We are suffering a plague of "scientists" overstepping the bounds of their expertise. It started with the Wentworth Group, which had some success in pretending to be the oracle of wisdom on water policy, and was influential in the introduction of the disastrous Murray-Darling plan. We subsequently got noisy "climate scientists" and those blaming our recent bushfires mainly on climate change.

The reason that academic ecologists are increasingly listened to at the expense of foresters, is that the former (who are generally on the public payroll) are increasing in numbers, while the latter are an endangered species.

“Those with practical knowledge and experience of managing forests have recognised for generations that the central plank in conserving their unique biodiversity is the capability to effectively deal with the fire threat. It is to be hoped that last summer's huge fires will enable our conservation scientists to learn this simple lesson, but the recent examples cited above don't provide much optimism.”

Indeed, it is difficult to hope when our conservation scientists, the ABC and popular media, politicians, and bureaucratic groupthink falsely attribute last summer’s huge fires to climate change, and then cap it off by advocating a zero emissions target by 2050

We need to chart our own course, stop listening to acolytes welded to this or that ideological imperative.

Carbon in soil is a temporary solution, progressively released with the plough or seeding harrows.

All of the carbon stored in timber is released with burning or decay!

And as long as it is so stored? Stored whether horizontal or vertical!

Hazard reduction with herded goats is vastly superior to seasonal burning given its narrowing limitations, none of which are the province of (12 months of the year) cell grazed or herded goats.

They also clean out heaps of feral weeds as a bonus! Sometimes as a permanent bonus! Fires on the other hand, frequently promote them!

Goats need water, as do forest fires and that can be guaranteed with hugely extended environment flows, in the creation of sardine stacked, small upland dams that quite literally force billions or trillions of maximised, extra litres of water into the landscape of the driest, inhabited continent on earth!

And given that is the management paradigm? Extend normal flows for up to three years and beyond!. Force the sal table further down in the landscape!

(See the, once highly controversial, Peter Andrew's story on the ABC's Australian story)

Indigenous populations the world over have been selectively harvesting their own forests for millennia, without harm to either flora or fauna! Just the very opposite! (David Suzuki)
Alan B.

Indigenous populations the world over have been selectively harvesting their own forests for millennia, without harm to either flora or fauna! Just the very opposite! (David Suzuki)
Alan B,
Until they started adapting to the western way of enjoying commodities they never had previously ! We don't see too many wanting desperately to go back to the days without commodities !

Generally agree "Academic over-reach" is causing problems. Not only for land management either. It's across the whole spectrum.

With the problems showing up thick and fast now it'll be interesting to see if the causative law and regulation changes will be reversed.
With land management the EPBC act is one that created space for academics and activists to impose their irrationality and should be repealed entirely. Being a product of the howard government it'll be a tough one for the current federal government to admit needs to go. Irony of that is for fear of losing credibility they'll refuse the only choice that could give it to them

What an excellent, rational and well written article, from someone who seems to have spent his professional life managing the environment to BOTH utilise and safe it, as opposed pontificating about saving the planet while buggering it all up like most academic environmentalists.

Thank you for your insights, sir. Much appreciated

Another excellent contribution by experienced forester Mark Poynter.
He points out a disturbing trend. I have no problem with academics speaking out their views in their own field of expertise, but those academics mentioned by Poynter are speaking on issues often well outside their level of competence. Their often distorted views are reported by media who usually make no attempt to get another view.

The ABC (Radio National) was again at fault on 12 March when Professor Lindenmayer was given free rein in Philip Adam's LateNightLive to espouse his anti-logging views without question. This Professor clearly has the ear of left-leaning media.

Alan B on 18/3 suggests having goats in native forests to control fuel load.
They have been used in the past in plantations in Victoria to control blackberry in places where they are difficult to spray - but you need major fences to keep the goats from spreading all over the countryside. Goats are a major feral animal in many drier parts of Australia so I don't think they are a solution to the fuel reduction (FR) issue- where FR is needed over hundreds of thousands of hectares - at least in Victoria.

Goats would also have significantly negative environmental impacts on native flora and fauna. Controlled FR burning is the way to go in most native forests.

Messmate: The ABC (Radio National) was again at fault on 12 March when Professor Lindenmayer was given free rein in Philip Adam's LateNightLive to espouse his anti-logging views without question.

Another illustration of Green-left bias by the supposedly impartial ABC

Correction to my last post: The name of the quote’s author should have read 'MESSMATE'.