Fire knows no boundaries and affects many different people in
different ways across the tropical savannas. These groups include
aboriginal people, pastoralists, fire fighters, park rangers,
tourists, fire researchers and urban dwellers. These groups often
have quite different attitudes to the landscape and land management
and currently, there is no shared view on how we should manage fire
in the tropical savannas. Perhaps a shared view is not needed,
however it is important for these different groups to understand
and respect the attitudes of the other groups involved in fire
management.
Remote land managers
Prime responsibility for fire management lies with the people on
the ground, and for the two groups that manage the largest
areas of land – Aboriginal people and pastoralists–
fire management can be very important.
For Aboriginal people, burning practices have long been an
integral part of their culture and are used for a variety of
purposes. The recent changes in burning patterns are of great
concern to many aboriginal people. See the Aboriginal fire
management section. For pastoralists, good fire management can have
significant implications for the financial viability of their
cattle stations. If a wildfire burns out their fodder
financial hardship can follow, and on fire can be used to manage
pastures, weeds. The consequences of fire management, good or bad,
tend to affect the people on the ground, the remote land managers
before they affect others – and those impacts may be
profound.
Fire is often a cheap and effective way of managing vast
landscapes for remote land managers , however problems are arising
because their numbers have diminished over wide areas in recent
times. Not only are there often too few people to manage fire
effectively, but valuable knowledge and experience are lost as
people depart. For example, cattle stations are operating with
fewer hands than ever before, and burning for protection against
wildfires and for pasture renewal and weed control is often
neglected, or even actively resisted. Concerns include the loss of
valuable late dry-season pasture and fear of legal action if
deliberately lit fires escape onto neighbours' land. On Aboriginal
land people have been moved into communities, leaving large areas
essentially unmanaged. National park rangers often transfer from
one park to another too frequently to develop an adequate
understanding of the fire needs of particular areas and institute
appropriate management regimes. Vacant Crown Land is mostly just
that: vacant.
Land Management Agencies and researchers
Most land-management agencies across northern Australia now have
as a goal the prevention of late dry season, high-intensity fires,
primarily through fuel reduction burning early in the dry season.
The Bushfire Council of the Northern Territory, for example, lights
fires over extensive areas of savanna using incendiary devices
dropped from aircraft. The strategic lines and patches burnt are
intended to minimise problems with fires later in the year. Such
burns are often done in collaboration with land managers such as
pastoralists. Western Australia's Bush Fires Board uses similar
methods to protect productive country in the Kimberley from
wildfire. Park managers also undertake extensive controlled burns
early in the dry season.
Research Scientists often have their own distinctive attitudes
to fire management. Some scientists would like to see a
more experimental and objective approach taken to fire
management.
'Blackened bush' encounters
For many urban dwellers and tourists, however, fire can take on
a very different aspect. For these people fire often has a negative
image as something dangerous and destructive. Black burnt bush is
the other obvious sign, and this can create problems for tourism
operators if visitors encounter the aftermath of fire and are not
impressed by what they see. However, encounters with blackened bush
provide opportunities to educate the public about fire in the
savanna. And people can be assured that it doesn't retain its burnt
look for too long; after early dry season burning the bush recovers
its green appearance in six to eight weeks.
Pollution concerns
 |
|
Smoke from necessary fires may be a pollution
problem, but in some situations it may be better to accept the
risks
Photo: Peter Whitehead
|
Smoke from controlled burning can cause significant air
pollution in towns and cities. The health impacts of this smoke
have yet to be studied to any great extent, but there are
indications that on days when there is above average smoke
densities, health impacts will result. But proposed national
air quality standards may have an adverse impact on the capacity of
land managers in some northern savanna regions to make the best use
of fire—because of the risk of sending unacceptable amounts
of smoke over urban areas. In some situations it may be feasible to
restrict burning to periods when the smoke will blow away from
population centres, but in others it might be necessary to accept
that the risks entailed in not burning outweigh any possible
aesthetic or health problems associated with occasional smoky
days.
One concern that can be put to rest is that burning in the
tropical savannas will add significantly to the build-up of
greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Emissions of carbon dioxide,
the main greenhouse gas, during savanna fires are balanced by
uptake as the grass grows again. Net releases of two other
significant gases, methane and nitrous oxide, are very small
compared with total greenhouse emissions.
Delegates to a workshop on fire management in northern
Australia, held in 1998, stressed the importance of communication
and education. They considered community involvement and awareness
vital if management goals are to be achieved.
