Comments

What "research" results or benefits could possibly be gained from miserable, suffering and tortured animals? Does this company represent the human race, monsters whose "health" depends on the suppression and exploitation of non-humans - almost-cousins? There are those in the Christian church who propose that human life is "sacred" and animals are utensils to propagate their existence! Planet Earth has between four and five thousands of species of mammals, and to suppress, kill, confine, mutilate and torture for the benefit of one species, humans, albeit the most technically advanced, is purely evil and puts them on a pedestal of almost "god" like status! (Is this the "Image of God"?) It is shameful to be part of the human race, and this "research" is a good reason to take on an ethical vegan diet to avoid most Western diseases, and avoid conventional medicine.

In today's news, we heard of the Brumby government prescribing on new fire-resistant building standards for homes and then a spokesperson for the construction industry came on saying that his group would be demanding that land-owners have more control over the vegetation on their properties, with bigger fire-breaks and more burning off! So, the ABC, continues to propagandise, using my taxes and yours, for the construction, logging and development industry - for continued drying of our State - for bigger and worse bushfires.

Sounds like a protest should be mounted outside the Midnight Oil performance, calling on people to boycott the band and handing out this article. Consider also singing the "Jump" song chorus and drowning the creep out. Did Garrett ever care about the environment, or was it just a brand to make his career with? He deserves to be shunned and left in total obscurity - which will probably be his fate in the Labor Party.

I would go further. Are the developers that are driving this country to ruin actually after the Prom??? Does DSE, which is removing all rights from citizens to object to development, purposefully causing extinctions through burning so that soon it will be able to say, "Oh, all that land is degraded, it may as well be developed"? I would put NOTHING past this government. It should not be allowed to get away with what it has already done to Wilson's PRom. DSE is really just an old wood-feller's hang-out. It should be closed down and something that cares about animals put in its place.

Despite having a so-called "anti-whaling" government, it must be apparent that they care nothing for these magnificent animals. Kevin Rudd made some sweeping promises about "tough" action to stop Japan, and a "fresh new approach" to saving them from exploitation, and extending their protection. This was just a ploy, empty promises, to get votes! Our Labor government has done LESS than our previous government! At least they didn't harass their only source of law-enforcement! They have wasted so many resources and dollars on futile "diplomatic" pressure, all useless. However, with the AFP raid on Sea Shepherd, they haven't been given the benefit of "diplomatic" pressure but were actively searched and questioned, on behalf of Japan! Whose side of the whaling wars is our government really on?

Substitute the name of any state in the USA for Australia and the article applies. The US Rockefeller Commission report in 1972 stated, “After two years of concentrated effort, we have concluded that, in the long run, no substantial benefits will result from further growth of the Nation’s population, rather that the gradual stabilization of our population through voluntary means would contribute significantly to the Nation’s ability to solve its problems. We have looked for, and have not found, any convincing economic argument for continued population growth. The health of our country does not depend on it, nor does the vitality of business nor the welfare of the average person.” Did any subsequent government listen to this observation? No, instead they turned on the immigration spigot to "save" Social Security. Over 2/3 of today's annual growth of 3 million people is due to immigration. We feel your pain. The following has been added from a subsequent e-mail to me from Wolfger. - JS, 4 Mar 09 Our recent State Task Force on the Future of Development In Maryland had nothing on limits in their report although several citizens had expressed their concerns at public "listening sessions". I suppose they were just listening - thank you. We've gotten the attention of several legislators and will try to introduce legislation for next year's session to establish a task force on limits. One of our neighboring counties in the State of Virginia is doing something similar right now: www.stopgrowthasap.org.

The CSIRO tend to agree with me in this regard also. Please note, this has been taken from the NASH buyers guide to steel framing. " FIRE SAFETY • Building materials for a high fire-resistant home • Steel frames top CSIRO recommended list • Design and floor plan suggestions • Tips to prevent accidents and limit damage No home can be completely fire safe but there are a number of steps you can take to plan for a house which has a high resistance to fire. Your choice of building materials is one way to improve your chances of establishing a fire-resistant home. This can influence how quickly and how seriously your house is affected by a fire, and whether your home could be repaired or would need to be completely rebuilt. CSIRO, Division of Building Research, Victoria, produced a paper1 outlining the features of a high fireresistant house. Major considerations include: • steel wall frames, with gypsum board linings* for further protection; • concrete slab floor; • the elimination of timber** in the roof; • brick veneer external cladding. *Although steel is not combustible, it will eventually lose strength at temperatures in the 400-500 degrees Celsius range. Gypsum linings with reliable resistance to fire will protect the steel frame. **The elimination of timber in the roof is a most important feature because, when a roof catches fire, the burning rafters fall down the space between the walls, which acts as a chimney, producing an intense local fire. (White pine ignites at 280°C) In the event of an external fire threatening the house, a bushfire for example, the main focus is to prevent sparks from gaining access to the building, principally through the space above the ceiling and from the space below the floor. A steel roof (Corrugated Iron) simply cannot burn. In addition, the long lengths and tight overlaps prevent the entry of fire even when burning embers fall on the roof. Coverplates or closure strips seal off the small openings at the end of steel roofing profiles. The space below the floor can be eliminated by building on a slab of concrete laid directly on the ground.

