Tasmanian Times


Smoke over Chudleigh

Does the NASA satellite cancel out smoke and look only for clouds?

We need experts to interpret this material. It is suggested that this evidence may not be impartial.

Links for the NASA web site.  Click on the thumbnails for larger images. 

There are two images for each day. The ‘terra’ image is usually about 10 or 11 in the morning, the ‘aqua’ image is usually about 2 or 3 pm.

If you have Google earth I’d suggest you download the kmz files for both Tasmania and South-east Australia for each day (morning and afternoon), and this puts the images together for you. (The ‘kmz’ files are available after you click the thumbnail.)

After you open a thumbnail image you have a drop-down menu called ‘vector options’. You can choose to view the fires (detected as hot spots) the NASA analysis has identified.

Tasmania on 16th March

Tasmania on 17th March

SE Australia 16th March

SE Australia 17th March

You may wish to look at previous days, which you can using the ‘prev’ and ‘next’ buttons on those pages. Help please, this for someone who cannot type or use a computer is beyond me.

The Tasmanian sites have, in my opinion, been doctored, destroyed or no longer exist!

A possible route for the spin doctors could be Scott McLean CFMEU candidate, to Bartlett or Forestry Tasmania, to Tas Times and the Examiner, who knows, but the Tas Times team will find out.

If this is the case with over 100,000 potential voters smoked out on 17th March in Launceston, I ask who gave the orders?

Forestry burns Tasmania … and Labor

Author Credits: [show_post_categories parent="no" parentcategory="writers" show = "category" hyperlink="yes"]


  1. Garry Stannus

    December 4, 2010 at 8:02 am

    Steve at #27
    sorry for the intrusion Steve, but believe it, I’m still working on a response to the BLANkET Tech. Report 9.

    Can I ask you:

    1 Was the smoke you encountered on the 16th (the day of the local burns) or the 17th (the day of the heavy smoke in the north and north east, said to be Victorian)?

    2 At what heights was it? eg Could you smell it? (=ground level) etc.

    3 Where did you encounter the smoke (ie, at what places between Burnie and your destination)

    Ta, if you can help,

  2. Steve

    October 30, 2010 at 10:54 pm

    24; That’s not how I recall it crf. You tried to run a line that all the smoke came from Victoria and FT weren’t burning anything at all. Was it you said that all FT boxes of matches were locked up and accounted for that day?
    Anyway, numerous people produced anecdotal information proving you wrong. Other’s produced factual information proving you wrong. You then departed from the conversation, taking your bat and ball, because you felt it was beneath you to argue with people who were obviously wrong.
    I see you are now trying to claim some sort of retrospective victory. Sorry, it was never established that the smoke came from Victoria, no matter how many times you say so.
    Personally, I was driving home from Burnie that day and I recall encountering much smoke along the way. It was all heading east. Makes you wonder how it could have come from Victoria. Albany (WA) perhaps?

  3. Garry Stannus

    October 30, 2010 at 9:46 pm

    crf (#24)
    I take it that you won’t be contributing to my investigation into the EPA technical report? You are more than welcome to participate, although it would be helpful if you posted correct information and appropriately referenced it.

    For example in the early days of the March 17 smoke debacle, you posted the following on TT:

    “Red Bob is on the right track. Check out the Sentinel satellite picture at http://sentinel2.ga.gov.au
    Smoke clearly from Victoria. Look at all the hot spots on the mainland and zero for Tassie!
    Egg on face of all those who accused FT and forest industry. ”

    When I challenged you over your “zero for Tassie!” words, guess what! Rather than admit your error to John Hawkins and myself …

    (readers: please access ‘Forestry burns Tasmania … and Labor’ via the TT search bar, just a little bit below top right)

    …you went to water. You moved away from your implicit claim that there were no fires in Tasmania at that time and took a new position – why the hot-spot symbols weren’t/were visible on the Sentinel/MODIS generated images at the time. Strategic redeployment, crf?

    You might have acknowledged your position change. A quick put-down, disappear from the thread, come back grudgingly and fudge it.

