Design with Nature

Protecting wild things

2011-12-09T09:10:00.002+11:00

Thinking people of all political persuasions are right to identify humanities widespread failure to look after the place of wild things in our world as a big issue . Some say we protect wild things by not designing at all for them , but I think that's too simple and wrong. The very failure of human beings to both see and to care is complex, but only human beings can really improve the situation - and they can do a lot to do that . For a bit of an overview and some more ideas click here.( still under construction )

Harvesting is not a dirty word

2011-12-06T10:36:00.009+11:00

I will start taking the Greens seriously when they start using several critical eco words such as "harvest, production and sequestration " in their proper scientific and ecological context .(You will note that I am a professional green -A small g green ; a bit like , I might be a small l " liberal" too !)
At the moment " harvesting" talk is forbotten ( at least in Australia) ;its a swear word which churchgoers and Brown devotees can expect to receive a feeling of guilt for if they should use it or ask more questions about it( say in relation to native timber harvesting ) The worshippers cherry pick their current favoured form of sequestration and reject , on theological grounds alone , the environmentally sound choices that work . Scientists amongst the audience will note that I am not spelling it all out in words because for many Greens the game is about using the right words - not the right science - the science that is, in substance, a process. So much for the brilliance of their theology; so much for the Green's commitment to understanding, and understanding the process of ecological sustainability.

Greenlabor are so out of touch that they promote carbon dioxide production when they claim its critical to reduce it . Make up your minds people, or you become totally politically and scientifically irrelevant. The Greens do confusion and religion by playing with sequestration subjects that suit their simple theories but ignore key subjects which would in fact sequester carbon. Green theology is ideologically constrained irrelevance
and useless as a result .
Minister Burke is such a dummy to fall again in late 2011 for the easy "lock up idea" that has left the religious Greens in the doldrums for decades ( All the hype on the abcnews and by Burke on proposed Coral sea exclusion zone proposals)
Clearly Greenlabor are unable to address the complex questions of management ( what most of do at work well )so they opt to opt out of management altogether .Clearly not many of these wannabes would survive in business.
Sadly the opposition haven't responded by advocating a reasoned way to define and protect wilderness and wild things.
Some Terms:
--Harvesting/ production - what one trophic level does with another
--Sequestration - what prevents decomposition; something that they favor for forests
I won't say any more . This stupidity is seriously stupid, but unfortunately few know why . Those of U who KNOW the cycles and what U are talking about need no more information .
If on the other hand you just don't know and you are serious about the truth, follow professional practical big picture here .

Toilet models tend to lower the tone

2011-11-28T17:26:00.011+11:00

The Greens and the ACF are not happy with the new Murray Darling Plan ; they want a flushing; a really decent flushing. Perhaps they want the sort that only a really big dam and a really big opening can provide ? It seems to me that what they want is only something God can provide, but they don't believe in God so its back to the drawing board.. Seems to me their drawing board is missing some key components - like the fact that "the quiet achiever" has filled our dams and made a farce of the drips we sought from desal . The half baked's don't believe in dams and fiddling so they resort to piddling . They think everything has to be flushed to be better when nature leaves things around to rot and fester .They mix nature with technology in ways that don't work because they understand neither.
The Greens can't be taken seriously as representatives of the big picture. Like many marginal parties they are often disagreeable for the sake of being disagreeable .They come in on a point of order they perceive to be important , when its just a distraction from the big picture. Unlike the farmers , they can't talk to the details of the Murray Darling plan , which makes them largely just noise; Noise about things they call "toxic things".
They camp at the end of the process waiting for a door to open , expecting only toxic stuff to come forth. Not very deep as even salt has its place ( see below) . Somehow , almost miraculously, once it got past them and entered Bass strait , it would all be cleaned up .
Point of order - 9 years out of 10 "the sea will get what it needs" ;Its clear they missed the point of river process completely ; the bits upstream will miss out.
If all the noisemakers and worriers want is a say , they have had it .
All the Greens can do on THE MDP is camp at one of the doors and cry foul about what's going inside a box they try to call their own . If they had more ownership of the complex issues of salinity, soil , floods and food they would move inland . Busy today at Lake Alexandrina they think the end product is no good when in the cycle of life ( that they seldom address) "it's all good" .
The Greens don't know what they want and neither does Burkes' and the Kingsford group .They know the numbers simplicity of allocations was too simple but they continue to play the same simple game of numbers because Greenlabor likes to make environmental choices simple.
Salt lakes are OK and if excessive saltiness is a current problem ,the people above are mistargeting it . We also won't solve anything long term by cutting our collection in dams Number stuff is largely nothing stuff . 4 numbers - can you believe it should come to this ? Bigger more important natural forces need to be taken seriously. Is a process discussion too hard .The States did a better job , before this , in talking process. Why do the Feds think they are so much more able ?
The newcomers tell us the river and the lake need to flush - fair enough, but is the only analogy a closet and piddling and pipe paradigms ( suits those who like to confine the problem to simple conduits ) . A 2075 mega litre flush is a piddle. The river doesn't need us .Calculated to flush but is Lake Alex the only toilet in the system?. Burke, the Green, s ACF and Knowles don't understand or accept the role of the sea in keeping the mouth open .A sea that they think is rising .Get real , get organised or get off the blower .
More science than Prof Kingsford is covering would be good . His word "Luck" doesn't come into risk analysis, but to hype talk.
Geomorphologists stand here with our mouths open- we are supposed to think the Green wooriers know what they are doing. No way

Whatever happened to Appropriate Technology?

