Thousands of people trapped in Australian coastal town by huge wildfires

[XJPSX]

On 12/31/2019 at 9:15 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

I fail to understand how a fire can get that close to a population center without the chainsaws and bulldozers removing the fuel BEFORE it could be a problem. Do they not have chainsaws, bulldozers and people to use them in that town, or is there some reason they could not attempt to save the town?

Agree....but the fuel (trees and scrub) have been growing for years. You cannot cut trees in Australia thanks to a greenie movement. Hopefully after this councils will keep areas clean. Loggers wanted to cut pathways into bush but protesters tied themselves to the front of their trucks. This was just waiting to happen.

[steven100]

6 hours ago, RJRS1301 said:

Those arrested are adults, think before responding sometimes, or comprehend what was written.

Ordered to under go mental health assessments indicates the magistrate has concern about issues in this case,

 

I hear ya, and while in part that may be true about other mental health issues, there are those who simply get a kick outa lighting a fire such as some kids do.  When I was young we lost our house and everything in a fire, very tragic experience i must say. 

Some folks don't realize how ferocious these fires are, flames 60ft high with wind gusts up to 80kph in different directions and embers raining down a kilometer ahead it's near impossible to extinguish such an inferno.

[ThaiBunny]

11 hours ago, XJPSX said:

You cannot cut trees in Australia thanks to a greenie movement.

https://greens.org.au/bushfires

[GroveHillWanderer]

16 hours ago, XJPSX said:

You cannot cut trees in Australia thanks to a greenie movement.

Quote

“Problem is it’s drier and hotter. Around here we’ve been trying to do hazard reductions all year.” Blaming "greenies" for stopping these important measures is a familiar, populist, but basically untrue claim.”
– Greg Mullins, fmr Fire & Rescue Commissioner.

The Greens do not oppose hazard reduction measures, such as cutting back the brush or controlled burning in the winter months.

[samran]

20 hours ago, XJPSX said:

Agree....but the fuel (trees and scrub) have been growing for years. You cannot cut trees in Australia thanks to a greenie movement. Hopefully after this councils will keep areas clean. Loggers wanted to cut pathways into bush but protesters tied themselves to the front of their trucks. This was just waiting to happen.

Get your hand off it. 
 

When have the greens even been within Cooee if power in Australia, particularly at state and local level in the bush? Never!

[Olmate]

12 minutes ago, Don Mega said:

Why would my Thailand employer give me time off work to visit a part of the country I dont come from ?

But you know so much about Australian bush fires and tree huggergreens. I grew up in that area as a young fella ,I know the grazing of the high country was an issue then. It was the precursor to the current thinking of locking up the national parks and generally using political pressure to prevent controlled back burns and other measures in the name of conservation? Really if you know nothing about that area what,s the point of replying.

[thaibeachlovers]

On 1/2/2020 at 12:06 AM, Lacessit said:

It's true eucalypts regrow shoots of leaves on the trunks a few months after a fire. It's a bit more difficult for them to do that when they are burnt down to a stub.

I'm not saying that isn't true in some areas, but on the Al Jazeera clip I saw recently, in an area that had been burned, the trees were still intact, though the bark was blackened and burnt to some extent, and the canopy was not burnt at all. The only vegetation that had burnt was the undergrowth that had not been cleared before the fire came.

I see no reason why those trees can't survive, so long as the tap root is still viable.

[thaibeachlovers]

On 1/4/2020 at 7:14 PM, RJRS1301 said:

The diesel generally will not ignite from a flame, but at sufficient heat it will explode, I do not know what temperate that is though

Just looked it up abput 200deg celcius

While you may be talking about diesel IN A TANK, diesel certainly ignites from a flame, as I've often used it to make a damp pile of rubbish burn.

[RJRS1301]

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I'm not saying that isn't true in some areas, but on the Al Jazeera clip I saw recently, in an area that had been burned, the trees were still intact, though the bark was blackened and burnt to some extent, and the canopy was not burnt at all. The only vegetation that had burnt was the undergrowth that had not been cleared before the fire came.

I see no reason why those trees can't survive, so long as the tap root is still viable.

It will depend on the heat of the fire at the time, damge done to roots by the heat, which lasts in the soil for days sometimes after fires appear to be out.

Some areas the growth have had no moisture in the soil for years, each area will be dependent on a variety of complex factors, there is no one size fits all.

Rember that eucalyptus trees often explode in extreme heat, as do avocados and macadamias and other oil producing trees

[RJRS1301]

8 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

While you may be talking about diesel IN A TANK, diesel certainly ignites from a flame, as I've often used it to make a damp pile of rubbish burn.

Umm on farms we have them in 1,000 gallon storage units.Also in the tanks of our trucks and farming equipment. That is to which we replying, read the thread, it was about fireys in a TRUCK in the middle of the fire.

