Submitted by Blowin on Fri, 06/21/2019 - 08:01
Talking points worthy of further discussion without devolving into insult.
Not completely true Uncle Leroy, fire was also symbolic/cultural and used as land management. Many Australian species adapted to fire, only propagating after being burnt, so it was also used for bush renewal.
Down here in Victoria we had the State government Department of Sustainability and Environment but after many mishaps in back burning right across the state they were commonly known as the Department of Sparks and Embers. For example some of you might remember how Wilson’s Promontory was substantially burnt twice after DSE back burning exercises got out of hand.
Again in Victoria back burning on private land is possible but subject to permit issued by local government. Its permitted during the winter months only and only on Fridays and Saturdays in the area where I live.
The CFA in Victoria used to organise back burns along country roads as training exercises for their crews but that function was taken from them some years ago and given to local government. The CFA members I know claim that was a big mistake because road sides are where many fires start and local government are risk adverse. The fuel loads that many of you talk about has now built up along those roads.
Well done to the 1000s and 1000s of bloody great Australians helping out, it’s a great example of the mateship that made us a nation. You can fuck being aspirational everyday of the week.
"But that’s an aside anyway , the main reason- in my opinion only - for the fires around here is mostly depth of fuel . Being dry as fuck certainly doesn’t help , but it’s mostly lack of previous burns responsible."
Might be different for different areas but that ain't the problem here.
The problem is a changing climate, tending drier and hotter which is having the triple effect of extending the length of the bushfire season, increasing the severity of fires and increasing the number of ecosystems that are now bushfire prone. For eg, coastal heath swamps, rainforests etc etc.
Like I said the coastal heath here, which is mostly peat swamp is usually waterlogged.
It's now burnt twice in the last 6 years and is looking extremely dangerous again.
The big fire at Mt Nardi is burning mostly in thick rainforest. It started in rainforest.
That country is not bushfire prone.
Normally you've got more chance of growing mouldy up in those hills behind Mullum than worrying about burning. It's amazingly wet country usually.
Because of the hotter, drier climate. Mostly because of the lack of summer moisture.
We had the millennium drought, a once in a lifetime drought.
Now less than a decade on we are in another once in a lifetime drought.
She'll be apples though according to Indo.
Just burn everything down and there'll be no probs.
Fucking greenies are to blame!
Look, it's raining in Vicco!
Fire also came from lightning strikes and volcanic activity for hundreds and thousands of years before humans evolved, so vegetation was already adapted to fire otherwise it would not be able to propagate/seed/regrow pre-indigenous intervention.
Indigenous life very different to today, no time to stop and smell the roses or gossip on swellnet, all about survival, hunt and gather or you died.
Exactly. Green shoot and seed propagation was noticed and became part of the bush renewal process when necessary.
I see Jennifer Marohasy gets a mention. Surprise!
Great minds n all?!
"Yesterday on Sky News, LNP senator Gerard Rennick told Tom Connell about why he believes the Bureau of Meteorology rewrote weather records to fit in with a global warming agenda.
What is the proof of that? Connell asked.
"The proof of that, is basically, that they, basically adapted a new weather measuring instrument and they didn’t run a parallel run at the time. So if you are going to adapt a new measuring instrument, which they did in the late 90s, they should have run a parallel run with the old measuring instrument, so you knew what the difference was between the old measuring instrument, and the new instrument was."
The BOM have released a lot of information on homogenisation of information, Connell says – and if you took that route, it would look like global warming was even worse.
"I’ve worked in finance for 25 years and I have never known a CFO to walk into a company and rewrite the financial statements from 100 years ago. So why you go back 50 or 60 years and rewrite records, that you have no idea how they were measured, the standardisation or anything, and then change that, you have got to have proof. And the way you do regression analysis, is that you have to have a large number of observations to do this."
Connell comes back with there being some issues with measuring stations, the changes in the environment giving different reasons - outlining some of the detail the BOM has put forward as why they did this. “What are you accusing them of exactly?”