Mike - I agree with what you say and very interested in your ideas for window and glass door SHUTTERS. We would like to make our own lightweight fire shutters - I was thinking a frame with some highly R rated insulation in it that we could fix over our double glazed windows etc on TFB threatening days. It will make it very dark and we would leave couple of doors/windows uncovered for light etc until necessary. comments please?? Carole

There has long been a collective blind spot in Australia when it comes to sheep. This country has indeed ridden upon the sheep’s back, and much of our collective wealth has been attained through sheep meat and wool. As a result our sheep industry is viewed as somewhat sacred and beyond examination or criticism. In Australian culture we are brought up to regard sheep as dull, stupid animals possessing little awareness of their situation and not capable of feeling pain like we do, in order that we will be less likely to question suffering. ‘They’re only sheep’ is often heard should one venture to suggest that the way they are treated is causing them pain and distress. Because life on sheep farms is largely hidden from the view of the general public, it is easy for people to believe the popular myth that sheep farming is a peaceful occupation, and that sheep happily graze all their lives with only the occasional haircut to interrupt their idyllic existence. In fact sheep endure having tails and testicles removed without anesthetic, many are mulesed, hundreds of thousands or even millions die slowly of flystrike (including many thousands which have also been mulesed - mulesing prevents only a proportion of flystrike), many are badly sunburnt after shearing or die of exposure from the cold in paddocks without shelter. Sheep are made to endure land transport with little or no regard for their needs, and stand on cement for long hours or days in saleyards without food, water or shelter in the depths of winter or in summer temperatures of over 40C. Sheep injured in transport and needing veterinary attention or euthanasia are, instead, sold to be transported again in severe pain all for the sake of a few dollars. The majority of sheep farmers in Australia have far too many sheep to ever be able to ensure their well-being or individual attention or even a merciful bullet should they become ill. Many sheep never see a human between occasional terrifying trips to the shearing shed where injuries such as having teats, pizzles or ears accidentally cut off are all too frequent because shearers are paid by numbers and speed is prioritised over care. Unfortunately sheep, as a farmed species, are exempted from animal protection laws, and the Department of Primary Industries, which pretends to represent farmed animals, actually exists to represent the industry at the expense of the animals. And even after all this, farmers send hundreds of thousands of these poor gentle creatures to their torture and death on the Death Boat. Our continuing participation in this hideous practice is contributing to the downturn of our wool industry as the rest of the world begins to wake up to the horrendous reality of Australia’s sheep industry.

Kill and eat is not a problem, but causing unnecessary pain during the process is (i.e. those that you missed). As humans, there are certain limits as what we can call "hobby". "Bullying children" is not a hobby, so isn't "causing unnecessary pain to animals". Also as humans, we should really be able to come up with better duck population management techniques to help the farmers than purely "shoot the ducks". "Shoot the ducks" strategy make it sounds like our intelligence hasn't evolved much over the centuries.

