Re: Fires

["Karl and Anita Shah-Jenner" <shahjen@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I wrote:
>>>Ecologies that can tolerate fires are all well and good, but I find >>it
hard to believe that any biosystem really depends on fires.

Jim writes:
>This is decidedly off topic but your statement is full of crap.

Gee, that was easy to write, wasn't it!

>I'm a Forester who does this stuff for a living and there are plenty of
examples of fire-dependent ecosystems >located all over the world.

Great Jim, I've worked as  a botanical researcher and collected species in
remote areas of Australia for the local state museum and the Univerity of
Western Australia, I'm also a horticulturalist, have worked on a variety of
farms for years, along with advising on regenerative replanting in fire
effected areas.

 >The Jack Pine/Pin Oak ecosystem located in Michigan's Northern Lower
Peninsula (USA) is a perfect example.  >This is a large expanse of glacial
outwash, dominated by the fire-dependent species such as Jack Pine, that has
>burned repeatedly and regularly since the glaciers left this part of the
world 10,000 years ago.  All types of fire->dependent life forms are found
here and one bird, the Kirtland's Warbler, nests here and nowhere else in
the world >(winters in the Bahamas).

Yup, that's what they say 'round these parts too about our plants - but the
fact is, it's all crap!  Yes our Eucalypts have the ability to withstand
fires and yes, the area cleared after a fire allows the young ones to grow.
Reviewed immediately after a fire it all looks great, but fires repeatedly
through the area and a completely different picture starts to unfold.
Simply put, these wonderfull fire dependant species die and get replaced
with smaller acacias and banksias.  These things only have short life spans,
they too are supposedly 'fire dependant'  but they soon clutter up the place
to the point that it will take nearly forever for the Eucalypts to return -
and only if the fires stop for long enough.  As to having unique species,
you _really_ want to look at what we've got down here! :-)

>I can't speak for what happens in Australia but fires are a natural part of
the ecosystem and those who claim otherwise really don't know what they're
talking about.

Yes fires are part of the natural ecosystem, as is oil, arsenic, mercury,
cadmium, salt, etc etc etc... the problem I'M SAYING is that when they
happen NATURALLY as in not assisted by man, they ARE natural - otherwise,
they're just another bloody burden we place on the world.  As to whether I
know what I'm talking about, as I said -" I'm sure it's different in your
part of the world", I also clarified the point that the clearing of conifers
is noted as being an important part of the step in allowing the normal
invasion of angiosperms ...etc, did you really read my post Jim?  Do you
really think I'm talking crap?   It sounds like you're presuming I'm an
anti-logging type... given that you've stated you're a forester.  Well I
ain't, and I'm not talking crap either!

Karl




*
****
*******
******************************************************
*  To remove yourself from this list, send:          *
*         UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED                       *
*       to                                           *
*         MAJORDOMO@xxxxx                            *
*----------------------------------------------------*
*   For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links:   *
*  http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm  *
******************************************************