Tasmanian Times

Economy

Wood smoke linked to deaths as Forestry Tas plots 245 autumn burns

image
Picture: Rob Blakers, http://www.robblakers.com/

Smoke from landscape fires has been found to contribute to 340,000 deaths worldwide each year.

Scientists from the University of Tasmania, the Menzies Research Institute as well as US and Canadian universities found smoke from forest, grass and agricultural fires affect the climate, air quality and human health.

Report co-author David Bowman says there are implications for forestry burns in Tasmania.

“We are exposing populations to risks and preventative measures have got to be taken.”

“There has got to be an understanding that people who complain about the smoke have a legitimate case, the medical science is on their side now,” he said.

The study found the toxic cocktails of chemicals in wood smoke is causing the most harm in very poor communities.

“Sub-saharan Africa, which is a savanna region, has a very lot of poor people doing a huge amount of burning of the savannas.”

“That is also reflected in the tropical rain forests, there is a huge amount of burning, particularly in south-east Asia where there are obviously a lot of high density cities,” he said.

The research is being presented today at an international climate change conference in Canada.

Last year a CSIRO study into air quality in the Huon Valley, south of Hobart, found woodheater smoke significantly outweighs emissions from forestry regeneration burns.

ABC Online HERE

• Forestry to fire up 245 burns in autumn

ROSEMARY BOLGER
21 Feb, 2012 08:07 AM

FORESTRY Tasmania plans to conduct 245 regeneration burns this autumn.

Fire manager Tony Blanks said minimising smoke nuisance in urban areas would continue to be a priority during the burning season.

Mr Blanks said there were 25 higher intensity burns planned for the North and North-East – fewer than last year.

More fires are planned in wetter forests in the Circular Head and Huon regions where unfavourable weather conditions meant planned burns could not go ahead in previous years.

Burning will start about mid-March and finish at the start of May.

Mr Blanks said Forestry Tasmania would continue to follow improved procedures implemented last year, including publicising its plans each morning and notifying residents if the fires might have contributed to air pollution.

He said it was important to provide as much information as possible to the community.

“We know the regeneration program causes some concern in some sections of the community, and frankly we wouldn’t burn if it wasn’t essential.”

Read the rest, Examiner here

• FORESTRY TASMANIA GLOSSING OVER TRUTH ON FOREST FIRES
Serious Health Risks Are Still Being Ignored

Paul O’Halloran MP
Greens Health Spokesperson

The Tasmanian Greens today said Forestry Tasmania was insulting the intelligence of Tasmanians and jeopardising their health, by persisting with forest management practices that do not even belong in the developing world.

Greens Health spokesperson Paul O’Halloran MP said Forestry’s glossy brochure in daily newspapers yesterday was an attempt to brainwash Tasmanians and greenwash the 245 forest fires which it plans to start in the autumn.

“These forest burns will be damaging to health, bad for the climate and bad for our clean and green image,” Mr O’Halloran said.

“Even more burns than usual will be conducted in north-west Tasmania, which is disastrous for those who are forced from their homes for long periods of time because they have asthmatic children.”

“It is bizarre that Forestry would deliberately inflict this serious increased health risk on the people of Tasmania, particularly those living in rural and regional areas.”

“New research led by Menzies Research Institute Tasmania, published this week, found forest, grass and agricultural fires had contributed to 339,000 deaths worldwide per year between 1997 and 2006.” [1]

“Toxic cocktails of chemicals and particularly small PM 2.5 particles are particularly dangerous and they are produced in abundance from this archaic practice.”

“The glossy propaganda piece from Forestry Tasmania Managing Director’s is typical of the misinformation coming from this debt-ridden rogue agency, an agency which fails to care for the health of ordinary Tasmanians.”

“How many more Tasmanians have to put up with the life threatening and health implications of a practice that never belonged in any era, let alone the 21st century?”

“This dinosaur GBE with its dinosaur practices must be consigned to the dustbin of history. “

“How is it that this GBE which makes tens of millions of dollar losses through mining our forests is able to find the money to fund outrageous brochures like those inserted in this week’s newspapers?”

“Their claim that Tasmania’s forests absorb and store three times more carbon each year than is emitted by FTs regeneration burns also requires scrutiny. Is Forestry including the loss of soil carbon as a consequence of their hot regeneration burns in these figures?”

“I will also be seeking to work with Asthma Tasmania regarding the impact of these against these atmospheric particulates. There must be a better way than just advising those with respiratory illness to merely activate their precautionary plans – presumably move out of home,” Mr O’Halloran said.