I first became concerned about the future of the world in 1936 , at age 12 , when I understood the implications of the facts that India had 300 Mill. people and China 400 Mill. , and that both populations were increasing rapidly. Since that time those populations have trebled and so has Australia's , and , I think , Earth's population also. In the late 1960's--early 70's the Club Of Rome commissioned two reports relative to matters which now concern you , (which concerned also Rev. Thomas Malthus and Charles Darwin many years prior to even the beginnings of MY awakening) . At about the same time Gordon Rattray Taylor produced a similarly focussed book which he christened , more than a little inadvisedly ( I think ) , 'The Doomsday Book' . ALL of these people had VERY valid concerns , but only Darwin seems to have stayed on the surface of public attention , which I suspect is due to the fact that only HE overtly and successfully challenges the beliefs of established sectarians , and not those of nationalists . ( Gordon Rattray refers to both groups of course but in a context of despair which reassures the targets ). ALL of these people approached the subject via Scholarly verbo-mathematica which is guaran- teed to do three things , (1) decorate the essential facts with a mass of challengable (even if it is correct) detail. (2) introduce people, un-scholarly in formal ways, to (for them) totally opaque thought processes and thus make 'translation' essential . (3) seriously challenge long-held dogmas concerning "rights" both intellectual and biological and also commercial . It is not prudent to write , at my age especially , nor even to infer, that it's all GOD's fault , but a quick examination of Genesis, within a framework of technological rigour, reveals that , (a) Adam was made (in GOD's image) fully equipped with Testosterone (which was , in any case , seemingly , redundant) . (b) This prototype wasn't entirely successful. (inadequate planning ?? technological skills ??). (c) A second construction was started with contaminated feedstock, (Adam's rib). (d) This second artifact was fabricated with residual testosterone ; large quantities of Progesterone were added , and eggs , and (inexplicably) it was made PRETTY. (e) Then , unwisely as it turns out , the pair of them were put in charge of the whole enterprise . These kinds of artifacts are not easily controlled within a framework of biological function , (the Chinese Hierachy has recently confirmed this ) -- and the prognosis is therefor not good . I haven't yet done any arithmetic or graphs for you , but I guess very basic statistics will do . Postulate 1.... All perceived problems are People Related . (This is really an Axiom) Postulate 2.... No people ----> No perceivable problem (Reductio ad Absurdam) Postulate 3.... (You guessed it ?) No standing room ---> No Food ---> Post. (2)---> (e) --->Post. (4) Postulate 4.... ALL of the Earth's Problems are SHAGGING derivatives . (QED) Comment ... (A) The same analysis is equally valid for Bacteria , Cockroaches , Lemmings , Mice, People, Rabbits , Rats , etc. (B) This analysis will not influence Witch-doctors , Prelates , Politicians , Shopkeepers, Bankers ,CEO's ,'Developers' etc. (C) Neither you nor anyone else will be game enough to publicly present Post.4 in its undecorated simplest generally accessible form , it is then 'translated'. (D) The Chinese experiment has already failed , it leaves behind a standing army of wife-less China- men perhaps some millions strong ..... Ghengis Khan will, in the end , be seen as an amateur. (E) 3 Kids and 5 grand-children later , MY guilt is simply that I KNEW all of this well BEFORE I married in 1959. I have agonised for years about whether there can be an equitable resolution of this monstrous problem ,and I have recently concluded that there is only one remotely possible solution ...We , the blokes , must , every last one of us , World-wide , convert to Roman Catholicism , and become Priests . The girls must , it follows logically , convert , and get them hence unto a Nunnery . This will not please every-one of course , but it can be quite truthfully pointed out to the unwilling that the ONLY alternative is Purgatory Here On Earth . George Pell should perhaps be approached concerning 'ways and means', (I'm a bit far away in Adelaide , and am of course 'stricken in years' ,---- and how a closet atheist could carry this off I'm not at all sure) . Best of Luck ......Harold

As far as I know, and I am going back over ten years of personal information, the only firebunker the State Government keeps up is one at Powelltown, Victoria

The Victorian government, if were to be honest, should tell Victorians that their neighborhoods will change for the worse and that squeezing in higher density living means demolition and destruction in the first instance in established neighborhoods. The inevitable effects of high rise (even if it is only one storey higher than the prevailing homes) means overshadowing. Higher density means disappearance of gardens. They are dishonest. It is the blandness of the way they express their intentions that is the most dishonest. Quark

