Is wildlife corridor a good idea?

A wildlife corridor has been created at the arboretum.

This we are advised was developed with Gosford Council and the Sydney University landscape school program and planted by the arboretum committee.

Over the years many thousands of trees have been planted in the arboretum's 5.5 hectares.

The article on the Crommelin Native Arboretum in Peninsula News, January 24, advises that hot westerly winds affected trees in the area, so more trees were planted as wind breaks.

The fire mapping of Pearl Beach suggests that the western side of the village is favoured.

This was certainly the case with the big fire in the early 90s that came through and removed a pine tree plantation which occupied the very area now referred to as the wildlife corridor.

In that fire, a high percentage of the arboretum was burnt and we were very fortunate to lose only two houses.

While we love trees in Pearl Beach, and acknowledging that the arboretum borders residential properties with little or no Asset Protection Zones, it seems foolhardy to extend the fuel potential in the area now called the wildlife corridor with tree plantings.

It increases the risk of a possible fire burning in the National Park, entering the Arboretum via the wildlife corridor which would change it to a wild fire corridor.

Given the terrain and creeks that make up the centre section of the arboretum, and the whole wildlife corridor, the fact that there is no vehicle access or for that matter safe clear working areas for fire fighters in that specific sector of the arboretum, should be further cause for concern.

The NSW Rural Fire Service slogan, Prepare, Act, Survive, initialised this letter.

We live in a beautiful village environment which is enriched by the presence of the arboretum.

With a single access road, we need to be risk-aware and conscious.

Is the wildlife corridor and current access to the area such a practical idea?

Email, 31 Jan 2011 Vic Brown, Pearl Beach