Bushwalk Australia

Took my Mum on a trip into the SW yesterday to show her where I spend so much time and have come to love so much.
After a drive down SPR in the morning everything went slightly bizarre - she was gobsmacked, and she is v. conservative!
The amount of tourists pulled over taking photos of this was amazing....
There was at least 6 BIG fires burning.
Possibly political so will probably get attention from mods, I haven't stated my view though

Call me cynical, but I don't think there is ANY coincidence that these burn-offs have are suddenly happening 2 weeks after the state election. Also funny how they're happening a couple of weeks later in the year than normal. Of course, the spin forestry would put on it is that conditions haven't been favourable until now. In a way, you could say they are exactly right !!!

As much as i dislike the practice, you are spot on SM.
Last year FT only managed 30% of their annual burns due to unfavourable weather. Therefore this season they had 2ce as much as usual to burn.
They have been advertising that this would be happening for a long time. It is although ugly not unexpected or unadvertised.

We had one on the hill behind us yesterday, it was actually kind of scary. You could hear the Woooosshhhhh as it went up.

Hadn't thought about the timing of it, didn't want to get political
It does amaze me they are allowed to nuke damp waste timber like this, is there no use for it?
Portable woodchippers maybe?
...and yeah it did frighten tourists - I spoke with a couple at Strathgordon who were worried about driving back to town that night as they were afraid of being caught in a wildfire - pity the LP Chalets are closed

Just to add to the fun here is a photo of pyrocumulus forming under Mt Field west on 31st March.

stepbystep wrote:It does amaze me they are allowed to nuke damp waste timber like this, is there no use for it?
Portable woodchippers maybe?

The trouble is that, as far as I know, FT operates to timetables rather than maximum extraction methods. Whatever hasn't been removed by a certain time is bulldozed and burnt, whether it is suitable for chipping or not. An enormous amount of chippable timber is wasted in every felling cycle.
They should be getting every bit of use out of the tracts they harvest, rather than wasting it like this and creating so much poollution.

north-north-west wrote:They should be getting every bit of use out of the tracts they harvest, rather than wasting it like this and creating so much poollution.

Yup, my thoughts exactly...

...except the word 'harvest' is incorrect when talking about old growth, you 'harvest' a crop you have planted, not native forest!

Totally agree SBS! Harvest indeed.....

Here's a couple of shots from our backyard taken through the week.

ILUVSWTAS wrote:Totally agree SBS! Harvest indeed.....

Here's a couple of shots from our backyard taken through the week.

That IS frightening!

You might find this page - Smoke Management from Planned Burns - interesting. It includes a complain form.

It is estimated that in 1776 there were approximately 4.8 million hectares of native forest in Tasmania. In 1996 the Forest Practices Authority reported that approximately 66% of these native forest remained. In 220 years the State had lost over 30% of its native forest. In 2006 the same authority estimated that a further 2% of native forest had been lost in the preceding decade.

It is not a matter of being pro or anti logging (but for the record I believe that while our society uses timber and paper products we should support that use with our own timber industry). It is a matter of protecting an irreplaceable resource, namely our old growth native forests. It is time to stop all logging of old growth forest. In the current political climate it is a good time to make a noise about having a responsible, plantation based timber industry that works with the community to recognise and protect our unique natural landscapes and our remaining old growth forests.

stepbystep wrote:...except the word 'harvest' is incorrect when talking about old growth, you 'harvest' a crop you have planted, not native forest!

I was trying to be diplomatic. Would you prefer the phrase 'rape, pillage and plunder'?

A spade is a spade.

north-north-west wrote:

stepbystep wrote:...except the word 'harvest' is incorrect when talking about old growth, you 'harvest' a crop you have planted, not native forest!

I was trying to be diplomatic. Would you prefer the phrase 'rape, pillage and plunder'?

Yep

Not just down south it seems, and something might become of it...
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010 ... 886371.htm

where's Guy Fawlkes when we need him eh?
but seriously, politics aside how can this level of waste and pollution be sound economical practise for a business!save the fire and charge folks for firewood collection of felled waste or ... well just about anything other than burn the lot!?
makes the question of a carbon tax or pollution fines make more sense to me for sure

Maybe at last a step in the right direction!!

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011 ... 202734.htm

That would indeed be great news!! I'll probably believe it when I see it though. They always make claims like this to distract the public eye away from them.
Like not logging old growth anymore... yeh right. Every day I see trucks down here with logs so big they only fit 2 or 3 to one truck.

but that says Gunns in their plantation forests. Nothing about FT or other logging contractors in Native forest

What baffles me is that one logging area gets wind rowed and replanted between the rows while another gets similar + burning. That doesn't make sense to me.

Also how many of us walk along roads/ tracks (vehicle) in areas where the land has been disturbed for whatever reason , but never burnt and the regrowth is phenomenal. It survives vermin or wild animals and seems to prosper in that environment and free of fire.

As an emerging youth of the day I still remember the sensational and profound announcements that came with the advent of woodchipping. No more waste on the forest floor - it would all be used - as in chipped.

There are just too many myths, half-truths and well meaning and much elaborated debates abounding on the whole forestry management issue.

Recently an area near here of pine forest was felled, raked together and burnt. Poor blokes picked the wrong day and the stench and smoke filled the district and our home for far too long.
Then came the rains and being undulating land, with many rills and gullies, water obviously found its way to the main stream which became a conduit of mud and other junk from the burnt ground. The colour was like tan nugget - yuck!!

I look at those instances and wonder if its any better than the 'slash and burn' techniques of '3rd world', 'developing countries' (what ever those terms are supposed to mean) that we rant against in our modern and well oiled technically correct practises.

taswegian wrote:.......

I look at those instances and wonder if its any better than the 'slash and burn' techniques of '3rd world', 'developing countries' (what ever those terms are supposed to mean) that we rant against in our modern and well oiled technically correct practises.

sure it's better..... "we" do it on a much larger scale!
i love wood in buildings etc.... i also support a forestry industry - but not one that logs forests that it didn't plant, grow, and nurture and then burns a nd pollutes the atmosphere with common knowledge of the impact this creates. If an industry cant do it properly then it shouldn't be done at all IMHO
The meatworks dont put animals down with toothpicks they have to be humane etc ie they are made to do it right ramble mutter etc
Bad for tourism, forests, inhabitants and not sustainable long term - so bad for FT too if they thought about it properly!
As someone who was burnt out completely in the Ash Wednesday fires as a kid I STILL HATE bush fires - after all even our kids are taught not to play with matches

firewood goes for nearly $150 per ton surely a go get it for a $100 license or similar could still cost FT less than burning and make them more $ .... still get burnt but would save a bit?

The meatworks dont put animals down with toothpicks they have to be humane etc

Mmmm - how would you advocate putting a tree down humanely?

Yes I agree about the firewood bit. I see so much waste wood when I'm out working and it makes my offsider boil.

I burn wood for heating, make furniture, have a house made without an plaster - heaps of timber, so surely can't say I'm against forestry.

by humane for a forest (not just a tree).... you plant it for a start.... (for a tree you can borrow my chainsaw if you like)

does forestry let people scavange for firewood here... trade for beer onsight? what is the go here in tassie?

you need a permit and then only in designated areas. (thats how I understand it round this neck of the woods)
But its very frustrating to drive past heaps pushed up that contain good wood (fire) and are out of bounds.

There's probably a beer traded on the side too.