I too thank you Stoptac for bringing this matter to our attention. While DAFF et al boast of this country’s biosecurity efficiencies, it appears that stringent safeguards do not apply to those who operate foreign flagged livestock vessels. In view of the global emerging and re-emerging zoonotic outbreaks in livestock now impacting on humans, I would ask if these same carriers are transporting non-Australian livestock on other trade routes around the world? Regardless, some animal pathogens are air-borne and can be deposited far from their source through clothing, shoes and dust adsorbents. I would be interested in knowing the names of overseas ports in which crew members disembark and embark. Additionally, I have not read of any requirements for these foreign ships to fumigate their vessels prior to re-entering Australia waters. These animals, which are crammed into these filthy vessels, are exposed to one another's waste. For a virus or bacteria capable of jumping between species, the live export industry is providing the perfect place to reproduce. Recently, two New Zealand sheep were found to be infected with Scrapies a disease related to BSE or Mad Cow Disease. There is no scientific data or collated data from across the scientific spectrum to ascertain how Australia’s live export trade is impacting on marine life. Thousands of tonnes of animal waste and millions of macerated and contaminated livestock have been dumped overboard as marine fodder. This industry conveniently overlooks the critically important fact that zoonotic pathogens can move back and forth among species, mutating and changing their characteristics in the process. It is an established fact that Australian livestock are force-fed hormone growth promotants and antibiotics in their feed. In addition, Australia continues on its ecologically destructive path by using bioaccumulative, endocrine disruptive and carcinogenic chemicals on pasture crops which are then ingested by livestock. The use of endosulfan has been banned in 56 countries but not in Australia. Add the carcinogenic Atrazine and that is one toxic soup which is contaminating Australia’s livestock and biodiversity. Persistent man-made organic pollutants are chlorine based where dioxins are formed through chemical reactions. The recent tragic bushfires in Australia have released massive amounts of dioxins which are transboundary and have no respect for geographical borders. Synthetic farm and residential chemicals have all gone up in smoke – pesticides, insecticides, solvents, plastics, asbestos, fuels etc. Gaseous depositions will have landed on pastures, crops, land and waterways, including fodder production thus further contaminating the entire food chain. The ecological situation in Australia, I believe, is grave and the situation is further exacerbated by the livestock industry’s penchant to dupe developing countries into buying even more of our cloven hooved livestock, which continue to desecrate these arid lands. In view of the live exports’ ramifications on marine, animal and human health, it is astonishing that Islamic countries regard Australia’s live animals as “halal.”

what do you s think you doing? you are trying to ban duck hunting...leave us alone and leave us enjoy our hobby. its only couple of days in a year. we kill ducks to eat them and another thing, do you know that ducks do damage to our australian farmers.

From realdirt.com.au/2008/09/08/hazard-reduction-burning-ecological-or-pathological-smhreal-dirt-exclusive A new scientific paper published in the CSIRO journal Wildlife Research by Michael Clarke, an associate professor in the department of zoology at La Trobe University, suggests the answer to both questions is: we do not know. What we do know is a lot of precious wild places are set on fire, in large part to keep happy those householders whose kitchen windows look out on gum trees. Clarke says it is reasonable for land management agencies to try to limit the negative effects of large fires, but we need to be confident our fire prevention methods work. And just as importantly, we need to be sure they do not lead to irreversible damage to native wildlife and habitat. He argues we need to show some humility, and writes: “The capacity of management agencies to control widespread wildfires ignited by multiple lightning strikes in drought conditions on days of extreme fire danger is going to be similar to their capacity to control cyclones.” In other words, sometimes we can do zip. Much hazard reduction is performed to create a false sense of security rather than to reduce fire risks, and the effect on wildlife is virtually unknown. The sooner we acknowledge this the sooner we can get on with the job of working out whether there is anything we can do to manage fires better. We need to know whether hazard reduction can be done without sending our wildlife down a path of firestick extinctions. An annual burn conducted each year on Montague Island, near Narooma on the NSW far South Coast, highlights the absurdity of the current public policy free-for-all, much of which is extraordinarily primitive. In 2001 park rangers burnt a patch of the devastating weed kikuyu on the island. The following night a southerly blew up, the fire reignited and a few penguins were incinerated. It was a stuff-up that caused a media outcry: because cute penguins were burnt, the National Parks and Wildlife Service was also charcoaled. Every year since there has been a deliberate burn on Montague, part of a program to return the island to native vegetation. Each one has been a circus - with teams of staff, vets, the RSPCA, ambulances, boats and helicopters - all because no one wants any more dead penguins. Meanwhile every year on the mainland, park rangers and state forests staff fly in helicopters tossing out incendiary devices over wilderness forests, the way the UN tosses out food packages. Thousands of hectares are burnt, perhaps unnecessarily, too often, and worse, thousands of animals that are not penguins (so do not matter) are roasted. All to make people feel safe. Does the burning protect nearby towns? On even a moderately bad day, probably not. Does it make people feel better? Yes. Clarke’s paper calls for the massive burn-offs to be scrutinised much more closely. “In this age of global warming, governments and the public need to be engaged in a more sophisticated discussion about the complexities of coping with fire in Australian landscapes,” he writes. He wants ecological data about burns collected as routinely as rainfall data is gathered by the agricultural industry. Without it, hazard reduction burning is flying scientifically blind and poses a dangerous threat to wildlife. “To attempt to operate without proper data on the effect of bushfires should be as unthinkable as a farmer planting a crop without reference to the rain gauge,” he writes. In the coming decades, native plants and animals will face enough problems - most significantly from human-induced climate chaos - without having to dodge armies of public servants armed with lighters. Guesswork and winter smoke are not enough to protect our towns and assets now, and the risk of bushfires increases with the rise in carbon dioxide. This piece was first published in the SMH, 08/09/08 as "Hazard Reduction Burning: ecological or pathological?"

