*** Conditions for use
of this material - please read ***
In dismissing broad-scale fuel reduction burning, Gavan McFadzean (Opinion, 15/12) demonstrates a knowledge of forest fire that appears to be limited to boiling a billy. How or why fires get into national parks is irrelevant, whilst McFadzean's use of historical comparisons of fire severity are invalid in view of the different social circumstances and today's advanced technological fire-fighting methods. What is important is the ability to minimise the threat to forests and the community by reducing fuels and being able to respond to bushfires.
Contrary to McFadzen's assertions, the timber industry has sought only to maintain access to Victoria's forests, but its exclusion from the minority of areas where it is still permitted to operate would remove the only substantial source of non-government funding as well as much of the motivation to maintain vehicular access, conduct hazard reduction activities, and maintain workforces capable of fighting bushfires.
McFadzen's denial of the importance of these activities is based on an idealistic view of forests separated from human disturbance. Perhaps if he and other armchair critics spent a summer working among the heat, smoke and flames they would appreciate their critical importance.