Liz Donoghue in her article in the November Indigenotes poses the problem of the loss of biodiversity in grasslands and grassy woodlands.She rightly points to the overgrowth of tussocks which shade out those non-grass species which make up the biodiversity. ( Lilies, Orchids and Daisy species predominate). This is the problem in grasslands, but in grassy woodlands an additional shading factor is the growth of shrub species.I would like to make a case for the use of fire as the main agent of biomass reduction. Liz says we have been ‘seduced’ by the idea of pre-1750 Aboriginal burning in grasslands, but I ask her to consider that the fire-adapted grassland ecosystems have evolved under many thousands of years of Aboriginal burning. That original biodiversity which the Europeans first recorded in the grasslands and which now serves us as a benchmark was the result of Aboriginal patterns of management. The purpose of the management in south-eastern Australia was primarily to maximise the growth of the tuberous perennial species which were the most important vegetable foods – and the two species she cites - Wurmbea dioica and Hypoxis vaginata are examples of this.Grazing by kangaroos and wallabies certainly would have contributed to the control of grass tussocks, but their populations in turn were restricted by Aboriginal hunting. Certainly we could encourage the grazing of areas by native animals, but I find it alarming that Liz should consider the use of sheep to control fuel loads, since they are well known to reduce the biodiversity of native species. Within ten years of the settlement of Melbourne we have a complaint from Moonin Moonin, a Goulburn Aborigine, that the cattle and sheep have completely destroyed Murnong Microseris lanceolata and other food species originally common in the grasslands and open forests around Melbourne. Another early record from Curr describes the sheep scratching up and eating the tubers of Murnong. It is well to remember that the frequency of burning by Aborigines was determined not by a time scale, but by observation of the land itself, and that the method was to burn in controlled patches, producing a mosaic of areas in different stages of fire recovery. Fuel loads did not accumulate to disastrous levels. The burns were carried out when the tuberous perennials were dormant – early autumn, when they had already shed seed, and not when they were in full vegetative growth during winter and spring. In addition, the Aborigines were able to draw on long-accumulated knowledge of weather patterns to time their burns. Now I recognise that to copy the Aboriginal burning patterns which produced maximum biodiversity presents difficulties in the present day, particularly in areas where lack of regular burning has resulted in high fuel loads. The difficulties may be summed up as follows:

1. Early autumn is a dangerous time to burn, considering the weather and the dry condition of the vegetation.
2. It is unwise to burn areas where the fuel load is very high
3. Obtaining permission and sufficient personnel to control the burn may be an unsurmountable obstacle.

Nevertheless, over a long time scale, if we want to maximise biodiversity, we should be guided by the Aboriginal history of management by fire of the grasslands and open forests.Reference: Gott, B. 2005 Aboriginal Fire Management in South-eastern Australia: aims and frequency. Journal of Biogeography 32, 1203-1208.