The white form of the Grey Goshawk is the only pure white raptor in the world. In Tasmania, Grey Goshawks, are listed as endangered species, with their nesting habitat affected by logging. It favours tall closed forests including rainforests and particularly those of the large wild tracts of tall forest across the Tarkine.
Grey Goshawks form permanent pairs that defend a home territory year round. Both sexes construct a stick nest lined with leaves high in a tree fork, and often re-use the same nest. While the female does most of the incubation, the male relieves her when she needs to feed, and catches most of the food for the young, which the female tears up for them to eat.
Bordered by the Arthur River in the north, the Pieman River in the south, the Murchison Highway in the east, and the ocean to the west, Tasmania’s wild Tarkine is a magnificent wilderness sanctuary but threatened by ongoing industrial interests from mining and logging, as well as from road making, off-road vehicles, poaching, cattle and exploitative tourism.
Scott Jordan from the Tarkine National Coalition says:
“We see it as an area containing great wilderness values, a lot of natural – as well as cultural – values. We see it as an area that really needs to be protected and enjoyed.”
Volunteer Tasmanian Environmentalist, Scott Jordan
The Tarkine National Coalition wants to see it made a national park, and protected under a World Heritage listing, before it is ruined and goes the same way as Mount Lyell.
With Tasmania’s alternating Labor and Liberal governments still hell bent on carving up Tasmania’s remaining wilderness, they have divvied up more than 50 mining exploration licences in the Tarkine.
There are some ten proposed mines set to dig up the Tarkine!
.
Whereas Alan Daley from industrial miner Tasmania Magnesite has plans to develop an open cut mine. He is reticent about identifying the Tarkine…“I’m not sure what the Tarkine is. To my knowledge there isn’t a boundary yet defined as the Tarkine.” I understand the marketing value.”
Tasmania Magnesite (Beacon Hill Resources) wants to establish an open cut magnesite mine within the Keith River area, Shree Minerals wants an open cut iron ore mine at Nelson Bay River, and Venture Minerals are planning open cut mining for tin and tungsten in the rainforest at Mount Lindsay.
Savage River MineThis is on the northern boundary of the Tarkine
.
Editor:
It has become apparent to this observer, that many of those with a broad commitment to protecting Nature are comparatively young. Whereas those ‘baby-boomer‘ industrial executives and old school Labor/Liberal politicians seem narrower in outlook, committed to pursuing 20th Century exploitation as if such business-as-usual plundering of Nature is limitless. May be I’m generalising.
. Tim Flannery:
“One of the greatest tragedies of Tasmania is that its European inhabitants have always wanted their island home to be something it is not – a little England perhaps, or the world’s largest sheep paddock or even, in later years, the Ruhr of the South (which was to be powered by Tasmania’s out-of-control hydro schemes). All such dreams have failed, but nevertheless their pursuit has cost the present generation dearly.” (Tarkine, 2010, p.4-5).
.
Tasmania’s Queenstown Left behind by 19th and 20th Century industrial minersThis is south of the Tarkine
Humpback Whale in a magnificent breach
(click photo to enlarge)
^http://rtseablog.blogspot.com/2011/09/bermuda-humpback-whale-sanctuary-noaa.html
.
Christmas is a time for goodwill and hope.
.
“There is joy in the companionship of others working to make a difference for future generations,” declares activist David Suzuki, “and there is hope. Each of us has the ability to act powerfully for change; together we can regain that ancient and sustaining harmony, in which human needs and the needs of all our (plant and animal) companions on the planet are held in balance with the sacred, self-renewing processes of Earth.”
.
We at The Habitat Advocate convey our goodwill and hope to those out there right now defending Nature.
We convey our goodwill and hope to the environmental activists in Tasmania’s wild defending threatened forests.
SWST advocates for the immediate formal protection of Tasmania’s precious Southern Forests using a combination of political and corporate lobbying, community education, research, exploration and frontline direct action. We also promote the creation of an equitable and environmentally sustainable forest industry in Tasmania. Protecting Tasmania’s ancient forests: a real climate change solution.
.
We at The Habitat Advocate convey our goodwill and hope to the environmental activists in the Southern Ocean defending threatened whales.
Captain Paul Watson and the crew of Sea Shepherd Conservation Society (SSCS)
currently braving the freezing Southern Ocean south of Australia to defend whales from poachers.
^http://www.seashepherd.org/
.
