Статті в журналах з теми "Forest fires Victoria East Gippsland"

Eleven stream stations within the basins of the Bemm, Cann, Thurra, Wingan and Genoa Rivers were sampled during a 3-month interval following a prolonged drought and intense and extensive forest fires. Emphasis was placed on flows resulting from three major storms that occurred during this period. Water-quality impacts of the fires were intermingled with those of the preceding drought, and flow- related comparisons with pre-drought data showed appreciable increases in colour, turbidity, suspended solids, potassium and nitrogen levels in the Bemm River, which was only marginally affected by the fires. In the Cann and Genoa Rivers, with much larger proportions of catchment burnt, electrical conductivity and phosphorus concentrations also rose substantially. Marked depletion of dissolved oxygen (to <6 mg I-1) was unique to streams with burnt catchments, but resulted from stagnant conditions at the end of the drought as well as from changes occurring at the time of the first post-fire storm. The fires had little obvious effect on temperature and pH regimes. Peak turbidities and concentrations of suspended solids and phosphorus were much greater in the Cann and Genoa river systems than elsewhere. Maximum values for these indicators were 130 NTU, 2300 mg I-1 and over 0.8 mg I-1, respectively. In the Thurra and Wingan basins, which were also burnt, stream suspended-solids levels were lower (<200 mg I-1), but solutes sometimes reached very high maxima (indicated by peak electrical conductivities of up to 110 mS m-1). Variations in catchment topography and soils and the relative importance of surface and subsurface flow probably account for these differences. The first post-fire storm produced the highest measured levels of many indicators in most streams, although the greatest flows were associated with the third storm. Nitrite and ammonia were notable exceptions to this generalization. Estimates of catchment exports indicated high sediment yields and moderate to high phosphorus yields from the Cann and Genoa catchments, by comparison with other Australian data.

Long-footed potoroos were studied at two widely-separated sites in Victoria, one in regenerating eucalypt forest in East Gippsland and the other in old-growth forest in Central Gippsland. Trap-revealed use of microhabitat at Bellbird (East Gippsland) showed a change from the 1980s to 1990s, with an increased amount of foraging in more open, drier areas. Over the same period, there was an increase in the size of home range of animals and a near-doubling of the minimum numbers of animals known to be alive on the trapping grid at Bellbird. These changes occurred over a period when few environmental changes occurred on the grid other than control of feral predators. Radio-tracking data from 12 animals at the two sites showed a similar trend in use of microhabitat by most animals, but there was individual variation. Differences between the sites were that home-range size was smaller at the Riley trapping grid (Central Gippsland), there was greater overlap in home range, and animals there foraged for significantly shorter bouts. This confirmed earlier speculation from reproductive and dietary studies that there is better quality habitat at Riley, but the sites were so dissimilar that differences in home range and foraging could not be ascribed to either the logging regime or to geographical differences between the sites.

Predation by European red foxes is believed to be the major cause of the extinction and decline of a large number of native medium-sized terrestrial mammals in Australia. We examined the impact of poisoning of foxes on the relative abundance of a group of medium-sized mammals in an experiment conducted in three large forest blocks in south-eastern Australia. The blocks consisted of paired sites, as follows: one site where poison baiting was used to control foxes (treatment site) and one where foxes were not controlled (non-treatment site). At all six sites, the population responses of a range of mammals were measured, and compared between treatment and non-treatment sites. The relative fox abundance, as indexed by bait-take, declined during the course of the study at treatment sites and to a lesser extent at non-treatment sites. The decline in bait-take at non-treatment sites was most likely due to treatment sites acting as ecological traps, so that reduced intra-specific competition attracted foxes from non-treatment to treatment sites, where they were subsequently poisoned. There was a significant treatment effect for the abundances of total mammals, long-nosed potoroos, southern brown bandicoots and common brushtail possums, with higher abundances at treatment sites than at non-treatment sites. Common ringtail possums increased in abundance during the course of the study, with no significant difference between treatment and non-treatment sites. There was no significant effect of time or treatment on the abundance of long-nosed bandicoots. The increase in the abundance of native mammals at treatment sites was most likely due to a lower predation pressure by foxes brought about by fox control, and the smaller increase in abundance in non-treatment blocks was likely due to the ecological-trap effect because of fox baiting at treatment sites. The present study demonstrated that broad-scale fox control can lead to increases in the abundance of native mammals in forested habitats, without recourse to aerial baiting or fences. The study also demonstrated that the influence of fox control on the fox abundance can extend well beyond the perimeter of the area baited.