    Your way out, crf, was to point to the elephant in the Tasman – the huge body of smoke that had originated in Mallacoota. In its first moments point of origin birth, it was of a size that was as big as/larger than Port Phillip Bay. It moved off the Victorian coast and then it was clear to you … you connected dots … to that huge bundle of smoke in the Tasman sea. Game set and match, according to you. Then we found the ‘Smoking Gun’ over there round Lake Rowellan. So far, crf, you haven’t admitted that there was locally generated smoke present in Tas on the 16th and 17th of March. The EPA report is more than happy to examine and document the local sources of smoke – why aren’t you?

    Are you yet prepared to admit the error in your “Look at all the hot spots on the mainland and zero for Tassie!”?

  4. Geraldine Allan

    October 30, 2010 at 6:39 pm

    #15 Slaked Lime: I recall your your comment #205 on the Trial of Michelle O’Byrne TT thread: –

    203# If all Minister O’Byrne is guilty of is refusing to see people such as you lot, then she has gone up in my estimation.

    Get it. There isn’t an alternate view. It was much ado about nothing.

    Posted by slaked lime on 24/03/10 at 04:25 PM

    Then followed my post that read: –
    #206. That’s a cop-out answer slaked lime.

    Your response is more of the same put-down stuff, which doesn’t add dignity to you or the Minister. By continuing in your dishonourable mode, you are also further humiliating Ms. O’Byrne. Don’t you think she has done enough damage to herself without you adding to her self-inflicted injury?

    Courteously, I asked you what was to your mind, the ‘right’ process to gain remedy. That was my attempt to engage in reasonable discussion with you.

    Like Minister O’Byrne, you have avoided the inevitable, which leads me to further believe you are one of her stool pigeons. Your anonymity adds to my belief. Can’t she speak for herself? You conveniently avoid answering my question. I thus take it there is no alternative on offer than to put the Minister on public trial, which we did.

    Posted by Geraldine Allan on 24/03/10 at 05:49 PM

    You didn’t respond. I note you don’t have much factual input into these most worthy ‘smoke’ discussions, all of which are matters of substantial public interest.

  5. crf

    October 30, 2010 at 1:26 pm

    Stannus (#23), is on a hiding to nothing. The EPA report outlines only what those who put some effort, in March, into looking at the same information, discovered very quickly. All the same satellite imagery and meteorological information was accessible in March. The usual culprits on TT continued then to call black “white” and white “black”, and it looks as if Stannus is heading down the same path.

    This is a topic of shame for the anti-forestry brigade on TT and given the recent embarrassing finale (EPA report), I’d have thought that letting sleeping dogs lie might have been a more advisable course of action.

  6. Garry Stannus

    October 30, 2010 at 10:56 am

    PUBLIC INPUT WANTED: I am putting together a response to the EPA’s “BLANkET Technical Report 9 : Smoke in Northern Tasmania – 17 March 2010”.

    Can readers assist with the following matters:
    1 Details of any EPA/FT explanation for the St Patricks Day smoke event that is not included in the Report. For example, have you had any personal communications with the 2 bodies following the smoke event?
    2 Details of any relevant EPA-FT interactions, agreements relating specifically to that smoke event, or to planned burns in general.
    3 Details of when and where smoke was first encountered at ground level on or around the 17th of March.
    4 Locations and times of any fires burning in the state in the days leading up to and including the 17th March.
    5 The EPA is a part of the Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment. The present Minister for Environment, Parks and Heritage is David O’Byrne. I am interested in learning about the relations/interactions between the Govt, its Minister and the EPA under its just resigned Director, Warren Jones.
    6 Details of any interstate agreements, understandings and interactions to do with planned burns are also sought. The focus for me here is on Victorian burn smoke and Tasmanian government rights to take legal action against the state of Victoria.
    7 Your own experiences in making or wanting to make a complaint about smoke.

    Your further comments and information on any other matters relevant to these smoke issues is most welcome. Please, you can contact me via email at garrystannus@hotmail.com

    I will treat your responses confidentially if you request me to, otherwise it is my intention to identify the sources of any information that I use in my response. I intend to publish the ‘response’ as an article in Tasmanian Times.

