Bush Fires

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
I know the other thread got closed, but that seemed to be for separate reasons and not because we can't talk about bush fires.

I'll kick the convo off again.

There is a lot of talk saying these fires are unprecedented, however, let's look at the worst fires in Australia by number of deaths and number of acres burned:

Worst by area burned:

1974-75 - NT - 110,000,000 acres
1974-75 - WA - 72,000,000 acres
1974-75 - SA - 42,000,000 acres
2002 - NT - 37,000,000 acres
1974-75 Qld - 19,000,000 acres
Current year 2019/20 - 16,000,000 acres

Worst by fatalities:

2009 Black Saturday Victoria - 173 dead
1983 Ash Wednesday South Australia & Victoria - 75 dead
1939 Black Friday Victoria - 71 dead
1967 Black Tuesday Tasmania - 62 dead
1926 Victoria - 60 dead
1962 Victoria - 32 dead
Current year 2019/20 - 25 dead

Everyone agrees this years fires are horrific but to call them unprecedented would seem an exaggeration?

Also, 183 people (to date) have been spoken to or charged by police regarding fire offences (including arson) since November. I don't think there are stats yet, however it would seem a significant majority of these fires are the cause of humans lighting fires (which of course has nothing to do with climate change).
 
Last edited:

JUNKYARD DOGS

Kennel Addict
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
7,086
Reaction score
3,601
Agree its bad obviously, but Climate change wasn't as much of a beat up as it is now. Everyone takes it and runs with the tag.
 

Bob dog

Hectik defence
Premium Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
19,324
Reaction score
3,564
I thought this was the worst ever, but its not, yet..
 

Papa Emeritus

Who wants their taint tickled?
Staff member
Administrator
Gilded
Joined
Dec 15, 2011
Messages
8,385
Reaction score
2,708
Agree its bad obviously, but Climate change wasn't as much of a beat up as it is now. Everyone takes it and runs with the tag.

It is hard to argue with graphs like this showing our temperature climb over time. Higher temps means fuel dries out more, which creates more ferocious fires.

There has been little to zero fire management done in recent years. A disaster waiting to happen.
 

Nexus

Super Duper Ultimate Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
Apr 18, 2006
Messages
10,647
Reaction score
4,385
No dramas with you talking about this stuff, the other thread got a bit out of hand and off topic so was best to shut it down. Hopefully this one fairs a little bit better.
 

JUNKYARD DOGS

Kennel Addict
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
7,086
Reaction score
3,601
It is hard to argue with graphs like this showing our temperature climb over time. Higher temps means fuel dries out more, which creates more ferocious fires.

There has been little to zero fire management done in recent years. A disaster waiting to happen.
Yes it is, but the main thing here is the last part you mention. Fire management needs to be of higher priority than what the government is allowing. Land management needs exactly that, to be managed. With certain figures not allowing effective pro-active fire hazard reduction things wont change, we will continue to be re-active.

The government in fact reducing their concern for this type of thing has clearly shown how out of touch they are. Has bit them in the ass big time. Now time for them to react again.
 

Natboy

Banned
Premium Member
SC H2H Champion
SC Top Scorer
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Messages
8,945
Reaction score
11,608
It is hard to argue with graphs like this showing our temperature climb over time. Higher temps means fuel dries out more, which creates more ferocious fires.

There has been little to zero fire management done in recent years. A disaster waiting to happen.
Very true but I’d like to see a graph that goes back at least thousands of years reflecting climatic cycles
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,412
Generally fires are rated by how many lives are lost. Black Saturday obviously being the worst. The reason for using this instead of acres is due to differences in what's burning. For example, the NT fires of 74/75 burned much more than any other, but they were mainly grass fires in unpopulated areas.

Regardless, this isn't the worst bushfires we've ever seen. It's just unprecedented that it would be so bad at the start of the bushfire season.

And it's not like anyone is actually saying that climate change started these fires. Feel free to prove me wrong if I'm wrong.
 