2011-06-09T10:28:00.001+10:00

Some one asked me about the place of wind power recently.
We western Victorians have been using wind power ever since western settlement ( son counted 80 windmills between here and Geelong along the main road - 1hour drive ) Our town is the famous source of our own brand called" Bryan Mills " which have a hefty gearbox to "torque up" the huge lifts necessary in our steep country . Windmills are the most common means , even today, for supplying water to our dairy herds of about 200 cows.

As for the wind generated electricity - similiar story to solar - the idea is oversold and the big things are dumped in places where it suits business but not always landscape . They don't work reliably early in the morning ( when they are needed ). Governments in Victoria are illadvised having cloned their own for too long and alienated the competent by their own stupidity
Small windpower units in remote areas of the Otways have often been abandoned because power source is unreliable and batteries cost too much ( seems same is true of many electric cars).
Appropriate technology is the way to view technology(ie positively) but you need wisdom and science , not political slogans and political ignorance and stupidity in conservation to do that. .

Cooperation rather than Competition is the best policy

2011-05-12T11:20:00.000+10:00

Thiopedia rosea ( Copyright below)
Always resist non scientists when they promote human prehensions ( Whiteheads word) because they are so often blinkered in nature . Sure , competition is a component of real world ecomia , but its not framing the big picture stuff. Stultifyingly, competition policy has become the dominant preoccupation of major political parties, when its not what makes the world go around .
Take bacteria and fungi , the things we really compete with in nature . Even procaryotes and archaic microbes take turns in turning composition and decomposition on their heads . As 8 million Irish found out in 1850's , one mere fungi can eat us out of house and home within months ,undoing all our good work in sequestration in moments ( remember you heard it first May 12th 2011 and Julia's blinkered team don't even factor it in to their wasted trip down carbon tax lane YET ) .
The best thing is not that Fun guys are not furry enough to be fascinating , but that 150 years later we know how to work together whereas , in 1850 we didn't . The same applies to bacteria . We are now friends and those of us who study these things properly are not in a panic. Our wine, bread and cheese are all the better for studying stuff .
150 years after a disease that caused real worry because noone understood what they were facing , do we still have people worrying because they don't understand ??? -
You bet , especially if they think the aim of life is to store up treasures here for themselves when the earth was created for very small unseen forces to return things to their proper homes for someone else to use ( maybe that's why some call her mother earth ? ) .Methinks there is more to knowing than our knowledge will ever know and some things are clearly blocking the path in some people's minds ( like denial ,selfcentredness, guilt and prejudice ) Copyright EA

Grazing sores will not go away

2011-03-21T12:57:00.000+11:00

While governments fail to govern

No poor land use better illustrates the footprint issue than grazing .This is world wide . It appears though that Mr Walsh doesn't get it .
If only Asia and North Africa had help to grab the nettle and say . Yes but only safely " here and here and here " . lets invest in something else " here and here and here " as we have done in Australia.

While the greens will label all grazing as "bad" ( and not help us resolve the real issue of balance )they ignore( as usual ?) half the natural biosystems in the world where grazing provides and important feedback loop in the carbon cycle . Brilliant simplifications .
If only the conservatives believed in conservation like they believe in the market they would make progress

Welcome mention of Resilience

2011-03-15T09:24:00.001+11:00

Most people in the media worry to much ; and they worry the people too much . I think this process , when it goes to excess, is wrong because it reduces our children's faith in science and technology and our ability to manage risk .
Its wrong too , when people who are not scientists in the area try to speak for those that are .
Now both of the above processes happen far too much in the media .

Positively though, there is a lot of talk of resilience of people at the moment . Resilience of earth processes is even more predictable and a sound focus for young people to rebuild hope and a career in a world of heavy , but not unsustainable, population pressures .
eg The profound damage to nuclear reactors in Japan this week
One hopes that even with the real tragedies associated with recent plate activity there will be a recognition that the very worst case scenario of nuclear power plants on fault lines and subject to tsunamis will not create unmanageable damage to the environment .A sound knowledge of chemistry and geology will limit the extent to which you worry about such real disasters and work towards preventing another .

Carbon Dioxide is not a pollutant and labelling it for taxation won't work

2011-02-25T11:25:00.001+11:00

Grand ambitions to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels have blinded many to the unworkable idea of trying to tax a element that moves in enormous and complex cycles.
And if your not a scientist, and i just lost you there , here's one example of a tax return on offer that just won't work . Labor is desperate enough to try anything to try and bolster up their brilliance.

Soil sequestration is touted by some as a means of helping farmers avoid taxation for "carbon polllution" -As soils all have their own natural limits ( and then re-export products to carbon dioxide) that expectation is a largely vain hope . ( this statement first appears here after it was sent in a letter to the leader of the opposition on the 14th February 2011)

Soils in warm areas will self limit the amount of carbon they absorb as humus, returning excess to carbon dioxide at a rate dependant largely on soil temperature .

