Does logging cause forests to burn?

Dr Zylstra and other scientists try to argue that logging regrowth “makes forest more flammable” (Gaz 30/6).

Despite their studies, it is common sense that in severe bushfire conditions, any area of forest, whether logging regrowth or not, will burn intensely.

The letter referred to a paper that was ‘funded by the logging industry and co-authored by logging industry employees.’

This is completely wrong – the paper was authored by independent scientists and expert foresters and received no funding from the logging industry.

The senior author was Dr Peter Attiwill, an associate professor, school of botany at Melbourne University, who has impeccable credentials and extensive experience.

The findings of the Attiwill paper showed that, irrespective of tenure, all forest burnt in 2009 – with the exception of some young post-harvesting regrowth.

The Zylstra letter is really arguing that native forest harvesting should be shut down. It is disappointing that the authors of the letter clearly don’t support a sustainable industry that produces vital, carbon-storing products needed by our society.

Peter Fagg, Blackburn

On top of that, we have had massive bonuses paid to the shire in the form of new rate sources from new land and house development.

The developers are required to pay for the new roads, footpaths, street lighting, underground electricity, water and gas etc, so no impost to running local government for provision of the above.

Additional costs imposed by the Baw Baw administration in infrastructure levies, road opening permits and planning application fees.

The street trees are paid for by the developers which are usually planted before handover to the council at the end of two years.

On the other side of the balance sheet, I see in the proposed draft budget, the administration has provided a sum of $2.65 million to upgrade Copelands Rd. Wow. I think this sum should be provided for by the developers of the new estates off the road seeing as the need for widening the road has been created by vast numbers of allotments and new houses created in that area.

To adopt this suggestion would save $2.65 million and maintain rate revenue at the same current level without increasing the cost to ratepayers (read taxpayers).

Alternatively, if $2.9 million was not spent on an artificial grass soccer pitch, the answer would be the same, no rate increase.

Ian Honey, Warragul

After receiving a robodebt letter from Centrelink for the amount of over $400, I queried and then appealed the decision because I knew it to be wrong.

Someone, not a computer, checked my situation out, only to find that I was in fact owed over $2300 instead and I have just received the amount owed since 2017.

If I had not appealed the Robodebt finding, the money owed would never have been uncovered. It may be prudent for other people to check their Centrelink records for they might get a delightful surprise too.

Greg Tuck, Warragul