If only the public were forced to see the hideous atrocities that animals are subjected to when they are being prepared for live export let alone finally shipped off to countries who handle and slaughter them in the most savage ways. Australians seem to believe that the cruelty only occurrs when animals finally arrive in the likes of the Middle East, however animals are treated poorly in Australia before they are even put on a filthy death ship. 60 minutes has ran stories about this hideous trade as have many other media outlets however the full extent of the brutality has never really been shown.

It's ironical that Bob Hawke, when being interviewed on TV by Andrew Denton ("Enough Rope" Elders Part 5 14th July 2008) stated that one of the biggest problems today was a blow-out of world population! Hindsight is a wonderful thing, expecially has he supported multiculturalism and high immigration to Australia. Yep, the same Bob Hawke who once boasted that the major parties had reached an implicit pact to keep immigration off the political agenda. The same person who confirmed that that, for most of the post-war period, the ALP and the Coalition had maintained bipartisan support for immigration despite public opposition. Maybe Hawke is one of those people who believes that overpopulation is a problem everywhere else but Australia. Maybe he believes that Australia is one big giant empty land simply waiting to be occupied and that Australians have an obligation to allow their country to be turned into Lebensraum for the surplus populations of the Third World. Whatever his views, the truth is that his government handled the immigration issue appallingly.

If Australia maintains its current regime of high immigration numbers during a recessionary period touted as the worst in the post-war era, it will simply prove beyond doubt that Australia's immigration program has become divorced from serving the real needs of Australia and Australians. It is immigration for immigration's sake; to property speculators happy by ensuring steady and ever increasing demand for housing; to keep wages down and party contributions from the business community up; to pander to ethnic voting blocs and satisfy their neo-colonial aspirations by assuring them that the influx of their countrymen will continue unabated, further cementing their permanence, prevalence, and eventual dominance in Australian society. In the end, of course, it is Australians who will end losing the most - their jobs, their prosperity, their chance at affordable home ownership, their quality of life, their natural environment, their culture and national identity, and even, eventually, their country itself.

It will be very interesting to see how this plays out in the near future! The government are going to be on thinner and thinner ice with this as unemployment rises. It's hard to see how they will be able to continue to justify to the public the continuation of the high immigration rate. But I'm sure they'll try. Their true motives will be exposed for all to see - bring it on!

Nobody seems to have mentioned sandbags. As a kid during WWII we built shelters against blasts and fire out of sandbags. These can be configured to any space and a blast wall (or two) built in front of the entrance, which would protect from direct radiation. How about a cut-out in a bank lined with a layer (or two) of sandbags and a baffle wall of sandbags in front with a zig-zag entrance? Roof of tin with a good layer of sandbags or earth covering it. Comments on this welcome. I also think a cylinder of air (or scuba kit) would be a wise addition.

Meanwhile, a key employer group says the research recommendations amount to a form of protectionism.
"The skilled program... can't be turned off and on," Australian Industry Group (Ai Group) chief executive Heather Ridout told ABC Television.
The government needed to be very careful about "chopping" immigration numbers, she said, adding that employers were committed to current intake.
"If we do not keep the immigration scheme robust our economic growth potential will be much reduced."

Source

Is Heather Ridout really suggesting that we should simply allow the free flow of foreign labour into Australia with no concern whatsoever for the economic wellbeing of our existing citizenry?

Oh, and as for employers being committed to a high intake, well duh! Of course they are committed to the ongoing importation of cheap labour and more consumers. However, last time I checked, we weren't meant to be running an immigration program for the sole benefit of employers.

"If we do not keep the immigration scheme robust our economic growth potential will be much reduced."

Rubbish. Economic growth means increasing the amount of capital per head of the population. Immigration does nothing to aid this process.