[1] Study by Menzies Research Institute Tasmania, published in Environmental Health Perspectives: Here

Author Credits: [show_post_categories parent="no" parentcategory="writers" show = "category" hyperlink="yes"]
31 Comments

31 Comments

  1. Clive Stott

    February 27, 2012 at 1:04 am

    Regen burns can be and should be delayed. In fact i would like to see them banned all together and they should be if they are in breach of EMPCA.
    You appear to be so worked up worrying about whether they are going to be put off any longer; worried about 245 burns not taking place.
    Please move with the times Robin, even Rome wasn’t burnt in a day.
    I personally hope very few of the 245 smoky burns ever get done.
    One thing you as a former burner can’t do is control the weather, or the wind, or the smoke, and at times the burn, once you set fire to things.
    Why don’t you listen to the scientists that say this is an outdated way of doing things.
    Please read the article again up the top where it says,
    “Scientists from the University of Tasmania, the Menzies Research Institute as well as US and Canadian universities found smoke from forest, grass and agricultural fires affect the climate, air quality and human health.

    Report co-author David Bowman says there are implications for forestry burns in Tasmania.

    “We are exposing populations to risks and preventative measures have got to be taken.”

    “There has got to be an understanding that people who complain about the smoke have a legitimate case, the medical science is on their side now,” he said.

    When you manage to work out how to burn, burn, burn the landscape, with out making harmful smoke please let me know.
    Until then please show some consideration for others and keep your drip torch in your pants.

  2. Robin Halton

    February 26, 2012 at 12:34 am

    #32 Clive, because our weather patterns are back to normal then there is no reason why extensive AFRB cannot be funded and carried out.
    Once the current major wildfires are made safe and a follow up of 25mm-50mm of rain the lighting up of 245 FT burns must start, no ifs and buts!
    245 is an extraordinary number of burns to achieve this autumn, being hampered by the unreasonable restrictions by the EPA!
    This cant go on, regen burns cannot be continually delayed year after year! Left in an unburnt condition is like leaving a mosaic of ignition hot spots within the forests which is not in the interests of sustainable forestry practices.
    Now come on Clive, evacuation, obviously anyone suffering from a respiratory condition would have the sense to put their hand up request to be moved away from areas affected by smoke!
    Generally property owners are more concerned with the damage a wildfire brings and will stay to fight and protect their properties.
    For Christs sake man what do you expect people to do, evacuate at the first sign of smoke!!!
    You give me the impression that the modern population in Tasmania glued to their I pods are city slickers and have no inkling of daily living conditions in rural areas where the bush is subject to regular firing.

  3. Clive Stott

    February 25, 2012 at 8:05 pm

    Make up your mind Robin.
    You write this in #31, “Now is the time for Tas to become engaged as our weather patterns are back to reasonably average levels by experiencing normal yearly rainfall.”
    You are saying this while i am here listening to the news about people having to be evacuated because of fires, not to mention the smoke.

  4. Robin Halton

    February 25, 2012 at 4:34 pm

    #30 Tigerquoll. Significant AFRB Fuel Reduction is required to be coordinated on an annual basis to reduce fuel loads on areas of buttongrass, scrub and open savanna dry forests to offer protection from the effects of wildfire to rural communities, production forests as well as parks and reserves.
    IGA or Climate Change funding, assuming it continues to flow must take into account the Fire Authorities committment to bolster their efforts, effectively for control measures on Private Properties, State owned Land and World Heritage Areas to prevent the unnecessary expansion of damage by wildfire to protect the values of those areas.
    It is highly unlikely Tasmania would be put off by the Perth Hills fires.
    Tasmania has extensive experience with AFRB which is a useful tool using planned fire measures to protect against wildfire.
    Now is the time for Tas to become engaged as our weather patterns are back to reasonably average levels by experiencing normal yearly rainfall.