"I am accusing them of not following proper process for recording statistical data."
"But you had the word “agenda” when you mentioned this - so are you saying there are people in there deliberately altering data within the BOM?"
"I am saying we should have more rigorous testing of the Bureau of Metrology in the way they change data, absolutely."
"But the agenda part, as in, they want more people to sort of take global warming seriously, so they are deliberately fiddling data. It is a pretty serious accusation."
"Yeah, it is a serious accusation, and I stand by it, I don’t believe the change in records, and the way they have gone about it, and I have a background in system accounting, where I have changed records, and we have always done a parallel run."
Better to watch the video I reckon.
Meet Liberal Senator Gerard Rennick. He reckons the Bureau of Meteorology is engaged in a conspiracy to rewrite climate records to fit in with a “global warming agenda”. He also makes climate policy in the Morrison Government. pic.twitter.com/qP6qo31SRc
— Senator Murray Watt (@MurrayWatt) November 11, 2019
Meet Liberal Senator Gerard Rennick. He reckons the Bureau of Meteorology is engaged in a conspiracy to rewrite climate records to fit in with a “global warming agenda”. He also makes climate policy in the Morrison Government. pic.twitter.com/qP6qo31SRc
"Indigenous life very different to today, no time to stop and smell the roses or gossip on swellnet, all about survival, hunt and gather or you died."
hhmmmmm.....not really. At least not for most of the fertile and even arid parts of Australia.
Necessary tasks for survival: gathering food etc etc took up far less of the day than we spend on going to work.
Which left time for culture, dreaming, trading etc etc.
Plenty of time to stop and smell the roses.
Go to any of the remnant fish traps built around east coast headlands. Imagine those traps fulled to the brim with mullet, tailor, blackfish, jew.
beaches full of pippies, bush full of wallabies, goanna, snake, flying foxes etc etc.
Lakes full of turtle, fish, birds.
rivers full of oysters.
it was very easy for most tribes to survive. No rent to pay etc etc. no money needed to buy food.
thats why they got the job done for 40 000+ years.
Far, far harder for those hard scrabble bush communities like Rappville that were full of battlers playing white mans rules and who now have nothing after bushfires.
Your on drugs freeride your short life observations are a tiny snap shot of anything.
Even Australian climate scientist have come out and said, despite what you read in the media climate change is not a direct cause of current droughts on the east coast.
And that was from a climate scientist that is not even sceptical of mans influence on climate change.
Not one person or group is to blame, but we do have a problem with managing fuel loads that fuels fires and this is influenced by the green protectionism movement.
Ha ha and now the old easy to survive gem.
But wait...it gets SO MUCH BETTER.
"Because has Gerard Rennick read the bureau’s explanations – the peer reviewed explanations – given, you know, he is accusing them of manipulating data, because he knows data?
"No, I haven’t actually read that."
Oh? Why? Wouldn’t that be a good idea, given his concerns?
"I read someone who I trusted, Jennifer Marohasy, who has a PhD in biology … she has heaps and heaps of statistical information, so I basically posted an article by her, on my website, on my Facebook page, and I basically agreed with what she said."
Dr Marohasy, it might interest you to know, is attached to the IPA.
"One person has written something, and you have agreed with that based on what they have said."
"Well based on her credentials, yes."
"But you haven’t read the data, or sought other resources."
"Well, I don’t … at that time I was a Senate candidate, and my view is, and I know enough to know, because I have a background in statistics, if you are not doing a parallel run, if you are not doing regression analysis properly, then you have to be very careful about changing data."
"Do you have to be careful about making accusations as a senator? … Have you sought briefings from the bureau?"
"And I’ll get to that, that is not the main reason that I ran for politics, so there are other things I would like to get to first."
"But don’t the facts matter?"
"Gerard Rennick had the third spot on the LNP Senate ticket: he wasn’t supposed to win. But Labor’s primary vote tanked in Queensland, meaning they lost a Senate spot to the LNP. And Rennick is in for six years.
There are bets about how long he’ll stay in the LNP before moving to the crossbench/One Nation – from within his own party room.
Those other things he is interested in? Read One Nation’s policy document and you can pretty much cross them off. He also thinks we need some sort of modern holy dollar to get the economy out of the doldrums."
Nothing the deniers say in broad sweeping statements stacks up to direct questioning as illustrated in that video and this is why Morrison and his cabinet are media shy when it comes to long format interviews. Best let some lackey take the hit to feed The flat earthers amongst us.
Heaps of amazing info contributed to this issue but I believe its a combination of all the science, and more circumstances than humans/scientists don't even understand as yet.
I lean a different direction every week as more theories/scientific data, theories and knowledge is added to the debate.Recently, quite a few scientific "facts" from the past have been debunked.
As we all know and have experienced the weather can change very quickly short term and, over 100 years (only 1 lifetime) the changes have been immense.
When designing stormwater drainage discharges, Engineers can choose 100year or 50year storm records to base their designs on which of course vary substantially..
Just for the records.......around 55years ago I clearly remember The Melbourne Sun front page newspaper headline read, " Tenth Day in a row of 100 degrees plus." Thats 37.7 degrees.Celsius.
"...influenced by the green protectionism movement."
Like the people protesting William Hu cutting down every tree on his Iluka property?
Which climate scientist is that Indo?
got a link for it?
freeride, I think Indo is probably talking about scientists on the right of this graph, cause the others on the left are just part of a giant conspiracy, hoax, and hidden green agenda....
Once the wet season ends up in the N.T., the fires start. They start burning as it is a cool burn, removes the fuel and it runs for most of the dry season. The indigenous folk call it "burn the germ". The occasional one gets away but it is few and far between and the land benefits from it.
What is going on atm on the east coast is, in my opinion, the perfect storm. It is not one factor causing it. It is a combination of a changing climate, years of drought and FA back burning and grazing going on. Land holders get prosecuted and fined for trying to reduce the fuel on their own property, burn permits are frowned apon, funding cuts to Rural Firies. Governments, Federal, state and local, need to take a good hard look at themselves as the current system of head in the sand and inaction, on all fronts, is not working.
“It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Hobbit, or There and Back Again
Such a strange scene unfolding around the fire ravaged valley where my parents live. The extreme and direct threat appears to have abated . The weather is cooler , there’s more moisture in the air but most importantly , the wind has settled into a light SouthEasterly as opposed to the devastating dryness of the furnace- like NorWester or the crazily relentless march of the howling Southerly which was the hallmark of last night.
Yesterday had a mood of restless mania . Of potential panic . The confluence of catastrophic conditions and the irresponsible profit driven hyping by the MSM had the populace ready to fight or flight. Unfortunately, this proved to be the disastrous reality for some , but for most, it was the classic crouching for the starter’s gun and the ensuing false start which is so common place with events hinging on the vagaries of nature.
I’ve seen it all before with cyclones and high surf , floods , tsunami threats and high winds whilst on the high seas.
But this is different .
I’ve never been so personally involved in a fire of this scale which threatens lives and property. I’ve seen massive conflagrations from up close - suburbs ablaze , residences lost , even driven through vast tracts of low Kimberly scrub alight on both sides of the highway for hundreds of kilometres as the black kites circled overhead. And in every instance the threat was transient. Either the fire was quelched , or outdistanced . The cyclone blew over , the floods receded , the swell died , the tsunami underwhelmed and the winds abated. There was a defined conclusion .
This fire is different. It’s in your face and ever present. For five days now it’s existed and grown around the otherwise innocuous valley . Five days is a long time to be confronted with potential ruination. For those involved, It gets old and it gets tiresome . Normal life needs tending to . Incomes to be earnt .
But a fire of this scale doesn’t get tired and it doesn’t get bored and it never gets satisfied. It just bides it’s time and devours what it likes until it’s either destroyed by rain or meets a dead end it can’t circumvent.