    Thank you,
    Garry Stannus

  7. Garry Stannus

    March 25, 2010 at 2:06 pm

    Thanks Chad for pointing out that

    “These burns are NOT fuel reduction burns. These burns are SOLELY ‘regeneration’ burns to kill everything not yet dead in the coupe both flora and fauna so they don’t interfere with a monoculture plantation…”

    It’s easy to forget this. I was talking to a lady at work on that St Pat’s day smoke-out, and we watched the kids playing outside before classes started. I had my camera and she asked me what I was taking pictures of. I told her the smoke. (Mt Arthur was virtually invisible behind her – we were in the heart of Lilydale. She then said she had thought it was fog. When I corrected her, she came back with the ‘well we do need to stop the bushfire danger’ response. I should have made your point Chad, that it had nothing to do with fire prevention, but I didn’t think of it. Actually I told her about how those with respiratory problems suffer in those sort of conditions, and she took that on board.

    All in all Chad, your point is strong and valid. Those huge burns are nothing to do with regard to the safety of you and me, they seem to be something to do with easy site preparation, for the next crop.

    I mean, fair dinkum, why are they going to burn 600 acres above residents at Mt Dismal? For bushfire safety? There surely are plenty of intellectual troglodytes around, aren’t there? The local variety ‘troglodites tasmaniensis’ is mainly found in that locality called ‘Denial’ They share their mental cave dwellings with environmental vandals, misanthropes and the Gollums of this world. Pity is they come out into the light of day, like modern-day Harpies, to befoul what is clean and good on our Island Home.

    Once again, Chad, thank you.

  8. billy greene

    March 25, 2010 at 8:17 am

    Nothing like a good regen burn!
    Good for the environment.
    Best time of the year to do it.
    It is clear most of the contributers here miss Vietnam.

  9. Justa Bloke

    March 25, 2010 at 12:15 am

    Whatever happened to the pitch that the woodchip industry would use all the rubbish as well as the trunks so that there would be no need to burn except for regen? Why is such a high percentage of the carbon (80% from some coupes I’ve heard) sent into the atmosphere?

    And who is currently pouring dollars or yen into Tasmania in exchange for all this carbon?

  10. Pete Godfrey

    March 24, 2010 at 11:34 pm

    Actually rather than fuel reduction burns we should according to the latest studies be actually encouraging the forest to grow around our population centres with no understory disturbance. As old growth forests offer more protection than logged forests.
    Can’t remember the name of the report but it was by Dr Lindemeyer and was on the Tas times.

  11. john hawkins

    March 24, 2010 at 11:18 pm

    You could bait with slaked lime for it is a poison in its own right, however it is not known to be particularly effective.
    NASA is fine; it is what it shows that is the question. Is it smoke , smoke and cloud or cloud only. Once this is determined we can move forward.

  12. William Boeder

    March 24, 2010 at 11:02 pm

    A question for you Mark Wybourne:

    What becomes of all the wildlife habitats as a result of this immense annual volume of voracious pyromania, then what of the smoke dangers and nuisances?

    I am loath to accept any recommendations from such as F/T on the basis that they are tarred with the very greed influences of Gunns Ltd, the most reviled institution in Tasmania, namely for their extremely short-sighted design to convert such huge volumes of our Ancient Forests into low value woodchips.

    This is done purely on the basis that the ever constantly erroneous State government are mistakenly driven into thinking that this madness seems to dwell in the terms of some miserly returns of revenue, as so created from the direct result of the State wide destruction of our sparsely timbered Ancient Forests. (AND their associated wildlife habitats.)

    Now add the product of the clear-fell mania to that of the areas of planned, unplanned, overt waste reduction burns et al.
    The net result is that it has become a huge habitat holocaust upon so huge an amount of Tasmania’s wildlife that will contiue ever be so ruthlessly devastated.

    This resulting deplorable outcome so that the likes of Gunns Ltd can woo the uncaring interstate shareholders along with the fetid bunch of heavyweights of all corporate forestry industry in Tasmania, whom can then giggly gloat over their vile costly to the environment profits.

    Thanks for your comments Mark.

  13. slaked lime

    March 24, 2010 at 10:43 pm

    #13 Stop baiting me!

  14. Gerry Mander

    March 24, 2010 at 9:36 pm

    “There are exceptions of course – there are some real dinky die arson hotspots in this state.”

    Interesting comment, that!