  5. Robin Halton

    February 25, 2012 at 1:21 pm

    #28 Insufficient broadscale Aerial Fuel Reduction is being carried out in Tasmania.
    This is evident at the current bushfire at Meadowbank in the Derwent Valley. According to a spokeswoman, her father a former Fire Captain estimates around 20 years since any FRB was carried out!
    The SDI’s in the local area of the origin of the fire are in the 150’s(Ouse and Bushy Park).
    During periods of bad fire weather fires can advance quickly through light to med eucalypt forests spotting ahead burning out into extensive dry grasslands which in turn can advance the fire front following the wind direction and speed.
    If we were within a series of drought years then there would be nothing to stop this fire taking its TRADITIONAL PATH and advancing down past the foot hills past New Norfolk striking the outskirts of the Eastern Shore following along the Meehan Range and ending up at Marion Bay.
    The Meehan Range was “effectively” fuel reduced by a nasty wildfire originating from Risdon Vale not that many years ago years ago and may offer some slowing down to the spread of fire beyond the Eastern Outlet beyond Cambridge.
    In an absolute worst case scenario a second fire flank with its head fire heading down the southern foothills along the Derwent River would create a high alert for the Western Suburbs- Knocklofty area behind the city.
    I doubt if it will get to this stage this season as we are not within a drought year, the lateness of the fire season is shortened by actual hours of drying however some autumn rains are required during the next week or too.
    William, these are only but a few of my observations since the 1967 wildfires for which I plainly remember as if it were only yesterday.

  6. William Boeder

    February 24, 2012 at 5:51 pm

    #27. Robin Halton, you appear to be the most intense advocate of the burning of our Native Forests and Button Grass in our State of Tasmania, when did you develop such fervour for forest smoke?
    I now refer you to a Forestry Tasmania burn that took place some 2-1/2 years or so past.
    The former system of fire protection to towns and farms et al was by tilling fire-breaks around each of these areas, paid for by fund allocations of councils and I’m told even with State government subsidy?
    The Forestry Tasmania ignited fires in a section of the Rosebery hills was not sought by the local fire service, nor were they consulted, the first they knew of it was from the local radio announcments and or the presence of the helicopter setting these fires.
    My call to the Murchison District Office of Forestry Tasmania even had them unknowing of the cause for these fires!
    I believe that the science followed by Forestry Tasmania is mostly the science of their own creation.
    As given in your words; “most of the scrub minor & species return all well as the previously burnt coupes becoming a mecca for browsing wildlife seeking shelter and food,” can you relate to me the species that live well of the charred remains of whatever is left in these burnt out coupes?

    There can’t be many others possessed of your avid glee when the State is alive with Forestry Tasmania ignitions?

  7. Robin Halton

    February 24, 2012 at 11:14 am

    #25 Tigerquoll, You are confused between hazard reduction and regen burning!
    It is undesirable to hazard reduce standing wet sclerophyll forest, FT have not burnt this type of vegetation for decades for protection, on occasions we see this happen on private property, some local fire brigades carry out H Red. as a back burning strategy or at the request of neighbours to protect property.
    TFS need to be reminded this is generally not a good practice, only to be used with “care” if life and property is directly threatened by a going wild fire nearby.
    It is ESSENTIAL to carry out HIB for regeneration purposes on logged over areas within wet sclerophyll forest, after a few years most of the scrub minor & species return all well as the previously burnt coupes becoming a mecca for browsing wildlife seeking shelter and food.
    I look foward to seeing smoke coming from the Huon and Upper Derwent Valley burns being a sure sign that FT are carrying out their regeneration treatment program in a timely manner.

  8. Barnaby Drake

    February 24, 2012 at 9:21 am

    editor’s note: comment deleted – see points 1 & 2 in the TT code

  9. Russell

    February 23, 2012 at 8:56 pm

    Re #9
    I don’t know, but do you have a degree or formal education in Nature or Common-sense?

    Re #15
    “Burn, burn and burn hard. No mamby pampy kiddie stuff for the faint hearted, feeble minded, I want to see smoke behind the mountain and plenty of it!”

    That comment is just plain insulting to every person who suffers a lung disease, Robin.

    Re #20
    And in which century prior to FT coming into existence was “high intensity burns followed by aerial seeding ESSENTIAL” to see the successful establishment of the wet eucalypt forests we found already thriving here?

  10. Robin Halton

    February 23, 2012 at 10:38 am

    #21 Tigerquoll, get your facts right first, Hazard Reduction is burning of forest floor litter/scrub/ buttongrass plains to reduce the fuel loads on lands SURROUNDING assets such as forests, farmlands, communities, power line easements or areas prone to regular arson attack. This is classed as Low Intensity Burning and is carried out in the shoulder season.
    High Intensity burning is applied to the burning of Native forest coupes, post logging to achieve a satisfactory seed bed for wet forest eucalypt regeneration.
    Your general comments are both stupid and misleading … become acquainted with the Tasmanian way of life.

