Select to expand quotedrsurf said..
Jeez there are a whole lot of smart people on here with the solution to everything to do with the fires (sarcasm)
How many of you are volunteers in the Rural Fire Service (NSW) or Country Fire Authority (Vic) or the other equivalents in other states??
It's easy to be a keyboard warrior know it all, in the cities where you don't have to deal with the reality on the ground.
We have a property on the NSW South Coast which was potentially in the line of fire on Saturday. We are surrounded by bush but have a cleared zone where house, sheds, veg gardens and orchards are, which is either green grass or compacted soil/road. We have carefully maintained this over the spring summer and paid attention to removing flammable material away from buildings and other assets. Then we have mains water, full rainwater tanks, mobile pump/and tank on a tractor as well as petrol & electric water pumps and 240v diesel generator if the power goes out. These are basic requirements if you want to live near nature and survive a fire.
In addition to this we had the local ABC radio on giving updates and as a good seabreezer, checked the wind direction nearby on the coast and inland to check fire progression. I also had access to a website to check where lightning strikes occurred locally as the oncoming fire created its own weather in the form of thunderstorms, with no rain but plenty of lightning, which could create new fires ahead of the main front.
We have tenants renting the house on the property who said they were going to help protect the property and their stuff, but lost their nerve as the fire loomed closer, and went to an evacuation centre. That's OK, you don't want someone freaking out when the fire hits. We had sprinklers on the house roof with blocked gutters and damped down the ground around the house and sheds and my partner and I waited as the fire traveled closer. Fortunately due to the wind direction on the day the fire went past a few km to the west of us and there was minimal ash and no ember attack to deal with. After the southerly buster came through and died down we packed our equipment back into the shed and went back to our normal lives. Not so lucky were some of our friends in the active fire zone.
As well as living in the country I do a lot of outdoor work with heavy equipment on farms and other rural property ranging from road construction, clearing for asset protection zones, excavation and demolition. Many people and their properties are completely unprepared for fire and they will catch fire and burn easily.
For all the clever dicks saying there should be more hazard reduction burning you need to think a bit smarter than such a blanket statement. The fire season has now become so long, the days when the a decent hazard reduction can take place are very limited. Even during a bushfire at night, back burning to deny a fire fuel, can become impossible with a heavy dew or a small shower. A change in wind direction and strength can turn a gently creeping hazard reduction burn into a raging uncontrollable inferno. Houses and lives have been lost due to a hazard reduction reduction burn going rogue.
And then there's the ecological science of hazard reduction. Every bit of bush is unique. Some areas require burns of a certain magnitude and frequency for the ecosystems to survive. Some areas will lose species with inappropriate hazard reduction burns, to be replaced by fire loving species which make the forest more flammable than before. There are always consequences for actions taken and if you don't know what you're doing you can easily make a bad situation worse. The last thing we need is politicians making knee jerk decisions on these matters. People who have a good understanding of forest and fire ecology need to make these decisions based on good, well funded research so that hazard reduction works as it's meant to.
But even if the hazard reduction means the fire doesn't even come into sight, embers travelling 5km or more ahead of the fire can drop in and around your house, falling on or under wooden decks, into gutters full of dry leaves, into garden mulch around your house, blown under your house if it's above ground, into oily rags in your carport etc. setting it alight in minutes. Most houses are lost due to such ember attacks either before the fire arrives or after it passes. That's why if you're prepared it's good to be around your property during a fire.
And why are we facing such catastrophic fires? The climate is changing, and changing fast due to the changes humankind has made on the earth. Record temperatures lead to record evaporation rates drying out the country to give us unprecedented droughts. These tinder dry conditions make everything flammable and the fires are unstoppable. Wind patterns are also changing increasing fire intensity. Sea temperatures are rising wiping out kelp forests off the coast of Tasmania. Climate change is real people and on the TV every night. We need to wean ourselves off fossil fuels which are increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere. Over 95% of credible scientists who have contributed to research on climate science warned us of what we are experiencing years ago. Some said they were exaggerating the risk, but it looks like they have been too conservative.
