A few months back, as it happens, I had to check out a national park in NSW on Google, so much easier these days. A small NP, its fuel-reduction program specified that the fuel load be reduced every '20 to 150 years'. 150 years. I'm not kidding. 150 years. The bloody forest would have time to grow, drop everything, and grow again, in that time.

Even twenty years seems far too long - a lot of stuff can build up in twenty years. Of course, the cute, furry animals need somewhere to burrow, but if their choice was to keep looking for shelter, or to perish in a 1000-degree conflagration, along with every other cute, furry animal within cooee, I know their pitiful little answer.

Is there climate change due to too much CO2 ? Of course there is. Is it relevant to Australia's droughts and subsequent bush-fires ? Maybe, I look forward to the evidence. Is the build-up of undergrowth and fuel a major factor in such conflagrations which wipe out all those cute, furry animals ? I think so.

Five- and ten-year-year burns - and other removal practices besides burning - surely should be considered, even if it means far more staff on the ground, year-round. Mosaic burning, fire-breaks, etc. also. Or do we do all this all over again in five or ten years ?

Joe

271 posts, and nothing has changed; no minds have been changed. No conclusion reached. Just the same steaming bullshite - just like real life, where nothing will be done while we wait for the next lot of bushfires to talk crap over.

You know, I think it ironic and fortuitous, but has anybody cared to take note of the heading for this topic?
I love it, it says it all, without the need for debate.
It is a statement of fact, and a perfect one at that!
"Global Warming Garbage"!

Joe,

Google is great as the free version allows us to see the recent past.

The town of Vivonne in SA is being evacuated, according to the news, and a quick Google shews a town that is immersed in gum trees.

There are plenty of fire retardant native trees that are ornamental as well as shady, so let's get rid of the eucalypts around houses and along roads.

ISSY, apparently according to the jelly brains and the greens, we can't do that, because the poor little koala's will run out of food and die, so we must plant eucalyptus trees everywhere, irrespective of the needs or safety of humans, and as it turns out, the koala's too.
So watch out you may get a green knife in the back for making such outrageous suggestions.
Where will the poor little, cute and furry koala go, if they can't come into town and avail themselves of all the wonderful services, amenities and ambiance that Aussie country towns have to offer?

Nobody likes to see animals suffer, but human interference AGAIN is the only reason that there are koalas on KI. They are not native to the island, having been shifted from the mainland by some smartarses during the clamydia infection.

The local KI inhabitants will tell you they are a nuisance, eating more than is growing.