Was that not the case with DPHB8 that the burn could have been commenced on east to north-east winds as Mr Marshall proposed?---It's my view that that would have presented an unnecessary risk or an unreasonable risk that the winds would have swung to the north during the conduct of the burn that would have represented a significant risk to containment of the burn and the values to the south of the burn were such that would have been a unreasonable and ill-advised commencement.
Would you look at ... the quotation from Mr Marshall where he suggested the burn be carried out with winds from the east to north-east - that this will keep the smoke off the grape vines ... He does not make any such qualification as you have just given in evidence, does he?---What we can make of that is that the preference would have been for winds to be blowing from the east to the north-east. That's indeed what was done in respect of the core lighting and the subsequent days of burning where the bulk of the smoke was generated. So the actual conduct of the burn was in line with the strategy that Mr Marshall was advocating.
And with the core ignition, would that mean that the bulk of the fire was also caused from which you say the bulk of the smoke arose?---Yes, the ignition.
That apparently, to your officers, didn't pose any concern about safety of forest areas to the south to start the core ignition on north-easterly winds, did it?---The - - -
That's right, isn't it?---The ignition on east to north-east winds as part of that cycle would have been before the wind swung to the north presenting the unstable and less predictable circumstances of northerly winds.
Starting, as your officers did, on 1 April - sorry, not starting it. Doing the core ignition, as your officers did, on 1 April on north-easterly winds, obviously was not a matter of safety concern to them with regard to forests to the south?---Generally the wind - -
Can you answer that yes or no? That's the case, isn't it?---The forecast for a north-easterly wind at eight kilometres an hour would not have represented a significant risk of containment of that burn. By contrast, had the wind swung to the north-west and the wind strength had been greater, that would have represented a significant risk.
The four-day forecast was for three days of easterly and north-easterly winds as the prevailing winds during those three days?---Yes.
That did not present any risk?---With the wind velocity that was forecast and the stability of the weather pattern, it represented a relatively low risk.
And indeed if you look at what you said on page 44, immediately after the quotation of Mr Marshall's note, you were asked this question, 'Is that right - winds of east to north-east?' and your answer, 'For the portion of that burn that lay immediately south of the vineyard, that would have been the most favourable prevailing wind to conduct the burn. That is correct, isn't it?---Yes, that's consistent with the discussion we just had.
...
Is not the upshot of all of that, Mr Walker, that the late Mr Denis Marshall was correct in amending the prescription for this burn to burn on east to north-east winds to keep the smoke off the grapevines?---That was a favourable wind and that was the wind direction that was chosen for the core lighting on subsequent days.
It was in fact not the prescription that was followed by the officers who conducted the burn because they commenced the burn on south-south-easterly winds, did they not?---The edging commenced on a day where there were south-south-easterly winds forecast as part of the winds for that day, but knowing that the winds were going to swing to the east and the north-east for the core lighting, that was the chief concern in choosing the first day to commence the edging.