And so it is today. The wind has turned back towards my parent’s place , though it’s mercifully light . They are tempted to return from their evacuation exile. But safety is in no way assured . Do they just go home ?What will the night bring ? The wind is forecast to steer in a beneficial direction but do you bet your life on it ? Do you just sleep in your own bed despite the possibility that winds are unpredictable, particularly under the influence of a 20,000 hectare wildfire , not knowing whether the unsleeping blaze will be silently advancing towards you as you slumber ?
Everything is normal , but nothing is normal.
The valley is filled with smoke , the school is empty , the official Watch and Act is in place and the pub is full , people are talking shit outside the co-op , Christmas decorations are going up at the post office and the cows are blissfully chewing their cud . Whilst others are mourning the dead and still unable to access the charred remains of everything they own.
Strange days indeed.
When will they end ?
thats a good question.
I've been thinking about the media hype.
I only listen to ABC radio, which broadcasts all the official warnings etc etc.
I think some of the fires have felt a little underplayed: the Rappville fire, Coraki fires etc etc .
Lots of homes destroyed.
When Sydney/Newcastle etc etc was threatened I think that they had to "over-react" a bit.
If shit really had hit the fan yesterday and warnings weren't seen to be over the top and ubiquitous then there would have been hell to pay.
But yeah, this keeps rolling on. More hot, windy weather to come.
It reminds me of the Ex Tc Debbie flood in 2017.
Warning were subdued, there was zero indication the levee bank at Lismore would be breached.
2am and the warning sirens are going off because there's a 20 foot high wall of water rolling down the Main Street.
Hard not to err on the side of caution and be over-prepared and over warned.
"...What is going on atm on the east coast is, in my opinion, the perfect storm. It is not one factor causing it. It is a combination of a changing climate, years of drought and FA back burning and grazing going on. Land holders get prosecuted and fined for trying to reduce the fuel on their own property, burn permits are frowned apon, funding cuts to Rural Firies. Governments, Federal, state and local, need to take a good hard look at themselves as the current system of head in the sand and inaction, on all fronts, is not working."
...now there's some sagely words of reason...
perfect storm indeed
a scary as fuck one
Interesting stat from Twitter..
The Greens have 58 councillors out of 1480 across NSW... That is 00.04 of all Councillors. How could they have the control over hazard reduction? Impressive if they do!
The whole fire debate is going off track.
Yes the climate has/is changing.
Yes governments need to take the lead with relevant policies in response.
However, it wouldn't matter if 3 years ago Australia signed up for 0% greenhouse gas emissions and banned all coal mining. The current fires would still have occurred and similar fires will still occur into the short and medium term because it will take decades before any global climate rectification policies have any noticeable impact on the ground. Finding someone to blame will not stop this.
There are two main issues that can and must be addressed right now if we are to minimise the impact of these inevitable fires.
First. People have to be educated/find out how to make their properties more fire safe. I live on the mid north coast, am surrounded and adjoined by National Parks, and built my house under the bushfire code so I considered myself pretty aware & prepared. But I spent all day yesterday going over my place and it blew me away how ill-prepared I really was.
Second. the issue of fuel load needs to be addressed. There are two main mechanisms available;
(1) the 10/50 vegetation clearing rule, and
(2) Section 66 of The Rural Fires ACT 1997
The 10/50 rule allows property owners in bush fire prone areas to clear trees within 10 metres of their buildings and undergrowth within 50 metres without seeking approval.
Under section 66 the owner or occupier of any land OTHER THAN A PUBLIC AUTHORITY can be required to carry out bush fire hazard reduction. So if Pitt Street farmer Dr Jones owns property next to me and has let the undergrowth grow out of control up to the canopy I can use section 66 to force him to carry out bushfire hazard reduction. If this is you then enforce it.
However, the sting in the tail is that if NPWS control the land adjoining you and your community, then you will have to cross fingers & toes and hope they do something out of the goodness of their hearts. This is not good enough.
