And if you look at the sun, you can see that it is early afternoon.

I have no real problem with burns as a fire prevention tool, in fact I believe that a ‘cool burn’ is necessary in preventing huge fuel loads around residential areas.

It is the hot, soil baking, ‘industrial burns’ that is used to clear heavy debris left over from forestry harvesting that I take issue with.

Dave,
they must serve pretty strong stuff in the pub.  Was this a hang-over, or did you get a post-card from a poor, third-world, banana republic and pretend it was clean-green Tassie,  where we know best-practice reigns supreme! 
Whose cuisine?  Proudly brought to us by Tamar Ditch Estates, with delicate hints of burnt eucalypt, evoking memories of trashed rainforests, crowded paddy-wagons, nuances of effluent and LGH waiting rooms.
It had to happen.  Clive said this year they held the burns of till after Targa was finished, after copping stick from the event last time ... bad for the image it was.
I’m thinking lately that Bartlett was presented to us as a wonder kid, but he’s beginning tosound like the sound like the robot in ‘Lost in Space’, which could malfunction when it took a couple of hits, would squawk and carry on, sometimes go limp, or just trot out a few stock phrases.  Sort of like a non-agressive opposite of a Dalek’s ‘Exterminate’, but more along the lines of ‘Warning!’  ‘Warning!’
Our robot Premier ‘Clever!’  ‘Clever!’  How clever are we that we could inflict this large scale pollution event on 100,000 Launcestonians plus those others along the Tamar, Beaconsfield, Exeter, Lilydale and the littler communities.

And how funny that they love it, keep voting the robots anda gangsters back in.

I hear that they were serving a new menu at the grand old pub at Rosevears. Smoked everything. Those wanting Lamb, Chicken, Turkey, Rabbit or Steak were provided it raw on a plate and given a chair to sit on outside with their meals. 10 minutes later all meals were cured and perfectly presented.

A representative from the Deloraine Smokehouse was last week seen in Melbourne going into the legal chambers of Malleson Stephen Jacques to launch an action against Forestry and Gunns for breach of registered and copyright smoking processes.

“they operate on a scale unimaginable to us - and they threaten our market share” a spokesperson said. “we use specially built Smokehouses - they use the entire Tamar Valley” We’ve applied to use the entire valley as well - but weve been told we dont have a preferred smoker agreement “.

—————————————————————-

And someone dares to object to people applying an “I dont shop at Gunns” bumper sticker ?

Rosevears pub ,a magic place ! one of the regrets of my life that I didn’t buy it when it was offered many , many moons ago.
                    sigh!
                        d.d

The big irony is that Forestry Tasmania is both pro and anti bushfires. They spend hundreds of thousands of our dollars telling us how important regeneration burns are, and then spend half the year fighting them. They also use tourist dollars to subsidise wood chippimg. They are liars and vandals.

Funny you should say that Don. 

The night of the big smoke I went up onto is it ‘Bald Hill’ lookout/reserve? (up in Trevallyn) to get some pix and was talking to a woman who was walking her dog.  I pointed out Tamar Island in the mist (smoke haze actually) and said how I always thought of Camelot for some reason when I saw it from the heights.  She responded that years ago the island had been put up for sale, and that she and her husband had wanted to buy it, but had in the end decided against it (I’m not sure why) and had kicked themselves ever since.

Life’s like that, isn’t it?

It’s all fine blessed Tasmanian brethren, the paid propagandist and born-again evangelical for Forestry Tasmania has written a wondrous epistle to the Mercurians just last Thursday: “Forestry is part of the green solution.”

Oh yeh! Oh Yeh! Read and be sanctified!

Re-read and be beatified!

Re-read that you cast out this demon doubt and until you submit to the POWER OF THE FORCE for good.

Saint Ken, latterly of the Church of the ABC and the PR spin-machine of our sanctified State Government (founded by St Jim & St Paul - oh, blessed be their actions!) is beseeching you heathenous greens & tree-lovers to give up your sinful ways and join the hallowed flock.

Read and be at Peace, oh my brothers & sisters.

The Good News has come!

St Ken tells us these smokey potents in the sky that blots out the sun are but good & glad tidings for mother Earth and for the true believers.

The Apocalypse of which anti-frorestry campaigners speak WILL never come!

Praise be to The Lord!!!!!

Re # 1 those burns last week were ‘cool’ burns, undertaken in the National Park by Parks, for private property protection reasons.  Cool burns produce more smoke, as they do not just burn harvested materials, rather they burn living plants in the understorey where it is cooler and often damper .... and therefore smokier.

I don’t quite understand # 3’s verbosity about Gunns as the burns are nothing to do with Gunns in the slightest.  Maybe we should produce some bumper stickers stating that we don’t support Parks!

Hi Shane

At the end of the next day, I required a number of extremely high dosages of nebulised ventolin and was about to be put onto a high tapered dose of cortisone. ALL because of the smoke. Burning is more aligned with the psychotic practices of Forestry and Gunns - but if it was Parks - screw them too.

Anyone in that once superb Tamar Valey thinking they live in cleaner air than Melbourne or Sydney needs to think again. Anyone believing the water is clean needs to think again. Gunns and Forestry practices are directly or indirectly responsible for that. If Parks have decided to create burns of the order of magnitude we saw last week - then who were the private property owners that Parks needed to protect. Who commissioned it, when and why.

Any behaviour in a community that places lives at risk should be prosecuted - either in the community accepted definition - through the structures of the law, or outside it by other means.

I see people who are close to using both.

Given the concern the smoke raised, how come yours is the only official (?) explanation the public has received. (And that only in TT.)
And if the explanation is as you’ve described, let’s have some evidence.
With more than twenty years experience in country fire brigades I find the idea of a ‘cool’ burn producing that much smoke surprising. You’ll have noted the comment by the Gravelly Beach Brigade chief in the Examiner; he too thought the fire had to have been very hot.
And there’s not a word of concern on your part for the environmental or health effects.