JUNKYARD DOGS

Kennel Addict
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
7,086
Reaction score
3,601
Generally fires are rated by how many lives are lost. Black Saturday obviously being the worst. The reason for using this instead of acres is due to differences in what's burning. For example, the NT fires of 74/75 burned much more than any other, but they were mainly grass fires in unpopulated areas.

Regardless, this isn't the worst bushfires we've ever seen. It's just unprecedented that it would be so bad at the start of the bushfire season.

And it's not like anyone is actually saying that climate change started these fires. Feel free to prove me wrong if I'm wrong.
Except Jennifer Aniston :-)
 

Papa Emeritus

Who wants their taint tickled?
Staff member
Administrator
Gilded
Joined
Dec 15, 2011
Messages
8,385
Reaction score
2,708
Yes it is, but the main thing here is the last part you mention. Fire management needs to be of higher priority than what the government is allowing. Land management needs exactly that, to be managed. With certain figures not allowing effective pro-active fire hazard reduction things wont change, we will continue to be re-active.

The government in fact reducing their concern for this type of thing has clearly shown how out of touch they are. Has bit them in the ass big time. Now time for them to react again.
Absolutely. It is sad that we have such reactive governments and not proactive ones. Hopefully they learn from this year and listen to people who know wtf they are doing when it comes to fire prevention.


Very true but I’d like to see a graph that goes back at least thousands of years reflecting climatic cycles
I understand this point of view, that the climate naturally ebbs and flows. But we do not have that data and we never will. For me personally it seems way too much of a coincidence that the rises we are seeing correlate with mankinds advances in this century. We pump more and more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere the more we advance. If there was some natural ebb and flow you would think it would not perfectly line up with this...
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,412
Very true but I’d like to see a graph that goes back at least thousands of years reflecting climatic cycles
How many of thousands of years would you like?

Here is a 9,000 year graph



Here's 150,000 years

 

Mr Beast

Admin
Staff member
Administrator
Premium Member
Gilded
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
9,011
Reaction score
5,207
I know the other thread got closed, but that seemed to be for separate reasons and not because we can't talk about bush fires.

I'll kick the convo off again.

There is a lot of talk saying these fires are unprecedented, however, let's look at the worst fires in Australia by number of deaths and number of acres burned:

Worst by area burned:

1974-75 - NT - 110,000,000 acres
1974-75 - WA - 72,000,000 acres
1974-75 - SA - 42,000,000 acres
2002 - NT - 37,000,000 acres
1974-75 Qld - 19,000,000 acres
Current year 2019/20 - 16,000,000 acres

Worst by fatalities:

2009 Black Saturday Victoria - 173 dead
1983 Ash Wednesday South Australia & Victoria - 75 dead
1939 Black Friday Victoria - 71 dead
1967 Black Tuesday Tasmania - 62 dead
1926 Victoria - 60 dead
1962 Victoria - 32 dead
Current year 2019/20 - 25 dead

Everyone agrees this years fires are horrific but to call them unprecedented would seem an exaggeration?

Also, 183 people (to date) have been spoken to or charged by police regarding fire offences (including arson) since November. I don't think there are stats yet, however it would seem a significant majority of these fires are the cause of humans lighting fires (which of course has nothing to do with climate change).
great post with facts.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
And it's not like anyone is actually saying that climate change started these fires. Feel free to prove me wrong if I'm wrong.
Has there been more articles about climate change and our bush fire crisis or more articles about arsonists starting bush fires?

There's your answer.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,412

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,412
What was the instrument used, and was it calibrated?
I'm this case the measurements were taken by a combination of factors including ice core samples and trees. They're unlikely to be entirely accurate. Just best approximations.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,412
Has there been more articles about climate change and our bush fire crisis or more articles about arsonists starting bush fires?

There's your answer.
I'm not saying arsonists didn't start the fires. You and several others claimed that climate change couldn't have started the fires because arsonists started them.

Im merely pointing out that what you are presenting is a strawman as people aren't saying "Climate change started the fires"
 
Top