Be prepared for the next natural disaster when we have record rainfalls in the burnt water catchments filling the dams with ash and eroded soil, silting up rivers and ecosystems and turning river mouths, bays and estuaries to muddy swamps of toxic algae which will then wash up and down the coast making surfing, kiting, windsurfing impossible. If you don't like this version of the future get off your arses and do something to create a better one. Stopping coal mining and burning is a good place to start and look at treading more lightly on the planet in your own lives. Take some responsibility, don't look for someone else or some thing to blame.
Great post - the most sane, well-balanced, informed opinion I've read in the last week.
Select to expand quotedrsurf said..
Jeez there are a whole lot of smart people on here with the solution to everything to do with the fires (sarcasm)
How many of you are volunteers in the Rural Fire Service (NSW) or Country Fire Authority (Vic) or the other equivalents in other states??
It's easy to be a keyboard warrior know it all, in the cities where you don't have to deal with the reality on the ground.
We have a property on the NSW South Coast which was potentially in the line of fire on Saturday. We are surrounded by bush but have a cleared zone where house, sheds, veg gardens and orchards are, which is either green grass or compacted soil/road. We have carefully maintained this over the spring summer and paid attention to removing flammable material away from buildings and other assets. Then we have mains water, full rainwater tanks, mobile pump/and tank on a tractor as well as petrol & electric water pumps and 240v diesel generator if the power goes out. These are basic requirements if you want to live near nature and survive a fire.
In addition to this we had the local ABC radio on giving updates and as a good seabreezer, checked the wind direction nearby on the coast and inland to check fire progression. I also had access to a website to check where lightning strikes occurred locally as the oncoming fire created its own weather in the form of thunderstorms, with no rain but plenty of lightning, which could create new fires ahead of the main front.
We have tenants renting the house on the property who said they were going to help protect the property and their stuff, but lost their nerve as the fire loomed closer, and went to an evacuation centre. That's OK, you don't want someone freaking out when the fire hits. We had sprinklers on the house roof with blocked gutters and damped down the ground around the house and sheds and my partner and I waited as the fire traveled closer. Fortunately due to the wind direction on the day the fire went past a few km to the west of us and there was minimal ash and no ember attack to deal with. After the southerly buster came through and died down we packed our equipment back into the shed and went back to our normal lives. Not so lucky were some of our friends in the active fire zone.
As well as living in the country I do a lot of outdoor work with heavy equipment on farms and other rural property ranging from road construction, clearing for asset protection zones, excavation and demolition. Many people and their properties are completely unprepared for fire and they will catch fire and burn easily.
For all the clever dicks saying there should be more hazard reduction burning you need to think a bit smarter than such a blanket statement. The fire season has now become so long, the days when the a decent hazard reduction can take place are very limited. Even during a bushfire at night, back burning to deny a fire fuel, can become impossible with a heavy dew or a small shower. A change in wind direction and strength can turn a gently creeping hazard reduction burn into a raging uncontrollable inferno. Houses and lives have been lost due to a hazard reduction reduction burn going rogue.
And then there's the ecological science of hazard reduction. Every bit of bush is unique. Some areas require burns of a certain magnitude and frequency for the ecosystems to survive. Some areas will lose species with inappropriate hazard reduction burns, to be replaced by fire loving species which make the forest more flammable than before. There are always consequences for actions taken and if you don't know what you're doing you can easily make a bad situation worse. The last thing we need is politicians making knee jerk decisions on these matters. People who have a good understanding of forest and fire ecology need to make these decisions based on good, well funded research so that hazard reduction works as it's meant to.
But even if the hazard reduction means the fire doesn't even come into sight, embers travelling 5km or more ahead of the fire can drop in and around your house, falling on or under wooden decks, into gutters full of dry leaves, into garden mulch around your house, blown under your house if it's above ground, into oily rags in your carport etc. setting it alight in minutes. Most houses are lost due to such ember attacks either before the fire arrives or after it passes. That's why if you're prepared it's good to be around your property during a fire.