Agricultural productivity and sustainability is dependant on a wise and close choice on the level that suits the soil . Because of soil variability and sensitivity only local accountability for carbon levels should be given . ( ie maths or figures could be used to create distorted views of a very dynamic system )

Excess carbon in soils can and often does produce soil and water degradation through higher acidity.( mainly cool climates )

The only place where carbon can be stored in growing amounts is in anaerobic ( low oxygen) environments and low temperatures . Cool cold soils environments can be considered to suffer from degradation themselves reminding all scientists and practical people that there is an ideal RANGE for carbon in soils that is soil and site dependant.

Conclusions : releases of carbon dioxide from degrading organic matter ( the excess grass now spread from the bottom of Australia to the top ) will occur . Unless we convert it to beef ,grain or harvest the wattles/ whatever to create fuel/ store in carbon chains . Either way the result is inevitable - Carbon stored in soils and vegetation after the recent rains will eventually be largely returned to the atmosphere as carbon dioxide from whence it came .( co2 is not a pollutant )

I trust you are also aware that the concentration of carbon dioxide is rate limiting the rate of photosynthesis providing powerful resistance to any panic about its levels in the atmosphere . .As does the effect of a lot of rain on the natural but temporary sequestration of carbon dioxide on the earth

Dam stupid

2011-02-01T14:56:00.002+11:00

Its time , as thankfully Tony Abott has said , to wean the environmentally naive off their paranoia over some words like the word " dam ".

There are different species of dams, and lumping them all into one big fat evil category is irrational and stupid. Thinking environmentalists need to protect the country from those who would simply label an idea evil and thereby completely avoid any discussion of the biodiversity within that word.
Nature creates its own dams with natural erosion , siltation , fault movement and geological flows . While our old and relatively landscape tends to obliterate lots of them , or keep them ephemeral , flood flows in rivers and channels ( Like the beavers in America ) years of red gum ageing, siltation and erosion leads to damming and course changes . Is it the channel Wong wants us to protect or the machinery of nature ? Many naturalists will be dissapointed that even dams die ,evolve and can't be put in a musuem , or a "list of eternal worship "relevance as they like to do - "endangered dams" ??? .
The famous narrow focus of one paranoid poly named Wong was wrong (L Alexandrina is a dam - a natural dam) . We too create dams with roads and bridges, levies and weirs . Do we really think these works are wrong ?
We better stop driving cars across our landscapes if we want to avoid "unnatural "dams .
I am not saying all types of dams should be supported as OK . Design and respect for nature means we support things to be where they should/can be ' where , when and how.
As a a competent earth and ecosystems planner its much harder to justify a huge wall in the headwaters of river system where complex issues of natural resource protection can be impacted - if they will be impacted permanently - i would want to be the first to know . Our Country however clearly needs more offstream storages ( dams !)_to be built .The right time place and design .
Finally, we seem to have weaned ourselves off the simple talk of good and evil actions and started talking about diversity. Finally there is some recognition that there are different species of dams .
Dams aren't dammed; it just depends where, when and how we build and support them. Design with nature -----not design against nature .

The Murray River isn't as unhealthy as most of the talk and worry around it

2010-10-22T14:23:00.009+11:00

Nothing in post election days highlights the basic stupidity of our political leadership than their failure to get under the worshipful talk of "river health" and "environmental flows" ( Toys from kindergarten ) .
(Tony Burke should sack his script writer for incompetence because none of the environmental issues listed by him on the 25th amount to anything of eco significance - comment added 25th October)

The whole Parliament is going to close down a great and sustainable ( in the most part ) food growing community because of "river health " worries : - most of which will never be identified because to do so would bring the problems back to earth .----Where they can be exposed.
To talk properly about the risks you have to be able to integrate the physical and chemical relations of soils, salts plants and water ( I just happen to be an expert there)
I'm not going to say here why all the excited pointing of the finger over the overallocation issue is mistargeting and simplistic crap - you will find that out if you look into it properly .While your at it, journos ask how much money has been wasted by pricing water ( who wins ?) and think about whether the government really knows what it is doing ? Price everything and you will solve everything -I don't think so ! Its a load of opportunity for stealing by the share market . No wonder some new businesses love working with pollies rather than people- "its so much easier to get money off them". I suppose- as long as its not your money, and you are not accountable for the brilliance of your new ideas , and your party says "business knows best"- you can justify even the most stupid arrangements .
So how do you know who to trust ? And who cares, really, not only for the farmers, but the resilient and safe use and development of the growth potential in our deserts ?( only a very capable team of applied scientists can----- and you are not hearing from them on the control mediums )
Look at the huge mess Labor governments across the country have created by fiddling with energy and water prices ! ( they would never make one group pay for train tickets now - absolutely noone would pay for a train ride and no more trains would move on those tracks in Melbourne , so they try to make us all pay for their blunders. I think some pollies get their tickets to ride too cheaply too? )
No doubt the greens have got a few more misplaced concreteness words up their sleeves to keep the Media and the public on the lead. (Words like adaptation, salinity , soils acidificaton ( I am an expert there on those and associated subjects)- the greenlabors feel safe using those words because they have managed to silence those who studied to show themselves approved in such areas )

