Western Australia’s controversial prescribed burning program has come into the sights of the environmental watchdog, which has cast doubt over its effectiveness and urged the Cook government to conduct an independent scientific review. Source: The Sydney Morning Herald
The Environmental Protection Authority also wants a cap on the number of hectares of forest in the state’s Perth, Peel and South West burnt under the program.
The authority’s recommendations were contained in its assessment of the government’s proposed 2024-33Forest Management Plan, which outlined future uses and activities in about 2.5 million hectares of state forest.
Prescribed burning is a polarising issue in WA, divided by those concerned about its impact on the environment and human health and those, including the government, who say it protects lives and property by reducing bushfuel loads and, subsequently, the intensity of bushfires in summer.
Public feedback to the assessment was largely split down the middle, but the authority’s questioning of prescribed burning’s effectiveness and calls for an independent review will send these two groups on a collision course as the Forest Management Plan comes into effect next year.
The authority quoted lines from a Victorian inquiry into its catastrophic 2019-20 fire season
where prescribed burning was described as a “blunt tool” that did not necessarily result in reduced risk to people and property.
It also mentioned advice from the Commonwealth’s threatened species scientific committee that “there is now strong scientific evidence that certain fire regimes threaten the persistence of much of Australia’s biodiversity.”
The authority said prescribed burning would play a role in the management of forest ecosystems and conservation of biological diversity, but whether the Forest Management Plan’s proposed burning program would achieve this was “contested”.
“The EPA notes that the ability and effectiveness of prescribed burning to achieve the stated aims and objectives to protect life and property and support forest ecosystems is also contested,” it said.
“There is also a body of research that suggests the impacts to threatened species (both fauna and flora) from prescribed burning may be significant over both short and long terms.”
On top of a scientific review, the authority recommended the government introduce a cap of 200,000 hectares of forest to be burned annually, which reflected the current prescribed burn target.
Environment Minister Reece Whitby said he would carefully consider all the authority’s recommendations but defended the state’s prescribed burn program.
“Prescribed burning is the primary means of protecting the community and environment from the devastating impacts of large bushfires,” he said.
“It is not risk-free but is the most effective strategy in reducing the likelihood, size and severity of fi res across the state.”
WA Forest Alliance convener Jess Beckerling said prescribed burning emitted huge volumes of carbon every yea rand had devastating impacts on fire-sensitive species and ecosystems in the South West.
“The next 10-year plan must be subject to strict conditions to prevent impacts on climate, flora, fauna, water, human health and other value,” she said.
“An independent review is a good start, but it must result in measurable, enforceable conditions being imposed.”
The Forest Management Plan also adds about 400,000 extra hectares of forest to the WA’s conservation estate.
Despite its large-scale impact on the state’s jarrah forests, bauxite mining by companies like Alcoa and South 32was not considered in the Forest Management Plan because their activities were covered under separate state agreements.
However, the authority recommended the northern jarrah forest east of Perth and Peel, where much of the state’s bauxite mining occurs, should be prioritised for conservation areas.
The plan also gives effect to the state’s native forest logging ban, which has been a hallmark commitment Premier Roger Cook has carried through from his predecessor Mark McGowan.
However, environmental groups are concerned ecological thinning, which reduced the number of trees in certain areas to help the remaining trees thrive, was a form of “logging by stealth”.
The authority largely supported the practice but said it should not occur in conservation areas or in prized or special areas of bush known as “disturbance avoidance zones”.
The authority said when the state wanted to carry out ecological thinning in conservation areas, it should be subject to a rigorous assessment before being given the green light.
Another recommendation was for thinning plans and activities as well as prescribed burns and the status of the conservation estate to be included in annual reports to be delivered to the minister.
Whitby welcomed the authority’s approval of the decision to ban native logging.
The authority’s report is now subject to a three-week appeals period.
