Green Mass Murder

Green policies have many negative consequences. Sometimes they even kill people-lots of them.

The forest fires still ravaging rural Victoria follow a pattern also seen in California.

As environmentalists stop intelligent tree felling and scrub clearage, forest fires, once started are very difficult to contain.

NBR’s Nevil Gibson takes up this point in his latest Editor’s Insight

The fires have caused Australia’s biggest loss of lives in peacetime – yet could have been avoided.

While media coverage has naturally focused on the many acts of heroism and family tragedies, some eyewitnesses and commentators have drawn unsettling conclusions.

One cause has been the heavy influence of Green politics on local councils that forbade the cutting of trees and undergrowth – all great fuel for a bushfire.

The much-interviewed Dennis Spooner, who lost his wife and son to the fire, was bitter about this on TV One, but the point was passed over. Then I saw this report in Melbourne’s Age, which quotes Mr Spooner’s surviving son, Warwick, as saying: “We’ve lost two people in my family because you dickheads won’t cut trees down.

A similar point is made by David Packham, a bushfire scientist and researcher at Monash University, who accuses authorities of ignoring the warning signs about the buildup of “fuel” (dried vegetation) in favour of “shocking pseudo science from a few academics.”


Author: Admin

Related Articles

11 thoughts on “Green Mass Murder

  1. Be careful Trevor in whom you accuse. Did you know that some of the biggest opponents to the felling of the trees was not the greens but in fact many of the residents in those areas. If you want to point the finger at the Greens you would then be pointing 10 fingers at the locals too, who died in droves in the bush fires.

  2. Yeah, the problem was not the environmental groups (including the Australian Greens), all of whom agree on the need for burning and encourage it to prevent larger fires that kill forests as opposed to merely scar them.

    Rather, it was an unwillingness on the part of the Vic Labour Government to burn, for fear of out of control fires (after a few years of drought the danger was huge) and for fear of property damage and death. They were trying to keep everyone happy, but especially the NIMBYs.

  3. Hey I dont have the energy to go and find a heap of references but I will post a few, firstly abotu dams drying up and vegetation dying back permaculture is predicated on increasing water storage in the ladscape through swales, careful planting etc which can all help with what you have said.

    Here is an example of how the techniques I mentioned above have been used in real life circumstances

    Ben Haggard, a permaculture consultant with Regenesis, a locally based ecological design and development company, has had first-hand experience with designing a successful fire prevention strategy. In the early 1990s Haggard was part of a team that began to reduce fire danger around the main buildings at the Lama Foundation in Lama, N.M. One day during the summer of 1996 his strategy was put to the test during the Hondo Fire.
    The strategy prevailed because of three strategies: re-routing the road along Lama’s fire sector such that it became a double fire break; creating moist microclimates in on-contour swales; and concentrating irrigated plantings around buildings. As Haggard predicted, buildings situated outside the focus of the design were almost entirely destroyed, but buildings being protected by the implemented design survived the catastrophe completely unscathed


    Anyway there is a lot more out there if you are interested the permaculture institute of Australia can probably direct you to appropriate resources

    My overall point was and is that blaming this on left wing people is really stupid. I could write about how short sited capitalist suppression of every and any fire to protect pasture of planting fire prone non native plants or any of a million things contribute to fires. However I dont think treating it as a chance to push my side of the ideological divide would help.


  4. Comment for John Darroch

    Read with interest your comments re: Permaculturalists.”Permaculturalists in Australia have effectively shown how plantings of fire resistant, high water content plants as well as effective management of the landscape (eg putting dams in the way of fire paths) could prevent most loss of life and property.”
    I’m living in Melbourne.
    Most dams in the way of the fires have dried up in the drought – they’re just filled with dry, dead grass.
    It’s probably this lack of the water in the dams which have caused the death of the high water content plants.
    Blackberries seem to survive though.
    And, in a drought – because residents aren’t allowed to clean even these introduced species – they become perfect fire fodder.
    Theories are fine.
    Then come the fire.

  5. The melon greens in Australia need to be charged with terrorism because this has been a direct result of their doing.

  6. Trev you obviously havnt spent much time hanging around ecologists. Everyone I know realises the danger of letting fuel build up to dangerous levels. Much of Australia was being actively managed by aboriginal peoples before Europeans arrived and this management often included frequent burn offs. It has been the suppressing of all small blazes that has lead to the massive bushfires we are seeing in Australia at the moment.

    I watched the fires and was angry at the completely unnessecary loss of human life. Permaculturalists in Australia have effectively shown how plantings of fire resistant, high water content plants as well as effective management of the landscape (eg putting dams in the way of fire paths) could prevent most loss of life and property.

    Your reactionary blaming of these fires on so called greenies shows a high level of ignorance and arrogance. The greenies I know have put a lot of though and effort into managing fire.

    John Darroch

  7. Wow, Trevor,very insightful connection. I never have connected the “tree-huggers” policies to leave nature alone to the death of people. That bothers me.
    Another way to reach their goals of population control ?

    S of WA—can you decipher that ?
    :)—that is a sideways smiley face.

  8. Environmentalists have been pointing out the dangers of letting flammable material build up in forests for years.

    But it’s true that bad or non-existent planning causes dangers – managing forests requires a cooperative, planned strategy. You couldn’t leave it up to individual property owners – fires, nasty little socialist things, ignore property boundaries.

    Reid – you are confusing deep greens with a few weirdo ‘primitivists’, an obscure ideology of little influence or credibility within the green movement. And actuallly I’ve never even heard a primitivist cite 1 million as the preferred population level.



  9. that is pure anti green bullshit, the biggest contribution to the fires is that Aboriginal People are not managing the land & burning off. See Nth Queensland for successful examples of this .

  10. I’ll elaborate on my claim that the Greens are essentially a human extinction movement. The average Green is just your everyday leftist who likes nature. But the Deep Greens who are behind the movement actually hate the human species. They view humans as a cancer on the planet and would prefer human extinction to the extinction of any other species. Deep Greens want to reduce the human population from 6 billion to 1 million which they claim is “sustainable”. And those 1 million will have to live like aboriginals. How do you go from 6 billion to 1 million except through extreme genocide.

    Being a hardcore Green is a mental disorder. I say that because all species have hardwired brains to favor their species. Greens view human success as an unsustainable failure. As far I am concerned if humans cause a million species extinctions that is nature taking it’s course. To a Green that is original sin.

    Greens are deeply disturbed humans. Green ideology is unsustainable.

  11. “shocking pseudo science from a few academics.” Just like global warming.

    I find Greens to be a much bigger threat at this point in history then communists. Communists operate by stealth or at the fringe of society whereas Greens operate openly and in the general mainstream. If the human species is stupid enough to follow the Greens and their misanthropic anti-industrial policies the result will be far worse then what Pol Pot did to Cambodia or Hitler did to the Jews. Communists hate freedom but Greens hate people. The Greens are essentially a human extinction cult.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *