Bushwalk Australia

What are your thoughts on this? Has to be done?

http://www.themercury.com.au/news/tasma ... 7273837614

THE biggest bushfire fuel reduction plan in Tasmania’s history will be announced by the State Fire Management Council today, but it’s been a long time coming say farmers.

Designed to reduce statewide risk over four years, the massive $28.5 million program comes as a result of the inquiry into the Tasmanian bushfires of January 2013 and the Royal Commission into the Victorian bushfires of February 2009.

Funded by the Department of State Growth, the amount of land that has the suitable vegetation for burning includes 39 per cent (0.97 million ha) in Parks and Wildlife reserves, 16 per cent (0.39 million ha) on Forestry Tasmania reserves, 3 per cent (80,000ha on Crown Land) and 42 per cent (1.05 million ha) on private land.

Smacks of secondary and tertiary agendas here.

Good idea so long as its strategic and people understand the consequences. I suspect the vast majority of the funds will go to the urban interface burns where it will require the most resources, the most frequent burning and the most consultation with the public. Just don't expect it to STOP every fire. And the final question is what happens when the money runs out?

The Govt state arsonists at it again on a grander scale....Never ends,never gets any better, just gets worse and worse with more wildlife slaughtered...Why would tourists want to come to a smoke ridden,blackened once was paradise..

Stuff grows back and gets rid of all the dead wood .The aborigines used to do it. They were smart. Bush fires are a part of nature. As long as they dont do it like the dse and let it get out of control. And every year lightning starts fires.

RichB wrote:The Govt state arsonists at it again on a grander scale....Never ends,never gets any better, just gets worse and worse with more wildlife slaughtered...Why would tourists want to come to a smoke ridden,blackened once was paradise..

What do you base your opinion on this on? Do you have a problem with the evidence for burns, or is it based on tourism/looks?

No evidence of anything..Does the smoke ridden sky effect people with respiratory conditions such as asthma..Im surprised these people are not suing this corrupt govt big time for the effects on their health...Look at Rocky cape National park where some parts are a blackened landscape..Why do these idiots allow people to live and build in national parks?..What effect do all these burns have on WILDLIFE..Lets forget humans for one minute?...Like I said Govt arsonists are destroying not only some peoples health but wildlife also..small and big. Tasmania markets itself as a clean green paradise..Well Rocky Cape National park is certainly not too green now in some areas..Oh and there are a fair number of Tasmanian Devils there..How do these fires affect them??..Waiting for your answer ??

G'day RichB,
Very emotive and a tad juvenile response don't you think ? you say " forget humans for one minute " ? What about this scenario "bush fire" you have the choice of saving a Child or a Wombat or Devil or Tree what would your choice be ??
Other than Pencil Pines I believe all other Greenery will re grow after a Fire .
Just my two bobs worth.

Hi Richb,
There are a number of things that could be said in response to you're post, but as the old saying goes, " start arguing with fools and pretty soon people can't tell the difference".

grant evans wrote:Hi Richb,
There are a number of things that could be said in response to you're post, but as the old saying goes, " start arguing with fools and pretty soon people can't tell the difference".

Well said Grant from you that understands "burn offs" some just don't get it do they !!

RichB wrote:The Govt state arsonists at it again on a grander scale....Never ends,never gets any better, just gets worse and worse with more wildlife slaughtered...Why would tourists want to come to a smoke ridden,blackened once was paradise..

Oh Lord!

Look, this is Australia. The bush burns. Naturally. It always has, and it always will. We can't stop it, and we shouldn't try - for one thing, there are many plant species that need a burn to promote sprouting of seedlings and new growth.
Yes, it needs to be controlled, but there's no difference in the appearance of a landscape after a natural burn and a controlled fuel-reduction burn and, mostly, less negative impact because the controlled burns are exactly that - controlled.

