roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

NSW scarred tree manual

Carved Trees

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

NSW scarred tree manual

Carved Trees

roughbarked said:

mollwollfumble said:

mollwollfumble said:

Don’t know why that link failed for me. From this tablet I have to use.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/cultureheritage/ScarredTreeManual.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjs_pzB5brgAhURfn0KHU-IDAQQFjAAegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw1FlBhfyCCXc31HkoP1trS8

Reading it now. Interesting.

“Bark strip and fibre components were used in the manufacture of a wide range of artefacts
and consumable commodities, such as sewing thread, fishing line/nets, binding twine,
climbing ropes, torches, tinder, blankets, disposable utensils, wrappers, packaging and
clothing accessories. Wattlebark chips were also used as a poison for stunning fish or
eels, as well as a tanning agent in curing skins.”

and they were firstly suppposed not to exist and secondly be savages who didn’t practice agriculture or any known science?

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

“Bark strip and fibre components were used in the manufacture of a wide range of artefacts
and consumable commodities, such as sewing thread, fishing line/nets, binding twine,
climbing ropes, torches, tinder, blankets, disposable utensils, wrappers, packaging and
clothing accessories. Wattlebark chips were also used as a poison for stunning fish or
eels, as well as a tanning agent in curing skins.”

and they were firstly suppposed not to exist and secondly be savages who didn’t practice agriculture or any known science?

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

mollwollfumble said:

“Bark strip and fibre components were used in the manufacture of a wide range of artefacts
and consumable commodities, such as sewing thread, fishing line/nets, binding twine,
climbing ropes, torches, tinder, blankets, disposable utensils, wrappers, packaging and
clothing accessories. Wattlebark chips were also used as a poison for stunning fish or
eels, as well as a tanning agent in curing skins.”

and they were firstly suppposed not to exist and secondly be savages who didn’t practice agriculture or any known science?

I can’t actually update this album set as the new owners of Flickr want me to pay them for the privilege. Thankfully they have extended the deadline on free accounts but I still cannot upload more until I buy more tiime. Scar Trees

roughbarked said:

and they were firstly suppposed not to exist and secondly be savages who didn’t practice agriculture or any known science?

Pffft.

It’s a well known fact that Australian Aborigines invented the Bar-Be-Que when they lit some scrub on fire and chased a mob of ‘Roos into it.

:-)

Rule 303 said:

roughbarked said:

and they were firstly suppposed not to exist and secondly be savages who didn’t practice agriculture or any known science?

Pffft.

It’s a well known fact that Australian Aborigines invented the Bar-Be-Que when they lit some scrub on fire and chased a mob of ‘Roos into it.

:-)

Yeah well, they were doing it for a long time before anyone noticed that they also knew how to toss a raw prawn on too.

Judge voids Paul Manafort plea deal, says he ‘intentionally’ lied to the FBI, special counsel and grand jury

Darla Shine, the wife of White House communications chief Bill Shine, has pushed false anti-vaccination claims on Twitter, tweeting that childhood diseases such as measles “keep you healthy & fight cancer.”

dv said:

Judge voids Paul Manafort plea deal, says he ‘intentionally’ lied to the FBI, special counsel and grand jury

Darla Shine, the wife of White House communications chief Bill Shine, has pushed false anti-vaccination claims on Twitter, tweeting that childhood diseases such as measles “keep you healthy & fight cancer.”

When was this carved on a tree?

roughbarked said:

Rule 303 said:

roughbarked said:

and they were firstly suppposed not to exist and secondly be savages who didn’t practice agriculture or any known science?

Pffft.

It’s a well known fact that Australian Aborigines invented the Bar-Be-Que when they lit some scrub on fire and chased a mob of ‘Roos into it.

:-)

Yeah well, they were doing it for a long time before anyone noticed that they also knew how to toss a raw prawn on too.

