the prescribed burning practice very intensively, without any scientific justification of their safety and their necessity.

Here the argument should be applied – *Any strong human intervention in Nature is always harmful, unless the otherwise is proved*. For this reason, it is not the opponents of prescribed burning practice must prove its danger and harm to environment and people. It is those who promote this practice and conduct the dry vegetation burning on vast areas must prove their SAFETY and their NECESSITY.

So, it is not finished yet. But everybody who wants to help with the ideas can do it.

Наталья Новоселова

Международный Социально-экологический Союз
Страницы: 1
Читают тему (гостей: 1)