The rate and spatial scale at which natural environments are being modified by human land-uses mean that a regional or national perspective is necessary to understand the status of the native biota. Here, we outline a landscape-based approach for using data from the ‘New Atlas of Australian Birds’ to examine the distribution and status of avifauna at a regional scale. We use data from two bioregions in south-east Australia – the Gippsland Plain and the Strzelecki Ranges (collectively termed the greater Gippsland Plains) – to demonstrate this approach. Records were compiled for 57 landscape units, each 10′ latitude by 10′ longitude (~270 km2) across the study region. A total of 165 terrestrial bird species was recorded from 1870 ‘area searches’, with a further 24 species added from incidental observations and other surveys. Of these, 108 species were considered ‘typical’ of the greater Gippsland Plain in that they currently or historically occur regularly in the study region. An index of species ‘occurrence’, combining reporting rate and breadth of distribution, was used to identify rare, common, widespread and restricted species. Ordination of the dataset highlighted assemblages of birds that had similar spatial distributions. A complementarity analysis identified a subset of 14 landscape units that together contained records from at least three different landscape units for each of the 108 ‘typical’ species. When compared with the 40 most common ‘typical’ species, the 40 least common species were more likely to be forest specialists, nest on the ground and, owing to the prevalence of raptors in the least common group, take prey on the wing. The future status of the terrestrial avifauna of the greater Gippsland Plains will depend on the extent to which effective restoration actions can be undertaken to ensure adequate representation of habitats for all species, especially for the large number of species of conservation concern.

A survey to assess the distribution of two endangered marsupial species, the long-footed potoroo (Potorous longipes) and the spot-tailed quoll (Dasyurus maculatus) in the south and east of the Goolengook Forest Management Block was conducted in September and October 2006. Survey techniques consisted of hair-tubing, camera surveillance, collecting scat of target species and predators, and searching for activity and tracks of the target species. Eleven sites were surveyed. Twenty-eight records of long-footed potoroo were confirmed at nine of the sites, while one spot-tailed quoll record was confirmed from one of the sites. A record of the long-footed potoroo in the eastern Blackwatch Creek catchment extended, by several kilometres, the boundary of the known East Gippsland distribution at the time of the survey. Long-footed potoroos are distributed widely within the study area and are likely to form part of a contiguous population that extends across the Goolengook Forest and into adjacent forest.

The long-footed potoroo (Potorous longipes) is one of the rarest and most elusive forest-dwelling mammals in Australia. Survey effort for the species over the past decade or so in south-eastern New South Wales has been driven, primarily, by predictions derived from climatic analyses using BIOCLIM. These predictions were based on known locality records of the long-footed potoroo from adjacent East Gippsland, Victoria. While they have proven useful in confirming the occurrence of the species in New South Wales, recent fortuitous records of the species from north-eastern Victoria fall well outside of the range predicted earlier by BIOCLIM. Using these new records a revised predicted range is calculated, enlarging considerably the potential geographic extent of climatically suitable habitat for the species. The results presented here highlight the limitations of BIOCLIM when given locality records of a species from only a portion of its true geographic range. I argue that less emphasis might be based on this approach to direct survey effort for the species in the future. Instead, a range of other environmental variables might be used in combination with BIOCLIM-derived outputs when selecting survey sites. In this way a more representative picture of the distribution of the species may be obtained.

A major wildfire burned 228 400 ha of forest in East Gippsland (Victoria, Australia) in February and March 1983, including Cooaggalah forest block where flora and fauna studies had just commenced. Bird abundance was assessed on 13 sites immediately before and after the fire, and annually for three years to 1986. The sites represented a range of habitats including rainforest, heaths and eucalypt forest, all of which burned. Total bird abundance was reduced to 60% of initial levels by the fire, but recovered within three years. These changes differed significantly between habitats. Initial decreases were greatest and subsequent recovery least in heaths where most above-ground vegetation had been killed. Post-fire increases were greatest in rainforest and on granite ridges, and in each case bird abundance rose to levels substantially higher than before fire. Some changes may have involved recovery from drought as well as fire. Changes over time were highly significant for many groups of birds (e.g., honeyeaters), while others showed little change (e.g., bark-foragers and insectivores that inhabit dense understorey or damp ground below shrubs). Honeyeaters and seed-eaters suffered the greatest initial declines, and some species in these groups were slow to recover (e.g., New Holland and Crescent Honeyeaters and Beautiful Firetail). Some species that feed from open ground increased quickly to levels greater than before fire (Flame and Scarlet Robins, Buff-rumped Thornbill and Superb Fairy-wren), but all except the latter then declined as shrubs regenerated. The main loss of birds immediately after the fire was of highly mobile species, and the composition of the remaining bird fauna appeared to depend on resource availability rather than the capacity of species to survive the fire front. Initial responses of species to fire were poor predictors of their responses after three years. Hence, the effects of fire should be considered in terms of habitat changes over several years. Many forest types including rainforest can provide continuing habitat even when they burn, but populations of mobile birds such as honeyeaters depend on access to alternative habitats on a broad regional scale.