Sea Shepherd’s mission is to end the destruction of habitat and slaughter of wildlife in the world’s oceans in order to conserve and protect ecosystems and species.
The meaning of Christmas has ancient Pagan origins pre-dating Christianity, coinciding with the Winter Solstice of the northern hemisphere celebrating the return of life at the beginning of winter’s decline. [Source: ^http://www.christmastreehistory.net/pagan]
Consistent with the original goodwill meaning of Christmas, we advocate the inclusion of Nature in this goodwill spirit:
That each us strives to do something every day for wildness.
That each us tries to practice simplicity and frugality. Conserve, reuse, and recycle to reduce pressures for resource extraction on remaining wildlands. Buy less. Play more.
That each us supports conservation organizations that champion wildness, especially those acquiring acreage for wildlands preservation.
As environmental activist David Suzuki advocates, “each of us has the ability to act powerfully for change”. So we like the initiative of Melbourne-based company ‘Eco Christmas Trees‘. Eco Christmas Trees rents out ‘living growing trees providing the real Christmas experience without cutting down a tree‘.
The ObserverTree in Tasmania’s magnificent Styx Valley below Mount Mueller
(Photo source: Alan Lesheim, Dec 2011, click photo to enlarge)
Click to visit: ^The ObserverTree
.
Ta Ann, industrial logger of Tasmania’s native old growth forests, has been exposed misrepresenting its timber products as environmentally sustainable. It reflects the underhand falsehoods behind the logging propaganda of Tasmanian Sustainable Forest Management.
Forestry Tasmania, which trashes and flogs old growth timber to Ta Ann, spends lots of money concocting glossy brochures claiming forestry (euphemism for ‘logging’) engages in ecologically sustainable forest management. But it is all simply logger language belying old growth clearfell! And the clearfell continues still, this year, this month!
The following video near ‘The ObserverTree‘ shows industrial logging underway in the magnificent Styx Valley on 16th December 2011.
.
.
.
Plywood supplier to London 2012 Olympics stops buying from Ta Ann
.
Recently Jenny Weber from the Huon Valley Environment Centre went to Japan with former Greens leader Peg Putt to meet with the Japanese companies purchasing from Ta Ann. The company representatives showed concern about the environmental destruction taking place to produce the products they are purchasing.
This week, a major British importer of plywood, International Plywood, which is helping to build facilities for the London 2012 Olympics, has publicly stated that it will not be purchasing any more timber from Ta Ann, due to Ta Ann being exposed for sustainable timber misrepresentation and using vital Tasmanian old growth in its plywood veneer timber flooring. Ta Ann has been falsely selling its plywood veneer timber products claiming that the timber is certified as sustainable under the international PEFC scheme and is sourced from plantations and sustainable regrowth forests. Doesn’t say much for the ‘PEFC’ scheme! The Programme for Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) has been widely criticised by international environment groups as it is not an indicator of acceptable environmental standards and does not safeguard high conservation value from ongoing logging. No wonder Ta Ann relies on it. Forest Stewardship Council is the superior forest certification.
Environmental campaigners from Markets for Change and the Huon Valley Environment Centre travelled to England recently to meet with UK companies implicated in forest destruction. They launch a detailed report that traced Ta Ann veneer timber from Tasmania’s high conservation value forests through Malaysia to a London sports hall which will be used in training by Team USA during the 2012 London Olympics.
Tim Birch from Markets for Change was among the delegation – “We went to London to visit a number of companies to inform them of exactly what was happening“.
Ian Attwood, managing director of International Plywood, says his company is now boycotting Ta Ann’s products. Even a recent letter from the Deputy Premier of Tasmania, Brian Green to International Plywood UK urging them to continue buying from Ta Ann Tasmania did not persuade the company to continue purchasing veneer plywood from Ta Ann Tasmania.
Attwood said: “We’re not there to you know, to savage the forests. You know we’re here to try and buy product in a responsible manner.”
And the response spin from Forestry Tasmania (logger of Tasmania old growth and vested interest supplier to Ta Ann) – General Manager Forestry Tasmania’s Corporate Relations and Tourism Ken Jeffreys said:
.
(Logger Logic #1): “Tasmanian timber products represent a sustainable and renewable resource with stringent forest practice standards and certifications.”
(Ed: see video above)
.
