I have been a subscriber now for 4 years. I was ecstatic when my cousins joined together and gave me a year’s subscription for my birthday, and I have renewed it three times. However, the more I read it the more I am dismayed at how the magazine seems to keep supporting the use of fire. The June 2011 issue, vol. 97(2) had two articles on fire, ‘Firestorms in savanna and forest ecosystems’ and ‘Before the spring rains’. They both angered and broke my heart.
To promote the use of fire in a world that already suffers from an overload of carbon dioxide and from soil erosion is ludicrous! Should we not be focusing on putting all that excess CO2 back into the soil where it belongs? Should we not rather focus on restoring the soil biology, an agent that if properly nurtured and managed, can sequester vast amounts of greenhouse gases in the soil and at the same time stabilize the topsoil and thus greatly reduce soil erosion?
There is nothing easier: high density grazing management of big herds of large herbivores! Large herds of herbivores grazing and browsing, creating animal impact, top litter, dung and urine can quickly increase the humus content of the soil and thus feed the soil organisms, if properly managed, creating favourable conditions for soil biota to multiply in. Fire has the opposite effect.
I am a cattle rancher in the North West Province, Vryburg district. I have been ranching now for 17 years. My great-grandfather bought the farm in 1920. It is situated on the edge of the Kalahari sands and is quite a brittle environment, with very hot summers and very cold winters. The winters are long and dry making the veld susceptible to fires, which we do our best to try and prevent. In my experience fire destroys, leaving behind disaster and death. Nature is wonderful and no matter what disaster occurs there are always plants that will strive to grow and heal the gaping wound. Flowers are particularly well adapted to do this, being mostly pioneers that prepare the soil for those plants that come after them. A climax plant cannot grow on a barren piece of land. Every plant has a reason for being, a task to perform, and once that task is complete it gives way to the next level of soil building by another plant. As the soil improves in fertility so the plant species change, the soil micro-organisms change and multiply and all become healthier and stronger.
But plants left untouched cannot do this. They need outside help in the form of animals and insects. There needs to be animal impact. The plants (grass) need to be utilized, grazed and trampled on by the animals. What grass is not grazed should be tramped and broken and is then worked into the soil by insects, bacteria, fungi and other organisms. In ranching there are many different management tools, of which fire is also one.
Fire is like a big hammer in a mechanics toolbox. There are other tools that should be used before resorting to fire, like animals. The important thing is impact; getting the soil healthy. The healthier the soil, the healthier the plants, the less likely the veld will burn. Fire is used to combat bush encroachment, to sweeten the sour grass and to bring on a green flush in spring, yet ironically, in the longer term the more an area is burnt the more bush grows and the more sour the veld becomes, so all you have at the end of the day is a vicious circle that you are unable to stop. As for that all important spring flush, if the grass has been utilized well during the dormant period then there will be a better spring flush on the unburned than on the burnt area!
The whole ecosystem is vitally important, each organism whether large or small, beautiful or plain are all major parts in keeping the ecosystem running smoothly. I understand that flowers are very exciting to look for and find and discovering new ones is thrilling. But I think that there is vast scope in improving the veld to its potential and maybe discovering completely new sets of plants that have now been given a chance to thrive. My grandfather was an amateur botanist and collected over 300 different flowers species just on our farm! Every year the weather conditions are different and stimulate the growth of specific flowers that are adapted to the condition prevailing at the time, so I would think it rather difficult to declare a species extinct just because it has not appeared for some years. Seeds may lie dormant for many, many years waiting for the perfect stimulation to come along. Most flowers, I believe, can still thrive under holistic management, as they are a key in the whole ecosystem but they mostly grow in disturbed areas, repairing and building the soil structure. Africa, I believe, suffered from relatively few fires, because of the vast herds of migrating animals that kept the veld healthy - grazed and trampled. These migrating herds created the savanna grasslands by grazing, dunging and urinating, thus encouraging a bacteria dominated soil which in turn encourages grasslands. A fungus dominated soil encourages forest. Forests too need to be utilized, they will not survive without animal impact of some kind.
There have been several articles in Veld & Flora all concentrating on how good fire is for flowers, and nobody looking a bit deeper and seeing the whole picture. When a fire rages through the veld it usually burns everything in its path, many cannot escape the onslaught! The tortoises, the chameleon, the chicks in the nests, the millions of various insects, the soil micro organisms, all get baked in this hideous furnace! Whole habitats are destroyed, great columns of carbon dioxide roar up into the sky, all for the sake of a few people to ooh and aah over the poor flowers that are trying to get on with their set task! Soil building! Fire bakes the soil surface forming a hard crust, so that when the rains come the water runs off and causes flooding as it cannot be absorbed into the ground in the absence of organic material. There are no plants to slow down the racing waters, so gullies form and topsoil gets carried off in the already brown rivers and is gone! For many years you will be able to see the ugly scar of a burnt area; recovery is a slow and meticulous process.
We can all be as environmentally friendly as we can but until we stop burning and start putting the carbon back into the soil where it belongs, all our efforts will be for nothing! All we have to do to put carbon in the soil is increase the humus content! The tool for this is animal impact.