We present a phylogeographic study of the tree species Eucalyptus baueriana Schauer, which occurs in disjunct areas on the near coastal plains and ranges of the south-east Australian mainland. DArTseq data are used to build a phylogeny including E. baueriana and closely related taxa to test its monophyly, test the genetic distinctness of the three subspecies of E. baueriana, and investigate relationships between its disjunct populations. Additionally, we use population structure analysis to investigate the genetic distinctness of populations, and MaxEnt to investigate the environmental factors potentially influencing the species’ distribution. We show E. baueriana is monophyletic and most closely related to three other Blue Box eucalypt species: E. conica H.Deane & Maiden, E. dalveenica T.L.Collins, R.L.Andrew & J.J.Bruhl and E. magnificata L.A.S.Johnson & K.D.Hill, with some evidence for genetic introgression between these taxa. Within E. baueriana, the deepest genetic breaks do not correspond with the subspecies classification as the two geographically restricted subspecies, together with samples of the more widespread E. baueriana subsp. baueriana from west of the Gippsland lowlands, form a south-western clade with that is sister to other populations of subsp. baueriana. The oldest genetic break in the species occurs in far eastern Gippsland (Victoria), corresponding to one of the shortest geographic disjunctions in the species’ distribution. Genetic breaks in other species have been observed in this region which is broadly referred to as the southern transition zone. Both total annual rainfall and the seasonality of this rainfall are hypothesised to affect the species’ distribution; gaps in its distribution are in areas of higher rainfall that support closed forest and in regions with more winter dominated rainfall.

The Late Oligocene to Mid-Miocene (25–13 million years ago) brown coals of the Gippsland Basin in southern Victoria, Australia, were deposited in peat mega-swamps, unlike any in the world at the present day. The swamps preserve a rich botanical suite of macro- and microfossils, many of which can be identified with plant genera and families present today in Australia, New Caledonia, New Zealand and New Guinea. The peat-forming environments also preserve evidence of past burning in the form of micro-charcoal as well as macro-charcoal, the latter being evident as regional lenses or layers of fusinite, generally in coals of the darkest colour termed dark lithotypes. The presence of micro-charcoal in dark and some other lighter lithotypes indicated that fires also burnt locally, although they may have been extinguished before regional-scale burning occurred. It is also feasible that some peat mega-swamp plant communities dominated by rainforest angiosperm plants may have been fire excluders and prevented widespread fires from developing. Pollen and macrofossil evidence is presented of a distinctive southern conifer and angiosperm flora with an open canopy, primarily associated with the darkest coals that formed in the wettest parts of the peat-forming environment. Elsewhere, swamp forests with a large rainforest component grew on swamps raised appreciably above the regional groundwater table in a structural context akin to the ombrogenous peats of tropical coastal Sumatra and Sarawak. These vegetation types were not fire prone, but may have occasionally burnt at a local scale or at forest margins. Evidence is presented for the existence of seasonal climatic conditions that would appear to have facilitated a drying-out of the peat swamps in the warmest months of the year. A mesothermal climate was invoked where mean annual precipitation was at least 1500 mm, and possibly as much as 2000 mm, and mean annual temperatures were ~19°C.

Abstract. 2003 was a record year for wildfires worldwide. Severe forest fires killed four people, displaced 20 500 others and burnt 260 000 ha in South-East Australia in January 2003. The uncontrolled fires ignited in early January 2003 as a result of a prolonged El Niño drought in South-East Australia. Severe weather conditions resulted in a fast spread of the fires and poor air quality in a region where 70% of the population of Australia lives. We use state-of-art global chemistry and transport model GEOS-Chem in conjunction with ground- and space-based observations to study the ozone (O3) and aerosol enhancement due to fires. Firstly, the monthly mean surface O3 and Aerosol Optical Depth (AOD) in January 2003 are compared to January 2004 and, secondly, from sensitivity model simulations, four episodes are isolated and an attempt is made to quantify the contribution of the fires to air quality in south and South-East Australia. In January 2003 the observed monthly mean afternoon surface O3 in Victoria (VIC) and South Australia (SA) reached 27.5 ppb, which is 6.5 ppb (i.e. 30%) higher than in 2004. The simulated O3 is 29.5 ppb, which is 10 ppb higher than in 2004. While the model tends to overestimate the observed peak O3, it exhibits very good skill in reproducing the O3 temporal variability in January 2003 with a correlation of 0.83. In VIC, the air quality 4-h ozone (O3) standard exceedences are reported on 17, 24 and 25 January. On 12, 17, 24–25 and 29 January 2003, the observed O3 peaks above 40 ppb and the simulated fire contribution is higher than 10 ppb. During these 4 episodes, the range of observed O3 enhancement due to fires is 20–35 ppb, which is a factor of 3 to 5 higher than the monthly mean. The simulated fire O3 enhancement is in the range 15–50 ppb with a factor of 1.5 to 5 higher than the monthly mean. During two episodes, a well-formed surface wind channel stretches across the Tasman Sea facilitating the long range transport to New Zealand contributing to a 10% increase of surface O3. During the four episodes in January 2003, the observed AOD was up to a factor of five higher that the monthly mean AOD. The simulated and observed AODs agree on the spatial structure. Despite the model tendency to underestimate the AOD, it proves a useful tool in reconstructing the mostly patchy observations.