Hi mate just want to let you know I think you are doing a great job. It's important to keep the truth out there so people really know whats going on! How long will it take the Australian Government to phase out this trade? It's an absolute blemish to us all.. I pray that I will see an end to live export in my life time. Poor things it's so upsetting.

K.G. writes: What burning did aboriginal people do? According to early photos of Victoria I have seen, and the stags (dead butts) of massive trees killed in the 39 fires, sticking out of the re-growth forests; the forest of Victoria were largely old growth. Some species of eucalyptus, like Mountain Ash are sensitive to fire and often die in hot fires. There are a lot of environmental vegetation classes (evcs) burnt in the Feb ‘09 hell Saturday fires. Which ones of these would have been burnt by aboriginal people and how often? Surely Lighting a hot fire would have been basically too dangerous if you didn’t own a bucket. It would have been more practical to notice where lightning strike fires were providing the burning. When I was a kid, before climate change, lightning came with a cool change and rain and fires often wouldn’t go far. As for cool burning, old growth sometimes has very moist undergrowth, which would have been hard to burn. I woke up the other day thinking of the Ada tree one of the biggest Mountain Ash tree ever found, in an old growth gully near Powelltown. The remarkable thing about this Tolkien-like area is the moss half way up the trees, the cool air, the moisture held in this vertical sponge. Victoria’s philosophy of forest management has been dominated by foresters keen to provide as much woodchip as possible. A forester is trained to despise old growth forests. To call them 'senescing' - which is to be avoided at all costs. A lot of towns affected by the bushfires may well have lost photos of the massive trees which used to be displayed pride of place. Photos that might suggest that burning hasn’t been much of a feature in the past. Did in fact Aboriginal people of the recent past enjoy at least some forests of bigger trees, taller tree fern, cooler air, moister undergrowth, with more fire retardant features?

Hi Sheila, My name is Sarah, I'm in queensland. I have started a facebook group in order to raise awareness and donations for some of the wildlife groups across Victoria. I am finding myself getting asked alot about what the best way for overseas members to donate is. I have been suggesting direct transfers as I figured that the best way to get the money to people quickly, however there is some questions about money orders, paypal and cheques and i wondered what your preference is. I am recommending your site above all others (to those who privately email me regarding donations) as the need to rebuild on top of feeding and treating animals I find a tragic situation for all. My heart goes out to you. I do hope this reaches you, I included the link to the group in the homepage line but in case it doesn't work the group is on facebook and called 'Remembering Animal Victims of the Victorian Bushfires' ( There are currently nearly 1700 members and growing quickly) As someone who has done wild care and also vet nursing I to have been devastated by this tragic event, I can't even imagine how awful it must be for you. If it was at all possible for me to come and help more practically I would but work commitments make that impossible so instead I have just been trying to gather donations and make information available for people. If you have any suggestions or other wildlife groups that I don't have listed that should be listed (If you have any time at all to have a look at the site, which I doubt!) then please let me know. Anything I can do to help I am more then pleased to do. Kindest Regards Sarah Gordon

No answers mean that are aren't any! Menkit has covered all bases. An answer would have to confirm that sustainable "use" of kangaroos is actually impossible, and they are acknowledging that our livestock industries are doing damage to Australia's environment. It is greenwashing to suggest anything else. Kangaroo or other wildlife will never be able to replace the amount of meat we eat in Australia and send overseas. They are not like Africa's "game" fauna. Their growth rate is slow, and they only produce a small amount of human-quality meat. There is no justification for kangaroo "harvesting". Our government and many land-owners would be quite happy to see our wildife, especially kangaroos, become novelties in zoos and santuaries.

Whatever the truth of the points in this article, which I am not in a position to judge since I don't know the terrain, some people have been deliberately lying on other forums. I found one that claimed that the Greens used to control the Blue Mountains council and while in charge banned preventing burning. The Greens have never been in control of that council, and the claim is a total fabrication. There is no excuse for this sort of dishonesty. The Greens have very seldom held power at any level of government in Australia and using the horrific tragedy in Victoria as a platform for blaming them for environmental mismanagement by other parties and industries is not only a vicious slur, but nasty exploitation of a situation where we should be focusing on the plight of the victims. It smells to me like an attempt to preempt blaming climate change for the fires or, worse still, poor land management practices by those who launched the attack. The Royal Commission, if properly set up, should provide more than enough opportunity to find out who or what caused the fires, and how best to minimise future risk. Engaging in political attacks now is inappropriate; doing so by lying goes beyond indecent.