news, latest-news

The head of a group representing volunteer bushfire fighters has launched a scathing attack on green groups, saying environmentalists were responsible for last month’s devastating bushfires, not climate change. Volunteer Fire Fighters Association president Peter Cannon, a self-confessed climate change sceptic, has called for an overhaul of environmental regulations relating to bushfire management, and said ‘‘green tape’’ had permitted ground fuel loads to build up without proper hazard reduction burning. ‘‘The point is the political agenda from the conservationists is about climbing on board with climate change and we’re saying this is not climate change, this is a man-made factor in the way of fuel loadings in the ground,’’ Mr Cannon said. The amount of bushfire-prone land being burnt as part of hazard reduction measures needed to be increased to around 5 per cent per annum, in line with recommendations made by the Victorian Royal Commission into the Black Saturday bushfires, he said. Less than 3 per cent of land deemed ‘‘bushfire prone’’ is burnt each year in NSW. ‘‘We just get sick of hearing this is climate change,’’ he said. ‘‘This is not climate change, this is massive fuel build-up.’’ Mr Cannon also called for a rethink on how fire bans were announced, saying warnings prompted fire bugs into action. ‘‘Why is it that when a total fire ban is called, 50 fires start up through the state?’’ he said. ‘‘That’s not climate change, it’s individuals going out with little incendiary devices.’’ Mr Cannon’s comments attracted criticism from University of Wollongong Centre for Environmental Risk Management of Bushfires director Professor Ross Bradstock. Though fuel was a factor, there were other elements which needed to be taken into account, he said. ‘‘You need weather conditions that are conducive to the spread of fire. ‘‘In other words, high temperatures, strong wind and low humidity.’’ Prof Bradstock said observations were already showing climate change was influencing fires in Australia. ‘‘You can’t say that any particular fire is due to climate change but because fire is an outcome of weather...climate change has huge potential to affect fires,’’ he said. Prof Bradstock said the percentage of fuel burned during hazard reduction operations was not as important as the way burning was undertaken. ‘‘Government has a commitment to increase strategic hazard reduction in that sense to protect several hundred thousand more homes,’’ he said. ‘‘We know from research, placement of hazard reduction adjacent to property is the key thing. ‘‘However it’s worth noting the principal limitation on that is money – it’s not cheap.’’ A Rural Fire Service NSW spokesman said it was important to remember hazard reduction did not always involve burning, and a strategic approach was often better than simply burning a percentage of ground fuel across the state. ‘‘There is some danger in looking purely at the hectare figure,’’ the spokesman said. ‘‘What we do prefer to do is assess the number of properties protected because that can give us good value on the people we’re protecting. ‘‘Doing a one-hectare burn in proximity to homes is going to give them protection, while a 100-hectare burn in the back of a national park, it’s not giving direct protection to those homes.’’ About 280,000 hectares were burnt across the state as part of hazard reduction during the 2012-13 season.

https://nnimgt-a.akamaihd.net/transform/v1/resize/frm/storypad-RrVrQgWitwMJTwHdCXhtp5/2c94f9bc-3003-487b-98ca-0a2410d84b12.JPG/w1200_h678_fcrop.jpg