The rarely encountered giant burrowing frog, Heleioporus australiacus, is distributed widely in a variety of sclerophyll forest habitats east of the Great Dividing Range in south-eastern Australia. Analyses of variation in nucleotide sequences of the mitochondrial ND4 gene and thousands of nuclear gene SNPs revealed the presence of two deeply divergent lineages. Multivariate morphological comparisons show the two lineages differ in body proportions with > 91% of individuals being correctly classified in DFA. The two lineages differ in the number and size of spots on the lateral surfaces and the degree by which the cloaca is surrounded by colour patches. The mating calls are significantly different in number of pulses in the note. The presence of a F2 hybrid in the area where the distribution of the two taxa come into closest proximity leads us to assign subspecies status to the lineages, as we have not been able to assess the extent of potential genetic introgression. In our sampling, the F2 hybrid sample sits within an otherwise unsampled gap of ~90km between the distributions of the two lineages. The nominate northern sub-species is restricted to the Sydney Basin bioregion, while the newly recognised southern subspecies occurs from south of the Kangaroo Valley in the mid-southern coast of New South Wales to near Walhalla in central Gippsland in Victoria. The habitat of the two subspecies is remarkably similar. Adults spend large portions of their lives on the forest floor where they forage and burrow in a variety of vegetation communities. The southern subspecies occurs most commonly in dry sclerophyll forests with an open understory in the south and in open forest and heath communities with a dense understory in the north of its distribution. The northern subspecies is also found in dry open forests and heaths in association with eroded sandstone landscapes in the Sydney Basin bioregion. Males of both taxa call from both constructed burrows and open positions on small streams, differing from the five Western Australian species of Heleioporus where males call only from constructed burrows. Using the IUCN Red List process, we found that the extent of occupancy and area of occupancy along with evidence of decline for both subspecies are consistent with the criteria for Endangered (A2(c)B2(a)(b)).

The Black Summer of 2019/2020 saw the forests of southeast Australia go up in flames. The fire season started early, in September 2019, and by March 2020 fires had burned over 12.6 million hectares (Werner and Lyons). The scale and severity of the fires was quickly confirmed by scientists to be “unprecedented globally” (Boer et al.) and attributable to climate change (Nolan et al.).The fires were also a media spectacle, generating months of apocalyptic front-page images and harrowing broadcast footage. Media coverage was particularly preoccupied by the cause of the fires. Media framing of disasters often seeks to attribute blame (Anderson et al.; Ewart and McLean) and, over the course of the fire period, blame for the fires was attributed to climate change in much media coverage. However, as the disaster unfolded, denialist discourses in some media outlets sought to veil this revelation by providing alternative explanations for the fires. Misinformation originating from social media also contributed to this obscuration.In this article, we investigate the extent to which media coverage of the 2019/2020 bushfires functioned both to precipitate a climate change epiphany and also to support refutation of the connection between catastrophic fires and the climate crisis.Environmental Communication and RevelationIn its biblical sense, revelation is both an ending and an opening: it is the apocalyptic end-time and also the “revealing” of this time through stories and images. Environmental communication has always been revelatory, in these dual senses of the word – it is a mode of communication that is tightly bound to crisis; that has long grappled with obfuscation and misinformation; and that disrupts power structures and notions of the status quo as it seeks to reveal what is hidden. Climate change in particular is associated in the popular imagination with apocalypse, and is also a reality that is constantly being “revealed”. Indeed, the narrative of climate change has been “animated by the revelations of science” (McNeish 1045) and presented to the public through “key moments of disclosure and revelation”, or “signal moments”, such as scientist James Hansen’s 1988 US Senate testimony on global warming (Hamblyn 224).Journalism is “at the frontline of environmental communication” (Parham 96) and environmental news, too, is often revelatory in nature – it exposes the problems inherent in the human relationship with the natural world, and it reveals the scientific evidence behind contentious issues such as climate change. Like other environmental communicators, environmental journalists seek to “break through the perceptual paralysis” (Nisbet 44) surrounding climate change, with the dual aim of better informing the public and instigating policy change. Yet leading environmental commentators continually call for “better media coverage” of the planetary crisis (Suzuki), as climate change is repeatedly bumped off the news agenda by stories and events deemed more newsworthy.News coverage of climate-related disasters is often revelatory both in tone and in cultural function. The disasters themselves and the news narratives which communicate them become processes that make visible what is hidden. Because environmental news is “event driven” (Hansen 95), disasters receive far more news coverage than ongoing problems and trends such as climate change itself, or more quietly devastating issues such as species extinction or climate migration. Disasters are also