You have commented 338 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Down Under
Green policy arsonists
2009-02-15
Posted by:tipper

#4  Aussie Mike, that's an interesting argument, and would make sense. You are closer to the situation than I -- does Australia get hit by lightening strikes often? I know that the American midwest and far west do; I saw an absolutely fascinating time-lapse photography thingy, taken from space over the course of one fire season (late spring through fall), and the fires just flowed in waves from west to east the entire time. Nonetheless, our Plains Indians periodically set fire to the Great Plains to encourage the growth of new grass to feed the bison which they hunted.

Shieldwolf, it never occurred to me to question why that was so, and I have spent a good deal more time than I liked getting rid of Chinese honeysuckle bushes and Japanese honeysuckle vines. Granted, those are invasive plants, not natives, but I see no reason why native plants would not behave similarly. Certainly poison ivy and Virginia creeper would quickly render a forest impassable given half a chance, even before bushy plants grew up to block easy movement along the ground. On the other hand, it's the vines and bushes that feed non-climbing wildlife, for the most part, not cathedral-like trees. It's clearly a good thing I needn't live by my wits and hunting skills!
Posted by: trailing wife   2009-02-15 23:49  

#3  Sounds like the American Indians in North America : they used to set forest fires every few years to clear off the undergrowth. That is why there are all the historical accounts of the cathedral aspect of the Eastern forests - no clogging underbrush because it was burned off.
Posted by: Shieldwolf   2009-02-15 23:24  

#2  tw, I have seen opinion that the aborigines merely took advantage of naturally occurring fires caused by lightning strikes. They may have enhanced the process by lighting more frequent fires of course but lightning alone might do it. Interesting to investigate and do some simulations. Should be amenable to proper analysis. No guarantee that the answer will be politically correct.
Posted by: Aussie Mike   2009-02-15 19:00  

#1  The "Green Policy" idiots ignore the fact that the local flora evolved in response to frequent wildfires. Without fire, the trees, particularly, cannot sprout from seed. Granted, it's my understanding that the frequent wildfires were introduced by the aborigines upon their arrival on Australia as the easiest method to produce the widespread grasslands which their preferred prey needed to thrive, but the plants evolved to need that scenario nonetheless. Seriously, one would think the Greens had no consideration for the plants they claim to care so much about.
Posted by: trailing wife    2009-02-15 16:39  

00:00