Farmers and graziers
"Extreme smoke pollution in Launceston City area in May result of burning gorse on
private property....says State Government." - Greeen Markets 9/07"
A weed reduction burn at Breadalbane has cast a large plume of black smoke over
Youngtown.- 16/5/2012
EPA Tasmania Air Quality Technical Report 18. An agricultural planned burn at Nile-
March 2013
Tasmanian Farmer and Graziers Association members should be demanding their organisation looks into smokeless ways to
clear their land rather than advocating to keep on using fire in the first instance that gives off large quantities of cancer-causing
smoke for populations to breathe.
Many people in Tasmania would relate to non-skin cancer as we have some, if not the highest, incidences of these cancers in
Australia.
In addition we have some of the other smoke related diseases at the highest levels in Australia such as respiratory and cardiac
disease.
The World Health Organisation has made it quite clear; air pollution causes lung cancer and particulate matter is
carcinogenic to humans. Go here.
Despite these clear findings the TFGA is continuing to promote smoky burning as opposed to less harmful, smokeless, fuel
reduction methods. See below:
Then Jan Davis put out a media release on 17.9.2014
Ms Davis claims: "Of course, we are aware of the issues surrounding potential environmental smoke hazards, but the fatal
pollution to which he refers mainly involves such things as smog haze where the particulate matter is 2.5 micrometres or less.
They are not usually generated by agricultural land uses, hazard reductions, etc."
Really?
Ms Davis will not accept for her members that farmer's smoke is primarily made up of PM2.5’s or less and the WHO has
determined that air pollution CAUSES lung cancer and particulate matter is carcinogenic.
Farmers are capable of making some of the worst air pollution because of their low intensity smoky burns.
It is incorrect of Ms Davis to say that cancer causing particulates are not caused by agricultural land uses and hazard reduction
burns, etc.
Wood smoke is greater than 90% Fine Particulate Matter, ie, PM 2.5 or less. (American Lung Association).
"The majority of particles emitted from biomass burning, which includes controlled burning and uncontrolled fires, are
ultrafine, with only a small fraction in the larger size range, and with most of the mass present in particles less than 2.5 um in
aerodynamic diameter." (WHO, 1999)
Go here to see harmful smoke produced from this type of burn.
Further, there is no "Tasmanian context" when it comes to cancer causing particulates. The WHO has determined air pollution
causes lung cancer, and particulate matter is carcinogenic.
The WHO made no exception for Tasmania farmers and graziers with its highest Group 1 cancer findings.
When you are subjected to cancer-causing farmer's smoke or read headlines such as the examples above you know this group of people must show more care with their pernicious smoke.
cleanairtas is not saying land clearing should not occur when there is a high build up of fuel.
It is saying there are other smokeless ways of managing this build up and some of these proven ways can be found here. We are still seeing fire being used first.
Tasmania Fire Service spells it out quite clearly under their heading Smoke and Asthma:
"Smoke, including wood smoke stemming from bushfires or fuel reduction burning can seriously affect the wellbeing of people with asthma, emphysema and other respiratory conditions. Fire agencies have little control over smoke produced from bushfires however, the State Government's Air Quality Policy requires that land managers and individual landowners undertaking planned burning should use best practice environmental management to minimise the effects of smoke pollution on individuals and the community. In implementing this fuel reduction, burning is undertaken when weather conditions will minimise the likelihood of smoke drifting into local communities."
cleanairtas is not saying land clearing should not occur when there is a high build up of fuel.
It is saying there are other smokeless ways of managing this build up and some of these proven ways can be found here. We are still seeing fire being used first.
Tasmania Fire Service spells it out quite clearly under their heading Smoke and Asthma:
"Smoke, including wood smoke stemming from bushfires or fuel reduction burning can seriously affect the wellbeing of people with asthma, emphysema and other respiratory conditions. Fire agencies have little control over smoke produced from bushfires however, the State Government's Air Quality Policy requires that land managers and individual landowners undertaking planned burning should use best practice environmental management to minimise the effects of smoke pollution on individuals and the community. In implementing this fuel reduction, burning is undertaken when weather conditions will minimise the likelihood of smoke drifting into local communities."
25.10.2014: VOLUNTEER firefighter Ian Sauer will fill the chairman position on the State Fire Management Council.
Mr. Sauer will oversee the roll out of the government's $28.5 million state-wide fuel reduction program, which will use controlled
burn offs to ease bushfire risk in the state.
Mr Sauer said the program was based on science with a practical application.
The whole plan is based on science, so that takes away a lot of the argument of the need to have hazard reductionj burning, he
said.
My roll over the next few months over the summer period will be liaising with a range of stakeholders including private land owners,
making sure they are on-board and they understand Mr Sauer said.
Editor: How come some 'science' is taken notice of by the fire council and not the most important health science which the top
body, the World Health Organisation based their cancer findings on?
Statistics show more people are dying as a result of inhaling particle pollution in Tasmania than are being burnt to death by fire.
The World Health Organisation's science based health findings show that air pollution causes cancer and particulate matter is
carcinogenic. This is the latest science (October 28, 2013).
Position Paper on the Management of Smoke arising from Prescribed Burning of Vegetation - SFMC April 2014
Go here to read how the state's top fire manager Ian Sauer says burning off 60,000Ha in the first years of a $28 Million fuel
reduction program would be "reckless".
Many TFGA members would be aware of horrible experiences with diseases that are associated with smoke and yet they are
going to be told it is ok to burn and make smoke.
Burning is old out-dated science when it comes to health. As stakeholders, members should insist the TFGA promotes cleaner,
healthier methods of getting rid of unwanted vegetation. Some of these methods can be found here.
MRM North Planned burning Project
The BIG picture - Outdoor air pollution is carcinogenic and so is particulate matter - World Health Organisation.
Click on the above photo to read how this group refuses to accept modern, safe, smokeless ways to clear their land.
They are living in the past and don't care about the environment or their neighbours.
A handful of burners can cause all this toxic, cancer-causing smoke.
Pubic Health Services (formally Public and Environmental Health) had no input into NRM N's Planned Burning Manual and yet they claim they:
Protect Tasmanians from public and environmental health hazards,
Prevent and reduce chronic diseases and injuries,
Promote good health
Farmers must tell their organisation they do not want to deliberately harm people using fire when there are proven cleaner and healthier methods available to them.
The BIG picture - Outdoor air pollution is carcinogenic and so is particulate matter - World Health Organisation.
Click on the above photo to read how this group refuses to accept modern, safe, smokeless ways to clear their land.
They are living in the past and don't care about the environment or their neighbours.
A handful of burners can cause all this toxic, cancer-causing smoke.
Pubic Health Services (formally Public and Environmental Health) had no input into NRM N's Planned Burning Manual and yet they claim they:
Protect Tasmanians from public and environmental health hazards,
Prevent and reduce chronic diseases and injuries,
Promote good health
Farmers must tell their organisation they do not want to deliberately harm people using fire when there are proven cleaner and healthier methods available to them.
Stanford study shows effects of biomass burning on climate and health....
"Agricultural burning, like this farmer's burning of rice straw, contributes significantly to climate change and adverse health effects, according to a study by Stanford Professor Mark Z. Jacobson."
"Agricultural burning, like this farmer's burning of rice straw, contributes significantly to climate change and adverse health effects, according to a study by Stanford Professor Mark Z. Jacobson."
POLLUTION OVER PEOPLE !
Jan Davis left Farmers and Graziers as their CEO not long after the above. She is now an agribusiness consultant:
Talking Point: Putting a price on the fresh air we breathe. Except we do not breathe fresh air, HERE and HERE
Talking Point: Putting a price on the fresh air we breathe. Except we do not breathe fresh air, HERE and HERE
Burning causes a flamable landscape.
The more you burn the more you will have to burn.
Bushfires, wildfires, convert our landscape to be fire tolerant.
These fires must be jumped on and put out in their infancy with sufficient resources.
Plannedburning has the same effect.
The more you burn the more you will have to burn.
Bushfires, wildfires, convert our landscape to be fire tolerant.
These fires must be jumped on and put out in their infancy with sufficient resources.
Plannedburning has the same effect.