Hi all, First off, hope all of you are safe. I'm a Canadian and we are only getting bits and pieces of what is happening over there. I am looking for some advice. I am booked to land in Melbourne on May 6th and staying for about 2 weeks. We had planned to do Great Ocean Road and Kangaroo Island but am now wondering whether any of this is feasible. Ticket is non refundable so we will be coming into AUS. From the news, it sounds pretty bad. So I am wondering if we should alter our plans or?....
Mate, it'll be done and dusted by then, and will have greened up. Depending on exactly what you're planning, some infrastructure might still be out if action (quaint little country pubs, etc). Sent from my SM-N920I using FerrariChat.com mobile app
Yeah it's been a terrible fire season but that's what you get when you have terrible land management. No major fires around Melb/GOR. 1/3 of Kangaroo Island went up so best to check if your accommodation arrangements still exist. The news mentioned Southern Ocean Lodge going up. Image Unavailable, Please Login
That’s a great drive You will drive through some burnt out areas You will see some beautiful pristine bush and coastal formations You will have a great time and the locals will be glad to have you visit Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat.com mobile app
Thanks. We planned one day in Flinders Chase. It sounds like it got hit pretty hard? Should we still go to KI?
By May the roads will all be open, and the national parks will (should) be open again. Of course there will be a lot of devastation and some things will not be open / recovered. But as said previously, the locals will appreciate you visiting and there will still be lots of beautiful things to see. You don’t got to KI to see anything man-made. It’s all about nature, and fires are a part of it, so I’d say you should still go.
I hope you’re correct...BUT today’s plan to head to the NSW Southern Highlands (Mittagong etc) had to be replanned due to fires that sprang up between lunch and dinner yesterday so we headed to Windsor instead - smoke was so thick after lunch we hightailed it back to town directly rather than head further into the country. If there isn’t significant rain (and there is some hope in the next couple of days) then things are going to stay ‘doubtful’ until that happens. I can’t begin to imagine what next year’s fire season will be like if we go into another winter with no significant rain... To those blaming the current situation on ‘land management’ just WHEN was the ‘cool, light load’ window for preventative burning this year? Sure as hell never happened anywhere I’ve been in Aus this year (Qld, SA, Western Vic, big chunks of NSW)?
If you don't do regular hazard reduction burns, the fuel builds up. If you wait 5 years to hazard reduction burn, it becomes more difficult (but not impossible). One was planned for Victoria last year, but the greenies (backed by the ABC) protested vehemently, and this is what the result is. The ABC has removed the news item from their website (interestingly, ABC East Gippsland - the same mob that had a go at us for crossing the centre line), but you can still google the details. There were lots of photos and quotes in the article - all the protagonists should be identified and publically shamed - I bet one of them was the histrionic middle aged woman in the silver X-Trail that complained to the police about us.
Yep. My Pop was a '50s-'70s Fire Chief at what was then a California Division of Forestry station (now County). Didn't have much (if any) good to say about the "Greenies" who were responsible not for greening, but browning & blackening the flora & in turn, roasting fauna. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J727A using FerrariChat.com mobile app
After the 2009 Black Saturday fires the Victorian Royal Commission recommended that they implement a long term prescribed burning plan of 5% or 390,000ha of public land per year yet they only managed between 110-170k per year. In the 2014 final report they removed that 5% minimum and now it's back to who cares levels. Last year protesters stopped 2 prescribed burning days in Nowa Nowa to save the birds because it was happening in Spring. That's 2 days more then "im everywhere in Australia" knows about, also prescribed burning doesn't happen much in Winter because the days aren't long enough and you can't keep burning at night because reasons..... It's against the law to collect firewood in National Parks because only bushfires have permission to disturb the animals and plants. Cutting down trees around your house requires council permission unless you live near bushfire risk area then you get 10m using the 10/50 rule. There is a 20km fire front coming your way and you get 10m But yeah nothing to do with terrible land management
In south eastern NSW, the fires are pretty much all in the National Parks.... Our family's former holiday home at North Rosedale (South coast) burned to the ground on the 31st of December, the area was adjacent to a reserve and it was nearly impossible to get permission to remove trees on your own land. We always knew that if a bushfire came through it would be devastating, and we were right. Tweet— Twitter API (@user) date
NSW only does 135000 ha a year. https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/topics/parks-reserves-and-protected-areas/fire/managing-fire/bushfire-management-program
You didn't answer the question of WHEN WAS THERE A SAFE BURN PERIOD in any of these fire areas this season? The fires started in many places (such as 3km north of my home) BEFORE any burnoff could happen.
