Slashdot Mirror
Man-Made Fire Blamed for Australian Extinctions
JeiFuRi writes "Around 50,000 years ago, many large Australian animals died off with the arrival of man. From a study carried out by the Carnegie Institution, we now know that the continent's earliest settlers caused these extinctions through their use of fire. In addition, it may have altered the ecosystem of ancient Australia and brought about it's collapse. Futher commentary at BBC News, newKerala, and Red Nova." "Know" is a strong word; the study suggests this may be the case, though.
50,000 years and the Aussies are still big on barbecues. .The species that could not adapt quickly enough died off.
Seriously though , Such is evolution
I always had a small problem with conservation efforts , I know its lovely to save endangered species and all that , but does it not hamper the natural order further by trying to save species that can not cope by themselves.
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
I've survived many a bush fire with nothing but a damp potato sack for my miseries, and much as I despise the negative impact we've had on this land, I can tell you that its a beautiful thing indeed to walk around the scorched Aussie landscape for weeks after the event, watching new life grow
Australia is a beautiful place, so truly uniqe. Its a good thing that, at least, we are discussing its management, and our effect, and the demise so far, intelligently at least
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
We have the ability to choose one outcome over another. In this case when several consequences are choosable, the argument that the "consequences are part of the natural order" is a moot point and at worst an excuse for being irresponsible. Even if *conservation* is a human concept it is a concept brought about by a desire to live in a world that is interesting, varied and reasonably stable for the majority of the human population.
The bikini - security through obscurity since 1943
You are absolutely correct when you say that most fires are started by lightning, the same is true here in Australia. However with regards to the fuel that the fire consumes and Occams razor, don't you think that wiping our most of the large herbivors would induce a change in ground cover?
The problem is that it is never just as simple as one correct answer. Sure the Aborigines changed things by using fire and importing dogs (not to mention snacking on giant wombats who had never seen a hungry human), but before they arrived there were so many low level lightning fires in the Australian bush that much of the vegetation has actually evolved to depend on fire to propogate.
The prevailing wisdom in temperate Australia is to deliberately burn off (or better still mulch) the undergrowth in autum and spring. We still have some of the planets worst bushfires here but that is mainly because of the sheer size of the bush and the fact that we just leave some places up to nature to sort out. We cannot manage the whole of the bush so we burn off and create firebreaks in strategic locations. No matter what we do nothing can stop a wildfire backed by 30knt winds and tempratures of 40+ degC in the shade. When you have spot fires starting several kilometers upwind from the fire front you just have to protect the properties you can and let it run out of fuel (or prey for rain).
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.