Go onto "fires near me" and get the map of NSW showing all areas currently burning. On top of this overlay a map of NSW National Parks areas. Tell me what you see.
As an example, the national park area adjoining me has not had any hazard reduction undertaken for 30 years. The undergrowth (bracken fern, tee tree and wattle) now touches the lower branches of the canopy. Even a cold season burn will now be difficult to manage, but a wildfire in a heatwave will disintegrate all around it. Every year the NPWS do a letter drop to the landowners and advise they will be doing hazard reduction burns. Every year they come back and say they didn't do it because conditions were "unfavourable". When questioned about what was unfavourable this year we were told the wind & temperature was right but the soil wasn't moist enough. How will black sand ever be "moist enough".
For all those arguing that a hazard reduction fire will kill endangered animal species think about this. If you don't have hazard reduction the ferocity and range of the wildfire that will come whether hazard burned or not kills everything that had a better chance of surviving the cold burn. Have a look at the mid north coast now, we will be lucky to have a koala population at all after this summer.
Craig, you’re not letting facts get in the way of a good story are you?
Great post , GM . Which general area of the mid north if you don’t mind saying ?
I owned some acres adjoining national park on the mid north ( between Port and Coffs ) and the national park never had a back burn. Then I was told that a lot of the vegetation on our block was protected koala habit and couldn’t be touched - which is fair enough - but but one day , perhaps in the not too distant future as it’s been brewing for years , every single koala will be completely fucking fried due to the scale of the imminent fire storm which will end that forest.
Kicking the can down the road.
I sold the land....too hard.
Over on Instagram, the Betoota Advocate has just posted some gold on Barnyard, can someone post, Im out walking in the bush atm, cheers
Blowin, who owns the adjacent forest? National park, state forest, private or all of the above. Trying to get agreement between adjoining landholders can be difficult.
It was a early last month it did get a bit of media and off course those like Bolt ran with it, there is other videos but can't be bothered looking for them but this one i watched from today has him speaking saying clearly at about 3:35
"This may not be what you expect to hear, but as far as the climate scientist know, there is no link between climate change and drought, now that may not be what you read in the newspapers and sometimes commented, but there is no reason per (some french word) why climate change should make the landscape more arid"
Off course since then because of conservatives running with it, he has tried to back peddle trying to change his tune and say he should have thrown in the word "direct" (direct link) which would have made a difference anyway?.
But really its not exactly something you can back peddle on, or claim to misinterpret or taken out of context etc, as you can hear it was very clear what he said even clearly calling out the media and others.
Thanks Craig, but I meant the one with Barnyard complaining about the power of the Greens, given we should all realise their true power in AU politics
Ah.. I'll change haha. Ah I can't find the one you're talking about.
My folks live on a rural property. They have never had a problem getting a permit to conduct a burn-off. Local RFS head comes round and inspects the intended area, proposed safety measures etc and issues a permit. Granted, it's not a big property and they're not big burns, but my guess is that a lot of people wouldn't bother doing the background work, then blaming the 'greenies' when their permit isn't approved.
yeah, thanks for bringing in some facts regarding property clearing for fire GM.
I've helped people clear properties for fire and knew they were operating under that rule, without knowing what it was directly.
Party in power 17 of last 23 years .... blame anything and everyone but your own incompetence !!
Thanks Indo. Seems Bolt and the Sky news goons jumped the gun a bit there.
So, does Professor Pitman actually believe there’s no link?
Well, no. Because last month, before Sky really piled on, a clarification was issued to say the professor had left out a crucial word:
Andy fully admits he should have said: “there is no direct link between climate change and drought”.
- Climate Extremes, ARC Centres of Excellence, 20 September, 2019
Yes, no direct link. But there’s still a link, says Pitman, telling Media Watch:
Do hotter temperatures lead directly to higher evaporation and a higher risk of drought? No.
But does global warming lead to changes in rainfall patterns that can lead to drought? Yes. This indirect link is clear.