An interesting thesis - the last paragraph is particularly relevant IMHO By Viv Forbes 12:00AM December 31, 2019 The firelighter was the most powerful tool that early humans brought to Australia. Fires lit by Aboriginal men and women created the landscape of Australia. They used fire to create and fertilise fresh new grass for the grazing animals they hunted, to trap and roast grass-dwelling reptiles and rodents, to fight enemies, to send smoke signals, to fell dead trees for campfires, to ward off frosts and biting insects, and for religious and cultural ceremonies. Their fires created and maintained grasslands and open forests and extinguished all flora and fauna unable to cope with frequent burn-offs. Early white explorers and settlers recorded the smoke and the blackened tree trunks. They admired the extensive grasslands, either treeless or with well-spaced trees, and no tangled undergrowth of dead grass, brambles, branches and weeds. Making fire without tinderboxes or matches is laborious. So most Aboriginals tried to keep their fires alive at all times. When on the move, selected members of the tribe were charged with carrying a fire stick and keeping it alight. In really cold weather several members may have each carried a fire stick for warmth. When the stick was in danger of going out, the carrier would usually light a tussock of dry grass or leaves and use that flame to rejuvenate the fire stick (or light a new one). As they moved on, they left a line of small fires spreading behind them. They were observed by early white explorers and settlers trying to control the movement of fires but never tried to extinguish them. Early explorers who ventured inland were amazed to find extensive grasslands and open woodland. Their reports attracted settlers to these grassy open forests and treeless plains with mobs of cattle and sheep. Despite modern folklore tales about Aboriginal fire management skills, anyone reading diaries from early explorers such as Abel Tasman (1642) and Captain Cook (1770) soon learned that Aboriginals lit fires at any time, for many reasons, and never tried to put them out. If threatened by fires lit by enemies, the most frequent response was to light their own protective fires (now called backburning). Firelighting was deliberate, and sometimes governed by rules, but there was no central plan. There were no firefighters, no 4WD tankers, no water bombers, no dozers. But Aboriginal fire “management” worked brilliantly. Because of the high frequency of small fires, fire intensity was low and fires could be lit safely even in summer. Any fire lit would soon run into country burnt one or two years earlier and then would run out of fuel and self-extinguish. Early squatters quickly learned to manage fire to protect their assets, grasslands and grazing animals. Graziers need to protect herds and flocks, homesteads, haystacks, yards, fences and neighbours, as well as maintain grasslands by killing woody weeds and encouraging new grass. So their fire management was refined. They soon learned to pick the right season, day, time of day, place, wind and weather before lighting a fire. Today we have replaced decentralised fire management with government-nurtured firestorms. First governments created fire hazards called national parks, where fire sticks, matches, graziers and foresters were locked out and access roads were abandoned or padlocked. And green-loving urbanites built houses beside them and planted trees in their yards. The open forests and grasslands were invaded by eucalypt regrowth, woody weeds, tangled undergrowth, dry grass, logs, dead leaves, twigs, bark and litter — all perfect fuel for a wildfire holocaust. These tinderboxes of forest fuel became magnets for arsonists, or were lit by windblown embers or lightning. With high winds, high temperatures and heavy fuel loads some fires will race through the treetops of oil-rich eucalypt forests. Into this maelstrom they send the brave volunteers. With insufficient tracks, insufficient nearby water, uncleared tracks, insufficient fuel reduction burning and bush right up to towns and houses, disasters are guaranteed. Central management and control of burn-off policy has failed. Too often the people in charge did not understand bushfire history and science and were too influenced by green ideology. Authorities should provide information but not control, which should be returned to landowners, homeowners, foresters and experienced local fire officers. Locals with fire knowledge, experience and skin in the game could make a huge difference. Residents should be able to demand fuel load reduction near their properties and towns, and carry it out on public land if authorities refuse to do it. It can be burnt, slashed, raked, composted, heaped or buried as long as it is no longer capable of feeding runaway bushfires. Insurance companies should reflect fire risk in premiums. No Aboriginals and few early settlers used water to fight fires. There were no water bombers, no fire trucks, often not even hand-spray backpacks. Graziers used backburning from station tracks. Their wives defended the homestead with garden hoses or tried to beat the flames to death with wet hessian bags and green branches. Aboriginals let the fire burn and tried to keep out of its path. Water is undoubtedly useful to protect homes and towns, to extinguish burning buildings, to stop grass fires and to stop the backburn from escaping in the wrong direction. But trying to extinguish raging bushfires and forest wildfires with water alone is usually a waste of time, energy and water. We must relearn two ancient skills — remove the fuel load everywhere and use fire to fight fire. Big fires need a lot of fuel. If you own the fuel, you own the fire. If you haven’t managed the fuel, you will not be able to manage the fire. And if your fire escapes and causes damage, you are responsible. Viv Forbes is executive director of the Saltbush Club. He has been a pastoralist in Queensland and the Northern Territory for most of his life.
