It is now more than two months since I had any useful rain. It was one of
the warmest (if not the warmest) winters on record. We have had hot days
(30C) already and it is not two weeks into spring. Out west on the plains
they are wondering if there will be any winter-planted crops. There were
bushfires in Sydney this week. The local fire burglars have been out, with
the dust kicked up by wind and the rising pollen count I have been almost
house bound. Not a good start. The BOM says ENSO indicators are neutral.
We can hope.

But (due to irrigation) the fruit trees are blooming and the asparagus is
up! Yay!

David

David Hare-Scott wrote:

It is now more than two months since I had any useful rain. It was one of
the warmest (if not the warmest) winters on record. We have had hot days
(30C) already and it is not two weeks into spring. Out west on the plains
they are wondering if there will be any winter-planted crops. There were
bushfires in Sydney this week. The local fire burglars have been out, with
the dust kicked up by wind and the rising pollen count I have been almost
house bound. Not a good start. The BOM says ENSO indicators are neutral.
We can hope.

BOM (burro of meaterology? ) local fire burglars?


But (due to irrigation) the fruit trees are blooming and the asparagus is
up! Yay!

i'll do a rain-wiggle for ya and hope it
comes through.


songbird

songbird wrote:
David Hare-Scott wrote:

It is now more than two months since I had any useful rain. It was
one of the warmest (if not the warmest) winters on record. We have
had hot days (30C) already and it is not two weeks into spring. Out
west on the plains they are wondering if there will be any
winter-planted crops. There were bushfires in Sydney this week.
The local fire burglars have been out, with the dust kicked up by
wind and the rising pollen count I have been almost house bound.
Not a good start. The BOM says ENSO indicators are neutral. We can
hope.

BOM (burro of meaterology? )

yes

local fire burglars?

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

D

David Hare-Scott wrote:
songbird wrote:
David Hare-Scott wrote:

It is now more than two months since I had any useful rain. It was
one of the warmest (if not the warmest) winters on record. We have
had hot days (30C) already and it is not two weeks into spring. Out
west on the plains they are wondering if there will be any
winter-planted crops. There were bushfires in Sydney this week.
The local fire burglars have been out, with the dust kicked up by
wind and the rising pollen count I have been almost house bound.
Not a good start. The BOM says ENSO indicators are neutral. We can
hope.

BOM (burro of meaterology? )

yes

good luck on the rains. we want all the
critters to be fat and happy in the pastures
down (or up ) there.


local fire burglars?

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

we have similar types around here, but
the fire hazard is much less most of the
time.

at first i thought you were talking about
people who would set fires and then use that
as a distraction while they broke into houses.


songbird

"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.

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

David

Every Night Something Orful... (c) Nigel Molesworth

In article ,
"David Hare-Scott" wrote:

It is now more than two months since I had any useful rain. It was one of
the warmest (if not the warmest) winters on record. We have had hot days
(30C) already and it is not two weeks into spring. Out west on the plains
they are wondering if there will be any winter-planted crops. There were
bushfires in Sydney this week. The local fire burglars have been out, with
the dust kicked up by wind and the rising pollen count I have been almost
house bound. Not a good start. The BOM says ENSO indicators are neutral.
We can hope.

But (due to irrigation) the fruit trees are blooming and the asparagus is
up! Yay!

David

Seems like 10% of the planet is looking at desertification, which drives
farmers to more marginal agricultural areas that are more prone to
erosion (and take longer to regenerate topsoil), and creating more
opportunities for desertification.

Add to this that for every degree "C" higher, during the growing season,
rice loses 10% of it's crop. Present predictions are for a 1C to 3C rise
world wide by the end of this century.
--
Palestinian Child Detained
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzSzH38jYcg

Remember Rachel Corrie
http://www.rachelcorrie.org/

Welcome to the New America.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA736oK9FPg

Farm1 wrote:
David Hare-Scott wrote:
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.

every bit of carbon lost to the air in
burning is that much less available to be
turned into humus.


songbird

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

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).

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.

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 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.

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.

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

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

every bit of carbon lost to the air in
burning is that much less available to be
turned into humus.

Photosynthesis uses atmospheric carbon to create biomass.

A lot of Photosynthetic action takes place in pastures that will not readily
burn.

Dry standing pasture which don't have lots of lush green active
photosynthesising plants burns very well, lush new growth doesn't.

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

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.


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.

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.

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.

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.


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

David Hare-Scott wrote:
Farm1 wrote:

I finally found time to read parts of that cite.

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

Irrelevant

it has a lot of references, some of which may
be useful.


....
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

if you have any bare soil then it is
not a good thing to burn as bare soil is
a sign that you do not have full cover
to collect and hold the ashes.

one heavy rain or blow and the ashes
are washed away or blown away.

for a spring, where there is rain, it
is much better to cut and leave it lay
on the surface for the worms to have at
it. this way the nutrients are not lost
as much to rains and winds and the mulch
acts as a protection for the soil.


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.


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.

right, it just makes them more immediately
available. the same nutrients are available
longer term if slashed and left on top for
the worms and fungi to break down.


I am not putting you in that category.

when i read Farm1 saying that she had a
burn it struck me as unusual and i took at
as a fire control requirement for the property
not as a normal or yearly event.


songbird

Farm1 wrote:
songbird wrote:
Farm1 wrote:
David Hare-Scott wrote:
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.

every bit of carbon lost to the air in
burning is that much less available to be
turned into humus.

Photosynthesis uses atmospheric carbon to create biomass.

yes, that's my point, your field gained carbon
via photosynthesis and some of that was in the dry
grasses and stalks. burning it releases that carbon
back to the atmosphere. slashing it and leaving it
as mulch will also release some of it back to the
atmosphere, but the rate is much reduced and spread
out and the slash has a much better chance of being
recycled by the worms/fungi than lost to the air.


A lot of Photosynthetic action takes place in pastures that will not readily
burn.

sure, some of it is transported to the roots and
soil community. it depends upon how dry the pasture
is when burned and how deeply various fragments
are buried.


Dry standing pasture which don't have lots of lush green active
photosynthesising plants burns very well, lush new growth doesn't.

all true. my point was aimed at those who
burn dry materials thinking that it improves
the soil. it may give a sudden flush of growth
from some of the released nutrients, but
whatever goes into the air is lost and has to
be regained by further photosynthesis. if
slashed and left that carbon is not lost but
largely retained and recycled or turned into
humus (over the long haul).


songbird

"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