highly visual in nature. Trumbo (269) describes climate change as an issue that is urgent, global in scale, and yet “practically invisible”; in this sense, climate-related disasters become a means of visualising and realising what is otherwise a complex, difficult, abstract, and un-seeable concept.Unsurprisingly, natural disasters are often presented to the public through a film of apocalyptic rhetoric and imagery. Yet natural disasters can be also “revelatory” moments: instances of awakening in which suppressed truths come spectacularly and devastatingly to the surface. Matthewman (9–10) argues that “disasters afford us insights into social reality that ordinarily pass unnoticed. As such, they can be read as modes of disclosure, forms of communication”. Disasters, he continues, can reveal both “our new normal” and “our general existential condition”, bringing “the underbelly of progress into sharp relief”. Similarly, Lukes (1) states that disasters “lift veils”, revealing “what is hidden from view in normal times”. Yet for Lukes, “the revelation tells us nothing new, nothing that we did not already know”, and is instead a forced confronting of that which is known yet difficult to engage with. Lukes’ concern is the “revealing” of poverty and inequality in New Orleans following the impact of Hurricane Katrina, yet climate-related disasters can also make visible what McNeish terms “the dark side effects of industrial civilisation” (1047). The Australian bushfires of 2019/2020 can be read in these terms, primarily because they unveiled the connection between climate change and extreme events. Scorching millions of hectares, with a devastating impact on human and non-human communities, the fires revealed climate change as a physical reality, and—for Australians—as a local issue as well as a global one. As media coverage of the fires unfolded and smoke settled on half the country, the impact of climate change on individual lives, communities, landscapes, native animal and plant species, and well-established cultural practices (such as the summer camping holiday) could be fully and dramatically realised. Even for those Australians not immediately impacted, the effects were lived and felt: in our lungs, and on our skin, a physical revelation that the impacts of climate change are not limited to geographically distant people or as-yet-unborn future generations. For many of us, the summer of fire was a realisation that climate change can no longer be held at arm’s length.“Revelation” also involves a temporal collapse whereby the future is dragged into the present. A revelatory streak of this nature has always existed at the heart of environmental communication and can be traced back at least as far as the environmentalist Rachel Carson, whose 1962 book Silent Spring revealed a bleak, apocalyptic future devoid of wildlife and birdsong. In other words, environmental communication can inspire action for change by exposing the ways in which the comforts and securities of the present are built upon a refusal to engage with the future. This temporal rupture where the future meets the present is particularly characteristic of climate change narratives. It is not surprising, then, that media coverage of the 2019/2020 bushfires addressed not just the immediate loss and devastation but also dread of the future, and the understanding that summer will increasingly hold such threats. Bushfires, Climate Change and the MediaThe link between bushfire risk and climate change generated a flurry of coverage in the Australian media well before the fires started in the spring of 2019. In April that year, a coalition of 23 former fire and emergency services leaders warned that Australia was “unprepared for an escalating climate threat” (Cox). They requested a meeting with the new government, to be elected in May, and better funding for firefighting to face the coming bushfire season. When that meeting was granted, at the end of Australia’s hottest and driest year on record (Doyle) in November 2019, bushfires had already been burning for two months. As the fires burned, the emergency leaders expressed frustration that their warnings had been ignored, claiming they had been “gagged” because “you are not allowed to talk about climate change”. They cited climate change as the key reason why the fire season was lengthening and fires were harder to fight. "If it's not time now to speak about climate and what's driving these events”, they asked, “– when?" (McCubbing).The mediatised uncovering of a bushfire/climate change connection was not strictly a revelation. Recent fires in California, Russia, the Amazon, Greece, and Sweden have all been reported in the media as having been exacerbated by climate change. Australia, however, has long regarded itself as a “fire continent”: a place adapted to fire, whose landscapes invite fire and can recover from it. Bushfires had therefore been considered part of the Australian “normal”. But in the Australian spring of 2019, with fires having started earlier than ever and charring rainforests that did not usually burn, the fire chiefs’ warning of a climate change-induced catastrophic bushfire season seemed prescient. As the fires spread and merged, taking homes, lives, landscapes, and driving people towards the water, revelatory images emerged in the media. Pictures of fire refugees fleeing under dystopian crimson skies, masked against the smoke, were accompanied by headlines like “Apocalypse Now” (Fife-Yeomans) and “Escaping Hell” (The Independent). Reports used words like “terror”, “nightmare” (Smee), “mayhem”, and “Armageddon” (Davidson).In the Australian media, the fire/climate change connection quickly became politicised. The Deputy Prime Minister Michael McCormack interviewed by the ABC, responding to a comment by Greens leader Adam