(Logger Logic #2): “If you were concerned about the planet, you would buy timber product from Tasmania, because we have the highest level of forest reservation anywhere in the world“
(Ed: have old growth, so we log it)
.
(Logger Logic #3): “If you were going to buy plywood you would buy it from Ta Ann, because Ta Ann is using a raw material that would otherwise be exported as woodchips.”
(Ed: buy old growth for veneer otherwise it’ll end up as woodchips anyway – we’ve gotta find some use for it).
London 2012 Olympics setting sustainability standards
One key reason why International Plywood is rejecting Ta Ann’s old growth plywood is that as building materials supplier to the London 2012 Olympics, International Plywood is obligated to prove its supplies are environmentally sustainable to the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA). The Olympic Delivery Authority’s Sustainable Development Strategy has the strict objective to identify, source, and use environmentally and socially responsible materials. . ‘Key to delivery of a sustainable development is its design, and the methods used in its construction. Also pivotal is what materials are used to construct the facilities. The materials used in the construction of the Olympic Park and venues are a key aspect of the ODA’s commitment to delivering a sustainable development. The ODA is working closely with industry bodies to allow suppliers to respond positively to the ODA’s requirements. Through this engagement, the ODA hopes to leave a lasting legacy of a more socially and environmentally responsible approach to materials use within development.
Four principles apply when sourcing materials.
Responsible sourcing
Use of secondary materials where possible
Minimising embodied impacts
Healthy materials.
.
Responsible sourcing
.
‘Suppliers will be asked to demonstrate, as appropriate, responsible sourcing of materials by providing evidence of the existence of legal sourcing, environmental management systems, or through the use of chain of custody schemes.’
‘A Timber Supplier Panel has been established for the Olympic Park to support the commitment to source 100 per cent of timber from legal and sustainable sources as defined by CPET (Central Point of Expertise on Timber Procurement) and in line with Government policy. [CPET website: ^http://www.cpet.org.uk/]
To date, all timber used in the construction of the Olympic Park meets this commitment.
The ODA received the ‘Achievement in Sustainability Award’ at the 2009 Timber Trade Journal Awards for the set up and management of the Timber Supplier Panel.
LOCOG’s Sustainable Sourcing Code states that the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification scheme is approved for the purposes of both ‘Legal Timber’ and ‘Sustainable Timber’. Where it can be robustly demonstrated that it is not possible to supply items from FSC-certified sources, then timber and timber products that can be verified with appropriate documentation in respect to their origin and legality are acceptable.’
‘Wood from forests which provide homes to some of the planet’s most endangered species is being used to construct athletes’ training facilities for next year’s London Olympics, it has been alleged. Eucalyptus trees, from forests which date back more than 1,000 years, are being logged, despite the UN World Heritage Committee’s repeated calls for that region of Tasmania to be protected.
The forests provide habitats to Tasmanian Devils, the Tasmanian Giant Freshwater Lobster and the Swift Parrot, all of which are listed as endangered species and scientists believe that the wooded area captures and stores the most carbon of any on earth per square mile.
Now though, an Australian environmental group has claimed that products made from trees felled there are being used to make a basketball court for Team USA to train on during the Games. Although the building is not being run by the London 2012 organisers Locog, in 2018 they pledged to only use sustainable timber in the construction of the Games’ venues and infrastructure, as part of a drive to make them a “truly green Games“.
And, while Athens was criticised for making “no requirements for any form of sustainable wood products” in 2004, the organisers of Beijing 2008 banned wood “obtained directly from virgin forest” and, in the run-up to the 2000 Sydney Olympics, organisers pledged to only use wood which was certified by the Forest Stewardship Council.
Wood in the London SportDock facility, construction of which is being lead by the University of East London (UEL), conforms to the rival Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) standard, which environmental groups attack for not going far enough to promote ethical logging. The facility will be rented by Team USA for the duration of the Games.
Though it does not contravene any law, the logging is opposed by environmental groups. Tim Birch, Chief executive of Markets for Change, which led a six-month investigation into the trade, tracing the wood from Tasmania to the London 2012 site, said:
“Tasmania’s ancient forests, which offer crucial habitat to endangered species like the Tasmanian Devil and the Tasmanian Wedge-Tailed Eagle, are being trashed so that plywood can be sold on to the international markets. It’s a tragedy that this time the trail of destruction has led to London’s Olympic Games so America’s international sports stars could be forced to play on forest destruction.”