- Email, Professor Andrew Pitman, University of NSW, 10 October, 2019
And expanding on that link by telling us:
In some regions, this increases the risk of drought, in other regions it decreases the risk.
In Australia, for example, according to the Bureau of Meteorology, summer rainfall in the north and west of the continent in the last 20 years has been far higher than the average since 1900, and in many places the highest on record.
But winter rainfall in the south east and south west of Australia has been much lower than average and in places the lowest on record.
Also, if you look at the published research — as Kenny, Jones and Bolt could easily have done — you’ll find any number of climate scientists concluding that global warming is having an effect.
The recent drought in South Africa, for example, in which Cape Town nearly ran out of water, was made three times more likely by climate change, according to researchers led by Oxford University’s Environmental Change Institute.
And studies by different researchers of 45 droughts around the world — mapped here by UK website Carbon Brief — have found that 30 were made worse or more likely by human-induced climate change.
So, given that scientific evidence, has Professor Pitman’s Centre for Climate Excellence tried to tell these conservative commentators they’ve got it wrong?
Answer, yes. More than two weeks ago it tweeted:
Dear @theheraldsun & @theboltreport, stop claiming our scientists and Director Andy Pitman say there is no connection between drought and #climatechange. There is a connection and, unlike your public statements on climate change, it is nuanced ...
- Twitter, @ClimateExtremes, 26 September, 2019
But seems Bolt, Kenny and Jones have blocked their ears, because they’re still treating Pitman’s original quote as gospel. As we saw when Chris Kenny, for the second time in his show, played it to Labor’s Matt Thistlethwaite:
CHRIS KENNY: … the leading scientist in this area is Professor Andy Pitman from the University of New South Wales and he makes very, very clear that there is absolutely no evidence that links the current drought to climate change.
… Matt Thistlethwaite, do you agree that you’re wrong to try and associate bushfires and drought now with climate change?
- The Kenny Report, Sky News, 9 October, 2019
Well, no, he did not agree, and no, he was not wrong.
But why let the facts or a clarification from the scientist you’re quoting spoil a good rant?
But let’s not put all the blame onto the Sky commentators, who are the most aggressive in the business. It’s also up to the scientists to correct the record, clearly, forcefully and repeatedly if they’re being misquoted. And they have not done that as loud as they should.
Yeah off course he has tried to back peddle.
But its pretty much impossible to back peddle from what he said, because he added in the
"now that may not be what you read in the newspapers and sometimes commented, but there is no reason per (some french word) why climate change should make the landscape more arid"
He was very clear in what he said...
If you listen he is in no way misquoted or taken out of context etc
He was very clear in his delivery, but obviously the conservatives highlighting what he has said doesn't look good for him or others he is involved with or organisations etc who knows what else has happened behind the scenes now....risk to jobs or funding?.....who knows?
Here is the whole of what he said https://wattsupwiththat.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Andy-Pitman.mp3
And he also goes on to say
“If you look at the Bureau of Meteorology data over the whole of the last one hundred years there’s no trend in data. There is no drying trend. There’s been a trend in the last twenty years, but there’s been no trend in the last hundred years, and that’s an expression on how variable Australian rainfall climate is.
There are in some regions but not in other regions.
So the fundamental problem we have is that we don’t understand what causes droughts.
Much more interesting, We don’t know what stops a drought. We know it’s rain, but we don’t know what lines up to create drought breaking rains.”
Mate, he's qualified his statements. Added extra emphasis, in writing: does global warming lead to changes in rainfall patterns that can lead to drought? Yes. This indirect link is clear.
Also, before you take him on as a cheerleader you should get familiar with his work on land clearing and what that does to the climate.
GM that was a really good post.
Link to 1967 Tasmanian fires, 652,000 acres (smaller than hectares) in 5 hours.
just heard Nat's place west of Grafton went up.
I've been there before ....it's open country with cattle on it.
heard that from a chick on ABC, she described fires so ferocious they were running across open ground.
