| Submit your comments on this article |
| Down Under |
| Angry Aussie fire survivors blame council 'green' policy |
| 2009-02-11 |
| ANGRY residents last night accused local authorities of contributing to the bushfire toll by failing to let residents chop down trees and clear up bushland that posed a fire risk. During question time at a packed community meeting in Arthurs Creek on Melbourne's northern fringe, Warwick Spooner — whose mother Marilyn and brother Damien perished along with their home in the Strathewen blaze — criticised the Nillumbik council for the limitations it placed on residents wanting the council's help or permission to clean up around their properties in preparation for the bushfire season. "We've lost two people in my family because you dickheads won't cut trees down," he said. "We wanted trees cut down on the side of the road … and you can't even cut the grass for God's sake." Later, the meeting was cut short when Mr Spooner's father, Dennis, collapsed in his chair and an ambulance had to be called. Despite losing his wife and son and everything he owned, a friend later said he had not stopped or slept since the weekend. Another resident said she had asked the council four times to tend to out-of-control growth on public land near her home, but her pleas had been ignored. There was widespread applause when Nillumbik Mayor Bo Bendtsen said changes were likely to be made about the council's policy surrounding native vegetation. But his response was not good enough for Mr Spooner: "It's too late now mate. We've lost families, we've lost people." More than 500 people spilled out of the small hall during the meeting, at which the CFA, Victoria Police, Department of Human Services and Telstra provided updates. Many expressed anger that police road blocks were stopping them from reaching survivors trapped in fire-ravaged areas with no water, power or other basic needs. One man present spoke of counselling a woman whose two children had been killed and whose grief had been compounded by not knowing where they were because the area had been declared a crime scene and she had not been allowed to return. Most of those present were tired, grieving the loss of relatives and friends and with little more than the smoke-coated clothes on their backs. Some were still showing symptoms of shock after experiencing the worst natural disaster in the nation's history. Scattered around the hall and outside were trestle tables with clothing sorted in neat piles, toiletries, food and bottled water. On the floor were dozens of pairs of shoes. There was also a section dedicated to baby clothes and another for children's toys. Of all the speakers who addressed the meeting, it was Arthurs Creek CFA Captain David McGahy who got the most rousing reception. Choking back tears he told them: "I'm so terribly sorry. We desperately wanted to protect you but we couldn't. In the cold analysis of light, it wouldn't have mattered if we'd have had 200 units here, all that would have happened is we would have ended up with a whole lot of dead firefighters. I've been at this game for about 40 years and I haven't experienced anything like that, not even remotely like it." |
| Posted by:tu3031 |
| #6 The Green Plan all along. Stage #1 has been successful. Stage #2 will be to prevent owners from rebuilding. |
| Posted by: Skunky Glins 5*** 2009-02-11 18:25 |
| #5 We've lost two people in my family because you dickheads won't cut trees down. In a just world, or a world even 70 years ago, the bureaucrats would have been the ones cut down soon after. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2009-02-11 14:08 |
| #4 The effect of out of control emotions and green a-holes. I like #3's suggestion. Soon. |
| Posted by: Trader_DFW 2009-02-11 13:04 |
| #3 Perhaps culling the environmentalists is the answer:>) |
| Posted by: Xenophon 2009-02-11 12:41 |
| #2 Environmentalists will gladly trade 200 deaths so that they can keep the land as they like it. To their thinking, there are too many humans already and we're due for a cull. |
| Posted by: gromky 2009-02-11 12:11 |
| #1 My Dad (82 at the time) cleared a 80-foot wide & 300-foot long swath of brush on a "State Protected" 'wild growth area' (read - wildfire hazard) in southern California adjacent to his house. Borrowed a bobcat from a nearby home construction site. Did it over a weekend. When the state DNR folks came looking soon after for who did it, he and his neighbors (who were and still are quite happy this happened as this hazard abutted their properties, too) told them that the "Mexicans probably came and got the stuff for firewood". During the last big area brush fire, it didn't seriously affect any of the homes adjacent to the 'cut'. Fire did get the homes down the hill that weren't cleared away, though. |
| Posted by: Mullah Richard 2009-02-11 12:04 |