He added that it was “essential” that companies review their procurement policies to ensure that they “end the UK’s part in wrecking some of the world’s last remaining old growth forests”.
Campaigners point to Tasmanian Government documents, which show that the Malaysian manufacturer Ta Ann received timber from logging operations undertaken within old growth areas of the forest. “Whether or not Ta Ann eventually use the old growth trees which are cut down is irrelevant, the habitats have been destroyed all the same,” said Will Mooney of the Huon Valley Environment Centre.
He added: “Even if they do not use the old growth timber to make their products, it is the demand for timber from the Tasmanian forest which means that old growth trees are nevertheless being cut down then discarded.”
But Ta Ann says that no old growth trees are used in their products, pointing out that machinery recently installed by the company is only capable of processing regrowth trees. A spokesman for Ta Ann Tasmania said that its products are produced “from regrowth timber billets harvested strictly in accordance with Australia’s forest policies and laws including the forest practices code”.
.
Greenpeace’s executive director John Sauven said:
“As a proud Londoner, I’m shocked that ancient forests crucial for conserving the world’s tallest flowering plants, the largest hardwood trees in the world, and many endangered animals are being used for flooring in London’s Olympics.
.
“British companies like International Plywood could end the destruction by ensuring they no longer do business” with companies who handle even new growth Tasmanian timber.
Both UEL and Dynamik Sport Surfaces, which installed the wooden flooring, said they were initially unaware that parts of the wood used in the flooring installed in the building was from the Tasmanian forest. UEL said that, had it been aware of the concerns over the source of the material, “it would have been considered. But hindsight is a great thing.”
A spokesman said: “We are totally committed to making sure the £21million Sports Dock facility is an environmentally friendly development and that this new facility has the best mix of sustainable materials and features.
“The International Basketball Federation has very clear specifications about what type of materials should be used when constructing a court, which will be used by professional basketball players. Following this guidance and consultation with the relevant consultant for this development, the material was sourced.”
According to Markets for Change, the wood products destined for the UEL site passed from the Malaysian logging company Ta Ann, entering Europe in the hands of International Plywood. It eventually ended up in the hands of Dynamik, which laid it as flooring.
Anil Batra, Dynamik’s Financial and Marketing Director said he was “interested in the issue, now it has been brought to our attention” but pointed out that no laws had been broken and that the wood was certified by the international PEFC.
A Ta Ann spokesman initially called said: “what a great result for Tasmania, our timber being used in the London Olympics. He claimed that the Tasmanian subsidiary uses regrowth billets of wood and operates strictly in accordance with Australian laws and sustainability requirements. He acknowledged that the Tasmanian forest is “a mosaic of regrowth and some old
growth” and said that the company can only use billets from regrowth”. He later said that the company had not carried out any production of veneer products bound for the UK and cast doubt on whether the wood used at UEL could be proven to be from his company.
Markets for Change produced images it said showed Ta Ann-branded crates at the UEL site which they said also had licence numbers identifying them as containing Ta-Ann-manufactured products.
A spokesman for International Plywood said the company did not have any current contracts with Ta Ann and would review its trading relationship with the firm, if it could be shown it was “acting in a way that would not comply with our purchasing policy standards“. However, the spokesman said it had no reason to believe that were the case and “if Ta Ann were able to supply PEFC certified plywood as they have done previously they would meet our current purchasing policy“.
A spokesman for Team USA refused to comment.’
.
Forest Defender Miranda Gibson
of Tasmanian activist group Still Wild Still Threatened, in ObserverTree
Mount Mueller Forest, Styx Valley South West Tasmania, Australia.
“To resolve the conflict over forests in Tasmania, protect native forests, and develop a strong sustainable timber industry.”
.
.
The Parties to these Principles:
.
Timber Communities Australia Ltd (TCA)
The Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU)
The National Association of Forestry (NAFI)
The Forest Industries Association of Tasmania (FIAT)
The Australian Forest Contractor’s Association (AFCA)
The Tasmanian Forest Contractors Association (TFCA)
Environment Tasmania Inc. (ET)
The Wilderness Society (TWS)
Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF)
Tasmanian Country Sawmiller’s Foundation (TCSF)
.
Note: Ratio of 7 to 3
.
.
‘Objectives‘ of the Parties
.
‘The parties to the Principles seek from State (Tasmanian) and Federal governments:
.