Seems even some of the ferals/hippies are having a whinge up you way Freeride, they don't seem to agree with your take on fuel load of the bush in the area
"Hippies of Nimbin admit bush got too wild
The greenies have a lot to answer for over the incendiary state of the Australian bush.
This is the view of Michael Balderstone, hemp candidate, deep environmentalist and leading figure in the Nimbin community, which is now beset by fire.
“They (greenies) own it,” Mr Balderstone said. “The Greens have to cop it on the head, they have been obsessed with no fires and no burning.”
Mr Balderstone says the lessons from indigenous land managers have been forgotten.
“The Aboriginals say it is country gone wild,” he said. “We were just blind to their knowledge.”
The hills of northern NSW are ablaze with an out-of-control bushfire that, with an expected change in wind, could on Tuesday race for the coast near Byron Bay.
Des Layer has for 30 years ridden his horses through hills now being ravaged by fire. For decades he has watched the structure of the bush change from what he says is poor logging and lax management.
Before the area became national park, Mr Layer said, he would get permits to collect firewood from the state forests. Since the national park was declared there had been no permits issued.
“It has just been building up,” he said.
A generation of locals, raised on forest protest, are being forced to confront some tough truths about forest fuel loads and management. Communities that have been on the frontline to stop logging and expand national parks are seeking refuge as fire threatens to consume their homes.
Protesters Falls near Terania Creek, the site of Australia’s first environmental blockade in August 1979, is surrounded by an out-of-control blaze in the Nightcap National Park. Tuntable Creek community, a free-spirited community that grew from Nimbin’s counter-culture movement of the 1970s, was one of the first settlements to be evacuated.
Greens leader Richard Di Natale has blamed climate change for what has been billed as a raging armageddon. But even among hippies bigger questions are being asked about park management and the extraordinary fuel loads that have been allowed to build up for more than a decade.
Poor logging practices have changed the forest’s ability to cope with fire. First the fire-retardant edges were lost and then the high-value canopy trees. With the big trees gone, the humidity of the forest was reduced, the canopy was opened to allow palms to grow and then drop dead fronds into the undergrowth. Extended dry conditions have resulted in a tinderbox of lantana and weeds in an area that has not seen a significant fire for half a century.
Mr Layer believes the solution should have been selective logging but “you can’t trust these people to go in with chainsaws to do it sustainably”.
Opinions are mixed about climate change. Some say climate is always changing; others think conditions are worse because of it.
At an emergency information meeting called for Nimbin Hall on Sunday the emphasis was on the task at hand rather than whether the federal government had been doing enough for fire brigades.
For many, Senator Di Natale’s attempts to blame lack of climate change action for the fires is seen as opportunistic and irrational. Climate change is a global problem. Local action on carbon dioxide emissions will not afford regional protection against the weather or fire.
Mr Layer has been taking action for his own property. He has spent winter slashing and cleaning up the property, which has 20 dams. He hopes he’s done enough.
some tasty photos just dropped on urban surf's insta account.
I heard from the carpark mafia that its going to be a 6am to 10pm operation. $75 a hour, max of 16 out.
today show channel nine this morning has the weather guy at melbournes wave park today with sally fitz going to show us what all the fuss is about.
Sure you’re in a pool surrounded by concrete with no chance of a pod of dolphins swimming through the line up. But it’s still wet, and you are still nervously negotiating the drop, and you are still anticipating and reacting to the randomness that is each slightly different wave. You do get stoked because it still is surfing.
I think they are going to start taking bookings from tomorrow.
About Melb pool a group of passes have been handed out to public to test it out, more apparently coming, you can sign up on website, did it the other week, fingers crossed.
I believe those registered also get booking priority .
looks bloody fun to me, the right is like a sucky mid tide rip bowl
Surf in the morning and Dandy market on the way home, does it get any better than that?
Going to Melbourne / Vic before Xmas. Might have to convince the missus to divert to Tullamarine for a few hours...
You never know who you might bump into, eh GS?