If only the opposition would dig deeper as Sharman Stone has done this week - calling greenlabor spade the spade that it is - skin deep and blunt as hell ! After all , the many children in the class need to be reminded that while civilizations like Babylon went under for ignoring the catchment , erosion and salinity realities of short term gain--. There is no basis for saying we will ... -
The many acute and the chronic situations which degrade both soils water and sustainability in the Euphrates River basin ( and in near east etc) have NOT been addressed there to this day! By contrast , we in Australia (used to) review the degradation risk areas regularly so they don't grow .What we are growing is an unsustainable bureau of worriers and their business partners.
Why don't we stop worrying about our own backyard and help the farmers in unsustainable disaster prone areas - helping people in that way can stop wars, but no, our energies are spent closing down things here That great Australain thinker ,Robert Conway talked about "The Great Australian Cringe" - maybe we should apply it to the public defamation of the Great Artesian Basin (plus ) and its power to do good for Australia and the world - cause it can keep doing the great good it has been doing ( with care ) for thousands of years.

After all, the well drained desert soils we irrigate for many crops in MD can sustain long term production even though salts in them and in the water have to be dealt with thoughtfully.There are soil and lake and irrigation unsustainably questions out there in MD, but they are and can continue to be addressed at the proper scale--- the local biodiversity scale ( where each system is respected and not treated the same ) .
Unlike Iraq, our governments have insisted on vigilance on these unsustainable issues on the agenda/horizon( time to tackle them, not panic the whole of Australia into some quickfix like them have been doing on regular basis ) until the green Labor chooks have captured the public imagination with their grand sky falling "we must get out of here" worries.

Time for someone to just quietly and sensibly tell the truth like Sharman Stone has done this week .Then all the new greens can stop worrying and talking half truths; hopefully use their welcome interest to find something to really get their teeth into (like local solutions that let them live their own best history instead of destroying in reaction to cultural excesses and misanthropic prejudice and projection .Global solutions are best left in the hands of someone almost unbelievably capable and clever.
The classic failure of the Government to over 20 years actually define "environmental flow" is a disgrace that reflects badly on parliament and the current public service as well .

Many of the MD channels MUST dry out to keep the circle of life going in them . The MDC celebration of the flooding of Hattah lakes is probably a proclamation of fools - the reseeding of soils and salinity tensions can only come, as with many estuarine systems do with natural size events ( not the piddling in the stream dreams of the catchment authorities ) that will give long life to the recycle period Red gum rejuvenation is a process related to the same delicate soil salinity and structural geomorphic elements in the stream system.

As usual, the graduates from the school of mere description clearly think the answer is a magic number ( 1.5, 7 or 12 GL). Even though most of them flunked maths , they can obviously follow numbers less than a thousand .The public it seems, are destined to allow those who can't really add up to reign , at least while they let such people and ideas rule and the truth to be hidden. The thing most people can understand is MEGA talk, MLitres etc ,,, and so, the discussion has to start there again .
But just like the wild river worriers , the numbers just don't add up to anything remotely related to reality.You need more than a mountain of numbers ( from say Myki) to make good decisions - You need someone with predictive skill; less snow; less confusion; more brilliance .
What difference does it make whether a channel buffer is 300 meters or 500 meters from some earth works . The height of the earthworks, the profile of the channels and the catchment character are far more important . The Queensland Minister is persuaded by mere numbers- thats pretty understandable for too many of our Ministers ; Bigger is better, according to some .Well it may seem safer to some , but its plain stupid if you do the science; the three dimensions. The place in the stream system where the works are created also has a huge bearing on risk ; is the channel aggrading or degrading naturally , flood flow patterns etc etc .see the sketch

If the greens and greenlabor are ever going to get out of kindergarten jail they will need to think in three dimensions.
I know what you are thinking - will they ever get out of jail ?,,,,Clearly , until they study things properly they should leave this really important job to those who practice biodiversity and resilience evaluation in the field ( production ecologists and engineers ) That way the greens will stop driving the wasting of huge amounts public money with half baked ideas and dead in the water solutions to those half baked worries.

GreenLabor have cultivated their own simple logic in the public service and the media; They now have only themselves to blame .
Why vote for anyone who can't tell the truth? Why vote for anyone who blatantly misrepresents the science and those who have their feet on the ground ?

Splashing around in the Birdbath

2010-09-15T10:36:00.003+10:00

RE August 2010 Ignorant panic this week about floods in rivers and insects yet to hatch

"We'll all be rooned" the TV said, as if they really know .
The cities in panic now, they let their worries show ..
Sit down relax and take a bex , the need to tell themselves ,
the problem is not ours me mate, the problem is your own .

You may wonder too as people do, why white coats worry too . .
They are no longer free to speak or to even thinking through
the job goes with the rhetoric ,, or its ......out the door for you !

For those who still can't believe organisations with a so called scientific badge can get it wrong, you need to consider just how easy it has ben and still is to discourage independent thinking . Your taxes are being used to drip feed institutions in a way that is unheard of in our history because both major parties have a slightly misanthropic problem of their own - they don't trust themselves or their advisors and they both think that business models will carry us all to heaven . Many Businesses too think that , as they see how much easier it is to get money our of government than it is to get it directly off us ! Tell me I am wrong . vote Independant FIRST .

Labor dreams itself into heavenly places over water conservation

2010-08-11T13:34:00.001+10:00

As many households use 1ML a year, you don’t have to be Einstein to realise how long the water creation idea will last. Nobody in their right mind would pay for the water produced by Tim Holdings wacky plant when the market will always provide it cheaper .

