RickD,
While you ably note that in fact insects were developing tolerance to DDT you fail to mention the high success rates that were seen when using DDT initially and that those countries with developed health care systems were able to maintain a successful eradication. You also fail to mention that in the few countries and localities that still use DDT it remains an effective preventative measure for Malaria. Of course it’s not the only answer and of course overuse of the chemical as was seen in the 1950′s and 60′s will lead to a stronger more resistant strain of mosquito’s; but controlled and limited applications of the chemical have proven for to be incredibly effective and consistent. You also fail to mention the proportional relationship between countries that abandoned ongoing DDT use and the subsequent rise in Malaria cases.
As for your theory that fire suppression is causing wild fires is both inaccurate and disturbing. While a fire suppression policy can intensify fires when they do finally occur, the idea that what we need to prevent fires is more fires is nonsensical. It’s particularly bizarre when we are talking about a process of allowing loggers to benefit from cleaning up the undergrowth that you advocate burning instead.
Also the fact that you use Mexican forests as your shining example of proper forest management is interesting since Mexico has very limited fire resources as well as a terrible record for wholesale deforestation, which would more than significantly make up for what you seem is a policy of non-suppression.