  15. Mark Wybourne

    March 24, 2010 at 6:08 pm

    Chad (# 12)

    What does it matter if they are regen or fuel reduction burns? (and the fact is that there are some fuel reductions burns occurring at present).

    You still need to get rid of the fuel, or Tassie will be just one huge powder keg.

    I believe that in most cases second or third rotations should not be burnt as the logging debris is generally light and breaks down quite quickly.

    There are exceptions of course – there are some real dinky die arson hotspots in this state.

    … can’t withdraw the comment sorry mate … you are baggin the outcome and not the cause.

  16. Chad C Mulligan

    March 24, 2010 at 4:16 pm


    For the nine hundredth time.

    These burns are NOT fuel reduction burns. These burns are SOLELY ‘regeneration’ burns to kill everything not yet dead in the coupe both flora and fauna so they don’t interfere with a monoculture plantation.

    You linking these ‘regeneration’ burns with the loss of life on Black Saturday. (You should) withdraw your comment

  17. crud

    March 24, 2010 at 3:45 pm

    COULDNT be a forestry burn, its them greenie/hippies smokin some of that ganja.

  18. Mark Wybourne

    March 24, 2010 at 3:00 pm

    So, are you people saying that no burning should occur in Tasmania …. and so soon after Black Sunday.

  19. Tony Saddington

    March 24, 2010 at 11:55 am

    Following on from;


    A letter received by us from the almost defunct FEA, (dated 23/3/10), informs us that the 600 acres clear felled on Mt Dismal will be torched over the next few weeks.

    This coupe is situated near Mt Direction on the East Tamar.
    It lies 20 Kms north of Launceston and is only approximately 3 kms (as the crow flies) from the Tamar river.

  20. Shirley Glen of West Tamar

    March 24, 2010 at 11:11 am

    We were driving back north from Hobart on Wed 17th, and had to keep our windows up from about Tunbridge at about 6pm because of the unpleasant smoke smell. For the next few days I had a raw soreness in the back of my nose/throat area. Tunbridge isn’t what I’d think of as a northern area.

  21. Gerry Mander

    March 24, 2010 at 2:35 am

    Two more huge forestry burns at the back of Launceston today and could be seen for miles.

    And here’s the government urging us all to reduce our carbon footprint!

  22. Steve

    March 24, 2010 at 12:55 am

    5; Isn’t the north/north east much of Tasmania? It could hardly be described as a “small portion” of Tasmania. Perhaps “part” of Tasmania?
    Seems to me, “much” of Tasmania is a reasonable description of last weeks smoke attack?!

  23. slaked lime

    March 23, 2010 at 11:04 pm

    So Dr Obendorf, it (smoke) now “enveloped much of Tasmania”. Why exaggerate? It has just been the north/north east until your comment #4

  24. David Obendorf

    March 23, 2010 at 10:32 pm

    John surely to goodness someone independent of the forest conflagrationists & air polluters and Forestry Tasmania investigate this incident very precisely. BOM in Tasmania and Victoria maybe helpful to liaise with.

    A few days before a state elections and after FT issues warnings Tasmanians, that it is going to ignite their usual autumn forest burn-offs weather permitting, and then we get the political ‘smokescreen’ and the spin doctored ‘smoke & mirrors’.

    Simple question: where did the smoke come from that enveloped much of Tasmania?

  25. Nic

    March 23, 2010 at 8:06 pm

    Looks like a forestry burn at Surrey Hills in the NW on the 16th, indicated by a tiny red dot on the map and a narrow plume of smoke extending to the east.

    A lot of cloud is visible on the 17th, some of this ‘cloud’ may be smoke since it appears bluish. If it is smoke it is extensive and occurs in Bass strait and is consistent with a northwesterly airstream carrying smoke from Victorian fires. If there are fires or localised smoke in Tasmania these could well be obscured by the cloud.

    I’m not sure what “the Tasmanian sites” refers to.
    Where is the conspiracy?

  26. slaked lime

    March 23, 2010 at 7:28 pm

    Why start another thread?

    ps: The “powers that be” in Tasmania were really smart to get NASA to take some of the information away. Ha ha.

  27. Garry Stannus

    March 23, 2010 at 3:15 pm

    Thanks for this John, we will pore over this!

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Receive our newsletter

Copyright © Tasmanian Times. Site by Pixel Key

To Top