Lethal Heating: 06/09/20

09/06/2020

(AU) More Than A Third Of NSW Rainforests Found To Have Been Hit By Australian Bushfires

The Guardian - Lisa Cox

The updated assessment also shows the fire ground includes more than 3.5m hectares of the state’s best koala habitat

The report also maps the relative severity of the fires based on how much of the tree canopy appears to have burnt. Photograph: Rob Blakers

More than a third of New South Wales rainforest was among 5.4m hectares hit by last season’s catastrophic bushfires, according to new state government data.

The report, an updated assessment of the effect of the fires on wildlife and landscapes, said 293 threatened animal species and 680 threatened plant species have habitat in the state’s fire ground. The affected area includes more than 3.5m hectares of the state’s best koala habitat.

Almost six months on from the crisis, the impact of the fire season is only beginning to be understood.

Recovery work has begun in some areas, while in others, the Covid-19 pandemic shut down early assessment work.

The fire ground includes 245 of the state’s 878 national parks and 208 out of 522 state forests.

The report maps the relative severity of the fires based on how much of the tree canopy appears to have burnt.

The maps were produced using geospatial data and will be refined over time with more on ground assessment, a NSW environment department spokesperson said.

Of the national parks in the fire ground, the analysis found 23% have had their canopy fully affected and 36% partially affected. In state forests, those figures are 17% and 32% respectively.

The report rated the ecological condition of forests in the fire ground, which is a measure of the quality and the intactness of habitat compared to its original condition.

Within the NSW RFS fire ground, 72% of the original ecological was estimated as remaining in 2013. In 2020, that figure has decreased to 44% the report states.

The analysis also looked at the ability of these locations to support native species and ecosystems, what is known as “ecological carrying capacity”.

It estimated that within the fire ground 62% of the original carrying capacity remained in 2013. That had now fallen to 38%.

As well as 37% of rainforests being affected, other findings included:

52% of all heathlands in NSW has been affected by fire.

50% of wet sclerophyll forests has been affected.

25% of the most suitable koala habitat in eastern NSW is in the RFS fire ground. That includes 68% of the best koala habitat on the south coast, 34% of the best koala habitat in the northern tablelands and 30% of the best koala habitat on the north coast.

The report builds on earlier work which found vast areas of the Blue Mountains world heritage area and the Gondwana rainforests world heritage area were within the fire ground.

John Merson, the executive director of the Blue Mountains World Heritage Institute, said although more than 80% of the world heritage area had burnt, it had not burnt uniformly or at the same intensity.

He said there were areas of refuges, and recovery was occurring, but some critical ecosystems, including swamp communities that are important water resources had been affected on a large scale.

Merson said surveys were occurring to examine not just the short term effects of the fires but what the longer term effect of climate change would be on the recovery, noting concern about fires returning with greater frequency.

“I think we need a better understanding of how to protect this environment,” he said.

In the state’s north, the botanist Robert Kooyman has been surveying areas of the Gondwana rainforests, including in the Nightcap national park.

He said six months on there had been a significant resprouting in eucalypt forest and in the rainforest.

But he said there was also a continuation of tree mortality.

“Trees die slowly. There’s a continuing impact of the fires six months later,” Kooyman said.

“The short story is there’s signs of life but the loss of large trees is something that doesn’t get replaced quickly.

“We’re talking many decades and in some cases hundreds of years to replace that.”

The department’s spokesperson said it was expected both the ecological condition and carrying capacity of the fire-affected areas would improve as areas regenerated.

“This response will be captured in future assessments.”

Links

What Can We Learn From Indigenous Groups About Safeguarding The Environment?

Euronews - Marthe de Ferrer

One million animal and plant species are at risk of extinction right now - and that number is only growing. Ecological decline on this scale has never been seen before, with scientists and policymakers rightly concerned as to what this means for our collective future. But the solution to protecting biodiversity on this planet could lie with Indigenous communities.

This new finding was highlighted by the UN in a landmark report last year from the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). IPBES chair, Sir Robert Watson, says the report “presents an ominous picture,” as humans “are eroding the very foundations of our economies, livelihoods, food security, health and quality of life worldwide.”

Let’s face it, the figures are bleak - two-thirds of the marine environment and three-quarters of land-based environment have been significantly altered, meaning numerous species are affected. However, among it all, there are some statistics which should both give us a sense of optimism and force a major rethink in how we tackle the biodiversity crisis.

The report found that in areas held or managed by Indigenous Peoples and local communities (non-indigenous people considered to have strong ties to the land) the ecological decline was far less severe - and in some cases, had been avoided altogether.

Indigenous-governed lands are declining ecologically far less than other areas. Gabrielle de Ferrer

Indigenous-managed land is critical to species’ survival

Around a quarter of global land area is owned, managed, used, or occupied by Indigenous Peoples. These territories are located across the world, with a particular concentration in the Americas. A study from the University of British Columbia (UBC) expanded on the findings of the UN report, examining how Indigenous-managed lands “play a critical role in helping species survive.”