Look it is recent white man science that raptors such as fork tailed kites whistling kites and both brown and black falcons rely on fire so much that they have been filmed picking up burning sticks to start new fires with.

Who is to say that the first aborigines did not notice this same phenomenon?

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

Rule 303 said:

Pffft.

It’s a well known fact that Australian Aborigines invented the Bar-Be-Que when they lit some scrub on fire and chased a mob of ‘Roos into it.

:-)

Yeah well, they were doing it for a long time before anyone noticed that they also knew how to toss a raw prawn on too.

Look it is recent white man science that raptors such as fork tailed kites whistling kites and both brown and black falcons rely on fire so much that they have been filmed picking up burning sticks to start new fires with.

Who is to say that the first aborigines did not notice this same phenomenon?

Harvesting fire is probably something learnt hundreds of thousands of years ago so it probably wasn’t Aboriginal Australians who first learnt it per se.

Why is this important?

I thought we already knew this stuff. Of course the trees are going to bear the scars of having bark removed, but what of it?

Witty Rejoinder said:

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

Yeah well, they were doing it for a long time before anyone noticed that they also knew how to toss a raw prawn on too.

Look it is recent white man science that raptors such as fork tailed kites whistling kites and both brown and black falcons rely on fire so much that they have been filmed picking up burning sticks to start new fires with.

Who is to say that the first aborigines did not notice this same phenomenon?

Harvesting fire is probably something learnt hundreds of thousands of years ago so it probably wasn’t Aboriginal Australians who first learnt it per se.

yeah yeah. I was talking about observations that could have been made long before mankind arrived here.
Yet sceince itself had no proof of it until quite recently. Previously it was imagined that we could have learned about how to control fire by other methods.

party_pants said:

Why is this important?

I thought we already knew this stuff. Of course the trees are going to bear the scars of having bark removed, but what of it?

There is still stuff to be learned and more trees to find.

roughbarked said:

party_pants said:

Why is this important?

I thought we already knew this stuff. Of course the trees are going to bear the scars of having bark removed, but what of it?

There is still stuff to be learned and more trees to find.

There is always the education equired to show prospective hand-me-down land owners who need to understand stuff on their land before they simply bulldoze it. Here is where it all disappears before any science can be done.

Witty Rejoinder said:

Harvesting fire is probably something learnt hundreds of thousands of years ago so it probably wasn’t Aboriginal Australians who first learnt it per se.

‘Sif.

Rule 303 said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Harvesting fire is probably something learnt hundreds of thousands of years ago so it probably wasn’t Aboriginal Australians who first learnt it per se.

‘Sif.

Harvesting at all of any type, was done by primates.

It really is quite interesting. Mrs rb suggested thta this was obviously a campsite area back in their day. I suggested that it was simply a place of access to food due to the presence of water. She also queried the size of what I told her were canoe bark removals. I maintained that it was for one man or woman to use to scoot out across the swamp to find foods. The swamps are no longer there due to white man’s interference but the scars remain to show how it once was. Another use for a coolamon is to make two. One for each foot. Imagine a mudskipper type of snow shoe adaptation.

The thing really is the evidence of things gone past can actually teach us about how to manage the future. It could indeed also be argued that past settlers read the information on such trees before they destroyed them so none others had the advantage.

Now this photo..
Consider and decide. Is this a canoe cut from bark or what?

roughbarked said:

Now this photo..
Consider and decide. Is this a canoe cut from bark or what?

Could also be a shield or funeral wrap. Depends where the tree is.

Rule 303 said:

roughbarked said:

Now this photo..
Consider and decide. Is this a canoe cut from bark or what?

Could also be a shield or funeral wrap. Depends where the tree is.

Thanks for that. I’m still open for more comments.

Rule 303 said:

roughbarked said:

Now this photo..
Consider and decide. Is this a canoe cut from bark or what?