And why are we facing such catastrophic fires? The climate is changing, and changing fast due to the changes humankind has made on the earth. Record temperatures lead to record evaporation rates drying out the country to give us unprecedented droughts. These tinder dry conditions make everything flammable and the fires are unstoppable. Wind patterns are also changing increasing fire intensity. Sea temperatures are rising wiping out kelp forests off the coast of Tasmania. Climate change is real people and on the TV every night. We need to wean ourselves off fossil fuels which are increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere. Over 95% of credible scientists who have contributed to research on climate science warned us of what we are experiencing years ago. Some said they were exaggerating the risk, but it looks like they have been too conservative.
Be prepared for the next natural disaster when we have record rainfalls in the burnt water catchments filling the dams with ash and eroded soil, silting up rivers and ecosystems and turning river mouths, bays and estuaries to muddy swamps of toxic algae which will then wash up and down the coast making surfing, kiting, windsurfing impossible. If you don't like this version of the future get off your arses and do something to create a better one. Stopping coal mining and burning is a good place to start and look at treading more lightly on the planet in your own lives. Take some responsibility, don't look for someone else or some thing to blame.
100%.
The question is, what will it take for the pro-coal/oil, pro-land clearing, pro industry ideologues to get their heads out of their arses, abandon their planet wrecking affiliations and start plotting a course towards a more sustainable future?
Select to expand quotedrsurf said..
For all the clever dicks saying there should be more hazard reduction burning you need to think a bit smarter than such a blanket statement.
If the prescribed burning window gets narrower we'll just need more resources available so more can be done when conditions are right. I'm sure the clever dicks will push this message and we will see more resources allocated to prescribed burning in the follow up to this bad season. Town dwellers might also have to be willing to cop a bit of smoke.
True but you're missing the real point IanK.
Prescribed burning can only tinker at the edges of the bushfire issue.
The real issue is the vastness of land, human habitation patterns, the need to maintain some National Parks and a warmer drier climate.
You need to drop this myth that prescribed burning is going to make a big difference.
If we did as much prescribed burning as some armchair know-it-alls would like we'd be living in perpetual smoke haze.
Select to expand quoteholy guacamole said..
True but you're missing the real point IanK.
Prescribed burning can only tinker at the edges of the bushfire issue.
The real issue is the vastness of land, human habitation patterns, the need to maintain some National Parks and a warmer drier climate.
You need to drop this myth that prescribed burning is going to make a big difference.
If we did as much prescribed burning as some armchair know-it-alls would like we'd be living in perpetual smoke haze.
That is good point. If we have natural output producitin 10 tonnes per ha of fuel every year.
Then we have 14 mln ha now burned off.
So to remove this amount we need to burn off all this material to be perfectly safe. So we need to convert whole country into one huge oven, furnace constantly chewing on ever growing material. We need army of firelighters doing this burn off on the daily basis. Then obviously fire will rise on the patch that for some reason wasn't burned off yet. Obviously we could perform burning at strategic locations, city surrounds but not to cover entire land.For economist on another hand this is trade off: completely unproductive activity that actually do not produce any $$$, consume budget, thousand of people in order to avoid something and then save. Not to produce GDP but avoid loosing something.Like you seatbelts and airbags in your car are completely useless till you have a crash. But some vehicles are designed to be safer even without those - TRAINS ( hopefully autonomous cars are next) .
Here what stop the fire in Australia and always did. Rain.
^^^ I think that perpetual smoke haze is what Lt Cook observed as he spent winter sailing up NSW and Qld coast. All due to frequent cool burning fires set off by indigenous farmers.