Collaborating with Indigenous land stewards will likely be essential in ensuring that species survive and thrive. Richard Schuster Lead author on the UBC study

The research team at UBC focused on three of the world’s biggest countries, Australia, Brazil and Canada, analysing land and species data across the nations. They observed that the highest concentration of birds, mammals, amphibians, and reptiles were consistently found on lands managed or co-managed by Indigenous communities.

Women from the Kichwa indigenous community in Ecuador protesting environmental policies. Dolores Ochoa/AP

"This suggests that it's the land-management practices of many Indigenous communities that are keeping species numbers high," says lead author Richard Schuster. "Going forward, collaborating with Indigenous land stewards will likely be essential in ensuring that species survive and thrive."

This sentiment is echoed by co-author Nick Reo, himself a citizen of the Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario tribe of Chippewa Indians. Reo explains, “Indigenous-managed lands represent an important repository of biodiversity in three of the largest countries on Earth. In light of this, collaborating with Indigenous governments, communities and organisations can help to conserve biodiversity as well as support Indigenous rights to land, sustainable resource use and well-being."

What are these communities doing to protect biodiversity?

There is no single action being undertaken by Indigenous Peoples to protect the environment; their success derives from a series of factors, practices, and efforts. Worldwide, these communities have been able to safeguard lands and species through a combined approach, including monitoring species-rich landscapes and fighting against land degradation.

Observing and tracking ecosystems is vital to conservation efforts, and Indigenous Peoples have a significant role in long-term monitoring. In part this is because some of the most remote areas in the world are home to these communities - such as in the Amazon or the Arctic.

The Iñupiat community in Alaska are increasingly at-risk because of global warming. LAURENT DICK/AP

“That monitoring role can be really important, particularly where we don’t have a long-term scientific presence,” Pamela McElwee, one of the lead authors of the IPBES report, told Scientific American. “It’s really these communities that are collecting the data, often through everyday experiences, so they can report back trends for species, population numbers over time, interactions between species, and noticeable declines.”

The IPBES report also noted that Indigenous communities create landscapes which are far more diverse than land typically used for agriculture, often combining wild and domestic species in gardens to create vital habitats. Plus, these groups are often using their unparalleled understanding of that environment to restore degraded lands.

For example, some Angola Indigenous communities, including the Herero, the Khoisan and the Muimba, collaborated with Global Environment Facilities (GEF) to help rehabilitate degraded pastoral and agricultural lands which had been devastated by drought. This improved pasture management has since been vital in protecting food security in the country.

Aboriginal social-ecological systems in the area have been found to be far more resilient and sustainable than European methods post-colonisation.

Native American tribes have also been part of restoration and conservation efforts in the USA’s Pacific Northwest, where large swathes of public lands are also Indigenous communities’ ancestral homelands. Aboriginal social-ecological systems in the area have been found to be far more resilient and sustainable than European methods post-colonisation, meaning critical food resources, like salmon, were better managed and more secure.

Cocoa trees being planted near Tamshiyacu, Peru. Gabrielle de Ferrer

Communities under threat

The UN and researchers around the world have made it clear that in order to halt the planetary extinction crisis, engaging with, learning from, and supporting Indigenous Peoples is key.

Historically, these people have been excluded from their land, threatened by loggers and other financially-motivated parties, and given no voice in the broader environmental conversation.

Though Indigenous communities are doing the most to protect the planet, statistically it is those same people who are most at-risk in the climate crisis.

The IPBES report also noted that “the areas of the world projected to experience significant negative effects from global changes in climate, biodiversity, ecosystem functions and nature’s contributions to people, are also areas in which large concentrations of Indigenous Peoples and many of the world’s poorest communities reside.”

Indigenous leader Kretan Kaingang protesting Brazil's president Jair Bolsonaro for his handling of the coronavirus crisis. Eraldo Peres/AP

Effectively, though Indigenous communities are doing the most to protect the planet, statistically it is those same people who are most at-risk in the climate crisis.

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought fresh problems for Indigenous Peoples as well, with supply chains affected and food prices rising. UK-based climate charity Cool Earth works towards ending tropical deforestation and degradation across seven countries in four continents, by empowering and supporting local people engaging in positive climate action.

The organisation recently launched its Rainforest Resilience Fund, making an urgent appeal to provide food and sanitation for Indigenous communities who are facing the impacts of coronavirus.

“Cool Earth’s long-term focus will always be protecting rainforest alongside local people, but in the last month, we have been inundated with calls for urgent aid from almost every one of our partner communities,” explains the charity’s director Matthew Owen. “Essential supplies of food and hygiene equipment are needed immediately to keep people safe and healthy, along with resources like seeds and tools to prepare for the coming months.”