If Tim was a real water conservationist, or he still employed a few[1]he would know that conservation is about conserving the rainy day.

While the average rainfall over the whole earth is only about 600mm (making it always necessary to conserve it ) most of that amount is guaranteed over most of Victoria each year . If you are an owner of quarter of an acre you get at least half a megalitre ML free each year. More here

Native Forests - leave em alone?

2010-03-19T08:22:00.002+11:00

Many people are rightly cautious about the damage we have done by clearing our native forests, because we have done some . But don't be too hard on our forefathers, because Australia , unlike areas in the Pacific Islands , Asia Africa and the Middle east we now have mostly well managed forests .Ask some questions if you don't believe me .
The photo is of a forest at Aireys inlet that was degraded by bushfire in 1983 - for more on the specifics click here
( If you see that label Well Managed Forest (WMF) - good , its better than thinking we are going to get all our timber from plantation forests). Its a renewable resource, so buy it with confidence !

Should we just leave the forest alone?
Well , we do have a choice . If we don't get the timber, Fire, Fungi and Ants will . FF&A don't sequester the carbon, but we do, when we cut up the timber and put it into our houses and furniture .Furniture and houses can last 1000 's of years . Our native forest won't last 300 years without a fire or a regeneration process of some kind.Most burn a lot more frequently that that .

What about water quality ?
As for the water( and soil) quality while the forest is rotting , it deteriorates, being exposed to leaching acid from organic matter breakdown over long periods . We don't need to pour so much alum and lime etc into our water if we harvest and use the timber from our forests.( you heard it first on Blogger)

Is there a down side to Timber harvesting ? . Yes Just like after fire there is the short term risk of soil erosion . This risk is much greater in tropical areas and where harvesting is not well planned in relation to the natural regeneration of the forest ( its natural cycle)

How are the native species protected if we allow harvesting?. All Australian approved logging is in small patches about one farm size ( unlike the big areas of bush-fires) so that recolonization and seeding is encouraged from the patches of untouched bush nearby ( this doesn't happen with bushfires so much ). Mixed aged stands which result from our logging also make for greater diversity than would occur by bush-fire ( these facts apply to Australia but may not apply to forests elsewhere) see more detail HERE
If you want to know more , Please ask Hanrahan on Yahoo Answers?

These matters are complex, and its only right that people need to be convinced that we are not just justifying more exploitation and damage to our natural heritage .

Copyright EA19 Mar 2010

Connecting Hot Air with onground issues

2010-02-05T12:51:00.009+11:00

2 problems .
The first problem is the car has no wheels. But that is to put the cart before the horse
The second is that the hot air ( gas exchange) questions are not settled

2A Incomplete modelling Sensible decisions about atmospheric and terrestrial gases MUST not just focus on one ( the atmosphere) but on both .
While atmospheric gases take some processing, they are not nearly as complex as the " modelling " ( that overused excuse by the unaccountable) required to " make a difference with terrestrial gas production and balance .

2B Quickfix on the ground Both parties want to walk/talk all over the word "sequestration" without knowing where even the angels would not tread on this professional risk management science area .
The first thing is to start talking to those who care and have a connection

Bushfire Royal Commission recommendation 15 : 6 .2 Do it

2009-08-19T09:23:00.008+10:00

The need for a proper site analysis
If you shouldn't be there on one of those days - at least tell em so!
While The Commisions interim report is anything but punchy ( what's really needed ) , was good to hear one of our local CFA people reinforce the above recommendation today .
The State needs to have the courage to state the need in statute!
The idea is to get the CFA , Shire or DSE to evaluate each site on the criteria below ( aspect on hills etc )and tell the owners whether they can be expected to be asked to "evacuate" or not.

The facts in such reports are safe ground, even for a pile of comfort zone critics!

Point of order though - you can tell people too much ! ( more detail on forestandfire.blogspot.com ) !

Common bushfire risk scenarios -Victoria only

2009-03-03T18:27:00.005+11:00

The lesson : While it is possible to try and control a bush fire on the eastern flank while the northerlies are dominant - it highly dangerous if the normal wind change is immanent ( click here). Exit routes must be planned beforehand.Seek more info for your situation
Note This info only applies to a typical Total fire ban day in Victoria Australia where early strong winds N-NW later W-SW .

Know where you are.

2009-02-23T14:53:00.011+11:00

Are you located on a north facing, southfacing or easterly slope ? Near the ridge or near the valley?

In a fire risk situation YOU need to know.
Maybe noone can help you if you don't where you are ?
TOP PHOTO South and EAST facing slopes --depending on which stage of the day and the depth of valleys --more slow moving generally .
BOTTOM PHOTO Northerly and western facing incl ridge -- not even the leaves are left if the winds are up ( photo to come)
Note This info only applies to a typical Total fire ban day in Victoria Australia where early strong winds N-NW later W-SW .

