Thinking of my friends in Australia

Dr Felonious Sloth · Posts: 16 Join date: 2008-12-06 Age: 100 Location: No idea!

mactavish wrote:

Actually,bugger all of those fires started in Pine plantations. The Bendigo ones started at the roadside. Ditto Churchill. Both started by accelerants in the undergrowth and they moved so fast because they had shitloads of groundfuel to grab onto.

The Kinglake fire was started by fallen powerlines next to a plantation area. In the conditions that prevailed, anything other than more combustible rocks becomes ground fuel.

Also, go have a squiz at Marysville and Kinglake on google earth. Maryville in particular was very open and relatively clear of evil trees. There's a handful of houses left. The lesson is that when you get 46 degree heat, drought conditions, 30-40knot norwesters and single figure humidity, yer fundamentally fucked, irrespective of what the understory is like!

Do what you like to understory - if those conditions repeat the outcome will be the same. False solutions are no solutions.

Dr Felonious Sloth · Posts: 16 Join date: 2008-12-06 Age: 100 Location: No idea!

Chuck wrote:

not withstanding the fuckwad in SA buggering with treasurery the greenies still have a lot to answer for...there was a case in Sydney where the fire brigade wanted to burn off dangerous undergrowth so that the vegetation was not such an accelerant and they actually had to go to court to fight the greenies so it could be done.

Ah yes, the nasty old greenies.

The conditions last weekend, and the drought, are our bloody future. They fit climate change modeling perfectly. As do the floods in QLD!

As it stands the "greenies" are about the only ones willing to call it as it really is, and demand change. The greed-driven cut it down/burn it off/dig it up mentality is now a major threat to every one of us.

Like it or not, fires of this kind WILL become more frequent because the conditions that drove them will become more frequent. The notions of blaming the "greenies" for a situation that's actually being caused by the very behaviour they're trying to combat is absurd beyond belief.

mactavish · Subject: Re: Thinking of my friends in Australia Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:26 pm

Well,what do you suggest? Of course random clearing/logging/slashing & the rest of it simply aren't acceptable solutions,but the Aboriginies learned years ago that burning off helps promote growth,so why NOT allow back burning? The tree huggers keep their trees,which is envionmentally important...belive it or not,I AM sympathetic....but you bust out on Chuck and I without an alternative,Doc,and that's what is annoying to those of us CRIBBED by council laws for back burning. Those farking fires reached our fenceline and they needn't have come CLOSE if the bloody council had allowed us to clear the crown land abutting us. By clearing,I mean the removal of underbrush and a huge proliferation of dead trees. Not all of them,because I know that the native animals live in them,but surely,75% of them is not unreasonable?
I don't mind saying that I have never been more frightened in my life and I'm justifiably angry about it. Those fires should NOT have come so close to us! Weather conditions notwithstanding...ANY match/ciggie/feckin anything left back there will destroy HEAPS! So what's the alternative?

MooSE667 · Posts: 53 Join date: 2008-12-01

the alternative is to clear brush and undergrowth away from within 100 meters of occupied buildings (if you would like to save occupants from a cruel excruciating death) or put a 1 k fire guard around each city,, fuck its nearly there anyway,, christ..

mactavish · Subject: Re: Thinking of my friends in Australia Tue Mar 03, 2009 4:08 pm

That's the friggin POINT,Moose! We aren't ALLOWED to clear a fucking thing! Mad

Dr Felonious Sloth · Posts: 16 Join date: 2008-12-06 Age: 100 Location: No idea!

mactavish wrote:

Well,what do you suggest? Of course random clearing/logging/slashing & the rest of it simply aren't acceptable solutions,but the Aboriginies learned years ago that burning off helps promote growth,so why NOT allow back burning?

There's another fallacy thats being kicked about...

Yes, aborigines DID use firestick farming, but NOT in heavily forested areas.

They burned off in grassland or very open country to promote new grow which attracted and concentrated game and some food crops. It wasnt done in forests because the canopy stopped the type of growth required. It was also far too dangerous.

Anyway, my point remains - no amount of backburning would have stopped the fires concerned. If you dont wanna believe it, look at some of the places that got totally trashed on Google earth.

Chuck · Subject: Re: Thinking of my friends in Australia Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:32 pm

Doc makes a couple of good points here. The Aborigines did burn off but as stated not in heavily wooded areas and back burning would not have helped much with the Kinglake/Kilmore fires....due to extreme dryness and high winds there was little chance to stop the fires. The fire front actually jumped the Hume Highway which is wider than a lot of fire breaks at an estimated speed of 150 kilometres an hour. How the hell do you stop that. With all that said there is and was things people could do to help themselves. Clearing up fallen debris and leaves etc around the house, cutting back trees from close to the house and general clean up around the property. My point still remains and that is the greenies need to learn what is fire prevention and what should remain fror the animals. The greenies still have something to answer for