CONGRATULATIONS to the North Burnett Regional Council for the good and “common” sense to remove fluoride from the water supplies.
However, condemnation must go to the health bureaucrats and politicians responsible for the implementation of this farce in the first place.
How anyone could spend millions of dollars (plus ongoing annual costs) on a scheme (in an area) where just about everyone drinks tank-water beggars belief.
Shame also on the councillors and councils throughout Queensland, along with the LGAQ, who meekly accepted the decree of government about this issue.
Nothing short of a referendum would have been acceptable.
The fact remains that anyone who believes in (the need for) fluoride can obtain all they want from other sources. JACK MULLER
Everyone’s an expert
FIRE seems to elicit some basic, primordial stirring in the human brain, causing everyone to think they are an expert on the topic and compelled to write uninformed articles, letters and editorials in newspapers.
This perpetual cycle of misinformation occurs after every large fire event in eastern Australia, peddling untruths about Aboriginal fire management and the efficacy of hazard reduction burns.
Not content with blaming state agencies for mismanaging fire, these instant experts have decided it is apparently the fault of the Greens now. Truly amazing. While it is true removing fuel on the ground will mitigate against small fire events, it is naive to think that removal of ground fuel will prevent the spread of a crown-fire, as it ignites gases hundreds of metres ahead of the flame front.
The trees themselves are the fuel, not a few sticks. And some species, notably Mountain Ash, require a large fire event to kill the adults, allowing the next generation to germinate.
The same is true for many Australian plants, including some grasses.
Coexistence of plant species killed by fire with those that resprout after fire is only possible when there is variation in the fire regime over time. This ensures diversity and therefore resilience against disturbances.
If fire is used too frequently and uniformly, it will favour resprouting species over seeders (and is) often a very good method for spreading weeds.
So, contrary to numerous unsubstantiated claims, the term “controlled burns” is more often than not a euphemism for “she’ll be right burns”, subject to very little or no regulation.
While it is the landholders’ business how they want to influence the species composition of their pastures with fire, it is incumbent on the community to ensure fire sensitive plant communities and fire loving weeds are considered during burns on or adjacent to public land. But then again, we might as well just pick up our clubs and try and beat each other into accepting one another’s opinion.
If you’re interested, type ‘plos one Armstrong Triodia’ into Google and look at the first link for an explanation of how fire enables plant species to coexist. GRAEME ARMSTRONG