No, I don't like the haze, I don't like the look of a fire-blackened landscape, I don't like what the smoke does to the air-quality, and I mostly certainly don't approve of FT's fell, bulldoze and burn policy, but a sensible, well-organised properly controlled series of fuel-reduction burns does more good than harm overall, particularly when you consider the impact on human habitation and particularly when compared to the impact of major bushfires.

Alternatively, we could all just pack up and leave the island to the wombats and wallabies.

'Fools' The guy hasn't engaged in any personal attack, started a personal attack or name calling, is entitled to his opinion.

A fire regime isn't 'necessary' for those species, a fire event on occasion is what they have evolved for. Firestick management isn't a 'natural' occurance, nor is it necessary. It may very well be the only practical way of maintaining forest in an acceptable or desirable way for us, that's as much for the fact that fires will keep on happening.. not any sophisticated 'non-fool' mindset. Factor in that scale with potential institutional bungling and blind, blanket acceptance may in fact be 'foolish'.


http://www.parks.tas.gov.au/index.aspx? ... intID=3388

"What about this scenario "bush fire" you have the choice of saving a Child or a Wombat or Devil or Tree what would your choice be ??"...My choice would be the Wombat or the Devil.. They are an endangered species which the human race plague certainly is not..Who says to you their lives are any less valuable than a human beings?? who..the Govt?

RichB wrote:"What about this scenario "bush fire" you have the choice of saving a Child or a Wombat or Devil or Tree what would your choice be ??"...My choice would be the Wombat or the Devil.. They are an endangered species which the human race plague certainly is not..Who says to you their lives are any less valuable than a human beings?? who..the Govt?

Sorry for you RB to value animals over humans ,I really value our wild life however I would gladly slaughter any of them to save my children or any other human being .

Nuts wrote:'Fools' The guy hasn't engaged in any personal attack, started a personal attack or name calling, is entitled to his opinion.

A fire regime isn't 'necessary' for those species, a fire event on occasion is what they have evolved for. Firestick management isn't a 'natural' occurance, nor is it necessary. It may very well be the only practical way of maintaining forest in an acceptable or desirable way for us, that's as much for the fact that fires will keep on happening.. not any sophisticated 'non-fool' mindset. Factor in that scale with potential institutional bungling and blind, blanket acceptance may in fact be 'foolish'.


http://www.parks.tas.gov.au/index.aspx? ... intID=3388

Not too sure where you are coming from Nuts especially with the emotive comments from the RichB and your convoluted post ,I am of the belief that "prevention is better then the cure" so safe controlled burn offs will be better than what happened at Dunalley In my opinion.

If we want understand fire in our ecology we need to under stand that fire is part of the ecology. The trees, the animals, they all rely on fire. Why is that??
It's because our ecology is one that has been shaped by humans for many thousands of years with fire being the largest force that humans have exerted on the ecology.
The Indigenous people of Tasmania used burning as a hunting and vegetation conversion process for a long time before the Europeans turned up. They had changed the landscape we see today, we see it as untouched but the reality is it is a human influenced situation. So where does that leave us?
If you say that we aren't going to burn then we are essentially changing the place by not burning,it is essentially a managed ecology and we will change it if we stop managing it by burning.
So the really question is how much to do we burn? I think we may have under burnt in the past and so we may need to burn more. It really is a very complex area, read some of the research and then maybe have a think about it would be my advice.
Start here http://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en& ... ia&f=false

Must admit that is an unusual point of view RichB lol.. anyhow

No corvus, did you follow the original post? Nothing emotive (by Dan), but it's a major escalation on unprecedented scale.
Our park service (at least) deserves the public questioning these things, especially considering what we have seen of political interference.
hence- 'blind acceptance' may in fact be 'foolish' (considering the potential scale and implications outside any particular valley).

Unusual point of view would be a complete understatement don't you think, unbelievable!

Yes, a bit Rich perhaps!
Some people are very passionate about wildlife. 1 million potential parks hectares is a lot of destruction, notwithstanding theory and the greater good.