This fellow says it worked fine to protect his property.
www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/it-s-miraculous-owners-say-cultural-burning-saved-their-property-20200103-p53okc.html
I wonder if dreamtime stories include much about big fires. If not, maybe they didn't happen
True. Doesn't mean it's a good idea in 2020 now that there are 25 million of us. ^^
Select to expand quoteholy guacamole said..
If we did as much prescribed burning as some armchair know-it-alls would like we'd be living in perpetual smoke haze.
That's how the first European explorers described it. The first human caretakers of the land had been burning it for 50,000 years and the fire adapted species took over. That's what we've stepped into. Can't turn it around over night. We at least have to try and maintain the previous custodians methods for a few thousand years even if we do eventually plan a transition to a vegetation mix suitable for fire exclusion.
^^ Still missing the point. Prescribed burning will only ever deal with the issue at the margins. Are you proposing we strip all the trees from National Parks or burn them = bushfire?
Haven't you looked at the maps? Essentially what's burning is National Park and State forests.
The indigenous people didn't burn mountainous wooded terrain, which is basically our remaining National Parks. They burned accessible undulating landscapes for food and to create grasslands.
Select to expand quoteholy guacamole said..
^^ Still missing the point. Prescribed burning will only ever deal with the issue at the margins.
The indigenous people didn't burn mountainous wooded terrain,
You need to do a bit of research.
www.ffm.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/21059/Report-51-Effectiveness-of-Broadscale-Fuel-Reduction-Burning-in-Assisting-With-Wildfire-Control-in-Parks-.pdf
Select to expand quoteIan K said..
The first human caretakers of the land had been burning it for 50,000 years.
Back then the Earth's population was less than 1 billion now it's closer to 8 billion.
The number of humans on this planet has had a big impact on climate change.
Select to expand quoteIan K said..holy guacamole said..
^^ Still missing the point. Prescribed burning will only ever deal with the issue at the margins.
The indigenous people didn't burn mountainous wooded terrain,
You need to do a bit of research.
www.ffm.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/21059/Report-51-Effectiveness-of-Broadscale-Fuel-Reduction-Burning-in-Assisting-With-Wildfire-Control-in-Parks-.pdf
Very interesting material to study.But would like to see similar study made ( for sure done already) on relation between time to and complete success in fire suppression at comparable conditions.
If for given initial size of fire incident reaction time ( Detection to First Sppn. Work) isn't more critical that anything else in equation.
Unlike above research proposed research can be done under experimental condition , not retrospective.
Under typical Planned Fire Reduction scheme we could have one time igniting fire then another attempting to put it down after : 10 min , 20 30 60 , 120 min etc. We could design such experiment by setting up 5 front fire at same time at given location and teams allowed to intervene after given time increments. We could also test effectiveness of fire truck versus air water bombing.My biases obviously thesis is such that we could rather concentrate our effort on reduction of DtFRW rather then fuel reduction.
Select to expand quoteIan K said..holy guacamole said..
^^ Still missing the point. Prescribed burning will only ever deal with the issue at the margins.
The indigenous people didn't burn mountainous wooded terrain,
You need to do a bit of research.
www.ffm.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/21059/Report-51-Effectiveness-of-Broadscale-Fuel-Reduction-Burning-in-Assisting-With-Wildfire-Control-in-Parks-.pdf
^^ Still missing the point Ian. There's never been more hazard reduction burns but the fires are worse than ever. What does this tell you Ian?
That report you cite was written in 2001 before the devastating 2003 Alpine fires, Black Saturday and 2019.
It specifically noted that in the FMZ3 areas hazard reduction is of limited effect due to the large areas.
How much more prescribed burning are you proposing we do. Double? Triple? Ten times? Twenty?
At what point do we say enough prescribed burning is enough Ian?
And how do we do it in a much smaller window of opportunity caused by the changing climate?
Fire season is hotter and longer. Volunteers wearing yellow vests running around the bush, banging into each other, isn't going to put these fires out. We need to move away from the Dad's army model of fire prevention and put it in the hands of professionals. The only thing we have managed to do well is minimize the loss of human life.