Bandt, said connecting bushfire and climate while the fires raged was “disgraceful” and “disgusting”. People needed help, he said, not “the ravings of some pure enlightened and woke capital city greenies” (Goloubeva and Haydar). Gladys Berejiklian the NSW Premier also described it as “inappropriate” (Baker) and “disappointing” (Fox and Higgins) to talk about climate change at this time. However Carol Sparks, Mayor of bushfire-ravaged Glen Innes in rural NSW, contradicted this stance, telling the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) “Michael McCormack needs to read the science”. Climate change, she said, was “not a political thing” but “scientific fact” (Goloubeva and Haydar).As the fires merged and intensified, so did the media firestorm. Key Australian media became a sparring ground for issue definition, with media predictably split down ideological lines. Public broadcasters the ABC and SBS (Special Broadcasting Service), along with The Age, The Sydney Morning Herald and The Guardian Australia, predominantly framed the catastrophe as wrought by climate change. The Guardian, in an in-depth investigation of climate science and bushfire risk, stated that “despite the political smokescreen” the connection between the fires and global warming was “unequivocal” (Redfearn). The ABC characterised the fires as “a glimpse of the horrors of climate change’s crescendoing impact” (Rose). News outlets owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp Australia, however, actively sought to play down the fires’ seriousness. On 2 January, as front pages of newspapers across the world revealed horrifying fiery images, Murdoch’s Australian ran an upbeat shot of New Year’s Day picnic races as its lead, relegating discussion of the fires to page 4 (Meade). More than simply obscuring the fires’ significance, News Corp media actively sought to convince readers that the fires were not out of the ordinary. For example, as the fires’ magnitude was becoming clear on the last day of 2019, The Australian ran a piece comparing the fires with previous conflagrations, claiming such conditions were “not unprecedented” and the fires were “nothing new” (Johnstone). News Corp’s Sky News also used this frame: “climate alarmists”, “catastrophise”, and “don’t want to look at history”, it stated in a segment comparing the event to past major bushfires (Kenny).As the fires continued into January and February 2020, the refutation of the climate change frame solidified around several themes. Conservative media continued to insist the fires were “normal” for Australia and attributed their severity to a lack of hazard reduction burning, which they blamed on “Greens policies” (Brown and Caisley). They also promoted the argument, espoused by Energy Minister Angus Taylor, that with only “1.3% of global emissions” Australia “could not have meaningful impact” on global warming through emissions reductions, and that top-down climate mitigation pressure from the UN was “doomed to fail” (Lloyd). Foreign media saw the fires in quite different terms. From the outside looking in, the Australian fires were clearly revealed as fuelled by global heating and exacerbated by the Australian government’s climate denialism. Australia was framed as a “notorious climate offender” (Shield) that was—as The New York Times put it—“committing climate suicide” (Flanagan) with its lack of coherent climate policy and its predilection for mining coal. Ouest-France ran a headline reading “High on carbon, rich Australia denies global warming” in which it called Scott Morrison’s position on climate change “incomprehensible” (Guibert). The LA Times called the Australian fires “a climate change warning to its leaders—and ours”, noting how “fossil fuel friendly Morrison” had “gleefully wielded a fist-sized chunk of coal on the floor of parliament in 2017” (Karlik). In the UK, the Independent online ran a front page spread of the fires’ vast smoke plume, with the headline “This is what a climate crisis looks like” (Independent Online), while Australian MP Craig Kelly was called “disgraceful” by an interviewer on Good Morning Britain for denying the fires’ link to climate change (Good Morning Britain).Both in Australia and internationally, deliberate misinformation spread by social media additionally shaped media discourse on the fires. The false revelation that the fires had predominantly been started by arson spread on Twitter under the hashtag #ArsonEmergency. While research has been quick to show that this hashtag was artificially promoted by bots (Weber et al.), this and misinformation like it was also shared and amplified by real Twitter users, and quickly spread into mainstream media in Australia—including Murdoch’s Australian (Ross and Reid)—and internationally. Such misinformation was used to shore up denialist discourses about the fires, and to obscure revelation of the fire/climate change connection. Blame Framing, Public Opinion and the Extent of the Climate Change RevelationAs studies of media coverage of environmental disasters show us, media seek to apportion blame. This blame framing is “accountability work”, undertaken to explain how and why a disaster occurred, with the aim of “scrutinizing the actions of crisis actors, and holding responsible authorities to account” (Anderson et al. 930). In moments of disaster and in their aftermath, “framing contests” (Benford and Snow) can emerge in which some actors, regarding the crisis as an opportunity for change, highlight the systemic issues that have led to the crisis. Other actors, experiencing the crisis as a threat to the status quo, try to attribute the blame to others, and deny the need for policy change. As the Black Summer unfolded, just such a contest took place in Australian media discourse. While Murdoch’s dominant News Corp media