|
|
       |
 |
 |
    |  |
 |
|
Environment Forest Ecosystems Forest Industries Forest Management Forest Products Greenhouse Gases NAFI Submissions Policy and Politics Renewable Energy Sustainability |
| |
Inquiry On Bushfire Mitigation and ManagementNational Association of Forest Industries Submission To The Council of Australian Governments Inquiry On Bushfire Mitigation and Management December 2003 Major wildfires have affected large areas of Australia’s forests and bushland over the past five years. The loss of life and property provides a compelling case for public authorities to change their current practices. The 2002-02 summer fires were also the most catastrophic on record, in terms of their impacts on the environment. Yet, the major causes behind the catastrophic nature of the fires still fail to be recognised by the primary controllers of land management – the State and Territory Governments. There is also a general lack of recognition that the severe damage caused by these recent fires, in terms of the intensity of the fires and the total area affected, is due to existing land management policies. Solutions to the problems of fire frequency and fire severity are already known to forest managers and forest scientists. They include forest thinning, other forms of hazard reduction, maintenance of forest roads, and maintenance of local industries – such as forestry – with direct expertise in forest management. It is therefore absolutely essential that forest fuel management is integrated within a national approach to bushfire management planning and responses. The forest industries recognise and support the human efforts to suppress fires and protect both the community and environmental assets combined with the improved processes for coordinating the fire suppression responses. However, their job is made so much more difficult by the changes in the landscape fire regimes adopted in recent times, which have seen the exclusion of low intensity fires and the forest industry, from vast areas of Australia’s bushland. When ignition occurs in the heavy fuel loads of the so-called ‘protected conservation areas’ in particular, there must be immediate suppression of the fires or fire fighters face a most difficult task that can extend for months at a time. An alternative does exist. The National Association of Forest Industries believes that the United States, Spain, Canada and other European countries have correctly identified the importance of developing a committed and comprehensive forest management regime to limit the impacts of wildfires on the environment and communities. “The real solution to catastrophic wildfires is to address their causes by reducing fuel hazards and returning our forests and rangelands to healthy conditions. Tree thinning and removal of dense underbrush can ensure thriving forests while reducing risks of catastrophic fires and the dangers they pose to firefighters.” (United States Healthy Forests Initiative, August 2002). The United States Congress has recently passed the Healthy Forests Restoration Act (21 November 2003), which concentrates on improving forest health as the means for reducing the severity of fires, when they do occur. Through their President’s Healthy Forests Initiative, an integrated approach is outlined to protect communities at the rural-urban interface, protect watersheds and catchments, and provide an improved habitat for protecting endangered and threatened species. Under a 10-year comprehensive strategy implementation plan, all phases of the fire management program on forest land are drawn together, including: – Fire preparedness – Suppression and prevention – Hazardous fuels management – Restoration of burned areas – Community assistance, and – Monitoring of progress. Forest thinning combined with other fuel management solutions should be the starting point for developing the fire management framework. In Australia, parliamentary report after parliamentary report have claimed that it has not been possible, due to either the number of suitable days or the complex requirements for regulatory approvals, and that Governments have not provided sufficient financial resources, for forest fuel loads to be managed through hazard reduction burning, alone. A far more integrated approach is required, that uses a range of solutions to deliver fuel loads that support lower intensity burns in our forest lands, when they occur. The recommendations below indicate the importance of delivering fuel management solutions that are based on the risks of fire occurrence and the likely impacts of those fires on the natural environment and community assets. If the scientists are correct in their predictions of future climate changes across the landscape, there will be a requirement to develop a more balanced approach to forest fuel management as part of Australia’s responses for adapting to the nation’s changing climates. By attempting to more accurately mimic the fire regimes of nature and the Indigenous peoples, there should be a reduced occurrence of wildfires. However, when they do occur, it is important to have the mechanisms in place to suppress those fires and to restore the ecosystems that are affected. The destructive effects of the January 2003 bushfires on a range of forest ecosystems, particularly the alpine ash forests, and the lack of any real effort by State governments or national park managers to help restore those forests indicate that no real lessons have been learnt by the ultimate regulators of forest management. The National Association of Forest Industries welcomes the COAG Inquiry on Bushfire Mitigation and Management and hopes that all Governments can work together to deliver a truly sustainable approach to protect our forests, catchments, personnel and community assets. The following recommendations indicate the importance of delivering an effective approach that can be built on the principles of appropriate forest fuel load management. Recommendations 1. A pragmatic and scientifically-based approach across all land tenures to fuel load reduction be adopted as the key component underpinning a framework for bushfire prevention, management and suppression. 2. Incorporate the broad elements of the United States’ Healthy Forests Initiative, with the highest priorities placed on fire fighter safety and environmental and community asset protection, into an Australian healthy forests framework that encompasses the broader principles of bushfire mitigation and management. 3. Each State and Territory jurisdiction should develop their approaches to bushfire prevention and management under a consistent national framework, given that fires do not stop at borders and fire fighters generally move from one jurisdiction to another to assist with fire suppression. (This last point is important for fire fighter safety. When fire fighters move to a new jurisdiction and have to respond to the changing objectives and strategies of those managing the bushfire responses). 4. Fuel management planning processes need to recognise that forests will face at least one possible catastrophic fire season and at least several bad fire seasons every 30 to 100 years, depending on the climate and type of vegetation. 5. The fuel management planning process should recognise that some jurisdictions, for one reason or another, continually fail to meet their hazard reduction targets. 6. The increased reservation of forests in national parks and reduction in multiple-use forests will require a more committed financial effort from national park managers to prevent wildfires occurring or to mitigate their impacts. Previously, national parks and state forests were closely intertwined. But by increasing the reserve areas, the neighbouring state forest agency fire suppression regimes that would have helped to protect the national park areas in the past, may no longer be available. 7. The fuel management planning process should be based on a more comprehensive risk assessment process which recognises the links between fuel loads, vegetation types, ecosystem types, accessibility, number of possible fires, climate, and resources available to fight the fires. Such a risk assessment process would identify the potential areas for fuel reduction in order to mitigate the spread of fires. 8. The fuel management planning process should recognise the risks to water catchments and water contamination from high intensity bushfires. 9. The fuel management planning process should be able to employ a scientifically-determined mix of hazard reduction burning, managed grazing and stewardship contracts to support thinning operations or the collection of firewood. 10. If State and Territory government legislation needs to be amended to allow these other forms of fuel load reduction activities to occur in areas such as national parks, it should be supported on scientific grounds, as the basis for governments committing to a national approach for improved bushfire management. 11. As part of a national healthy forests framework, there should be a commitment to determine, on a case-by-case basis, the most appropriate means for restoring badly damaged ecosystems, such as the large tracts of alpine ash forests devastated in Kosciusko National Park during the January 2003 bushfires. |
|
 |
      |
|
|
|
| Site development by Rendrag Networks, Canberra - Graphic design by Swell Design Group, Canberra | |