The fund has seen significant support, meaning hundreds of families have already received aid during these challenging times.

Cool Earth launched the Rainforest Resilience Fund to support Indigenous communities impacted by the pandemic. Cool Earth

“By supporting Indigenous communities that live in rainforest, we can help them continue to be the guardians and custodians of the rainforest that we all need,” adds Cool Earth’s ambassador and television presenter Gillian Burke.

Cool Earth’s broader mission is exactly the approach to environmental action that researchers, and now the UN, are calling for. By placing Indigenous Peoples at the heart of environmentalism, taking their lead and following their examples, we have a chance to limit the extent of the extinction crisis and protect our vital ecosystems around the world.

As UNESCO Director-General Audrey Azoulay concludes, “our local, Indigenous and scientific knowledge is proving that we have solutions and so no more excuses: we must live on earth differently.”

Links

(AU) Logging And Fire Both Make Forests More Flammable

Sydney Morning Herald - Jamie Kirkpatrick*

The clear and overwhelming evidence is that logging makes forests more flammable.

These are the findings of four peer-reviewed, published scientific studies from four institutions in six years, and of multiple scientific reviews.

Bushfire risks have been getting worse for eastern Australia in recent decades. Credit: NIne

The likely reasons are that after logging, increased sunlight dries out the forest floor, thousands of fast-growing saplings per hectare increases the fuel for a fire to burn, and the wind speed on hot days increases because of the lack of a tree canopy (wind speed is a key factor in creating extreme fire conditions).

Most branches that burn in a bushfire are smaller than the diameter of a human thumb. Young trees burn almost completely while big, tall trees often remain alive and standing after fire.

Climate change is already resulting in more extreme fire danger days, and the evidence is that native forest logging makes things worse.

Dense plants create a "fuel ladder" to the treetops. Dense plant growth occurs in forests growing back from either logging or fire. More severe fires produce denser regrowth. Growing trees in young forests create greater fire hazard for decades.

In logged forests, the body of evidence shows increased flammability begins in the first 10 years after logging or fire and continues for about another 30 years, depending on forest type.

The evidence is that logging and fire both make forests more flammable. Post-fire, the logging industry receives taxpayer-funded grants for additional, increased logging of burned forest, as it did last month. Peer-reviewed studies show post-fire logging also increases forest flammability for decades.

After logging, the top of the tree, the bark and the branches are left on the ground. Only the stripped trunk of the log is taken. Even if the area is then burned, excess dead branches remain, and then dense plant regrowth creates much more fire fuel.

An examination of Tasmania’s January 2019 fires found forests growing back after industrial logging burned more severely than old-growth forests.

Another peer-reviewed paper found Victorian state forests allocated for logging burned more extensively and frequently than national parks over the past 20 years, and 28 per cent of the area VicForests had planned to log up until 2024 was burned last summer.

Two other studies found fire is more severe in logging regrowth. Studies from the US and Patagonia had similar outcomes.

The catastrophic Kilmore fire in Victoria in 2009 burned slower and with less intensity in tall, wet, old-growth forest on Mt Disappointment.

The logging industry funded a contradictory piece on fire behaviour in 2014, using members of a group called the Institute of Foresters of Australia. The paper, led by Peter Attiwill with co-authors employed by the logging industry, was titled Timber harvesting does not increase fire risks and severity in wet forests of southern Australia.

Immediately, a peer-reviewed paper called Errors by Attiwill (Bradstock and Price, 2014) responded that Attiwill had “erroneously reported our results” and pointed out other key flaws.

Speaking about mountain ash forests, Attiwill had said: “There is no evidence from recent megafires in Victoria that younger regrowth (less than 10 years) burnt with greater severity than older forest (over 70 years)”, a statement that did not address the key period of flammability found by other studies, between around years 10 and 40.

Robust analysis of the same Victorian fires shows a clear relationship between time since logging and fire severity.

There is no published scientific work suggesting logging reduces fire risk. Still, VicForests aggressively attacks scientists who publish peer-reviewed science on the subject, including those it has previously employed.

Private Forests Tasmania has claimed commercial logging is a preventative fire strategy. This claim is not supported by any peer-reviewed fire behaviour models.

Industrial logging continues near country towns including Warburton, Toolangi, Healesville, Noojee, Orbost, Mallacoota and Cann River in Victoria; around Eden and Batemans Bay and along the south and north coasts of NSW, and in areas around Geeveston, Maydena, Derby, Southport and Dover in Tasmania.

As scientists, our purpose is to inform the public and decision-makers about the peer-reviewed scientific evidence. The evidence is that logging makes forest more flammable.

*Jamie Kirkpatrick is distinguished professor in geography and spatial sciences at the University of Tasmania. This article was co-authored by Dr Jennifer Sanger, Dr Chris Taylor, Dr Robert Kooyman, Dr Phil Zylstra and Professor James Watson.

Links