  11. mjf

    February 22, 2012 at 12:56 pm

    editor’s note: comment deleted — see points 1 & 2 and “some legal red flags” sections of the TT code http://oldtt.pixelkey.biz/index.php/pages/legalbits

  12. Robin Halton

    February 22, 2012 at 10:02 am

    #19 For Christ’s sake Barnaby high intensity burns followed by aerial seeding is ESSENTIAL for the successful establishment of wet forest eucalypt regeneration.
    Stop misleading the public.
    #18 I have a woodheater and will continue to use it until old age overtakes me.
    I dont smoke, am quite fit, cut my own wood for exercise and for convenience of knowing that my wood is acceptably dry enough to burn.
    As I politely said earlier, my #15 I want to see FT achieve all of their 245 burns this late summer- autumn not to be hampered by all of this silly modern nonsense re. smoke related deaths. Tasmania does not have any smoke related deaths due to regen burns to my knowledge.
    Get a life folks go out and breath the fresh Tasmanian air, this is not Indonesia or the Amazon.

  13. Barnaby Drake

    February 22, 2012 at 9:05 am

    FORESTRY Tasmania plans to conduct 245 regeneration burns this autumn.
    ‘We know the regeneration program causes some concern in some sections of the community, and frankly we wouldn’t burn if it wasn’t essential.’

    These burns are NOT essential neither are they ‘regeneration’ burns; they are sterilisation burns. I aver that it is a myth and totally unnecessry to scorch the earth with these high intensity napalm burns. A walk past any recently burnt coupe will show you there is no ‘bed of ash’ generated. Instead there are some blackened logs in rows with a minimal amount of ash between them, but these are not the planting areas. Bare and blackened earth is all that remains between the windrows. There is no ash. That mostly went up into the atmosphere with the original fire and what was left behind, either blew away or was washed away.

    The humus has gone, the rotting wood and vegetation has gone, large amounts of the topsoil has gone, mostly to end up in our river beds and all that is left is a sterile soil only suitable for some species of eucalypt which can tolerate these conditions, and weeds, and the seedlings require large amounts of artificial fertilser, herbicides, fungicides and insecticides to help them establish themselves. The more exotic species stand little chance of recuperating, but then who cares. They are of the least commercial value.

    The 7.4 million tonnes of aerial pollution generated each year? So what! Got to have something for the greenies to grouse about!

  14. Barnaby Drake

    February 22, 2012 at 8:37 am

    Dr Barry Tomkins, who is a forestry consultant, implies that it is probably smoking and woodfires that cause 340 000 deaths per year rather than woodsmoke released into the air as stated in the international report. That is 680 times the population of Tasmania who die annually, so I think he is drawing a particularly long bow here to excuse the smoke from 7.4 million tonnes of Forestry burns.

    By his logic it would seem that if you do not smoke or possess a woodheater or belong to a lower socio-economic group you will be unaffected by these burns. (How these things can detect lower socio-economic groups to attack beats me.)

    As he states: ‘Simplistic answers/assertions to complex issues come from the idealogues on this site’. He, of course, excludes himself from these ‘vacuous statements’, and as he doesn’t have an axe to grind, possess a woodheater, smoke, or is from a lower socio-economic group, he must have a natural immunity to this cause.

    Pity about the 340 000 people who don’t. However, some of them come from warm climates, and don’t smoke. If only they had money they too would be immune!

    Trust Forestry to target the poor!

  15. Clive Stott

    February 22, 2012 at 5:04 am

    Further reading…forest industry is not trying hard enough.
    http://www.themercury.com.au/article/2012/02/21/302751_tasmania-news.html

  16. Clive Stott

    February 22, 2012 at 2:47 am

    Thank you Paul O’Halloran MP, Greens Health Spokesperson, for your press release above.

    Now i would like to see all the Liblabs join with the pro-active Greens to put an end to all this pernicious forestry smoke nonsense.

    Again, I am not sure why forestry chooses to burn when the medical science is not on their side now.
    They are exposing populations to risks and preventative measures have got to be taken.

    Bob #12: Surely we are talking about health science here?
    Not really sure what you are alluding to, but for one have a look at the credentials of the scientists who wrote the report.
    I think you might get a shock as to the credentials of those fighting for clean air.

  17. Robin Halton

    February 21, 2012 at 11:31 pm

    Burn, burn and burn hard. No mamby pampy kiddie stuff for the faint hearted, feeble minded, I want to see smoke behind the mountain and plenty of it!
    Now is the time to get those regen burns done.
    We are not being waylaid by whinging doctors who reckon smoke kills. To bad, I”ve worked with bush smoke all my life and I want to see more, mega volumes of it before winter.
    Time for the Greens and their dropouts to accept that Tasmanian wet forests are dependent on fire for both regeneration and protection against severe wildfires.

