THE FORESTRY Department has said it is working to aid recovery efforts in private-owned areas of the Saittas region, despite locals’ complaints that they have yet to see any results.
The comments were made yesterday in the Department’s response to a letter sent by Saittas private property owners. The homeowners had criticised authorities for discriminating between state and private forests in their efforts to control last month’s blaze as well as in the habitat rehabilitation.
The June 29 fire destroyed over ten square kilometres of forest and farmland, affecting the villages of Saittas and Pelendri, as well as Fylagra and Kato Amiandos.
The Forestry Deparment referred to it as “one of the worst fires that have occurred in the last few decades Cyprus, not in extent, but in amount of damage caused.”
Despite this, homeowners have complained about the lack of assistance or guidance from the department in restoring both affected homes and private forest.
On July 5, a group of 12 affected homeowners sent a letter addressed to President Tassos Papadopoulos and the Ministers of Agriculture and Interior, outlining their grievances. Among the homeowners was Artemis Yiordamli, executive director of conservation organisation Terra Cypria.
The complaint is that, while the Forestry Department has already begun examining destroyed areas of state forest and looking into ways to prevent soil erosion and aid in its recovery, it has yet to offer services to owners of private property also affected by the disastrous fire.
“Our position is based on the fact that all the forests, independent of where they belong, make up part of Cyprus’ forestry heritage and in this case private owners bear no responsibility for the destruction,” read the residents’ letter.
But a press release from the Ministry of Agriculture stated that efforts to help private forest owners were in the planning stages, and that the Forestry Department Director had met with the Pelendri Community Council on July 4 to assess the situation.
“The Forestry Department is certainly studying methods of recovering government-owned forest and has already begun work that will be progressively intensified. However, at the same time we are looking over the best possible ways in which we can help private owners,” read the statement.
“We are sorry that the efforts made have not been appreciated by portions of the public, but we attribute this to the feelings of disappointment for the losses, which are more intense for those that lost property and for those who live in the area.”
In the letter, homeowners demanded answers from authorities on nine questions regarding the recovery of their homes and the regeneration of private-owned forest as part of the wider recovery of the natural forest habitat.
Regarding affected homes, owners enquired over what compensation they could expect to receive; the removal and appropriate disposal of rubble; the restoration of damaged homes; and what help if any would be received for homes left without roofs, walls and windows.
As regards the recovery of the forest habitat, the homeowners’ questions concerned the removal of ash from the area without affecting seeds, and whether burnt trees would be removed and if their roots would be kept in place to avert soil erosion.
Responding to these questions, the Forestry Department stated that it would aim to reduce soil erosion and the transport of eroded materials being carried in streams, and would aid in the regeneration of forests in selected areas through planting and seeding efforts.
Ash, it said, would not be removed from the area as it acted as a natural fertiliser for the growth of new plants, containing inorganic elements from burnt tress and other biomass.
With regards to private property, it said a guide would be sent to all homes interested in receiving assistance via their community councils, which would offer information on how to go about restoring their property and receive any financial aid to be decided.
The Forestry Department statement, however, only briefly referred to the complaint that more had been done during fire-fighting efforts to protect state land than private property.
“We estimate that, as the fire progressed, the extent of property destroyed by the fire was as small as possible,” it read, adding that the fire-fighting effort was hindered by the high temperatures, time of day, strong wind, topography and dense vegetation, with wooded landscapes in all directions.