Support for an delivery of all principles in full
Interim support for the development of a plan to deliver the Principles, including:
Verification (1) of Resource Constraints
High Conservation Value Boundaries
Implementation of the Principles through an agreed, fully-funded package and timeline that maximises benefits and reduces negative impacts
Immediate interim assistance for Tasmanian harvest, haulage and silvicultural contractors
To determine with industry, a guaranteed sustainable quantity and quality of wood supply within 3 months that is outside of the identified high conservation value forests, for the period of negotiations, in order to provide certainty for the industry, workers and communities.
A progressive implementation of a moratorium on the logging of high conservation value forests commencing within 30 days – ensuring that priority, (i.e. those in the most advanced stages of planning for harvesting) HCV coupes identified by ENGO’s (2) are the first to be addressed. The full moratorium is to be completed within 3 months. Any necessity for any proposed variation to this due to unavoidable planning constraints has to be independently verified.
To provide exit assistance for industry where required; and
Not to accept new entrants into the Tasmanian industry, nor enter into new contractual relationships with the state while the negotiations are underway unless by the mutual agreement of all parties (3).
Accept that delivery of these Principles will require joint agreement of the parties to timelines and funding.
To develop an agreed stakeholder-led implementation process with a finalised full agreement within 12 months.
.
– – – – – – – – – – – –
Notes:
.
(1) Draft verification process document under construction.
(2) ENGO’s in this document means those environmental non-government organisations who are parties to this document (i.e. ONLY Environment Tasmania, The Wilderness Society, and the Australian Conservation Foundation)
(3)No party shall be required to accept a Principle which would otherwise apply to it where to do so would cause a breach of an existing contract or statutory obligation.
.
.
The Principles
.
The parties agree to the following:
.
General Wood Supply
Provide a sustainable resource supply profile to industry based on an agreed minimum quantity and quality requirement for industry. This will be underpinned by legislation.
.
Native Forest Wood Supply
Subject to the provisions of the transition, as legislated Native Forest entitlements are handed back, ensure these entitlements will not be allocated nor licensed to new players.
.
HCV Forests
Immediately protect, maintain and enhance High Conservation Value Forests identified by ENGO’s on public land.
.
Transition
Transition the commodity (non specialty) forest industry out of public native forests into suitable plantations through a negotiated plan and timeline.
.
Industry
Create a strong sustainable timber industry including the development of a range of plantation based timber processing facilities including a pulp mill. There will need to be stakeholder consultation and engagement with the proponent, ENGO’s and the community.
.
Specialty Timbers
Provide for ongoing speciality timber supply including Eucalypt for our Tasmanian high value furniture and craft industries through a negotiated plan and timeline.
.
Plantations
Support sustainable and socially acceptable plantations including agreed reforms and new agro-forestry outcomes, including pursuing certification.
.
Private Forests
Encourage and support, but not mandate, private forest owners to: seek assistance for certification; and protect, maintain and enhance high conservation value forests on their properties.
.
Communities Impacted
Support impacted rural and regional communities, workers, contractors and businesses, through a range of economic development, financial assistance, compensation and retraining measures.
.
Community Engagement
Engage and involve the broad Tasmanian community in the development and implementation of a durable solution to the Tasmanian forest conflict.
.
Tourism
Develop Tasmania’s nature based tourism industry in line with these Principles.
.
Planning
Develop a fully funded, independent, scientifically led landscape conservation, restoration and integrated catchment management program, and associated governance and regulatory improvements.
.
Government
Reform and support government agencies, policies and legislation as necessary for the implementation of an agreement associated with these Principles.
.
Climate Change
Seek funding for improving carbon outcomes as a result of delivering these Principles.
.
Biomass
In Tasmania, only permit plantation forest processing and plantation harvesting residues to be used as biomass for Renewable Energy Certificates.
.
Certification
Encourage Forestry Tasmania to firstly obtain Controlled Wood accreditation on delivery of the moratorium, secondly, obtain full FSC certification on resolution of an FSC National Standard and once an agreement based on these Principles has been finalised.
.
Durability
Undertake to ensure all elements of this agreement are fulfilled on a durable basis.
.
Legislation
Require State and Federal legislation to implement agreed outcomes arising from these Principles including appropriate review mechanisms, milestones and sanctions.
.
.
Editor’s Comment:
.
The above Statement of Principles was reproduced manually due to restricted access of the official PDF document as provided on the Tasmanian Premier’s official website. The security lock down denied printing and copying.
