Diwundrin
Well-known Member
- Location
- Nth Coast NSW Australia
I think that 62m years theory is stretching credibility. The propensity for one or two species to make that adaptation isn't proving that the joint was on fire at the time. Many mutations prove useless, eucalypts were just lucky that they had that trick to survive when they needed it.
There were many now extinct species of non fire resistant plants around up until relatively recent times. Like the Wollomi Pine. Like the palms in Palm Valley. They are the remnants of wetter climate forest in what is now scrub and desert. They aren't fire-proof. He's just trying to get the Kooris off the hook as starting the process with fire-stick technology.
Yes DB, October is the official start, but we've had 200 since early September, just sayin' it's started a bit early this year, and we don't usually get them all at once until around Jan/Feb.
The CSIRO article says it. We are the foreigners here, not the fires. The bush needs the fires to survive by regeneration, we need to learn that before building where we do. And wonder if doing environmental good deeds by planting fire bomb eucalypts in our gardens is a good idea.
Fires that go through areas often, go through quickly, and cause little damage to the environment. 6 weeks later it's green again, 6 months later you'd never notice a fire had been through it at all.
Areas that are prevented from regular firing build up more fuel to produce more intense fires that are not survivable by even the eucalypts.
e.g. The Royal National Park fire a decade or so ago. There were century old trees that died in that because regular burn offs had been stopped. Some mental giant thought that a National Park's vegetation was different to the rest and would just stay pretty to look at forever. Doh.
Also the Snowy Mtns National Park. Greenies stopped them grazing cattle in it. Stopped them burning off.= More damaging fires than ever.
We can have 'nature' or we can have civilization and the houses and people that go with it. Our type of civilization is not well suited to conditions here. So it's it or us. It's a big country. Would it be such an unthinkable thing that the relatively tiny proportion of populated areas be cleared of fire bomb eucalypts and planted with less volatile vegetation?? Sure it would change the 'Australianness' of the area, but then houses don't grow naturally here either. Right? The fires could be let rip at leisure through the other regions without people being expected to risk their lives to save houses built in wrong places, in tinder boxes.
We also need to rethink our 'architecture'. Some houses were alight when the trees weren't! Embers are getting into roofs and that just shouldn't happen.
There were many now extinct species of non fire resistant plants around up until relatively recent times. Like the Wollomi Pine. Like the palms in Palm Valley. They are the remnants of wetter climate forest in what is now scrub and desert. They aren't fire-proof. He's just trying to get the Kooris off the hook as starting the process with fire-stick technology.

He warns against using fossilised pollen of just a few species to make far-reaching conclusions about the spread of bushfires, and adds that it's highly unlikely that bushfires were frequent 62 million years ago. "At this period of time the whole of Australia was dense rainforest – a super wet environment," he says.
Robert goes on to question the idea that unique regenerative ability of eucalypts first evolved as an adaptation to fire. "It could have been frost or drought or insect damage; there are all sorts of things that damage foliage," he says.
Yes DB, October is the official start, but we've had 200 since early September, just sayin' it's started a bit early this year, and we don't usually get them all at once until around Jan/Feb.
The CSIRO article says it. We are the foreigners here, not the fires. The bush needs the fires to survive by regeneration, we need to learn that before building where we do. And wonder if doing environmental good deeds by planting fire bomb eucalypts in our gardens is a good idea.
Fires that go through areas often, go through quickly, and cause little damage to the environment. 6 weeks later it's green again, 6 months later you'd never notice a fire had been through it at all.
Areas that are prevented from regular firing build up more fuel to produce more intense fires that are not survivable by even the eucalypts.
e.g. The Royal National Park fire a decade or so ago. There were century old trees that died in that because regular burn offs had been stopped. Some mental giant thought that a National Park's vegetation was different to the rest and would just stay pretty to look at forever. Doh.
Also the Snowy Mtns National Park. Greenies stopped them grazing cattle in it. Stopped them burning off.= More damaging fires than ever.
We can have 'nature' or we can have civilization and the houses and people that go with it. Our type of civilization is not well suited to conditions here. So it's it or us. It's a big country. Would it be such an unthinkable thing that the relatively tiny proportion of populated areas be cleared of fire bomb eucalypts and planted with less volatile vegetation?? Sure it would change the 'Australianness' of the area, but then houses don't grow naturally here either. Right? The fires could be let rip at leisure through the other regions without people being expected to risk their lives to save houses built in wrong places, in tinder boxes.
We also need to rethink our 'architecture'. Some houses were alight when the trees weren't! Embers are getting into roofs and that just shouldn't happen.