Melbourne, Thursday 2 February 1939

Eucalypt tree forests are different from Northern Hemisphere forests which are the best developed in the world, in that the leaves, instead of being broadside on to the sun, in that way casting a deep shadow, hang side on with the eucalypt, thus permitting a great amount of light to stream through on to the forest floor. That favours the growth of the under stories.

By measurements I have made, I have found that approximately 15 per cent of light passes through the crown of mountain ash. In the Northern Hemisphere forests, and principally so in Germany where it reaches highest development, German foresters claim to intercept 99 percent of the light.

That means there is practically no light reaching the forest floor and there is no growth at all. … Fires tend to destroy the crowns thereby opening up gaps between the trees and permitting a greater amount of light to get in, thus favouring the growth of scrub. On the other side of the world there is practically no light reaching the floor to permit this undergrowth, hence you only have the trees.

In connection with the condition of our forests before the arrival of white men, I have given attention to that factor over a considerable period. Very large trees existed in our forests, reaching a maximum in the case of King Edward VII which is on the track from Marysville to Cumberland. I have tried to arrive at the age of those huge trees, and find it very difficult.

On the other side of the world, tree age can be calculated very readily by rings of growth, but that is impossible in our case. The rate of growth was very low in the old age, and I would not be surprised, or rather. I estimate the age of King Edward VII to be in the neighbourhood of 3,000 years. Possibly it is the world's oldest tree.

There are a large number of these old large trees, which indicates that the forests were not burnt. Hill tree ferns which accompany the mountain ash I would regard as being in the neighbourhood of 500 years old. The size of the old musk trees, blanket woods and beeches suggests that they have been immune from fire in the past.

In the short space of time that the white man has spent in Victoria, all these magnificent specimens have gone. The apparently even aged forest is very uneven aged. With regard to the types of fires, and the devastating fires we had recently, it is interesting to record the damage done, and the effects on the forest.

After the 1926 fires, we made a succession of studies in the Blacks Spur region, particularly with regard to the growth of bracken, and I noted that bracken came through after thirteen days following the Acheron fire. No rain had fallen. Bracken fern was first through, and we recorded up to seven stems per square foot of bracken fern.

Bracken is practically the only thing that is completely undamaged ultimately by fire. Bracken, I regard as the most serious menace to the water supply of this State. Most plants shed their seeds when mature, but eucalypts hold their seeds, and this has an effect in the regeneration through seedlings.

The trees seed late, and if a fire destroys young seeds before they can seed themselves, the area must necessarily be completely devoid of trees from then onwards, and, if the fires continue, we finally get only bracken. The difficulty of re-establishing a forest in bracken areas is serious.

[Mr. Kelso] It has been put before the Commission that if we kept the fire out of the forest, we would generate so much scrub as to make it dangerous from a fire risk point of view.

Is it not a fact that if we kept the fire out, it would foster a true canopy that would act in depressing the scrub?
Scrub will only grow in such places where it can obtain light, carbon dioxide from the air, and moisture from the soil.

[The Commissioner] What about the eucalypts? You told us that the leaf hangs vertically and does not afford so much cover. Do you agree that you could build up a sufficient canopy there?
Yes. Let us go back to the German forest for a moment for a parallel.

[Mr. Kelso] One way of assisting in the growth of shrubs, and particularly of bracken, is by the use of fire?
The more you open up the crown, the more light will get through, and the more light you have, the greater the amount of ground material and growth generally.

[The Commissioner] You speak of suppressing scrub so that you can get rid of it by improving the canopy. Take the present state of our forests, would you not have to wait for many years to achieve that end?

To get the canopy you would like to see, I suggest would necessitate the employment of an army of men planting and re-afforesting? [Yet] If you wish to exclude fire from the forest, I take it you must exclude all people?
No, I would not say that. The Germans, for instance, open up the forests for people to go through them. The more people go through the forests the more they will appreciate the forests and support forest activities.

I am afraid you have to deal with Victoria. The Germans may be better educated on that subject. Even if you keep fire out of the forest for so many years, I think you might never achieve your object of the trees forming a canopy that would mutually suppress the undergrowth?
I should say that, aided by the hand of man, and with real scientific control, you could obtain the canopy that is desired. Other nations have achieved it, and I do not see why we cannot.

It seems to me that it would take a long period. We must be patient and active, if I may use that paradox - physically patient and mentally active. Whilst that is taking place, the cycle of seasons will continue and there will perhaps be another repetition of January the 13th a few years hence. You may take precautions and yet again have fire?
I would take every precaution to fight fire if it arises.

As part of those precautions, would you use fire?
I do not like fire under any consideration. Fire does damage. I would work on the basis that I could prevent fire from getting in. To use fire successively is undoubtedly to create damage, and it may be that you will have a sufficiently long spell to enable you to get the forests in good order. There was 13 years between 1926 and 1939. That is a good long period to enable active measures to be taken.

I suppose people will be saying something like that in 50 years' time?
Yes, that is one of the evils of democracy.

[Mr. Kelso] Does that explain the reference to Germany?
Germany does not happen to represent my brand of politics, but I admire the Germans for their efficiency. I have the utmost regard for them in that respect.

[Mr. Barber] Does it amount to this: that while you are waiting 10 or 15 years to grow a canopy to kill the undergrowth, you are in the meantime subject to a severe fire hazard?
Admittedly.

[The Commissioner] There appear to be two points of view. The Doctor is saying that if you burn you destroy, and he would not destroy. The point is, should responsible authorities be allowed to destroy a little in order to save a lot?
If one assents to that doctrine, what is 'a little'? 'A little' might be a mighty lot at the end. I would not trust anyone with fire. I will not have it under any consideration.

[Mr. Barber] I take it that you would entirely exclude fire from the forests?
I would.

Read more about what a leading botanist in 2004 has to say about Victorian forests in the Aftermath Section