But then as Tasmanian Labor Premier Lara Giddings studied Law, perhaps there was a legal reason for her deliberate restriction of the details to the Tasmanian public.
.
This is the Tasmanian Premier’s restricted document:
Forestry clearfell of old-growth in Tasmania’s Styx Valley
(Photo by Editor 20110928, free in public domain, click photo to enlarge)
.
More than two months (on 7th August 2011) after the landmark deal that promised to bring peace to Tasmania’s forests the protests – and the logging – continue unabated.
Funding for the struggling timber industry under the landmark $276 million Gillard-Giddings deal is starting to trickle out, but as yet not one tree has been saved!
Conservationists concede they may end up with nothing to show for 18 months of torturous negotiations, while many in the industry are sceptical that the promised peace will ever be achieved. The key decisions – on how many and which forests will be saved – are bogged down in difficult detail and alleged recalcitrance. Tasmania’s upper house, meanwhile, is lining up to sink the legislation needed to create the new national parks and reserves.
Environment Tasmania’s Phill Pullinger (right) with The Wilderness Society’s Vica Bayley
.
A key conservationist and negotiator, Environment Tasmania director Phill Pullinger, concedes to Inquirer that events could conspire to see money flow to industry without one tree ever being saved.
“To be honest, it is a possibility,” says Pullinger, a Hobart doctor and former young Tasmanian of the year. “It has always been the case that the forest protection couldn’t be permanently delivered until the legislation goes through both houses of the Tasmanian parliament.”
.
That vote is a long way off, probably well into next year. The most immediate hurdle to overcome is a row over whether the state-owned Forestry Tasmania should be allowed to continue logging in 41 coupes (forest areas). All are within 430,000ha of forests set aside for “immediate” interim protection in the Gillard-Giddings deal of August 7, known as the Forests Intergovernmental Agreement or IGA.
Forestry Tasmania insists it needs to log in these coupes, a fraction of the total area, to maintain existing contracts to timber mills. Conservationists argue Forestry Tasmania could and should reschedule logging to less ecologically significant forests. The dispute was being sorted out by an independent rescheduling team appointed by state and federal governments. Inquirer has learned this process has gone badly for conservationists, with only seven of the 41 coupes able to be protected and five already logged. Forestry Tasmania and industry claim there simply is not time to do the rescheduling work – new roads, development of forest practices plans – necessary to shift to new areas quickly enough to meet existing timber contracts.
.
‘It is a fundamental problem that has weakened the (peace) process: you’ve got a government agency that is essentially working against the agreement. And the governments haven’t shown the stomach to pull the agency into line.’’
~ Phill Pullinger, Environment Tasmania, October 2011
Conservationists claim this should have been done months ago, given that Forestry Tasmania was asked by the state government – its owner – to place a moratorium on logging in these forests in March.
“They (FT) have basically for 12 months now deliberately spun the wheels on that; there could easily have been a moratorium delivered six or nine months ago,” Pullinger says. “It is a fundamental problem that has weakened the (peace) process: you’ve got a government agency that is essentially working against the agreement. And the governments haven’t shown the stomach to pull the agency into line.”
Crew-cutting pristine Tasmanian wilderness
.
This is rare intemperate talk from Pullinger, normally diplomatic and restrained as he tries to keep his constituency in the peace tent and the process on track.
It’s a sign things are not going well. Forestry Tasmania, a government business enterprise that reports to a board and is not necessary bound by ministerial direction, denies it has been dragging the chain. While it is the party with the most to lose – up to 572,000ha of native forest it manages for timber production – corporate relations manager Ken Jeffreys insists it is acting in good faith.
“Some people out there seem to think that FT has some maniacal glint in their eye and go out and harvest forests when it has no market because it has nothing better to do,” Jeffreys complains to Inquirer. “That is so far from common sense it’s hard to respond to.“
He insists Forestry Tasmania is happy to abide by the independent reschedulers’ verdict and points out that it has already rescheduled logging out of some contentious coupes. This fight over a handful of coupes has been holding up plans under the IGA for an overall immediate interim conservation agreement between the state, Forestry Tasmania and Canberra to protect the 430,000ha. Under the IGA, this interim agreement would protect those forests while an independent verification team determines the final size and location of the new permanent reserves.