The safe time was 5 years ago, then 4 years ago, then 3 years ago etc.. but the greens know better and now we are paying for it.
https://twitter.com/search?lang=en&q=hazard%20reduction%20burn%20(from%3AQldFES)&src=typed_query QLD RFS tweeted 50 days of hazard reduction alerts for 2019. NSW RFS shows around 20 days but they don't burn during June/July. That's still more than the zero days you claim there was. NSW RFS doesn't show FFDI historical data it only shows today/tomorrow and today is Low for some parts of NSW so that's 1 more day we can add to 2020 totals. Image Unavailable, Please Login
The video shows how they do it vs current hazard reduction methods. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-18/indigenous-burning-before-and-after-tathra-bushfire/10258140
My friend was staying with a mate south of Canberra until last week. The guy a few properties over applied to remove trees and bush around his house because he felt that it was to dangerous for bushfires if it ever happened. His application was rejected, but he cut them down anyway, and cleared back the distance he wanted, only to cop a $8,000 fine from the council. The fire did come through, his house was the only one left standing. Best money he ever spent he said. He prefers his land management style.
https://caldronpool.com/abc-deletes-story-about-climate-protesters-halting-protection-burns-prior-to-devastating-bushfires/
And https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/01/04/australia-fires-and-misses/?fbclid=IwAR1qsRF-p9BPMJV6NWw17UUloLvGSxvsfjQ7RM1m30mhBBjSeVDaVoqpRoQ
Government agency outlook in August and December. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
Les Crowe I am writing this because I am appalled at the amount of near hysterical reaction to the recent NSW and Qld bush-fires. My reasoning is not so much about the fires or the people effected, but about whether “man made” climate change is the underlying cause. Before I go further, my stance is not so much a personal but rather a professional reaction. I begin by telling those of you who don’t know, for a period of some 40 years, my work as a loss adjuster was involved with natural disasters, ranging from Cyclone Tracey through to a lesser involvement in 2009. I was appointed as National Chief Loss Adjuster, an advisory role, to the Insurance Council of Australia on all natural disasters but particularly bush-fires. This role was interactive with all agencies and spanned more than 10 years. It was both proactive in planning stages and reactive after the event. I was heavily involved in the 1983 Victorian fires. I acknowledge the advice of The Bureau of Meteorology and the Climate Council, is a reality to the effect the projected changes to climate, was derived from modelling, which strongly suggested change would occur unless man made contribution was reduced,. Somehow or other, sections of our communities, have taken control of the scientific argument about the future and have interpreted it to mean the change has already occurred. Not so. Records I have seen, actually show that the slight upward trend in temperatures on a global scale seem to be in direct line with the earth’s ever occurring”natural” climatic change patterns. History shows numerous ice ages, when the planet cooled, to corresponding heating up periods, over billions of years. This has always occurred. It is the nature of our planet and cannot be influenced by what man can or cannot do. On the other hand, the impact of humans is a future projection, well founded on scientific modelling. The true position, despite all the comments about what the current fires mean in a climate change scenario, is nobody can tell if there is any connection. What I can tell you with absolute certainty is that these fires , as bad as they were, are no more intense, widespread, dangerous or unexpected in outcome, to many previous and historic events . There is no accurate method to measure such outcomes. However, it is possible to look at prevailing conditions and contributing factors to seek patterns or influential factors. Take a look at the following comparative data, much of which has been ignored by the frantic argument to directly link man made climate change to the outbreak and effects of these latest fires. I detail some of the arguments I have heard go unchallenged or are simply ignored and unreported, particularly by the ABC who are the appointed official national disaster communications service. This the first time such fires have been rated as catastrophic.. True, but not because they were rated any worse than many previous fires. In 2009, following the bush-fire inquiry, the defined categories of fire were renamed. Catastrophic was introduced as the most