  18. Dr Barry Tomkins

    February 21, 2012 at 10:40 pm

    Re # 11: That wouldn’t have anything to do with the comparatively low socio-economic status that is the unfortunate lot of the Tasmanian community as a whole, would it? OR #13, (Judith King) that a significantly higher proportion of Tasmanian women smoke compared to the mainland States? Perhaps there is a higher proportion of Tasmanian households using wood as a heating source than on the mainland? I do not know the answer, but I suggest that, as usual, if it can be blamed on forestry, that is all that is necessary to set the hares on this site and thread running!

    Simplistic answers/assertions to complex issues come from the idealogues on this site, as usual. It is probably a waste of time posting a comment, but it does appear that the vehement commentators on TT really are blowing hot air out of the top of their heads (which implies some vacuousness in the first instance!)

    Dr Barry Tomkins

  19. Judith King

    February 21, 2012 at 6:56 pm

    #9 I am a qualified heart lung health practitioner, worked at the Heart Lung and Open Heart Unit at Alfred Hospital and spent 18 years working at the Alfred. I also have a Bachelor of Applied Science, a Grad Dip in Health Admin and a Masters in Health Sciences so hope you think I can comment with some expertise.

    It is the health issue about woodsmoke impact that is most important here.

    You would be horrified during an operation to look at the damage to people’s hearts and lungs due to inhalation of pollutants. The organs and their tissue are grey black, shrunken,scarred and hardly resemble the beautiful healthy pink-red well perfused organs they used to be.

    You would be distressed to see people in Emergency and intensive care sweating, grey and gasping for air like gold fish out of water as these vital organs fail them.

    It is negligent in the extreme, for forestry agencies and Tasmanian politicians, to ignore the scientific facts that 340,000 deaths due to inhalation of wood smoke.

    Red herrings such as source or type of woodsmoke are used to distract from the fact that woodsmoke is causing so many deaths.

    The tobacco industry ran distraction campaigns for decades about smoking cigarettes and were finally caught out. Wood smoke is a very similar health issue.

    Within 24 hours of the research release about woodsmoke causing deaths, FT stupidly, blindly announced 245 forestry burns to start mid March.
    http://oldtt.pixelkey.biz/index.php?/weblog/article/wood-smoke-linked-to-deaths/

    Surely people realize there is a major public health issue that needs to be addressed urgently.The only ones ignoring the danger seem to be FT, LibLab, a few TT trolls and the Public Health Office.

  20. bob palendrome

    February 21, 2012 at 5:36 pm

    Hi Ed,

    Bit of paraphrasing going on there on my comment.

    It actually changed the sense of my comment. My point was that the leadership and therefore the direction of the Greens et al is staffed by those trained in other disciplines. Not the Botanical sciences.

  21. sanguine

    February 21, 2012 at 5:22 pm

    On ABC radio two days ago; a study by Menzies Institute stated that 1 in 4 adults in Tasmania are found to have high blood pressure..an astonishing statistic in clean, green Tasmania! This as well as all the other bad health stats that Tasmania has collected!
    And the explanation given was that is was Tasmania’s latitude and climate that may have caused this problem!
    Give me strength! where do the research experts dig this up from? On reflection – don’t answer – it will be censored!

  22. mjf

    February 21, 2012 at 4:48 pm

    #1. Oh, yes. I support a class action against people who spruik about taking class actions against anything under the misguided belief they are representing the Tasmanian community.

    Does count count me as in ?

  23. bob palendrome

    February 21, 2012 at 3:28 pm

    Question, do any of you guys commenting have a degree or any formal education in Forestry, Botany or Plant science in general?

    … Which expertise do you rely upon?

  24. Shirley Brandie

    February 21, 2012 at 3:12 pm

    There is sufficient, documented evidence to show that smoke causes many health problems including cancer.
    When forestry puts all that smoke into the air, that people are literally forced to breathe, how can they justify their actions?

    Pure outright ignorance as I see it.
    Let the people breathe and stop making so many of them sick!

  25. Barnaby Drake

    February 21, 2012 at 1:19 am

    #3. Surely there is no need to burn to create a seedbed…… full-stop.

    There are stringybarks and white gums springing up like wildflowers in my paddock next to a small clump of these trees, and they are becoming a pest. They don’t need any ash seed bed to germinate. They do it quite naturally by themselves. A bit of sunlight, fertile soil and some water will do it nicely,thank you.

