Who really opposes fuel reduction burning?

Pro logging and cattle grazing groups have tried to link recent devastating fires to policies by conservation groups.

In River Red Gum forests in northern Victoria, where the Victorian Government recently declared new national parks after a four-year investigation, some of these groups are attempting to further their agendas by exploiting recent fire events.

The VNPA has long supported fuel reduction and ecological burns in River Red Gum forests. These calls have been resisted by logging and cattle grazing interests.

In a 2007 submission (1.1MB pdf) to the Victorian Environmental Assessment Council Riverine Red Gum Forests investigation, the Barmah Forest Preservation League, a group supporting logging and grazing, said:

"Because river red gum is a heat sensitive eucalypt the League does not support fuel reduction burning in the Barmah forest. Cool burns will kill young trees and badly scar older ones."
- 2007 VEAC submission, Peter Newman, Barmah Forest Preservation League.

Peter Newman is also a member of the Barmah Cattlemen’s Association and a spokesman for the Rivers and Red Gum Environmental Alliance, a group backed by grazing and logging interests.

There has been consistent opposition to fuel reduction burning in River Red Gum forests by the Barmah Forest Preservation League. In 2002 Country News reported reported Stan Vale, BFPL president as saying:

"You cannot successfully cool burn a red gum forest. Even 'cool' fires will kill the young trees, permanently damaging the matureones and burn to the ground the hollow habitat trees."

Cattle grazing in the Barmah Forest does not reduce the fire hazard, according to the DSE. In recent media interviews DSE northeast fire manager Peter Farrell said:

"Cattle grazing has little impact on the bushfire risk in forests ascattle do not eat branches, twigs, bark and eucalyptus leaveswhich are the main flammable fuels."