severe warning. So this description was never intended to make people think they were the worst fires ever. I have heard many media reports entrench this mistake The fires are occurring earlier because of climate extending the summer risk. Can only be applicable in the North. However, NSW has a long history of November and December bush-fires. In 1944, the Blue Mountains lost 27 homes and other property in November. Since then, I can recall at least 3 other similarly timed events in NSW. So this year was not unique, as has been strongly inferred by many reporters. In southern areas, January and February have historically been prone to outbreaks. These fires are the most widespread and worst ever. They certainly were disastrous. However, it is impossible to compare unless it can be based on raw data…. Have more lives been lost than ever before. No, although 1 is far too many, in 2009, 173 people died. In 1983, 75 people died. In 1962, 62 people died. In that decade one of the victims in Eltham North was George Crowe, my Grandfather and Grandma’s father in law. In 1967, it was reported that 2,600 square kms of land was devastated in just 5 hours (Just try to imagine that ferocity). In 2009 there were 2030 homes destroyed and in 1983 there were 6,000 homes and other buildings destroyed.. Does this define which fire was the worst. NO. All fires are bad but to try and claim the current fires are the worst ever is a blatant disregard for historical fact. Worse still, it is a deliberate attempt to scare people into accepting the fanatical side of the global warming argument, by accepting radical changes to our economy, power generation and mining {let alone agriculture and transport} must occur right now and in a premature manner. The so called re-definition of the predicted changes into an emergency, is a way to virtually destroy our entire way of life. The fires were started as a result of climate changed conditions. Clearly wrong. 80% of fires were started by people either deliberately or accidentally lighting them. Dry lightning strikes have been long recorded and are nothing new. What has our Media and ABC generally ignored. One of the most clear data based facts, reported out of the 2009 Inquiry, was the finding that fire intensity is proportional to and severely aggravated by fire loads created by undergrowth and forest floor debris accumulation. We can’t control wind and heat but we can control fuel load. Ask any active Rural or Country serving fireman what they think of this hazard. Then ask your Green Party representative, why they have influenced the management of National Park maintenance, as well as local government reserves, to leave far too much of the forest floor intact at any cost. Winter back burning, firewood removal and general debris clearance has been widely restricted by stupid laws. They argue it preserves natural ecosystems that rely on such decaying material. Well, systematic removal of this fuel load may well disrupt some Eco-systems, consider this;. A bush-fire positively destroys them all. The only identifiable and recently introduced risk factor, is the environmental law changes that have impacted a fire’s intensity potential and capacity to burn faster and hotter. Find this hard to believe, Go into a forest and try setting fire to a living gum tree with a match. Now stoop down and see if you get any better results from the dead and therefore dry undergrowth at your feet. This is the effect ember spread has on adjoining bush-land. There is much more to say about bringing sanity back into discussions and I have my own opinion that if you believe the science of global warming, stick to the science and ignore the fanatical self professed experts, like some of the current crop of Green Party politicians and shrieking media, self appointed, experts. No, before it can be said. I was not self appointed in my former career positions. I can only reflect that the handful of ex-firemen who were paraded before the media, may have had other agendas. The spokesman listed his current occupation as a “Climate Change Consultant”. Another said outright, on camera, that fires have always been linked to climate change. I prefer to listen to our Indigenous community who talk of bush-fire management over thousands of years. - oops before any hint of an industrial age, meat production or mining.
I ACTUALLY read the whole thing !!! Hard not to agree with the logic I'm sick to death of ****s talking up climate change from a knee jerk perspective. What does some dumb little **** 16yo know about climate change FFS Get back to school and learn something you twit instead of preaching to the adults ICE AGE anyone ??!!! ffs Millions of years of data totally ignored by the uneducated