sought to protect the status quo, promote conservative politicians’ views, and divert attention from the climate crisis, other Australian and overseas media outlets revealed the fires’ link to climate change and intransigent emissions policy. However, cracks did begin to show in the News Corp stance on climate change during the fires: an internal whistleblower publicly resigned over the media company’s fires coverage, calling it a “misinformation campaign”, and James Murdoch also spoke out about being “disappointed with the ongoing denial of the role of climate change” in reporting the fires (ABC/Reuters).Although media reporting on the environment has long been at the forefront of shaping social understanding of environmental issues, and news maintains a central role in both revealing environmental threats and shaping environmental politics (Lester), during Australia’s Black Summer people were also learning about the fires from lived experience. Polls show that the fires affected 57% of Australians. Even those distant from the catastrophe were, for some time, breathing the most toxic air in the world. This personal experience of disaster revealed a bushfire season that was far outside the normal, and public opinion reflected this. A YouGov Australia Institute poll in January 2020 found that 79% of Australians were concerned about climate change—an increase of 5% from July 2019—and 67% believed climate change was making the bushfires worse (Australia Institute). However, a January 2020 Ipsos poll also found that polarisation along political lines on whether climate change was indeed occurring had increased since 2018, and was at its highest levels since 2014 (Crowe). This may reflect the kind of polarised media landscape that was evident during the fires. A thorough dissection in public discourse of Australia’s unprecedented fire season has been largely eclipsed by the vast coverage of the coronavirus pandemic that so quickly followed it. In May 2020, however, the fires were back in the media, when the Bushfires Royal Commission found that the Black Summer “played out exactly as scientists predicted it would” and that more seasons like it were now “locked in” because of carbon emissions (Hitch). It now remains to be seen whether the revelatory extent of the climate change blame frame that played out in media discourse on the fires will be sufficient to garner meaningful action and policy change—or whether denialist discourses will again obscure climate change revelation and seek to maintain the status quo. References Anderson, Deb, et al. "Fanning the Blame: Media Accountability, Climate and Crisis on the Australian ‘Fire Continent’." Environmental Communication 12.7 (2018): 928-41.Australia Institute. “Climate Change Concern.” Jan. 2020. <https://www.tai.org.au/sites/default/files/Polling%20-%20January%202020%20-%20Climate%20change%20concern%20and%20attitude%20%5BWeb%5D.pdf>.Baker, Nick. “NSW Mayor Alams Deputy PM’s 'Insulting' Climate Change Attack during Bushfires.” SBS News 11 Nov. 2019. <https://www.sbs.com.au/news/nsw-mayor-slams-deputy-pm-s-insulting-climate-change-attack-during-bushfires>.Benford, Robert D., and David A. Snow. "Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment." Annual Review of Sociology 26.1 (2000): 611-39.Boer, Matthias M., Víctor Resco de Dios, and Ross A. Bradstock. "Unprecedented Burn Area of Australian Mega Forest Fires." Nature Climate Change 10.3 (2020): 171-72.Brown, Greg, and Olivia Caisley. “Greens Policies Increasing Bushfire Threat, Barnaby Joyce Says.” The Australian 11 Nov. 2019. <https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/deputy-pm-michael-mccormack-slams-raving-innercity-lunatics-for-linking-climate-change-to-fires/news-story/5c3ba8d3e72bc5f10fcf49a94fc9be85>.Carson, Rachel. Silent Spring. Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin, 2002 [1962].Cox, Lisa. “Former Fire Chiefs Warn Australia Is Unprepared for Escalating Fire Threat.” The Guardian 10 Apr. 2019. <https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/apr/09/former-fire-chiefs-warn-australia-unprepared-for-escalating-climate-threat>.Crowe, David. “Ipsos Poll Offers Only a Rough Guide to the Liberal Party’s Uncertain Fate.” Sydney Morning Herald 7 Apr. 2019.Davidson, Helen. “Mallacoota Fire: Images of 'Mayhem' and 'Armageddon' as Bushfires Rage.” The Guardian 31 Dec. 2019. <https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/dec/31/mallacoota-fire-mayhem-armageddon-bushfires-rage-victoria-east-gippsland>.Doyle, Kate. “2019 Was Australia’s Hottest and Driest Year on Record.” ABC News 2 Jan. 2020. <https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-02/2019-was-australias-hottest-and-driest-year-on-record/11837312>.“Escaping Hell.” The Independent 2 Jan. 2020.Ewart, Jacqui, and Hamish McLean. "Ducking for Cover in the ‘Blame Game’: News Framing of the Findings of Two Reports into the 2010–11 Queensland floods." Disasters 39.1 (2015): 166-84.Fife-Yeomans, Janet. “Apocalypse Now.” Herald Sun 1 Jan. 2020. Flanagan, Richard. “Australia Is Committing Climate Suicide.” The New York Times 3 Jan. 2020. <https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/03/opinion/australia-fires-climate-change.html>.Fox, Aine, and Hannah Higgins. “Climate Talks for Another Day: NSW Premier.” 