 

It also takes some higher temps according to the "experts" . Diesel uses compression to ignite in engines, petrol uses sparks.(spark plugs)

 

Personally I have never tried to light it, nor petrol, nor will I ever.

 

Edited January 5, 2020 by RJRS1301

[thaibeachlovers]

3 minutes ago, RJRS1301 said:

Umm on farms we have them in 1,000 gallon storage units.Also in the tanks of our trucks and farming equipment. That is to which we replying, read the thread, it was about fireys in a TRUCK in the middle of the fire.

 

It also takes some higher temps according to the "experts" . Diesel uses compression to ignite in engines, petrol uses sparks.(spark plugs)

 

Personally I have never tried to light it, nor petrol, nor will I ever.

 

Diesel is perfectly safe to use for lighting fires unless one chooses to soak themselves in it before lighting the fire, which is why I, and others use it. Petrol however, explodes, so not a good idea to use it.

[RJRS1301]

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Diesel is perfectly safe to use for lighting fires unless one chooses to soak themselves in it before lighting the fire, which is why I, and others use it. Petrol however, explodes, so not a good idea to use it.

I know many people who use fire as a control mechanism on the land, and never known one to use diesel or petrol it as an accelerant.

But your life, your enviroment your decisions

[thaibeachlovers]

11 minutes ago, RJRS1301 said:

It will depend on the heat of the fire at the time, damge done to roots by the heat, which lasts in the soil for days sometimes after fires appear to be out.

Some areas the growth have had no moisture in the soil for years, each area will be dependent on a variety of complex factors, there is no one size fits all.

Rember that eucalyptus trees often explode in extreme heat, as do avocados and macadamias and other oil producing trees

I haven't forgotten about the exploding trees, but the trees on the Al Jazeera clip had not exploded, nor had the canopy burnt as too high for the ground fire to reach.

The point I was making, was that without vegetation at ground level, the fire would not have even occurred there. IMO, the lack of backburning before the current fires is the reason they are so severe now. No doubt that will be an issue in the coming investigation.

[RJRS1301]

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I haven't forgotten about the exploding trees, but the trees on the Al Jazeera clip had not exploded, nor had the canopy burnt as too high for the ground fire to reach.

The point I was making, was that without vegetation at ground level, the fire would not have even occurred there. IMO, the lack of backburning before the current fires is the reason they are so severe now. No doubt that will be an issue in the coming investigation.

You are such an expert on fires, Australian trees, regrowth and other matters I am sure the Prime Mnister will welcome you and your sand buckets on his expert advisory panel, Please bring your chainsaw as well

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, RJRS1301 said:

I know many people who use fire as a control mechanism on the land, and never known one to use diesel or petrol it as an accelerant.

But your life, your enviroment your decisions

I did say it was only for damp rubbish fires, so don't see why you mention control mechanism.

When the people starting backburns use some sort of liquid to start the fires, as I have seen on movies about US firefighters, I assume it's diesel, but I could be wrong.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, RJRS1301 said:

You are such an expert on fires, Australian trees, regrowth and other matters I am sure the Prime Mnister will welcome you and your sand buckets on his expert advisory panel, Please bring your chainsaw as well

Personal insults don't help your case.

[RJRS1301]

17 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Personal insults don't help your case.

Mere using your suggestions to controol fires. Your words no one elses

[metisdead]

Some inflammatory insulting posts and replies have been removed, please remember these forum rules when posting:

 

7) You will respect fellow members and post in a civil manner. No personal attacks, hateful or insulting towards other members, (flaming) Stalking of members on either the forum or via PM will not be allowed.

 

8.) You will not post disruptive or inflammatory messages, vulgarities, obscenities or profanities.

[Olmate]

2 hours ago, RJRS1301 said:

I know many people who use fire as a control mechanism on the land, and never known one to use diesel or petrol it as an accelerant.

But your life, your enviroment your decisions

Fire drippers for use in back burning to start fires use a mix of diesel and petrol  or kero diesel  ,diesel is to maintain the flame 

Edited January 6, 2020 by Olmate

[thaibeachlovers]

4 minutes ago, Olmate said:

Fire drippers for use in back burning to start fires use a mix of diesel and petrol  or kero diesel  ,diesel is to maintain the flame 

I once asked my wife to get diesel to use for burning a pile of damp vegetation, but she thought it was easier to get petrol, which she gave me, but didn't say it was petrol. After the explosion that happened when I lit the fire she realised why I had asked her for diesel- she almost became a widow that day.

[Salerno]

9 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

When the people starting backburns use some sort of liquid to start the fires, as I have seen on movies about US firefighters, I assume it's diesel, but I could be wrong.

 

Depends on the agency e.g.

 

Operators are to ensure they know what fuel is contained in both the lighter and the refill container. A 75% diesel to 25% petrol is the standard practice in CFA, with the mixing being done in the fuel container not the firelighter.