Ancient Myrtle Beech (Nothofagus cunninghamii) chainsawed in the Upper Florentine Valley, Tasmania
(Photo by Editor 20110928, free in public domain, click photo to enlarge)
.
IGA Independent Verification Team
.
The independent team, overseen by academic Jonathan West, will decide how much forest, of a larger 572,000ha nominated by green groups, is worthy of protection. West’s team will also test industry claims about how much timber it requires to meet existing contracts. Then it must decide how much forest can be protected while providing this resource. The job, which unrealistically is due to be completed by December 31, is the “forest wars” equivalent of deciding where exactly the boundaries of a Palestinian state should be drawn.
Conservation groups believe that most – if not all – of the 572,000ha can be protected, once a developing plantation resource is factored in.
.
Forestry Tasmania’s position
Forestry Tasmania chief, Bob Gordon
– what IGA? It’s logging business as usual to fill ‘orders’.
.
Forestry Tasmania stands by its modelling suggesting that no more than 300,000ha can be protected if it is to deliver on current timber contracts. Some in the industry believe only 250,000ha can be saved from the chainsaws. Neither of the industry figures is unlikely to be enough for conservationists, but may well be too much for Tasmania’s independent-dominated upper house. Several recent votes in the Legislative Council suggest it is opposed to the IGA and to more forest “lock-ups”. Its refusal to pass the reserves would leave conservationists relying on a federal-state conservation agreement to protect those forests.
While such an agreement would ban logging, it is legally uncertain if Forestry Tasmania could ignore this on the basis that it conflicts with its legislative or contractual obligations.
Jeffreys insists Forestry Tasmania would abide by any final agreement, subject to being able to meet those commitments – a big out if Forestry Tasmania decided to dig in for a battle.
.
Tony Burke’s position:
.
Federal Environment Minister Tony Burke
in Tasmania’s Wielangta forest, March 2011
(Photo by Matthew Newton, Source: The Australian ) .
Despite the difficulties, federal Environment Minister Tony Burke remains confident he can pull off the kind of final “win-win” forest peace deal that has eluded so many of his predecessors. He tells Inquirer the alternative is a kind of mutually assured destruction, whereby the forests continue to fall as fast as the jobs.
The number of jobs in Tasmanian forestry has halved since 2008 from 6960 to 3460, due mainly to Japanese paper-makers boycotting woodchips sourced from native forests, Gunns exiting the industry in favour of a plantation-based pulp mill and as a result of the high Australian dollar.
“If you let the markets sort this one out without a co-ordinated strategy from state and federal government … then you end up with a terrible outcome for the Tassie economy … diabolical,” Burke says.
Initially as Forests minister and more recently as Environment Minister, Burke has been involved in the process from the beginning. The first in federal cabinet to twig to the potential to assist industry while securing a historic conservation outcome, he has repeatedly slipped quietly into Tasmania to do his own field work.
The former staffer to Graham Richardson has camped with greenies amid the giant eucalypts of the Styx Valley and toured sawmills and production forests. When the process has looked as if it were imploding, he has intervened with all sides to keep it on track. Inspired to join the ALP by landmark conservation battles such as the Daintree and Kakadu, Burke constantly stresses his desire to also secure a good outcome for jobs and industry.
He believes the (Tasmanian) Legislative Council will take a different view to new reserves when details are developed for a $120m federal regional development fund promised under the IGA. That money, to revitalise timber communities and diversify the Tasmanian economy, is contingent upon state parliament passing the new reserves legislation. No reserves; no $120m.
Burke, himself a former state upper house MP (in NSW), believes this cash for regions will ultimately win over the key 12 independent MLCs.
“Those MPs will have to look in the eyes of a whole lot of their constituents who are out of work and justify their actions,” he says. “I just don’t believe when it comes to it they’ll vote this down. This is the first time we have tried to deal with this issue with an independent process rather than a political fix. The irony this time is: can we stop politics from wrecking it, not from fixing it?”
He warns both sides will need to accept the outcome of the independent verification process. “They are honour-bound to accept the process – they created it,” he says.
This suggests Canberra will not be afraid to impose the verdict of the independent verification team if the two sides cannot embrace it – or at least an agreed variation of it. Such action may well see either side – timber or conservation – walk away.
Certainly, Pullinger won’t promise to accept the outcome if it is not embraced by both sides.