7 News 11 Nov. 2019. <https://7news.com.au/news/disaster-and-emergency/climate-change-talk-inappropriate-premier-c-55045>.Goloubeva, Jenya, and Nour Haydar. “Regional Mayors Criticise Politicians for Failing to Link Climate Change and Deadly Bushfires.” ABC News 11 Nov. 2019. <https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-11/carol-sparks-climate-change-federal-government-claire-pontin/11691444>.Good Morning Britain. “Interview with Craig Kelly MP.” ITV 6 Jan. 2020.Guibert, Christelle. “Dopée au Charbon, la Riche Australie Nie le Réchauffement Climatique.” Ouest France 20 Dec. 2019. <https://www.ouest-france.fr/monde/australie/dopee-au-charbon-la-riche-australie-nie-le-rechauffement-climatique-6664289>.Hamblyn, Richard. “The Whistleblower and the Canary: Rhetorical Constructions of Climate Change.” Journal of Historical Geography 35 (2009): 223–36.Hansen, Anders. Environment, Media, and Communication. New York: Routledge, 2010.Happer, Catherine, and Greg Philo. “New Approaches to Understanding the Role of the News Media in the Formation of Public Attitudes and Behaviours on Climate Change.” European Journal of Communication 31.2 (2016): 136–51.Hitch, Georgia. “Bushfire Royal Commission: 'Black Summer' Played Out Exactly as Scientists Predicted It Would.” ABC News 25 May 2020. <https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-25/bushfire-royal-commission-hearing-updates/12282808>.Johnstone, Craig. “History of Disasters Shows There Is Nothing New about Nation’s Destructive Blazes.” The Australian 31 Dec. 2019. <https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/history-of-disasters-shows-there-is-nothing-new-about-nations-destructive-blazes/news-story/f43c2a6037a8b0e422a69880bce10139>.Karlik, Evan. “Opinion: In Australia’s Raging Bushfires, a Climate-Change Warning to Its Leaders — and Ours.” The Los Angeles Times 10 Jan. 2020. <https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-01-10/australia-fires-prime-minister-politics-united-states>.Kenny, Chris. “Climate Alarmists Don't Want to Look at History.” Sky News 21 Nov. 2019. <https://www.skynews.com.au/details/_6106878027001>.Lester, Libby. Media & Environment: Conflict, Politics and the News. Polity: Cambridge, 2010. Lloyd, Graham. “Climate Pressure ‘Doomed to Fail’, Says Angus Taylor.” The Australian 30 Dec. 2019. <https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/climate-pressure-doomed-to-fail-says-angus-taylor/news-story/f2441a20c70b944dd1d54ae15f304791>.Lukes, Stephen. “Questions about Power: Lessons from the Louisiana Hurricane.” Social Science Research Council (2006). 12 May. 2020 <https://items.ssrc.org/understanding-katrina/questions-about-power-lessons-from-the-louisiana-hurricane/>.Matthewman, Steve. Disasters, Risks and Revelation: Making Sense of Our Times. London and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015.McCubbing, Gus. “Declare Climate Emergency: Ex-Fire Chiefs.” The Canberra Times 14 Nov. 2019. <https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6491540/declare-climate-emergency-ex-fire-chiefs/>.McNeish, Wallace. “From Revelation to Revolution: Apocalypticism in Green Politics.” Environmental Politics 26.6 (2017): 1035–54.Meade, Amanda. “The Australian: Murdoch-Owned Newspaper Accused of Downplaying Bushfires in Favour of Picnic Races.” The Guardian 4 Jan. 2020. <https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/jan/04/the-australian-murdoch-owned-newspaper-accused-of-downplaying-bushfires-in-favour-of-picnic-races>.Nisbet Matthew C. “Knowledge into Action: Framing the Debates over Climate Change and Poverty.” Doing News Framing Analysis: Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives. Eds. Paul D’Angelo and Jim A. Kuypers. London and New York: Routledge, 2010. 59–99.Nolan, Rachael H., et al. "Causes and Consequences of Eastern Australia’s 2019‐20 Season of Mega‐Fires." Global Change Biology (2020): 1039-41.Parham, John. Green Media and Popular Culture: An Introduction. New York and London: Palgrave, 2016.Redfearn, Graham. “Explainer: What Are the Underlying Causes of Australia's Shocking Bushfire Season?” The Guardian 13 Jan. 2020. <https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jan/13/explainer-what-are-the-underlying-causes-of-australias-shocking-bushfire-season>.Rose, Anna. “The Battle against the Bushfires Should Focus Our Attention on the War against Climate Inaction”. ABC News 2 Feb. 2020. <https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-02/battle-against-bushfires-war-against-climate-inaction/11909806>.Ross, David, and Imogen Reid. “Bushfires: Firebugs Fuelling Crisis as National Arson Toll Hits 183.” The Australian 15 Jan. 2020. <https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/bushfires-firebugs-fuelling-crisis-asarson-arresttollhits183/news-story/52536dc9ca9bb87b7c76d36ed1acf53f>. “Rupert Murdoch's Son James Criticises News Corp, Fox for Climate Change and Bushfire Coverage.” ABC/Reuters 15 Jan. 2020. <https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-15/james-murdoch-criticises-news-corp-fox-climate-change-coverage/11868544>.Shield, Charli. “Australian Bushfires: The Canary Building the Coal Mine.” Deutsche Welle 1 Jan. 2020. <https://www.dw.com/en/australian-bushfires-the-canary-building-the-coal-mine/a-51955677>.Smee, Ben. “Darkness at Noon: Australia’s Bushfire Day of Terror.” The Guardian 31 Dec. 2019. <https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/dec/31/darkness-at-noon-australia-bushfire-day-of-terror>.“This Is What a Climate Crisis Looks Like.” Independent Online. 2 Jan. 2020. Suzuki, David. “Ecological Crises Deserve Better Media Coverage.” The David Suzuki Foundation, 2020. 18 Mar. 2020. <https://davidsuzuki.org/story/ecological-crises-deserve-better-media-coverage/>.Trumbo, Craig. “Constructing Climate Change: Claims and Frames in US News Coverage of an Environmental Issue.” Public Understanding of Science 5.3 (1996): 269–84.Weber, Derek, et al. "#ArsonEmergency and Australia's ‘Black Summer’: Polarisation and Misinformation on Social Media." arXiv preprint arXiv:2004.00742 (2020).Werner, Joel, and Suzannah Lyons. “The Size of Australia's Bushfire Crisis Captured in Five Big Numbers.” ABC News 5 Mar. 2020. <https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2020-03-05/bushfire-crisis-five-big-numbers/12007716>.