Trees and Fire Protection

2009-02-23T13:08:00.005+11:00

The early settlers noticed it - but do we ? " These native trees shed bark, not leaves --like the ones back in Europe" . What's clear from the biggest disaster in Australia's history is that many of our people do not understand the significance or danger from bark in particular. Does the Department responsible - DSE ? It's bark that creates the main danger from ember attack forward of the fires but DSE have one arm as well as Shires and CMA's encouraging its retention with regulations which restrict it and its associates removal. Take this roadway in the Yarra valley - the fuel load is huge; cars colliding on this crest hasn't moved the DSE to reasonability ; trimmings from the two dying trees is to this day left to provide homes for ants and no safe exit from people down these tracks .(possums have better places to live )

Take even the single native gum . Because of the constant fall and formation of fuel ,You simply can't expect to manage a fire near such trees when the wind is bad. Such trees should not be left near assets you want to protect. So why has DSE encouraged the retention of native trees to the point that people are not reminded that they must remove them if they are going to protect their assets .

People love trees - but not all trees should be treated the same . Lots of careless talk about trees - they are all different and create different risks. Some houses were protected by Western district cypress (WDC)during the western district fires in 1983 . This reality in the open country with one tyep of tree created a bit a false sense of security in form of camplacency about stay and defend - not appropriate near native mountain forest .
So its the type of tree that should be at issue, not trees in general. WDC is one tree which itself can burn easily , but its not directly lethal, as many of our native forests are .
Lack of the precision which we expect of professionals in planning is also evident in the dumb and belligerant NVR regulations which for decades now talk about, amongst many other elements of unreason ground fuel removal, when bark itself will fall on fire ban days and create the hazard straight after you have removed it. Dead tree removals too have been a "no touch" by DSE ; they fall over on such days; Have a look at all the dead twigs and leaves on native trees around - just waiting to fall on a TFB day .

Trying to manage a total ecolot with regulations about all the seperate parts of the ecolot is madness. Reasonablity has been replaced with regulation.Conservationists beware - not respecting true diversity in design will destroy our gains in conservation credibility

Make sure you dig deep enough to know how it works !

2008-08-18T14:56:00.004+10:00

Wishywashy water talk.
Flannery and his followers need to work out just which part of the river basin they are really worried about . trips to here and there will end up wearing out their welcome .
The lastest rush to the river mouth was a faisco
Where are the key lakes in the Murray Darling system . Clearly NOT lake Alexandrina
In a typical change of agenda coping strategy, Rudd's advisors and the theme songs hangerson rush dow to Lake alexandrena to worry themselves silly about the water thats not flowing into it . Unaware of course that the mouth doesn't open very often ( they don't employ students of earth history in his court) and that the keylakes aren't down there .
The question for students who care , is of course what lakes are the ones that set the system going and when and where are they.

How long is a piece of stringing along

2007-07-30T22:08:00.000+10:00

Gunns aren't the first developer to find the cost of environmental planning processes to be bigger than the questions, ignorance and obfiscation of the dark greens. Even the tasmanian governement are forced by this monster to find anaother way, risking their credibility and right to govern in the process.
The even bigger issue is that while mainlanders enjoy the huge dilemma faced by every tasmanian and lots of thoughtful environs and developers ---- that Tasmania is not alone . Mr turnbull has no idea of what could face hime very soon - ask mr campbell

More importantly --ask us ; at least we know very well how to limit the damage.
We are not saying we can stop political push pulling.But we can help leaders who want proper reviews of risk .
There is a way of making Gunns accountable without running around with pieces of string - it is completeley unprofesional to ask Gunns to use planning processes that don't work.

Four corners review of Tasmanias testing time over ever which way the dummies on all sides try to run environment reviews .Send us an email for more info mreforce@telstra.com

2007-07-10T07:00:00.000+10:00

The absence of competent risk analysts in the court of Mr Thwaites has yet to dawn on his collegues and the people of Victoria .Our leaders splash around 1 in 1000 and 1 in 100 as if the difference between such numbers means little. What if the number was not 1 in 1000 but actually with the flods in gippsland recently 1 in 30 .
Talk of numbers may mean little to those wanting the media spotlight but the right numbers mean a lot to the farmers and local governance agents who have to live with goverenment leaders who don't know what they are talking about ! The better publicity for bigger numbers draws out, in the absence of planners , the bigger numbers; they become gospel; feeding the frenzy of disaster management wastage . cost , planning and relief implications from correct use of these figures are huge -yet you wouldn't get that impression from all the careless talk of them.
With all this careless numbers and risk leveltalk, one hopes, for the sake of good governance and professional environmental planners and scientists, that change of leadership happens soon.
Instead of risk prevention specialists, the dummies are developing disaster management specialists ( eg bushfire s and floods ). The current Victorian government, like never before, is learning too late about one of its main responsibilities- - planning.
The Bracks government will be remembered , not for its ability to prevent disasters, but its ability to create institutions and budgets to manage them . The floods in Gippsland were quite predictable and therefore the State governmnet is liable for not anticipating the high daily rainfall totals in that week . Their ignorance is no excuse .

GIPPSLAND FLOODS RISK SCIENCE

The unusually high runoff , landslide, soil erosion and stream bed energy risks associated with consistent northerly air flow are not unusual or unpredictable . Such events can be expeceted to have return period of around 10-30 years . High stream gradients, and siltation patterns in the streams running south provide conclusive landscape evidence of processes that have been going on along the southern fall of Victoria for eons . Pity our current leaders miss something as obvious to env planners as that !

