Letter to the Editor: Little Grove resident Greg Mair on the essential use of back-burning to fight bushfires

Tony Pedro’s assertions about the suppression of the recent bushfire in the Fitzgerald River National Park and the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions’ fire policy cannot go unchallenged.

To suggest that the fire authorities did not respond promptly to the bushfire and stood back from the fire in order to light up more bush is erroneous and offensive.

His criticism of back-burning reflects his lack of appreciation of the scale of the national park and the access challenges.

Well known to experienced fire managers as a form of indirect attack, burning back from a safe location is a strategy utilised where access, time or fire behaviour limits direct attack right at the fire edge.

Does Mr Pedro really believe that park managers, bushfire volunteers and surrounding landowners wanted a large fire in the middle of summer and deliberately delayed responding?

No level of resources can halt a large fire, which has developed incredible power and momentum, by direct attack.

The experiences of the United States, which provides huge resources into their fire suppression (rapid response) and has sought regular assistance from Australia and other countries over the last two decades, is evidence of that.

Mr Pedro’s suggestion that DBCA resources were committed to planned burning and not available to respond adequately to the Fitzgerald fire is flawed.

The WA fire agencies, local governments and the volunteer network are highly mobile, and resources are moved all around the State according to bushfire response needs.

This is exactly what happened at the Fitzgerald bushfire.

I can agree with Mr Pedro’s view on additional resources distributed around the State, in particular to high-value areas outside of the main population centres, however that is a matter for the State Government and funding of their agencies.

Mr Pedro, like many others, is enamoured by water water-bombing aircraft.

They are very useful and another resource for firefighting, however aircraft alone rarely extinguish a bushfire and in almost every case need to be supported by ground crews and heavy machinery.

They should be considered as another fire resource — a flying fire truck.

In light of the recent bushfire, DBCA will no doubt review any future plans it had for cool-season burns, not because there will be a move to “rapid response” only as a means of curtailing large bushfires, but because of the extent of this recent fire.

A bushfire in the Fitzgerald River National Park should not be able to run the length of the park and threaten surrounding communities and farmland, and impact conservation values.

A fire management approach which includes strategically placed and carefully managed low fuel zones are the only way to prevent a repeat of the events of the last couple of weeks.

A fire management policy based solely on rapid response is doomed to failure and would be an ill-considered and irresponsible approach by the Government of WA.

It would inevitably result in towns, farms and the natural environment being devastated by large bushfires, and the loss of human life.

Greg Mair OAM, Little Grove

Letters to the editor must contain the author’s full name, address and daytime contact number. Letters may be edited for space, clarity or legal reasons. Email news@albanyadvertiser.com or post to PO Box 5168 Albany, WA, 6332.