Thursday, February 12, 2009

Irresponsible Environmentalists: What Part of the Blame Must They Share for Australia's Deadly Wildfires?

Could it be that the horrible fires in Australia were, in fact, worsened rather than better controlled because of "green" policies? That's the opinion of several of the victims who are vehemently denouncing the local government's prohibition of cutting down trees, grasses and other "native vegetation" that had gotten out of control on public land near residential areas.

One grieved and angry survivor criticized the Nillumbik council for limitations it had placed on residents wanting the council's help or, at the very least, its permission to clean up around their properties in preparation for the bushfire season. "We've lost two people in my family because you _________ won't cut trees down," he said.

Miranda Devine, writing an op/ed for the Sydney Morning Herald, went even further. In her column entitled, "Green Ideas Must Take Blame for Deaths," Devine described how the government's irresponsible submission to radical environmentalists (and their refusal to listen to warnings of how dangerous were the resultant conditions) set the stage for these deadly fires.

It wasn't climate change which killed as many as 300 people in Victoria last weekend. It wasn't arsonists. It was the unstoppable intensity of a bushfire, turbo-charged by huge quantities of ground fuel which had been allowed to accumulate over years of drought. It was the power of green ideology over government to oppose attempts to reduce fuel hazards before a megafire erupts, and which prevents landholders from clearing vegetation to protect themselves.


So many people need not have died so horribly. The warnings have been there for a decade. If politicians are intent on whipping up a lynch mob to divert attention from their own culpability, it is not arsonists who should be hanging from lamp-posts but greenies.


Governments appeasing the green beast have ignored numerous state and federal bushfire inquiries over the past decade, almost all of which have recommended increasing the practice of "prescribed burning". Also known as "hazard reduction", it is a methodical regime of burning off flammable ground cover in cooler months, in a controlled fashion, so it does not fuel the inevitable summer bushfires.


In July 2007 Scott Gentle, the Victorian manager of Timber Communities Australia, who lives in Healesville where two fires were still burning yesterday, gave testimony to a Victorian parliamentary bushfire inquiry so prescient it sends a chill down your spine.


"Living in an area like Healesville, whether because of dumb luck or whatever, we have not experienced a fire … since … about 1963. God help us if we ever do, because it will make Ash Wednesday look like a picnic." God help him, he was right.


Gentle complained of obstruction from green local government authorities of any type of fire mitigation strategies. He told of green interference at Kinglake - at the epicentre of Saturday's disaster, where at least 147 people died - during a smaller fire there in 2007.


"The contractors were out working on the fire lines. They put in containment lines and cleared off some of the fire trails. Two weeks later that fire broke out, but unfortunately those trails had been blocked up again [by greens] to turn it back to its natural state … Instances like that are just too numerous to mention. Governments … have been in too much of a rush to appease green idealism … This thing about locking up forests is just not working."...


Only seven months ago, the Victorian Parliament's Environment and Natural Resources Committee tabled its report into the impact of public land management on bushfires, with five recommendations to enhance prescribed burning. This included tripling the amount of land to be hazard-reduced from 130,000 to 385,000 hectares a year. There has been little but lip service from the Government in response. Teary politicians might pepper their talking points with opportunistic intimations of "climate change" and "unprecedented" weather, but they are only diverting the blame. With yes-minister fudging and craven inclusion of green lobbyists in decision-making, they have greatly exacerbated this tragedy.


There is an opening now in Victoria for a predatory legal firm with a taste for David v Goliath class actions.