See the annual rain fall map above which also indicates, by showing the edge of public forest, the steeper country and higher mountains in the region. The natural tendency to periodic drought and the reliance that localised areas have on irrigation should, we hope, be noted by those who don't like dams . Hopefully all that water going out to sea last week was also a timely lesson to learners too , about the complexity of water conservation in the budget of ag production in Victoria .

Moist air masses in southern Victoria do not commonly or easily produce much more than 25 mm of rain (one inch is used as a general guide only ) in an hour or for more than an hour (they can produce more , but the area affected becomes smaller) . Normally rain in June doesn't easily produce runoff because drier soils can readily absorb a small amount under 25mm . This physical limit to high intensity rain production ( greater than 25mm/hr) keeps high intensity and high total falls to normally small areas and short time frames ( for example :25mm /hr for the first hour but then , for example only , 10 mm for the next hour ) The only time when a high intensity rate such as 25mm/hr can be maintained for more than an hour , is when a moisture laden air flow , and an orographic uplift , such as the mountains in the top left of the picture above combine ) This effect enables the cooling and raining effect to be maintained for many hours .. Such localized and complex atmospheric processes explain how areas near mountains ( such as that air mass which was forced up on the eastern highlands shown on the above map ) on the southern fall can get over 20mm/hr for 10 hours , or the 200 mm in a day that was reported recently in Gippsland .

ANOTHER SCOOP
Here's another scoop for Gippsland - you heard it first on blogger, The map above can be used to ALSO demonstrate yet another poor planning of resource conservation -- the problem is alluded to ( but not yet spelled out just yet ) here
The Bracks government will thus be liable for not doing anything to reduce the viability of farming in the Gippsland area because of their ignorant,reactive , planning poor and disaster centered approach to governance . You heard it first on blogger

2006-10-11T08:05:00.000+10:00

Through the glass darkly
774 is onto something with this planning thing .Pity the MAV didn't give a better lead . Cart before the horse to target VCAT, i suggest
Somehow its not working .Planning and environment that is
For those of us who have worked with VCAT and who are used to making decisions not deliberations, it a case of shutting the door after the horse has bolted .
The proper target for inefficeiency in planning is not VCAT.
Its like blaming the family court for a marriage breakdown . cuttingedegecare like cutting edge planning means if we go to VCAT " both parties have failed" .
VCAT is not designed to be a court of law and only the dummies cuurently in charge of this State allow it to be used so.
VCAT is not there to argue point by point in a court of law VCAT is never relaible as its a tribunal and a great idea as a tribunal its not designed to be a court of law - those who use it that way abuse it .
Stand back and look at what it is - Jewel in Victoria's crown Yes . Its a admin court and restricted to laws set by the councils and courtiers themselves . Sure there are problems with VCAT, but the bigger problems are the cumbersome and confusing paper games and irresponsible consultancies that push planning away from resolution in the early stages .to the final frontier of nimbyism.
A lot of inefficenincy in the way planning is not working can be resolved --but only when we stop shooting the messenger or the first person to actually make a decision.

2006-08-26T10:05:00.000+10:00

IDEAS ARE EVERYTHING
Grahame morris made the point very wellon LATELINE last night , but is anyone in the major parties really listening .

Take the public expenditure on environmental and health care mangement. ITs all over the place like a dogs breakfast and just as appetizing . Needs some ideas some cutting edg ideas

2006-04-07T10:52:00.000+10:00

Mr Campbell talking up the parrot when it suits him .
Surely Mr Campbell is quietly making a mockery of the Environment as a real issue . By using one faddish furry matter as a political football ---he, as environmental minister, has made the profession into a joke.

2005-10-07T17:03:00.000+10:00

A new book which appears to advance the cause of planning. Love to hear some comments that cut a bit deeper into the investement dilemmas beyond subdivision driven drivers .

City developments generate the sorts of cash flows that can generate some great public space outcomes,and are not used enough . BUT how do we do it in rural areas? Comeon !

2005-04-01T12:13:00.000+10:00

Consumer coast. Perhaps the coast is now in control of those who pay the highest price- even it means reams of paper and going to court? Its not helpful to focus on the door after the horse has bolted at Leopold .

Think rather of the chicken coupe with the fox still in charge.If the fox is still smiling, perhaps our leaders are still running the show as if governing was just another arm of business?

2005-03-23T13:00:00.000+11:00

Nobody home

2005-02-28T09:51:00.000+11:00

Rural Planning is dying the death of a thousand cuts.

The simple facts are that a planners role is never very well understood. The current high economic and ethical pressure on rural industry makes it worse for those who act at the coalface of planning there .The dangerous alienation of the moment need not be so, as rural communities have a deep commitment ( that overused word) to holding a practical and realistic tension between short term gain and long term pain that lies at the heart of good planning.
BUT CURRENTLY Planners and environmental planners, in particular, find it really hard to survive in areas where they are most needed and most alone ( the country).

Industry finds too it really hard to accept planning when the government operatives are not experienced and aware of rural realities - seeming to be driven more and more by city centric logic on matters of environment in particular.Time is needed to train good environmental planners.