What we need bigger water bombers and more of them.
Select to expand quoteholy guacamole said..
How much more prescribed burning are you proposing we do. Double? Triple? Ten times? Twenty?
I'll go with the experts. 5 times as much.
www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/fivefold-increase-in-funding-for-hazard-reduction-burns-needed-experts-warn-20200103-p53om0.html
Select to expand quoteTheTruth said..
Fire season is hotter and longer. Volunteers wearing yellow vests running around the bush, banging into each other, isn't going to put these fires out. We need to move away from the Dad's army model of fire prevention and put it in the hands of professionals. The only thing we have managed to do well is minimize the loss of human life.
What we need bigger water bombers and more of them.
Water bombers don't put fires out without a lot of ground support. They were evaluated in great detail during project Aquarius.
publications.csiro.au/rpr/download?pid=legacy:2927&dsid=DS1
"Project Aquarius trials suggested that, while a retardant concentration of 0.5 mm on the eucalypt surface fuel would prevent the fuel from burning, the retardant would eventually be nullified by fires over 3000 kW/m in intensity due to spotting across the retardant line."
Can you find any research that's more recent than 34yo- ROFL
The graphics on that PDF looks like it was published around the time Skippy was on TV
So, TheTruth, apart from the fact that you like slinging **** at volunteers while wanking behind a keyboard, what makes you a legend who knows so much about firefighting?
Only a complete ****wit would be insulting the people who are actually doing something.
Oh, and you apparently missed the fact that on NYE there were many times and places where air support was impossible due to atmospheric conditions such as limited visibility. Not to mention the slight problem that fires take place well away from many areas where very large tankers can be supported locally.
Select to expand quote
Fascinating lecture, Whole encyclopedia of bushife , worth to read and memorize !
Select to expand quoteChris 249 said..
Only a complete ****wit would be insulting the people who are actually doing something.
Complete ****wits play the avatar and not the issue.
Don't be a liar as well as a ****wit. I have been discussing the issue, complete with references to reality, in a bunch of previous posts. You, on the other hand, have utterly failed to consider issues such as visibility over the fire, airspace restrictions, retardant and runway availability, control issues and others. You have shown no evidence of having done any research or having any experience but you are so self-obsessed that you nevertheless fantasize that you know more than those who have spent years in the field. Revolting.
Select to expand quoteTheTruth said..
Can you find any research that's more recent than 34yo- ROFL
The graphics on that PDF looks like it was published around the time Skippy was on TV
Science behind wildfires now and years ago remains the same. We may only have more gadgets to deal with that now.If some people here could send kids to study pyrology rather then cooking classes, nation may benefit as whole and more modern research.Stuff seems to be very interesting for youngsters and if they could get some robotics, AI and drones knowledge applied to bushfires , we could sleep safely.
Select to expand quoteChris 249 said..
Don't be a liar as well as a ****wit. I have been discussing the issue, complete with references to reality, in a bunch of previous posts. You, on the other hand, are a self-obsessed megolamaniac arsewipe who is so arrogant that you sling **** at people risking their lives while you cower behind a keyboard. Vile, disgusting and cowardly.
You have utterly failed to consider issues such as visibility over the fire, airspace restrictions, retardant and runway availability, control issues and others. You have shown no evidence of having done any research or having any experience but you are so self-obsessed that you nevertheless know more than those who have spent years in the field. Revolting.
Settle down and watch that ticker of yours, Boomer - hahahahah
TheTruth is that these fires are caused by humans - specifically too many of us. And we have to be smarter at fighting them. The unkempt volunteers, running around the bush in their yellow jump suits, banging into each other, cursing the PM, may be well meaning. But they are out of their depth. They have saved human lives but have largely failed in controlling the fires we are seeing in recent times.
4 years ago experts suggested to the federal government to buy a fleet of 747's to fight fires. Federal Government said it was a state issue.