 

Only use fuel from appropriately labelled containers. Both FFMV (DELWP) 3/1 and 2/1 premixed firelighter fuels can also be used in CFA firelighters if available, with all being assessed as compatible with the CFA mix. However, note FFMV 2/1 premix is more volatile than the FFMV premix 3/1 and CFA’s authorised 75% diesel to 25% petrol mix, and is used by FFMV when fuels to be burnt have higher moisture differentials often associated with planned burning operations.

 

CFA = Country Fire Authority - Victoria

FFMV = Forest Fire Management Victoria

DELWP = Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning

[RJRS1301]

The fires were so intense in Conjola Park that they melted an aluminium boat.

Above From a news feed I received today

[Scott]

Off-topic post and replies removed.

[chainarong]

The whole shebang was multiplied by huge emounts  of under growth and vasts amounts of land that were locked away by lefties and geenies for decades, one town last year carried out a protest to stop a burn off, so instead of 900 hectares they only managed 9 around the town and the end result that town isn't there today, these fires mostly started in remote area's impossible to access, which were left to burn them selves out instead they all joined up and with the help of some low life arsonists and lightning strikes, well, the rest is history. 

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, chainarong said:

The whole shebang was multiplied by huge emounts  of under growth and vasts amounts of land that were locked away by lefties and geenies for decades, one town last year carried out a protest to stop a burn off, so instead of 900 hectares they only managed 9 around the town and the end result that town isn't there today, these fires mostly started in remote area's impossible to access, which were left to burn them selves out instead they all joined up and with the help of some low life arsonists and lightning strikes, well, the rest is history. 

More reflexive anti-green nonsense. In fact, when the FFDI (Forest Fire Danger Index) is above 50, clearing potential fuel is useless. And the FFDI is at near or record levels throughout Australia.

Are hazard reduction burns effective in managing bushfires? 

"Professor Bradstock agreed, pointing to the example of Victoria's Black Saturday bushfires in 2009 that claimed the lives of 173 people.

His team studied the aftermath of the fires which were associated with an FFDI of well above 100.

They found that even in the areas where fuel had been treated with planned burns less than five years prior, there was no measurable effect on the intensity of the fires."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-20/hazard-reduction-burns-bushfires/11817336

[RJRS1301]

Perhaps if successive governments had  read the Garnaut report from 2007, which predicted some of what has occurred, and taken some actions, as well as acted on the fire comissioners plan and report for more fire bombers several years ago, and state federal coordinted response back in September when this began, we may have witnessed a different outcome.

Now of course there will be a Royal Comission costing more millions, more reports, no coordination federally,  trees lopped for reports to sit on desks.

 

 

 

[samran]

4 hours ago, chainarong said:

The whole shebang was multiplied by huge emounts  of under growth and vasts amounts of land that were locked away by lefties and geenies for decades, one town last year carried out a protest to stop a burn off, so instead of 900 hectares they only managed 9 around the town and the end result that town isn't there today, these fires mostly started in remote area's impossible to access, which were left to burn them selves out instead they all joined up and with the help of some low life arsonists and lightning strikes, well, the rest is history. 

Keep up...

 

The fire services are actually coming out and stating this is pure propaganda. 

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, samran said:

Keep up...

 

The fire services are actually coming out and stating this is pure propaganda. 

Soooooo, either they are saying that the undergrowth I saw burning on a tv news clip wasn't actually there, or they are saying undergrowth had no factor in the fires. Hmmmmmmm.

[RJRS1301]

The NPWS had a hazard reduction target to treat 680,000ha of parks and reserves in the five years from 2011, which the spokesperson said it had exceeded.

The spokesperson added: “Hazard reduction is just one way of preparing for bushfires – it doesn’t remove the threat of fire.”

Bradstock says: “In New South Wales, hazard reduction work is governed by policies that are set by coordinating committee chaired by the Rural Fire Service. They bring together all players – with representatives from farmers, environment groups and governments.

“Hazard reduction work has increased because of increased funding to the RFS and to national parks. There has been more carried out in recent years than in previous decades.”

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/nov/12/is-there-really-a-green-conspiracy-to-stop-bushfire-hazard-reduction

 

[bristolboy]

59 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Soooooo, either they are saying that the undergrowth I saw burning on a tv news clip wasn't actually there, or they are saying undergrowth had no factor in the fires. Hmmmmmmm.

It looks like you need to see this again:

Are hazard reduction burns effective in managing bushfires? 

"Professor Bradstock agreed, pointing to the example of Victoria's Black Saturday bushfires in 2009 that claimed the lives of 173 people.

His team studied the aftermath of the fires which were associated with an FFDI of well above 100.

They found that even in the areas where fuel had been treated with planned burns less than five years prior, there was no measurable effect on the intensity of the fires."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-20/hazard-reduction-burns-bushfires/11817336