Thursday, February 12, 2009
BUSHFIRES AND BURNOFFS
Now the worst of the Bushfires are hopefully over in Australia, the ugly and depressing task of counting the costs must begin.
One issue that is becoming apparent and is bound to create controversy is the role irresponsible but politically correct green policies played in the disaster.
“One of Australia's leading bushfire experts, Rod Incoll, warned Nillumbik Shire Council in a 2003 report that it risked devastation if it went ahead with changes to planning laws proposed by green groups that restricted the removal of vegetation”
They did go ahead with the new regulations and there was devastation, cause and effect..you be the judge?
Unfortunately, the real keepers of the knowledge required to live and work in bushfire prone rural Australia are usually too busy trying to earn a living to bother with the inanities required to run for things like local council positions. The end result is often the self seeking, soy bean swilling, sea (tree) change seeking morons end up driving land use policies in a bush setting that are in effect a ticking time bomb of destruction.
Of course, any farmer or station owner could have told you 20 years ago that regular burning off, vegetation control, establishment of dams and other water storage points was the price to be paid to live on the land in Australia. However, the blood tick like infestation of "inner rural" areas by rabid greens and “hobby” farmers in Australia of the past 20 years has seen bitterly learned lessons gathered over generations disregarded as pseudo environmentalists ride roughshod over hard learnt bush university wisdom.
The insanity of overzealous rstrictions on burning off and on the construction of dams has definitely played a significant role the wholesale destruction of vast swathes of Australia.
And yet they ask why the Stump tends to treat the rabid greens with contempt.
More rabid green lunacy
For those too lazy to chase the link some selected quotes
.......David Packham, a former supervising meteorologist for fire weather nationwide at the Bureau of Meteorology, accused environmentalists of behaving like "eco-terrorists waging a jihad" against prescribed burning.
"The green movement is directly responsible for the severity of these fires through their opposition to prescribed burning,"
The federal Environment Department's spokeswoman declined to name the applicant behind the proposal to list controlled burning as a "key threatening process".
But bushfire consultant Chris Muller, a former fire officer with the Victorian and West Australian governments, said the proposal would make it even harder to carry out precautionary burn-offs to reduce fuel loads in forests.
"I am appalled that Minister Garrett (You remember him, washed up rock star and Labor Minister for Plastic Bags..Stump) would even contemplate an action that would remove or restrict the use of the only effective large bushfire mitigation tool -- prescribed burning," he said.
"The inevitable consequences of such action are disasters on the scale of that currently experienced in Victoria.