"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
Farm1 wrote:
"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
...
Farm1 wrote:
"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
songbird wrote:

local fire burglars?

Those who set fires, either because they think it improves their
pasture (it doesn't) or for fun, or both.

Why do you say it doesn't improve pastures? From observation, I'd
say it probably did improve pastures even if just because it cleans
out things like tussocks and other weeds etc and doesn't add
anything.

Yes it does reduce some obvious weeds and gives a nice green flush
if you get a shower of rain afterwards. It is cheap compared with
slashing. But....

If not a hot fire it selectively reduces more tender grasses to the
benefit of tougher ones (eg blady grass), if a hot fire it also
tends to destroy the stolons of the grass along with the weeds so
favouring seed-propagated grasses over perennials. I think a mixed
pasture with both is desireable.

It reduces organic matter which helps to hold soil moisture and
nutrients, I want to build organic content not burn it.

It reduces volatile nutrients, eg nitrogen compounds, which then
have to be replaced with chicken litter, urea etc.

It pollutes the air.

If heavy rain falls or strong wind blows after burning it can result
in erosion.

To me it a practice of yesteryear along with set stocking in big
paddocks, random (in)breeding and 'when in doubt add more
super(phosphate)'. I *might* consider doing it once to begin the
rehabilitation of a badly weed infested paddock but as an annual
ritual I think it is very misguided. have a look at this:

http://www.northern.cma.nsw.gov.au/d...hernrivers.pdf

I finally found time to read parts of that cite.

I noted the obligatory full page Aboriginal recognition (yawn!) and

Irrelevant

This is a discussion group. It was jsut a part of my discussion so it
possibly is irrelevant to you.

later a whole 2 paragraphs devoted to regular burning (underline
that) and one of paras referring to north coast (underline that)
blady grass impacts.

That is my context.

But not my context. I've noted improvements in pasture after the odd burn
so am interested in the issue.

My location is my context but does my context being different to your
context mean that you have nothing to say or evidence to support your claim?
And especially given that your context is
now said to include 'annual' burning which you haven't previously mentioned
till this post.

Not a lot of use nor ornament. No doubt that publication was
designed to be handed out like a free lollie at small farm field
days. (And yes, I do acknowledge that I am a cynic).


Well find something that deals with your region, you can search DPI,
landcare etc sites as well as I can.

Yes I've done that. I've not found anything that either supports or denies
your claim that burning pasture improves or doesn't improve pasture as a one
off. Of course I hadn't looked with your previously unmentioned context of
'annual' burns. I just thought you'd know or have hard evidence given how
you usually make a point of making statements based on evidence.

A number of points that occured as I read your post:

You're talking about regular burning whereas I wasn't thinking
specificially about regular burning. We don't burn our pasture
regularly (or ever), don't know anyone who does or ever has done, so
I am more interested in the impacts following a sometimes burn such
as what happens after, say, a grass fire.


Regular burning is common here, I don't know why. That was the context I
that introduced the subject, the annual spring burning.

'Annual spring burning' may have been in your mind but it wasn't mentioned
by you till this past post.

There have already been 40 fires across the State so it'd be impossible to
recognise that your 'context' related to an annual event rather than just
the fire trucks having been out, in your locale, at a one off event at this
time of year.

Stolons aren't a feature of all pasture grasses, are somewhat rare
aren't round here and I've never even heard of blady grass. But if a

I wish I could name all the grasses I have and which have stolons but I
can't. I was under the impression that many (maybe all) do. I would
still rather not select in favour of some. But if don't burn regularly it
isn't an issue.

But it relates to your generalised claim and that is why I mentioned it.
It's about learning. Perhaps you had some specific knowledge to support
your general comment.

fire can manage to kill the stolons of white clover, then I might
just set fire to my rose bed where the sodding clover is growing like
Topsy. It's where I grab handfuls to feed the cows mouthfuls when
they decide to hang over the gate between the veg garden and the
paddock.
Erosion following fire may or may not happen. It's never a given.

true


Palatability of regrowth is worth a consideration. I don't like
tough old lettuces and I've no doubt that pasture grazers prefer lush
growth to dry standing forage.

Of course but there are other ways of getting fresh growth than burning.

Yes indeed. Slashing being one but then that is another atmospherically
unfriendly way.


Nutrients in burned grasses can't all be lost. Some of it must
return to the soil in the form of ash.

True, metals (K and trace elements) and P are not volatile which is why I
mentioned volatility. OTOH I have been told that burning *increases*
nutrients because of the ash that remains, as ash contains nutrients (the
last is true). Those of this opinion have missed the point that that any
nutrients in the ash were already there in the plants or soil, nothing is
created. I am not putting you in that category.

D