Luis Feliu
Tweed Shire Council is calling on the state government to immediately suspend a controversial new bush fire law which is being blamed for the destruction of a rare littoral rainforest remnant at Fingal Head two weeks ago.
Council has also called for an urgent meeting with premier Mike Baird, his police and fire ministers and local state MPs to discuss the issue in the wake of the incident.
The new vegetation-clearing amendment for bushfire zones, which came into effect on August 1, has already also led to landowners in Sydney’s leafy suburbs and waterfront suburbs chopping down 100-year-old trees that are blocking their harbour views.
On 11 August, Echonetdaily reported how Fingal Head residents were shocked and outraged when most of the endangered remnant was wiped out on a private property for which the owner had a subdivision bid knocked back by council just a few days before.
And despite police and council rangers attending the Queen Street property and ordering tree-chopping contractors to stop work, senior council planners decided nothing could be done given the new ’10/50 vegetation clearing code of practice’ the state government introduced after the Blue Mountains bushfires earlier this year which parliament passed two months ago.
(The new code allows people living within 350 metres of designated bushfire-prone areas to clear trees on their property within 10 metres of their home, and for removal of undergrowth and shrubs within 50 metres of their home, with no distinction between bushland and urban areas.)
The Fingal Head remnant was part of a critically endangered ecological community (EEC) protected under federal law, but federal environment officers told Fingal Head neighbours the remnant, though very rare, was not large enough to warrant intervention or prosecution.
The Environmental Defenders Office is also looking into the Fingal Head case.
The new amendment has Tweed and other councils across the state fearing it’s a one-size fits-all policy which may lead to whoselasale destruction of suburban trees and canopy, and that it’s bad fire policy.
Councillors also fear it may also limit development that could otherwise be approved.
The motion noted the new amendment was ‘responsible for the loss of critically endangered littoral rainforest in Fingal Head’ ahead of council’s consideration of a development application for demolition of an existing house and the building of two townhouses on the site.
Biodiversity values
Councillors said it ‘could impact on the internationally recognised biodiversity values of Tweed Shire which has the highest number of threatened species in Australia, including a koala population of the Tweed Coast which is estimated at less than 144 koalas’.
It would also undermine significant economic benefits for tourism that derive from Tweed’s ‘green’ image, and ‘inevitably place pressure on neighbours (including councils) to consent to clearing that they would otherwise not contemplate fearing legal liability should a fire occur’.
They say the new law was ‘introduced without clear mapping and criteria to define clearing entitlement areas at the time of public consultation, effectively preventing community input into the extent of the areas included.
The laws would also impact on council planning in terms of consent conditions and override or undermine other planning instruments.
The motion calls for an immediate suspension of the new provisions, an urgent scientific review into their ecological impacts and bushfire-hazard reduction benefits, and shirewide mapping of the clearing entitlement areas and the criteria for defining them to enable council to fully assess the potential impacts.
It also calls on the premier Mike Baird, his police, fire and emergency ministers and state MPs to urgently meet with council over the issue.
The urgency motion introduced by Crs Katie Milne and mayor Barry Longland at last Thursday’s meeting was passed 5-1 (Cr Phil Youngblutt against, Cr Warren Polglase absent).
Council general manager Troy Green last week wrote to Tweed MP Geoff Provest expressing alarm over the 10/50 vegetation clearing code of practice and its impact on the shire.
Mr Green told Mr Provest that ‘whilst the intent of the new code to protect lives and properties is sound, since the release of the code of practice and associated mapping, some serious concerns have been raised as to the impact of the vegetation clearing entitlement on the Tweed shire’s significant ecological values.’
He said they would override significant state environmental planning protection instruments and policy.
Limited protection
Mr Green said the recent Fingal Head case highlighted how the federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act offered limited protection to vegetation communities, habitats and species listed under the act given the federal environment department considered the clearing of the littoral rainforest at Fingal Head had not been of significant impact.
He said it was also unclear whether existing conditions of consent related to asset protection zones remained valid as a result the new provisions.
He also outlined legal ramifications of the new code of fires spreading onto neighbouring properties, and that it would give ‘little relief from bushfire at a landscape scale during large bushfire events as it would require entire neighbourhood to undertake clearing to provide a suitable reduced fuel area’.
Meanwhile, a report in Fairfax Media at the weekend said residents in some northern suburbs of Sydney had already started cutting down trees, including 100-year-old angophoras.
The report quoted Pittwater mayor Jacqueline Townsend saying the felling there was at a rate of 10 a day.
‘There are concerns there are going to be great big bald patches right up the escarpment,’ Ms Townsend told Fairfax Media.
Mosman deputy mayor Roy Bendall said the Rural Fire Service (RFS) had taken a blanket approach and any benefits from the new code in areas like the Blue Mountains were not necessarily good for highly-populated areas.
Tweed MP Mr Provest told the media outlet that he feared the policy could be used ‘for other purposes’ although he agreed with its intent.
The state Greens have also called for state intervention and suspension of the code for land containing critically endangered littoral rainforest.
Greens MLC David Shoebridge told Fairfax Media councils including Mosman were seeking exemptions for urban areas, while the Nature Conservation Council of NSW’s CEO Kate Smolksi says the changes are ‘bad policy’ which could result in losses of canopy cover in some local government areas of more than 50 per cent.
RFS deputy commissioner Rob Rogers said the RFS would review the code in the next 12 months.
A few scungy rare trees at Fingal. Like who cares about that if your views to a wrecked beach or rock walled river are in the way? Next you loppers will have to actually talk to your indigenous neighbours those scummy trees blocked out. They might not want to enjoy your company as they will know who you are, have no doubt.
Truly horrifying when you consider how critically important trees are for the planet’s ecological health (and ours too).
I am very proud of our council (especially Cr Milne for bringing the motion) and General Manager Troy Green for strongly speaking out on behalf of our environment in this instance. How fortunate we are to have a proactive council (at least some of the time).