Final answer:
Controlled burns can be argued against due to their resource intensity, limited success in maintaining fire regimes, impact on biodiversity, and threat to urban areas and infrastructure.
Step-by-step explanation:
There are several factors that can be used to argue against controlled burns. Firstly, controlled burns may be resource intensive and of limited success in maintaining 'historic' fire regimes. Secondly, they can have a greater impact on biodiversity than natural changes in fire regimes. Lastly, controlled burns can pose a threat to urban areas, infrastructure, and public safety. It may be more effective to allow natural changes in fire regimes and manage the consequences while ensuring suitable habitats for sensitive species and simultaneously managing the threat to human settlements.