How serious is the problem ? I suggest that whatever the budget says , local government resources for planners is clearly waning. Despite all the talk of New funding projects in this area, The project budget maybe full, but the profesional toolbox has been raided and a lot of people who could do the job are not there .More importanatly real rural planners feel like thretaened species. As often happens with reactive politics , the money arrives only after the critical point of balance has been lost . Is it true in your area? tell us here !
Witness the numbers of councillors elected on a "roads first " platform and the unresolved high loss rate of experienced staff from rural areas. Anyone can do environmental planning – ask the media and marginal polys --they seem to know a lot about these things .

Those of us who have made their job planning know the above cynical element will probably never change and that their job will always be " a difficult one".
The point is that this cynical project based funding
is anti professional, counterproductive and likely to be read as self fulfilling prophecy for planning's many critics . Death by a thousand cuts.

THERFORE what can and must change is provision of a stable unchanging professional framework for planners to operate in. The mad changing of directions and projects by overrated and unnecessary fund managers in planning and environment must stop to support the leaky boat. The madness will continue while polys fund projects rather than people.
Short term gain long term pain
People are the key to good government business and the system is alienating them like no time before .To those sustainability scientists who have contributed to this great Australian tradition, planning remains a critical job under threat from a thousand changes of direction and responsibility. The most important jobs in environment will go first ---to be left to those who like simple agendas.Not a good outcome and risking the strong cultural commitment to planning that is one of the most powerful edges to our "most liveable status"

For example, whose job is it too provide independent advice on development applications? The planners?, the strategic planners ,The departments of environment the NGOS , some QUANGO?, the CMA's , some high level policy group , state government committees, Some CODE some private consultants , or heaven used to forbid it ---the courts . Talk about heaps of unsustainable process getting in the road of good governance !!!!!
The reality is that if several are in charge, no one is charge . Nooone is in charge and noone wants to work for 10 bosses- especially when they keep changing direction like the fund managers who follow the leaders .

Planning is of course a much more sustainable and sensible profession than much politics . At least it used to be . What do we do now then? Plan for our future, or our future demise - to please the political process is to not plan.

2005-01-20T13:52:00.000+11:00

What can we learn from overseas about regulation and its role?
em>
eg from The prominent"Death of environmentalism' debate see Shellenberger as in Grist magazine

Among The lessons? Short term gain long term pain . Win one court case but lose the people. That's whats happening politically .

Real progress is not made by quick fix media methods but by supporting the positives and the negatives --supporting professionals first . http://productionecologists.blogspot.com

Enviro fanatics in govt need to put their feet back on the ground before they make another move either to woe or to win approval out in the bush.

More importantly, the feds can spend a billion on environment but nothing will work long term if there are no production ecologists trained who know what they are talking about and what onground dogood really means.

2005-01-07T13:44:00.000+11:00

Vegetation management in Queensland – a Case of Constitutional Vandalism
More in IPA review

Suri Ratnapala, Professor of Law and Director, Centre for Public, International and Comparative Law, T C Beirne School of Law, University of Queensland
The guilt of a person accused of a vegetation clearing offence under the VMA is determined not by a court but by an official. (The judicial trials mandated by Division 3 have no application to vegetation clearing offences under the VMA). If an authorised officer issues a compliance notice, a failure to comply without a reasonable excuse results in an automatic penalty. (Maximum of 1665 penalty units or $ 116,550 - s.55) The innocuous term ‘compliance notice’ masks what is actually a straightforward conviction and sentence without trial.
ce.
The legislation I examine is Queensland’s Vegetation Management Act 1999 (VMA)

2004-06-04T12:02:00.000+10:00

Toxic waste dumps - was it always this hard for governments to do their job? Have we given a licence to nimbys and strangled the process of getting to the truth about real risks? How would you advise the court?

2004-02-23T14:35:00.000+11:00

"I have often argued that when it comes to planning, the State Government should 'get out' of the detail and focus on the big picture. Well done NSW mr knowles lets hope Vic takes the same lesson ! on NSW planning reforms.

2004-02-12T11:24:00.000+11:00

Next time you get a wad of paper to digest remember
In planning, efficency is measured by the thinness of the plan . Back of an envelope can be the best !

2004-02-03T12:07:00.000+11:00

Increasingly unsustainable Increasingly centralised
The vain attempt to make codification do what only process and performance review can do in planning will fail again soon. Planning now costs too much and is not credible as a result of blinkered quick fix approaches involving books and tables decisionmaking .

Sound planning is about focusing on performance and process ---not prescriptions

Planning in Australia is moving down below the bottom line because the move to elemental codes ( water, waste, vegetation management ) isn't an effective screen for dealing with these complex matters - lawyers and pedants just love to make their way through them.
If the issues weren't inherently complex we wouldn't require planners ! No wonder we can't keep planners in Regional Australia - we treat them like they can't make good decisions themselves .
Planning decisions driven by codes cost more than ever and make even less big picture sense because the outcome is based on interpreting a few words , not an integration of the dynamic ecosystem imperatives in an area - the unique local things that should drive top classhigh performance resolutions that will keep those unique environmental elements functioning well together into the future.
Need someone who knows, not someone who throws (the book at them).

2004-01-28T12:10:00.000+11:00

Is there no way to stop Apollo bay becoming like the rest of the coast ?
How is it that a major estuary along Victoria's Great Ocean road is about to have houses on it . Who will pay for estuary management what ever happened to green wedges? is anyone in charge of planning along the GOR ?