The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The Greens' burning problem > Comments

The Greens' burning problem : Comments

By Mark Poynter, published 11/2/2013

The Greens’ attempts to connect with rural Australia are being hampered by a hot fire season that has exposed their contradictory behaviour with regard to bushfire management.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
Robert

You are sadly displaying the hallmarks of a typical Greens supporter. Someone who doesn't actually know much about the topic at hand, but nevertheless has strong, self-righteous opinions way out of kilter with their personal experience or knowledge; as well as a healthy denial that those with an alternate view - lets call it an anti-Greens view - may actually know far more because they've lived and worked with these issues for decades.

As one of the earlier commenters has put it, it is astounding and extremely sad for Australia that the political power of the Greens derived through the incessant campaigning of their ENGO associates has to a large extent steered land management out of the hands of those with expertise to appease those such as yourself who like the idea of environmental protection from afar, but don't understand what it entails.
Posted by MWPOYNTER, Tuesday, 12 February 2013 4:24:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Whish-Wilson's desperate attempt to deflect the barrage of criticism of the greens anti-burn off policy is shameless . He is now saying The Greens only object to regeneration burns (an essential part of sclerophyll forest management). He goes on to say they are happy with "hazard reduction burns". BUT On the Tassie Greens website from mid-2012 http://mps.tas.greens.org.au/2012/06/where-there%E2%80%99s-norske-skog%E2%80%99s-smoke-there%E2%80%99s-ire-at-maydena-maydena-residents%E2%80%99-furious-at-smoke-pollution/ we have Tim Morris saying Norske Skog's burns are a “Neanderthal practice” and should be stopped. Sorry Tim - but Norske don't grow eucalypts - only pine trees. They don't do regen burns - only fuel reduction burns. This is just more evidence of green deceit and hypocrisy - but what is worse he insults a leading Tassie employer and an exemplar of a very green Nordic corporation
Posted by Henry Midship, Thursday, 14 February 2013 3:40:40 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=14625#253110

and thus the "Wild Rivers" legislation in QLD, drafted from a coffee shop in inner city suburban Sydney.
Posted by Valley Guy, Friday, 15 February 2013 1:45:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Mark Poynter understandably displays an eloquent and plausible knowledge of forestry and fire ecology. Like his erstwhile comrade Evan Rolley ex Forestry Tasmania CEO,an eloquence sufficient to bamboozle government policy. M Poynter also in this argues for a continuation of that same status quo that has led the Tasmanian forest industry to the present monocultural ruin. His line of argumentation in many forums displaying more of a defense of his life investment in the profession of forester. He cannot accept, like many other professionals, that it is a failed failed world view he operated in.

I feel for people in such a predicament, I too had a similar if not bigger investment in the failing (from and ecological perspective) paradigm of industrial agriculture. On which tragically contemporary foresty attempts to model itself. For me it took retirement from Agriculture and development of social ecology perspectives to start to get a handle of it. I know how hard it is to accept that one has made a bad investment; but they can also be a great vehicle for life's learning.

To understand how we become unwittingly trapped we must critically analyse the culture that produced us. Australian culture has been heavily influenced by the experience of colonisation, mining booms and two world wars. Social phenomena that rewarded swift moving action on the part of human organisation in pursuit of short term goals. The winner taking the strategic high ground of wealth/survival regardless of the long term consequences.This then appealing to the innate conservatism of human nature which further entrenches it.This world view has also found a seductive ideology in neo conservative economics and an unwitting partner in our lower brain, the home of ego.

These forces conspire to inhibit us from thinking rationally at higher moral and ecological levels for the longer term; for the sake of the quality of all human experience, for all life forms and for future generations.

In Poynter's argument for the status quo in fire management, we see the ego trap and received wisdom playing out once again, feeding continued paralytic polarisation of society.

cont/...
Posted by duncan mills, Tuesday, 19 February 2013 12:58:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
from previous

An institutional response is necessary to counter act this human frailty. The first and essential step is to vest the management of public lands in an authority who commission is to manage for ecological sustainability, an ecology that accepts humans and their future needs (not wants), as the reality of the current ecosystem. Within the scope of the consequent management objectives it may then tender utilisation of the resources to separtate entities to administer the harvest. A separation of interests that minimises (with integrity) the opportunities for the tail to wag the dog, as has been the case Australian forestry .

While managing forests will never be without risks, a more balanced landscape wide and holistic approach that is not compromised by vested and short term interests is required.

An example would be to manage fuel levels on the staggered mosaic approach . Harvesting the fuels where practicable for biochar and product that has been shown to lock up carbon and amend ancient Australian agricultural soils. Thus reducing the loss of nutrients that are plaguing coastal ecosystems, evidenced by coral die of and increasing algal blooms. Also contributing are catastrophic forest fires, accidental or intentional. Where not possible mosaic cool burns at high soil moisture do minimal damage to soil, wildlife and standing trees; The science on this is well developed and easily applied.

If we are to transform natural resource management, surely we need to first compensate for our own human weakness with appropriate structural responses?
Posted by duncan mills, Tuesday, 19 February 2013 12:59:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Duncan

I probably shouldn't bother even responding to your pontifications about my supposedly ego-driven defence of my supposedly failed life investment in forestry, but I guess its worth exposing your self-righteous foolishness in advocating changes to management regimes that you don't even understand.

Sadly, society may one day have to bear the needless costs and upheaval of overturning a century of evolution in forest management to eventually find that mooted improvements advocated by self-righteous laypersons such as yourself either don't work (which is obvious to any forester) or simply return us back to the system that we currently have - probably after the passage of many wasted years.

Some examples from your post are:

"While managing forests will never be without risks, a more balanced landscape wide and holistic approach that is not compromised by vested short term interests"

Using Tasmania as an example, most people would think it to be already pretty well balanced when 75% of its public lands are managed for conservation and just 25% for long term timber supply.

"An example would be to manage fuel levels on the staggered mosaic approach"

This already happens where fuel reduction burns and regeneration burns are scattered across the landscape. We need more of it, but simply killing off Forestry Tasmania (as you advocate) which is best at it, is certainly not going to help, and will make it difficult to maintain the current level of fuel management.

"Harvesting the (forest) fuels for biochar ......"

Do you understand how extensive Australia's/ Tasmania's forests are?? The best way to do this is via timber production systems using waste wood, but you clearly view this as some out-dated process that has no part in your utopian future.

"Where not possible mosaic cool burns at high soil moisture do minimal damage to soil, wildlife and standing trees; The science on this is well developed and easily applied"

Gawd..... just what do you think happens now if you see this as something new - reinventing the wheel!
Posted by MWPOYNTER, Wednesday, 20 February 2013 10:13:02 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy