3 ms·

Not for nothing, but doesn't the occasional fire help habitats overall? I would expect ground-based seedlings in a canyon to perhaps regrow, and perhaps they ha

Not for nothing, but doesn't the occasional fire help habitats overall? I would expect ground-based seedlings in a canyon to perhaps regrow, and perhaps they have had a few fires over the millions of years of their existence? https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/how-forest-fire-benefit-living-things-2.htm https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-scienc... Not saying this is a net good - more of a silver lining / glass half full.

gfody 7y ago
especially pyrophytic ones like au
brianfitz 7y ago
Yes, but the idea is to set controlled fires to prevent these larger uncontrolled ones. It not only requires regular controlled fires, but when they are performed, for how long, and where are all critical. The remaining factor is you have to ensure the controlled fires do not burn too hot. This is knowledge that was passed down from the indigenous people of Australia, but apparently has not been well understood (it’s not easy, especially the part about hot enough versus too hot). https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-14/traditional-owners-predicted-bushfire-disaster/11700320?pfmredir=sm https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-14/traditional-owners...
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
ph4 7y ago
Not necessarily. Increased fire frequency is the primary hypothesis cited for why the population of Wollemia nobilis is so small today. They've absolutely seen fires in their past, but due to the nature of the physical isolation of this particular grove (incredibly steep, wet, narrow sandstone canyons), they've been insulated from the worst of it.
gdubs 7y ago
Fire is a natural part of many ecosystems. However, magnitude matters. Natural forest fires that creep along the forest floor and don’t turn into raging, out of control wildfires, can help certain seeds germinate and keep invasive plants under control. But when the fires burn out of control, they can push ecosystems totally out of whack to the point where they become something else entirely.
pvaldes 7y ago
Is a relict forest from a much more humid Australia. Like a time machine to what the place could had been if left alone. Does not need fire.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
taberiand 7y ago
Many Australian species are evolved to coexist with fire, but not the catastrophic level that has been occurring recently and is forecast to become worse. Rainforest areas especially haven't evolved with much fire tolerance and these places are being gutted. We will lose many species of plants and animals to extinction from these fires without major conservation efforts (which are underway).
- mytailorisrich 7y ago
  Not too sure about that. From the articles I've read, it seems that the scale of this year's fire is partly due to the lack of controlled fires and clearing of accumulated dead plants over the recent past. If so, this year's fires might actually be closer to what bushfires used to be before humans arrived in Australia. Though perhaps they occurred less often (many of the current fires probably have an human origin). Regarding the risk of extinction of animal species, I think this is also because the range of these vulnerable species vastly shrunk because of humans, not necessarily because of the fires per se.
  - inopinatus 7y ago
    Beware; the news outlets peddling the twin lines of "it's arson" and "greenies stopped us clearing land", or their slightly diluted variants, are the same that wheel out coal lobbyists to make dark pronouncements on how climate action threatens jobs. There has indeed been a lack of controlled burning, but that's because the planned clearance was itself inhibited by hotter, drier conditions earlier in the year. The causes of ignition are statistically very poorly understood. What is known, however, is that convictions for arson have been in steady decline, and 2019 had the lowest levels of intentionally causing a bushfire for at least a decade. Not only that, but despite the proximity to human habitation, the current fires have been (so far, touch wood) less fatal than the catastrophic bushfires of 2009. The Royal Commission into those fires found a lack of preparation and poor advice. Since then, policy and awareness of risk has changed dramatically for the better - including a reduction in the sources of inadvertent/accidental human causes of ignition. To sum up, both suggestions fail to support the conclusion "this is how it always was". Hopefully, you're also reading articles from less gaslit publications.

gfody 7y ago

especially pyrophytic ones like au

brianfitz 7y ago

Yes, but the idea is to set controlled fires to prevent these larger uncontrolled ones. It not only requires regular controlled fires, but when they are performed, for how long, and where are all critical. The remaining factor is you have to ensure the controlled fires do not burn too hot. This is knowledge that was passed down from the indigenous people of Australia, but apparently has not been well understood (it’s not easy, especially the part about hot enough versus too hot). https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-14/traditional-owners-predicted-bushfire-disaster/11700320?pfmredir=sm https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-14/traditional-owners...

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

ph4 7y ago

Not necessarily. Increased fire frequency is the primary hypothesis cited for why the population of Wollemia nobilis is so small today. They've absolutely seen fires in their past, but due to the nature of the physical isolation of this particular grove (incredibly steep, wet, narrow sandstone canyons), they've been insulated from the worst of it.

gdubs 7y ago

Fire is a natural part of many ecosystems. However, magnitude matters. Natural forest fires that creep along the forest floor and don’t turn into raging, out of control wildfires, can help certain seeds germinate and keep invasive plants under control. But when the fires burn out of control, they can push ecosystems totally out of whack to the point where they become something else entirely.

pvaldes 7y ago

Is a relict forest from a much more humid Australia. Like a time machine to what the place could had been if left alone. Does not need fire.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

taberiand 7y ago

Many Australian species are evolved to coexist with fire, but not the catastrophic level that has been occurring recently and is forecast to become worse. Rainforest areas especially haven't evolved with much fire tolerance and these places are being gutted. We will lose many species of plants and animals to extinction from these fires without major conservation efforts (which are underway).

mytailorisrich 7y ago
Not too sure about that. From the articles I've read, it seems that the scale of this year's fire is partly due to the lack of controlled fires and clearing of accumulated dead plants over the recent past. If so, this year's fires might actually be closer to what bushfires used to be before humans arrived in Australia. Though perhaps they occurred less often (many of the current fires probably have an human origin). Regarding the risk of extinction of animal species, I think this is also because the range of these vulnerable species vastly shrunk because of humans, not necessarily because of the fires per se.
- inopinatus 7y ago
  Beware; the news outlets peddling the twin lines of "it's arson" and "greenies stopped us clearing land", or their slightly diluted variants, are the same that wheel out coal lobbyists to make dark pronouncements on how climate action threatens jobs. There has indeed been a lack of controlled burning, but that's because the planned clearance was itself inhibited by hotter, drier conditions earlier in the year. The causes of ignition are statistically very poorly understood. What is known, however, is that convictions for arson have been in steady decline, and 2019 had the lowest levels of intentionally causing a bushfire for at least a decade. Not only that, but despite the proximity to human habitation, the current fires have been (so far, touch wood) less fatal than the catastrophic bushfires of 2009. The Royal Commission into those fires found a lack of preparation and poor advice. Since then, policy and awareness of risk has changed dramatically for the better - including a reduction in the sources of inadvertent/accidental human causes of ignition. To sum up, both suggestions fail to support the conclusion "this is how it always was". Hopefully, you're also reading articles from less gaslit publications.