Could also be a shield or funeral wrap. Depends where the tree is.

one place we camped in Vic, can’t remember where as it was around 1975, had quite a few “shield” trees.

roughbarked said:

Rule 303 said:

roughbarked said:

Now this photo..
Consider and decide. Is this a canoe cut from bark or what?

Could also be a shield or funeral wrap. Depends where the tree is.

Thanks for that. I’m still open for more comments.

I could add that it is rather large for a shield.

ChrispenEvan said:

Rule 303 said:

roughbarked said:

Now this photo..
Consider and decide. Is this a canoe cut from bark or what?

Could also be a shield or funeral wrap. Depends where the tree is.

one place we camped in Vic, can’t remember where as it was around 1975, had quite a few “shield” trees.

Shield trees may often be confused with what is otherwise known as a coolamon.

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

Rule 303 said:

Could also be a shield or funeral wrap. Depends where the tree is.

Thanks for that. I’m still open for more comments.

I could add that it is rather large for a shield.

I could add that the tree was probably a lot smaller when it was cut off.

;-)

Rule 303 said:

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

Thanks for that. I’m still open for more comments.

I could add that it is rather large for a shield.

I could add that the tree was probably a lot smaller when it was cut off.

;-)

The smile indicates that you are aware of the impossibility of the previous statement. ;)

roughbarked said:

Rule 303 said:

roughbarked said:

I could add that it is rather large for a shield.

I could add that the tree was probably a lot smaller when it was cut off.

;-)

The smile indicates that you are aware of the impossibility of the previous statement. ;)

Since no smart science has ensued from the last comment, could I add that the tree could have been thinner but not taller?

I imagine most if not all humans who lived in tribes had similar technology and knowledge but slightly specialised for the environment they lived in. We are all humans so do think and act similar regardless of other considerations. It would only take one person to do something different notice its affects and either others copy them or its shared.

Rule 303 said:

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

Thanks for that. I’m still open for more comments.

I could add that it is rather large for a shield.

I could add that the tree was probably a lot smaller when it was cut off.

;-)

This. Kind of like scratching a design in a pumpkin skin and it gets bigger as the pumpkin grows. A scar in the bark would get bigger as the tree grows.

I reckon there are trees with scars similar on our bush block out at Digby. I wouldn’t be necessarily claiming human intervention. Animal scratchings, lightning. Another tree falling against a tree and ripping the bark.

buffy said:

Rule 303 said:

roughbarked said:

I could add that it is rather large for a shield.

I could add that the tree was probably a lot smaller when it was cut off.

;-)

This. Kind of like scratching a design in a pumpkin skin and it gets bigger as the pumpkin grows. A scar in the bark would get bigger as the tree grows.

I reckon there are trees with scars similar on our bush block out at Digby. I wouldn’t be necessarily claiming human intervention. Animal scratchings, lightning. Another tree falling against a tree and ripping the bark.

Scar trees often show narrow-blade tool (axe) marks.

Michael V said:

buffy said:

Rule 303 said:

I could add that the tree was probably a lot smaller when it was cut off.

;-)

This. Kind of like scratching a design in a pumpkin skin and it gets bigger as the pumpkin grows. A scar in the bark would get bigger as the tree grows.

I reckon there are trees with scars similar on our bush block out at Digby. I wouldn’t be necessarily claiming human intervention. Animal scratchings, lightning. Another tree falling against a tree and ripping the bark.

Scar trees often show narrow-blade tool (axe) marks.

I hadn’t thought of the scar growing in size as the tree grows, but of course you’re right, it would.

I think we should discount the possibility of canoe trees more that a hundred yards or so from contemporary water.

buffy said:

Rule 303 said:

roughbarked said:

I could add that it is rather large for a shield.

I could add that the tree was probably a lot smaller when it was cut off.

;-)

This. Kind of like scratching a design in a pumpkin skin and it gets bigger as the pumpkin grows. A scar in the bark would get bigger as the tree grows.

