The Need for an Objective Evaluation - science-informing response
The Black Summer bushfires in eastern, southern and western Australia were unprecedented in their geographic scale, the extent to which native forests on all tenures have burnt, and their impacts on the coastal zone. The catastrophic fire season was driven by climate change which has caused an increase in extreme heatwaves, prolonged and severe drought, and lengthening of the fire season. With more climate change in the pipeline, our post-fire forest management responses need to recognise this new norm and be based on a sound scientific understanding of what is needed to promote natural regeneration of forests and wildlife, and future ecological resilience.
Unfortunately, various interests are seeking to exploit the catastrophic bushfires by advocating post-fire forest management interventions that will degrade the forest, prevent forest regeneration and wildlife recovery, further deplete ecosystem carbon stocks, and make the forests more fire prone. A great deal of misinformation is being spread that runs counter to evidence-based prescriptions for ecologically sustainable forest management.
Inappropriate and scientifically unsupported post-fire forest management interventions being proposed include: (1) ‘salvage logging’ of native forests that have been burnt; (2) the need to now log national parks to reduce fuel loads and provide wood for the logging industry; (3) a massive increase in fuel reduction burning especially in national parks to prevent future fires; (4) large scale clearing of forests on the basis they are now dead and should be converted to another land use; and (5) that there is no link between climate change and the forest fires that are the fault of poor park management and a lack of fuel reduction burning.
Fortunately, there is a substantial body of scientific knowledge documented in peer-reviewed journals and books that provide the information needed to counter these false claims and support the scientifically valid forest management that is needed. Furthermore, there is a groundswell of community concern and action, especially among local and regional land care, bush regeneration, animal welfare, indigenous communities and other environmental organisations who are deeply concerned about the impact of the Black Summer bushfires on wildlife. These community members and organisations are actively engaged in efforts to support post-fire forest recovery and are struggling to counter the false claims of vested interests. There is an urgent need to provide these organisations, operating at local, regional, state and national levels, with clear and evidence-based information to support their efforts in promoting sustainable outcomes for our forests, wildlife and critically important ecosystem assets and services of carbon storage and sequestration and water quality.
Unfortunately, various interests are seeking to exploit the catastrophic bushfires by advocating post-fire forest management interventions that will degrade the forest, prevent forest regeneration and wildlife recovery, further deplete ecosystem carbon stocks, and make the forests more fire prone. A great deal of misinformation is being spread that runs counter to evidence-based prescriptions for ecologically sustainable forest management.
Inappropriate and scientifically unsupported post-fire forest management interventions being proposed include: (1) ‘salvage logging’ of native forests that have been burnt; (2) the need to now log national parks to reduce fuel loads and provide wood for the logging industry; (3) a massive increase in fuel reduction burning especially in national parks to prevent future fires; (4) large scale clearing of forests on the basis they are now dead and should be converted to another land use; and (5) that there is no link between climate change and the forest fires that are the fault of poor park management and a lack of fuel reduction burning.
Fortunately, there is a substantial body of scientific knowledge documented in peer-reviewed journals and books that provide the information needed to counter these false claims and support the scientifically valid forest management that is needed. Furthermore, there is a groundswell of community concern and action, especially among local and regional land care, bush regeneration, animal welfare, indigenous communities and other environmental organisations who are deeply concerned about the impact of the Black Summer bushfires on wildlife. These community members and organisations are actively engaged in efforts to support post-fire forest recovery and are struggling to counter the false claims of vested interests. There is an urgent need to provide these organisations, operating at local, regional, state and national levels, with clear and evidence-based information to support their efforts in promoting sustainable outcomes for our forests, wildlife and critically important ecosystem assets and services of carbon storage and sequestration and water quality.