Nuts, is that your attempt to defend the undefendable, to even contemplate putting the life of an animal before that of a child, another human being is indeed unbelievable, your attempt at defending or somehow justifying that comment, breathtaking!

Who says a Tasmanian Devils life is of any less importance than a humans ?, and why?
Its not like the human race is endangered really is it...Have you not noticed the human race is now more like a virus in the way it behaves and its destruction of everything in its path...
Any how thats my opinion and Im happy its different..

Sometimes a burnt landscape is beautiful.

There is also evidence that a patchwork of recent burns increases the carrying capacity and ecological variation of species in the Australian bush. The highest biodiversity is often found at the edges of two biomes.

Scottyk's book would be a really good start.

I'm with nuts on the entire name-calling thing.

Point taken

grant evans wrote:Nuts, is that your attempt to defend the undefendable, to even contemplate putting the life of an animal before that of a child, another human being is indeed unbelievable, your attempt at defending or somehow justifying that comment, breathtaking!

I'd imagine Rich isn't the only one to hold that view, though it's pretty extreme and not one I can picture.

As for a land management tool (in parks, for the park) I don't relate the theory to practice. A managed landscape to conform to our ideal?
The adaptation to fire happened long before aboriginal people were involved? Minimal genetic evolution over 15-20k years? What we (they) are trying to achieve is to alter the natural regime (as aboriginal people did), hold it at a point more acceptable (to us) where communities are held in stasis or a primary/secondary cycle, never reaching maturity. A good outcome for people, less understorey & fuel load- yes! probably, assuming the various authorities can keep such a scale under control and the purpose is realised without unnecessary/collateral damage.. which to accept as a given would take some ignorance of history and a lot of faith.

Nuts wrote:Must admit that is an unusual point of view RichB lol.. anyhow

No corvus, did you follow the original post? Nothing emotive (by Dan), but it's a major escalation on unprecedented scale.
Our park service (at least) deserves the public questioning these things, especially considering what we have seen of political interference.
hence- 'blind acceptance' may in fact be 'foolish' (considering the potential scale and implications outside any particular valley).

My apologies to the OP Dan I meant RB and have edited my post

corvus wrote:

Nuts wrote:Must admit that is an unusual point of view RichB lol.. anyhow

No corvus, did you follow the original post? Nothing emotive (by Dan), but it's a major escalation on unprecedented scale.
Our park service (at least) deserves the public questioning these things, especially considering what we have seen of political interference.
hence- 'blind acceptance' may in fact be 'foolish' (considering the potential scale and implications outside any particular valley).

My apologies to the OP Dan I meant RB and have edited my post

No problem, I was pretty sure you were referring to RB's post.

It's been an interesting discussion.

Personally I don't know enough about it to say with any certainty what's right or wrong. I am certain it is far more complexed than it may first appear, as is most things.

I will admit however that my first thoughts were that it is the sensible thing to do, but I concede it comes at a cost. Parks are well underway with it according to their Facebook page.

Parks and wildlife are a govt agency..Should be the destruction of parks and wildlife agency..they havent got a clue..

RichB wrote:Parks and wildlife are a govt agency..Should be the destruction of parks and wildlife agency..they havent got a clue..

Really?
I think for the budget they have they do a good job.
Give some examples of their cluelessness if you can, might be helpful

Scottyk wrote:

RichB wrote:Parks and wildlife are a govt agency..Should be the destruction of parks and wildlife agency..they havent got a clue..

Really?
I think for the budget they have they do a good job.
Give some examples of their cluelessness if you can, might be helpful

Yeah, I'm with you scotty.
Get it off your chest Richy - what's yer beef with PAWS.?

Richb,
You talk about a corrupt government, show us the corruption.
You talk about arsonists. Definition of arson " the crime of unlawfully setting fire to a property". Surely these burn offs are sanctioned by a democraticly elected government, how then can this organisation be labelled as arsonists.
You call for the destruction of PAWS, but give no information as to what will replace it.
Perhaps it's time to back up these accusations.
Show us the proof.
Give us the facts.