I reckon there are trees with scars similar on our bush block out at Digby. I wouldn’t be necessarily claiming human intervention. Animal scratchings, lightning. Another tree falling against a tree and ripping the bark.

Yes there are quite a few reasons for scarred bark but in fact when a canoe is cut off the scar gets smaller as the tree grows or tries to grow back over it.

mollwollfumble said:

Michael V said:

buffy said:

This. Kind of like scratching a design in a pumpkin skin and it gets bigger as the pumpkin grows. A scar in the bark would get bigger as the tree grows.

I reckon there are trees with scars similar on our bush block out at Digby. I wouldn’t be necessarily claiming human intervention. Animal scratchings, lightning. Another tree falling against a tree and ripping the bark.

Scar trees often show narrow-blade tool (axe) marks.

I hadn’t thought of the scar growing in size as the tree grows, but of course you’re right, it would.

I think we should discount the possibility of canoe trees more that a hundred yards or so from contemporary water.

Contemporary water is not the same as it was when the trees were scarred. There were no dams, no irrigators back then.

Being a Friday there’ll be no proper meat tonight just sausages.

So BBQ sausages, smashed potato, fried tomato and onion gravy washed down with a popular cola.
Port wine jelly and ice cream for desert.
Over.

roughbarked said:

buffy said:

Rule 303 said:

I could add that the tree was probably a lot smaller when it was cut off.

;-)

This. Kind of like scratching a design in a pumpkin skin and it gets bigger as the pumpkin grows. A scar in the bark would get bigger as the tree grows.

I reckon there are trees with scars similar on our bush block out at Digby. I wouldn’t be necessarily claiming human intervention. Animal scratchings, lightning. Another tree falling against a tree and ripping the bark.

Yes there are quite a few reasons for scarred bark but in fact when a canoe is cut off the scar gets smaller as the tree grows or tries to grow back over it.

The Burke and Wills dig tree is a good example of that, plus the markings made by other early explorers.

PermeateFree said:

roughbarked said:

buffy said:

This. Kind of like scratching a design in a pumpkin skin and it gets bigger as the pumpkin grows. A scar in the bark would get bigger as the tree grows.

I reckon there are trees with scars similar on our bush block out at Digby. I wouldn’t be necessarily claiming human intervention. Animal scratchings, lightning. Another tree falling against a tree and ripping the bark.

Yes there are quite a few reasons for scarred bark but in fact when a canoe is cut off the scar gets smaller as the tree grows or tries to grow back over it.

The Burke and Wills dig tree is a good example of that, plus the markings made by other early explorers.

If they didn’t use all that energy to carve that message into the tree they’d probably still be alive today.

This is a selfie with one of our local ‘scar trees’. This location overlooks Brisbane Water, near Gosford.

fsm said:

This is a selfie with one of our local ‘scar trees’. This location overlooks Brisbane Water, near Gosford.

The more pictures I see in this thread the more I am sure we have trees like that at the Digby block.

buffy said:

fsm said:

This is a selfie with one of our local ‘scar trees’. This location overlooks Brisbane Water, near Gosford.

The more pictures I see in this thread the more I am sure we have trees like that at the Digby block.

Yes, there are ways to check for sure but they are usually invasive to the remaining live tissue on the tree. Of note though is how close is the Digby block to actual contemporary water?

In the case of a scar tree, everything stops there. There is a retreat of bark callus in the first years but after that the bark continues to attempt to heal the woound.

I saw a brand new scar tree tonight. Suicide attempt or seizure in a Ford Territory at high speed. Full depth scar in a big Eucalyptus. Nasty.

Rule 303 said:

I saw a brand new scar tree tonight. Suicide attempt or seizure in a Ford Territory at high speed. Full depth scar in a big Eucalyptus. Nasty.

Saw that happen here one night a stolen car left the road flipped end over end and tore the bark of the whole of one side of a Callitris that had stood there for several hundred years previously undisturbed..