  26. Barnaby Drake

    February 21, 2012 at 1:12 am

    There are 340 000 deaths related to woodsmoke from burns worldwide.

    There were three reported deaths from an intensive spiking campaign in Canada several years ago.

    Yet Lara Giddings stands up and accused the ‘greenies’ of risking the lives of foretry workers by spiking trees. There have been no reported deaths or injuries due to this practice in Tasmania, but Forestry burns present a real and present danger.

    Where is she on this issue? It shows quite clearly on which side of the fence she stands!

  27. Clive Stott

    February 20, 2012 at 11:54 pm

    I seem to recall Bob Gordon saying in the past that he would much prefer to be doing something else with the waste than burning it.
    To me this says it is not necessary to put millions of tonnes of wood up in smoke to create an ash bed.

    BTW, thank you Rob Blakers for recording this toxic pollution.

    Back to the top article and the bit about the CSIRO study which, “…found woodheater smoke significantly outweighs emissions from forestry regeneration burns.”
    Yes I would say it probably does in pockets of the Huon Valley.
    Don’t forget that FT commissioned this study at a cost of thousands of dollars.
    The point is Geeveston was known to have the poorest winter time air quality so far found in Tas. But if you compared FT burns and woodheater smoke at Judbury (also in the Huon valley) the comparison would be somewhat different to the often quoted CSIRO finding.
    I’m sorry, I always had a high regard for the CSIRO but this report was a bit of a flop I believe when itself was analysed.
    The equipment failed for some of the study, and they never used NEPM Ambient Air Quality 24 hour PM standards.
    But, they did get the opportunity I believe to familiarize forestry staff in the use of air monitoring equipment (part of the brief).
    Not sure why we are paying to double up on air monitoring equipment and forestry people to do air monitoring when we have a capable EPA air monitoring section and have invested in 20 odd BLANkET monitoring stations and main stations in the state?
    Really, if FT wanted to know what produces the most smoke (wood heaters or regen burns) they could have just gone to http://www.cleanairtas.com.
    FT produced somewhere between 17 and 24 times that of wood heaters in 2008 Tasmania wide.

    I am not sure why forestry choose to burn when the medical science is not on their side now.
    They are exposing populations to risks and preventative measures have got to be taken.

  28. john hayward

    February 20, 2012 at 10:25 pm

    Tasmania may have elevated rates of respiratory illness, but that’s the price of keeping up with West Papua in relative logging rates.

    We’re incredibly dumb, and proud!

    John hayward

  29. Pete Godfrey

    February 20, 2012 at 7:41 pm

    There was a propaganda brochure in Monday’s examiner newspaper from FT about their burns.
    The government company continually use the furphy of having to burn in wet forests as the reason they do regen burns.
    So why did they burn the Branch’s creek pine forest after harvesting.
    Why did they burn the Gog Ranges Pine forests in Lower Beulah last year after logging took place.
    Surely there is no need to burn to create a seedbed when the pine trees are subsequently planted as seedlings?
    It is time the government company stopped using that old smoke screen as the reason they burn.
    We all know that there are a lot of dry forests, damp sclerophyll and pine forests burnt each year also.
    If they must burn then only burn the bona fide wet forests. The rest can be left with a bit of waste in windrows as habitat.

  30. John Groves

    February 20, 2012 at 5:10 pm

    Re# 1 This comment clearly breaches the TT Code of conduct No 2 “threatening or encouraging legal action” Ed a bit of consistence is needed here I have been pulled up for this breech and have been threaten with legal action but you seem to let Green contributors through but pull up others what’s the go there?
    Judith Who will you sue when there is a bush fire? Will you also sue everyone with a wood heater?

  31. Judith King

    February 20, 2012 at 3:02 pm

    Nick McKim says it well in his article…dinosaurs stuck in a swamp.

    http://oldtt.pixelkey.biz/index.php?/weblog/article/i-wont-be-silenced-on-forestry-by-dinosaurs-stuck-fast-in-a-swamp/

    Forestry Tasmania will end up being sued in a class action by people with respiratory and heart disease as the science shows wood smoke kills. It doesn’t matter the source…wood smoke kills people.

    Let’s consider getting a class action together. Are there readers interested in forming an action group to look at taking further action to prevent this negligent action by Forestry Tasmania in abrogation of their duty of care to the Tasmanian community?

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Receive our newsletter

Copyright © Tasmanian Times. Site by Pixel Key

To Top