Veld reflects management. If you manage for 'weeds', then 'weeds' are what you will get. The veld should be alive, throbbing with activity no matter how small the area is there should be ecosystems in place going through the circle of life. So next time you find yourself in a beautiful piece veld, close your eyes and listen for that precious circle of life, smile, then imagine putting a match to it! Conventional wisdom advocates the use of fire, but perhaps it is time to dig into the box and find another management tool.
Jennifer Speedy, Vryburg district North West Province
Eugene Moll replies:
I see that you live in the Kalahari, in an environment where fire is more of a problem than an asset. I understand much of what you are saying but fear that your basic understanding of the principles of ecology globally has a modern anthropomorphic bias. If one reads the literature and looks at the archaeological and geological records one will see that fire has been part of many ecosystems for millions of years. And humans have been using fire in Africa for at least 1 million years. Yes fires do cause problems particularly for those in the agricultural production sector (and as a threat to property). However for the maintenance of the natural biodiversity of many systems if there was no fire many species would go extinct. There is extensive scientific literature on this subject and I will make some available on the Veld & Flora blog.
Yes there may well be a global CO2 problem but that is not only because of fire. Most of the problem comes from burning fossil fuels as though there is no tomorrow. Global over population of humans is the real issue facing the future of humankind.
I could go on with many arguments and counter arguments concerning the pros and cons of using fire as an ecological management toll in natural ecosystems, but from your correspondence I perceive that you have very strong views that are not likely to be changed. Hopefully you will look on this reply as one from someone who is concerned about the management of natural ecosystems and their biodiversity.
And a further conversation: Eugene We are not that far apart, it is just that biodiversity conservation is my driver and yours is feeding people (and with some meat) on “well managed” natural pastures. This is OK in good years but in the dry years the stocking rates have to be radically reduced accordingly. However, because we farm with more K-selected than r-selected animals it is difficult to slaughter animals wholesale when it becomes ecologically necessary, because to re-build your herds takes time. That is the critical tipping-point.
I have commented further in the text of your email – in UPPER CASE.
Jennifer: We seem to be missing each other.
I understand that there is a lot of write-up about fire and that fire is and has been an integral part of most management recipes THESE ARE NOT RECIPES, I.E. THEY ARE NOT THE PRODUCT OF HUMANS, BUT AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE WAY MANY NATURAL SYSTEMS WORK AND HAVE EVOLVED. Fire is a natural part of nature, and we have used it, excused it, and accepted it. But what I am suggesting is, let us do away with intentional fires, let us manage the veld with animals, which are also natural. YOU SEE HERE WE DIFFER FUNDAMENTALLY. NATURAL SYSTEMS HAVE BECOME SO FRAGMENTED (THEY ARE NOW ISLANDS TROPICAL RAIN FOREST
I do not think that even your mere 1 billion vegetarians would be able to remain fit and healthy for any length of time! I AM AFRAID THAT THE SCIENCE OF THAT WILL PROVE YOU WRONG – NOT THAT I AM VEGETARIAN AND NEVER WILL BE I HOPE, BUT MY COUSIN IS AND HE IS AN RENOWNED ORGANIC CHEMIST WHO KNOWS A LOT MORE ABOUT THESE MATTERS THAT I EVER WILL. The production of grass fed meat and the demand from meat eaters is our only hope, so I am very happy to hear that you do not intend to change! There is no real reason, unless political, that properly managed veld cannot feed our 7 billion people! I WOULD LOVE TO AGREE WITH YOU, BUT AGAIN THE SCIENCE SHOWS DIFFERENTLY [AND I ALSO IGNORE THE SCIENCE AS IT SUITS MY LIFE-STYLE].
It is no use conserving a piece of veld, it will not remain in a fixed state AGREED – ALL SYSTEMS AND IN A STATE OF FLUX – BUT THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT THEY ARE RUNNING DOWN. We need to strive to improve it to make it produce what it was designed for, and that is something that is beyond our wildest dreams, but it is what I find the most exciting part of farming. That potential, we just don't know what it is, and I am looking forward to pushing boundaries and breaking paradigms! WE ARE NOT GODS, THOUGH MANY PEOPLE THINK THEY ARE, BUT WE ARE ABLE TO CHANGE THE STATE AND HENCE THE FORCED CHANGE IN THE PRODUCTIVITY OF SYSTEMS FOR OUR OWN SHORT-TERM BENEFIT [AND THAT IS WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING FOR THE LAST 10,000-ODD YEARS – SINCE THE ADVENT OF MODERN AGRICULTURE AND THE DOMESTICATION OF STOCK].
The plants, the insects, birds and animals that all come together to make life work, I want to be a part of it. I cannot do this on my own as all the different ecology types are all connected, it needs to come from all sides to be completely effective and beneficent to everyone! This is a long term commitment and not a quick fix, but then most worthwhile things take time! BUT NEVER WITH A GLOBAL; POPULATION OF MORE THAN 7 BILLION WILL THIS BE POSSIBLE – THE PLANET CANNOT GO ON GIVING 50% OF ITS TOTAL PRODUCTIVITY TO HUMANS – MAYBE 1 BILLION ARE SUSTAINABLE. THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. HOWEVER, WE WILL NOT GIVE UP THE FIGHT AND I HEAR THAT IN 200 YEARS TIME WE MAY BE ABLE TO LIVE ON MARS TOO – WELL SO I HEARD ON A NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC TV PROGRAMME …
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.