Thread: Mega fire bears down on Sydney and the Hunter

Originally Posted by Eevo

i have that one done as the 2001 Black Christmas bushfires

wiki has a page on it
Black Christmas bushfires - Wikipedia

migh even be two pages on it
2001 Warragamba bushfires - Wikipedia

That's it.
The ex and I had only moved three months prior.

There are cool and hot burns.
A cool burn might creep along the ground, slowly burning the ground cover and leaving the canopy untouched.
A hot burn, driven by winds, might bounce across the canopy from tree to tree, maybe not even going on the ground.
So the same area can burn more than once.
Aborigines used regular cool burns to clear the ground cover and cause the green pick which attracted the wallabies. They cool burnt grassy patches while leaving lines of trees to divide between the grassy areas. The tree lines allowed birds, koalas and other wildlife to move around in safety, and also gave cover for the hunters to sneak up on the wallabies, before driving them into the kill zone.
It was rare for Aborigines to start hot burns, because they wanted to manage the vegetation, not incinerate it. They identified with areas of land which housed their totems, so they knew those areas intimately.
When they were expelled from those areas, the pattern of managing using small cool burns stopped. Now we get hot burns in neglected areas.
I really recommend reading 'The Biggest Estate on Earth: how Aborigines made Australia' by Bill Gammage. Fascinating book.

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

There are cool and hot burns.
A cool burn might creep along the ground, slowly burning the ground cover and leaving the canopy untouched.
A hot burn, driven by winds, might bounce across the canopy from tree to tree, maybe not even going on the ground.
So the same area can burn more than once.
Aborigines used regular cool burns to clear the ground cover and cause the green pick which attracted the wallabies. They cool burnt grassy patches while leaving lines of trees to divide between the grassy areas. The tree lines allowed birds, koalas and other wildlife to move around in safety, and also gave cover for the hunters to sneak up on the wallabies, before driving them into the kill zone.
It was rare for Aborigines to start hot burns, because they wanted to manage the vegetation, not incinerate it. They identified with areas of land which housed their totems, so they knew those areas intimately.
When they were expelled from those areas, the pattern of managing using small cool burns stopped. Now we get hot burns in neglected areas.
I really recommend reading 'The Biggest Estate on Earth: how Aborigines made Australia' by Bill Gammage. Fascinating book.

This one I recall, Mick, had recently seen a full blown fire sweep through, not a "cool burn" & why I thought it was remarkable that another fire could find it's way into the same area. I have since wondered if gas had been generated from the blackened soil & ash. as it appeared like a fireball apparently.

Not NSW but just had two fixed wing water bombers overhead for a grass fire near here.

Thank goodness, Woodside ( CFS) Airstrip is not all that far away as it seems to be only be seconds before they were circling around. Nip it in the bud promptly seems to be the way to go if you can. Mind you, bugger all wind though & a temp here of 27c or it could be a different story.

Good to know they can be here very quickly but this prompt attendance may not happen on a Fire day with a gale blowing.

Just sayin'.

I asked my Friend Google about secondary fires over the same ground. It could make some sense now.

The black stuff is called burnt sugar! But seriously, this is what happens when you heat or burn things that contain carbon. It reacts with oxygen and "oxidizes" (burns). The black stuff itself is mainly carbon.

Originally Posted by 4bee

Good to know they can be here very quickly but this prompt attendance may not happen on a Fire day with a gale blowing.

correct. if its too windy, they cant take off.

Just looking at the excellent CFS Maps they publish as information together with their Fire Advice Reports & can't help but notice the plethora of "Con. & Rec Parks" shown on these maps these days & situated it seems by the dropping of a hat all over the hills.

So, can't help but wonder (with reference to Mick's above post re the Aboriginal Land Management) about non maintained pockets of bush land especially them being named Conservation Parks. Who maintains them & gets shot of fallen branches & floor litter or does 'Conservation' mean that you can't get rid of all that stuff because it is "natural" & it is being "conserved"?. What a load of bollocks if that is the case.

I also wonder how much these "parks" contribute to the ongoing fires (I am assuming this is not just a SA thing but each State would have them of varying sizes).

EG. Double click on the map.CFS Incidents and Warnings

The State Government has a hazard reduction budget. It claims to have done more than the budget. The problem is, the budget is is inadequate to do the job that Aboriginal people once did as part of their culture. Not surprising, really.