Here ya go 'Pops' - some links (lol)
www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/government-rejected-major-air-tanker-expansion-20200103-p53onl.html
www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-15/are-bigger-water-bombers-the-answer-to-bushfire-woes/11705502
Select to expand quoteTheTruth said..
Fire season is hotter and longer. Volunteers wearing yellow vests running around the bush, banging into each other, isn't going to put these fires out. We need to move away from the Dad's army model of fire prevention and put it in the hands of professionals. The only thing we have managed to do well is minimize the loss of human life.
What we need bigger water bombers and more of them.
Sorry, didn't work. Had 2 drops from the DC 10 and 1 from the 4 engine Herc when it was relatively mild on my first trip 7 weeks ago. Slowed it down a bit but still had to cut, dig and pull stuff apart to put it out.
Just back from Orbost, no air support as there was zero visibility for most of the 7 days.
Stuff the bigger is better thoughts, invent a way of flying in zero visibility, 130 kph winds, large mountains , very slow drop speed and 99.99% safe. Do that and then we can have a chat
Select to expand quoteMacroscien said..
Fascinating lecture, Whole encyclopedia of bushife , worth to read and memorize !
????? Wind, Slope, FDI etc table like that has zero relevance
Select to expand quotekato said..Macroscien said..
Fascinating lecture, Whole encyclopedia of bushife , worth to read and memorize !
????? Wind, Slope, FDI etc table like that has zero relevance
Anyway you want to be on site rather earlier then later,
have more time for preparation then less.
Have this aerial backup when possible rather then not at all.BTW> table that I shown only to demonstrate that things that I propose or think about , people did research half a century ago already. Whole article possibly have answers to all questions I ever wanted to know about bushfires.
Select to expand quoteTheTruth said..
4 years ago experts suggested to the government to buy a fleet of 747's to fight fires.
Ha, maybe now is good time to buy 747 Max?
Instead to send to scrap metal we could buy a hundred of those at the price for one. Throw chairs and instal water tank inside.
Scumbo is now saying climate change is real. Is there any time prior to the catastrophic fires this season that the libtards acknowledge the effects of climate change?
Select to expand quoteTheTruth said..Chris 249 said..
Don't be a liar as well as a ****wit. I have been discussing the issue, complete with references to reality, in a bunch of previous posts. You, on the other hand, are a self-obsessed megolamaniac arsewipe who is so arrogant that you sling **** at people risking their lives while you cower behind a keyboard. Vile, disgusting and cowardly.
You have utterly failed to consider issues such as visibility over the fire, airspace restrictions, retardant and runway availability, control issues and others. You have shown no evidence of having done any research or having any experience but you are so self-obsessed that you nevertheless know more than those who have spent years in the field. Revolting.
Settle down and watch your ticker Boomer - hahahahah
TheTruth is that these fires are caused by humans - specifically too many of us. And we have to be smarter at fighting them. The volunteers, running around the bush in their yellow jump suits, banging into each other, cursing the PM, may be well meaning. But they are out of their depth. They have saved human lives but have largely failed in controlling the fires we are seeing in recent times.
4 years ago experts suggested to the federal government to buy a fleet of 747's to fight fires. They said it was a state issue.
Here ya go boomer - some links (lol)
www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/government-rejected-major-air-tanker-expansion-20200103-p53onl.html
www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-15/are-bigger-water-bombers-the-answer-to-bushfire-woes/11705502
Your heart is more likely to explode from your excess of bile and arrogance. If you have any involvement with the RFS you'd know that while they are human, they are vastly more knowledgeable about fires than you and generally vastly better humans than someone like you, who sits behind a keyboard and insults those who are risking their lives for others.
Your own link itself says that more large air tankers are not going to solve the problem. Throwing up a poster does nothing to address the issues that people like Kato, a professional firefighter who just came off the fireground, have pointed out. Aircraft cannot work as well in the worst of conditions, are very problematic much of the time (they rarely waterbomb at night, to show one issue) and there are other logistical problems.
