Not necessarily. In some cases, ‘artificial’ mitigation is an option worth exploring. Case in point. Here in Sacramento County (California), we have vernal pools that are home to a species of fairy shrimp that’s not found anywhere else on Earth.

Eventually, some developers would like to build houses in the area. If that comes to pass, the developers would dig a few holes in the ground in a less commercially valuable location, stock them with fairy shrimp and other assorted beasties, stir lightly, and attempt to pass them off as environmental mitigation. Would it be real mitigation? Could the transplanted fairy shrimp survive there in the long term? I do not know. There’s only one way to find out. And it ain’t computer modeling.

One could do a similar albeit longer-term experiment with a few test strips (having approximately the same width as the roadside verges) of the eminent-domained farmland that I alluded to earlier. Plant ironbark, dry box, grey box, and yellow box there. After the trees reach a reasonable age and there’s a significant amount of forest litter, start doing FRBs every other year. Then transport some squirrel gliders there. (The grey-crowned babblers will probably find it on their own.)

Get your hands dirty and do the bloody experiment. Then get your mind dirty, and analyze the bloody data. If you get good results, then the ‘artificial’ mitigation would be more efficient than the “channels of death” (Ray’s term) that you’re so fond of.

The next question: Would Gaia forgive you for short-changing her on the number of burnt human offerings to which she’s become accustomed?

http://preview.tinyurl.com/lthdzn

My educated guess is that the observed biodiversity in roadside vegetation has more to do with the man-made ecotones, than with the magical powers of asphalt and gravel. If I’m right, isn’t choking off bushfire escape routes a pretty stupid strategy for mitigating habitat loss due to farming and sustainable timber harvesting? In other words, why not declare eminent domain on some narrow and disconnected strips of farmland (with reasonable compensation for the landowners, of course) far from the road, and plant ironbark, dry box, grey box, and yellow box there? And then throw in FRBs every few years for good measure.

I specified disconnected for two reasons. First, preliminary studies in the US show that the putative species-preserving efficacy of ‘wildlife corridors’ is largely an urban myth. Second, if the strips are disconnected, then the once-in-a-century monster bushfires will spread somewhat slower, and they will serve up fewer crispy critters. And as an added bonus, fewer people will get killed, not that that consideration shows up on your radar screen.

In the US, we do have a little experience with environmental mitigation. Example: The Forest Service can specify that for the sake of the birdies in certain areas, a specified number of snags be left standing on any given timber sale. That strikes me as reasonable.

The idiot Greenies in Australia can learn a thing or two about environmental conservation from the rest of the world. Yes, that includes our mistakes. You don’t need to re-invent the square wheel. And you don’t need to prove your ideological purity, by choosing mindless environmental mitigation schemes that kill the maximum number of people, and then turning around and blaming the victims for your deliberate obtuseness.

“The conservation of at least two threatened species in Victoria, both typical of the dry box and ironbark woodlands, is dependent on roadside vegetation.

The grey-crowned babbler is an endangered bird in Victoria, with total numbers estimated at about 2,000 individuals. These individuals occur in about 500 family groups making up at least 77 local populations. The species has gradually declined in southern and western Victoria. In northern Victoria, the size of local populations is significantly related to those districts with extensive networks of roadside vegetation. …

Forests dominated by grey box and yellow box on the higher-rainfall plains fringing the Box-Ironbark region are of great importance for conservation of the squirrel glider, an endangered mammal in Victoria. In the Euroa – Longwood – Nagambie area, for example, roadsides dominated by grey box support high densities of gliders compared with other known habitats. …

Surveys of reptiles in remnant woodlands of the plains found that, on average, roadside vegetation supported a larger number of species per site than comparable sites in either small or larger fragments of woodland (Figure 2)….”

etc., etc.

http://tinyurl.com/mn3×3z

There’s no shortage of information about the value of roadside vegetation.

The flipside of the so-called “Green doctrine” coin is the fundamentalist zealotry of the “Man’s dominion over Earth” brigade.

These pseudo-religious nuts are so detached from reality and devoid of common sense they would remove every last tree from the planet lest some idiot drive into one and deprive the human gene pool of their genius.

At least the so-called “Green doctrine” has some benefit to humanity in that it seeks to conserve the natural systems that render the planet habitable for our species. I’m at a loss as to why the God Botherers think it is a religious duty to find and justify increasingly banal means and reasons to despatch ourselves from the Earthly realm. The whole twisted belief system is based around venal gratification and egocentricity.

RWFOH, if you quote someone, you should take a few extra seconds to get it right. And if you paraphrase someone, do not use quotation marks.

RWFOH wrote:
“Sure, some areas have by-laws against people removing vegetation from roadsides but that’s because the roadside verges often provide remnant habitat for endangered species e.g. trees with nesting hollows.”

I have two responses to the RWFOH quote. First, I’m calling your bluff; let’s see what you’ve got in your hand. Please name ONE endangered species that lived in the specific roadside verges in question.

Second, suppose that there was an endangered species that lived in the specific roadside verges in question. RWFOH, do you feel that choosing to provide critical habitat in a location that recklessly endangers humans living in that area is a reasonable thing to do?

Reading between the lines of your post, that’s the impression that I get. If I’m correct, then I’d like to thank you for partially corroborating another of Ray’s points.

“At the core of Green doctrine is the belief that trees are sacred and that mankind is a pest or a virus on the planet.”

Says it all really Larry.

Let me explain.

The issue of roadside vegetation is a bit of a furphy, like so many elements of the bushfire equation it is simply an aspect that allows rednecks to fixate and froth.

Sure, some areas have by-laws against people removing vegetation from roadsides but that’s because the roadside verges often provide remnant habitat for endangered species e.g. trees with nesting hollows. If the forests and farms hadn’t been flogged and/or denuded of every plant thicker than 80cms or higher than grass it wouldn’t be an issue. You can always rely on dumb rednecks to come up with a proposal to compound a bad situation.

Also, if people manage to die in a scrappy strip of bush less than fifty meters wide and dissected by a road I think we’re entitled to ask a few questions. We know that most of the people who have died in these “fiery tunnels of death” (as the calm and considered Ray calls them) have died because they have crashed their cars in thick smoke or blind panic and have then been caught by the flames.

If you’ve driven off into smoke you haven’t been listening….to anything or anyone for a long time. Darwin might have something to say about that. If you’re in a forest, the concept of a “fiery tunnel of death” is a nonsense. If you’re driving in farmland, why would you wait for the road to become a “fiery tunnel of death”? Wouldn’t you drive into a paddock and then drive through the fire front onto burnt ground?

Better still, grow a brain and face the reality of where you live.

I shouldn’t waste my time on dumb rednecks. There are plenty of smart people who are willing to listen and learn. As has always been the case, the dumb, inbred and half baked cretins will need to be shepherded in the rear. There’s an old saying about the halfwits who are dragged along yowling, kicking and screaming at the rear of humanity as we evolve into higher beings…”The dogs may bark but the caravan moves on”.

“fiery tunnels of death” my @rse! You idiots need to wake up to yourselves.

I don’t recall anyone saying they disliked burning off. Did I miss something?

I do recall someone on the radio making disparaging remarks about the DSE, calling them the “Department of Sparks and Embers”. You can’t win.