“If the independent verification group comes down and says … we are going to protect just a fraction of these forests … then – expert group or not – I don’t think anyone believes that is going to be able to deliver a lasting agreement.”
.
Editor:
The IGA deal is a deal is a promise. Why are Gillard and Giddings allowing Forestry Tasmania to renege on the deal by continuing to log these now protected native forests in Tasmania’s Styx Valley and southern forests. Why are Gillard and Giddings breaking their promise to Tasmanians?
IGA interim reserves are IGA interim reserves? The IGA offers millions in contractual compensation. So take the compensation Bob Gordon! You can’t have your compensation and interim reserves too!
Leave the bloody old growth alone!
Prime Minister Julia Gillard, 2011
– do I really have to honour that forest deal?
(Photo: The Examiner)
.
Evidence of new logging despite Tasmanian Forests Agreement
Environment Tasmania, the Wilderness Society and the Australian Conservation Foundation have released a report assessing the status of logging in important native forests and photographs that show new logging activity in forest reserves prescribed by the Tasmanian Forests Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA).
“The settlement and retirement of Gunns’ native forest timber quotas has halved the demand for native forest timber from Forestry Tasmania, so there is no need or justification for logging within the forest reserve areas,” said Dr Phill Pullinger of Environment Tasmania.
“Wood supply for remaining sawmills can be provided from outside of the important native forests identified for protection,” Dr Pullinger said.
“Aerial photographs taken in late August and last week show Forestry Tasmania continues to log inside the 430,000 hectares of unique and important forests identified for immediate protection in the IGA,” said Vica Bayley of the Wilderness Society.
“In fact, our report and the new photos show Forestry Tasmania has not rescheduled logging outside this area and has even commenced logging new coupes since the IGA was signed.
“While we are encouraged to see progress on key components of the intergovernmental agreement — including the retirement of Gunns’ wood quota, funding for timber workers and contractors and the independent verification group — we have seen no progress on halting logging inside the nominated forest reserve areas,” Mr Bayley said.
“Environment groups again call on the state government to honour the agreement it has signed by directing Forestry Tasmania to declare the nominated forests as informal reserves and immediately appointing an independent expert to undertake the rescheduling,” said Denise Boyd of the Australian Conservation Foundation.
The report released today is part of environment group signatories’ ongoing commitment to implementing the IGA and will provide governments with verified, accurate information to help achieve the forest protection outcomes of the IGA. The state government must now ensure delivery of the critical plank of the IGA – forest protection.
“We have seen no progress on halting logging inside the nominated forest reserve areas.”
~ Vica Bayley, The Wilderness Society
.
Forest protest continues in Mount Mueller Forest, Styx Valley (Tree Sit, Day 7)
“The moment one definitely commits oneself, then providence moves too. All sorts of things occur to help one that would never otherwise occurred. A whole stream of events issues from the decision, raising in one’s favor all manner of unforeseen incidents and meetings and material assistance which no man could have dreamed would have come his way. Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. Begin it now.”
~ attributed to Goethe.
Miranda – Defender of Tasmania’s Forest Heritage
at the foot of ‘The Observer Tree‘
Mount Mueller Forest, Styx Valley, Tasmania .
One young Tasmanian woman, charged with a deep commitment to her natural island heritage, continues to be prepared to do more to protect Tasmanian old growth forests than most Tasmanians. Miranda Gibson of Still Wild Still Threatened is certainly prepared to do more than the current (read ‘temporary‘) Premier of Tasmania Lara Giddings, and more than the current (read ‘temporary‘) Prime Minister of Australia, Julia Gillard, who have quickly turned their backs on Tasmanians to more populist party-political issues of the day.
.
Tasmania’s Forest Wars
– what the Intergovernmental Agreement is supposed to resolve.
.
Gillard and Giddings in breach of Tasmania’s 2011 Forest Agreement
.
Tasmanians are condemning government delinquency on meeting the conservation goals contained in the Gillard Labor Government’s Forests Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) signed and promised to all Tasmanians in Launceston on 7th August 2011.
Giddings and Gillard
– hollow Labor promises
.
IGA Clause 25 states:
.
‘The State will immediately place the 430,000 ha of native forest identified in Attachment A (other than any areas which are not State forest) from the 572,000 ha nominated by ENGOs through the Statement of Principles process, into Informal Reserves.’
.
IGA Clause 27 states:
.
‘In the event that Forestry Tasmania reports that it cannot meet contractual requirements from production resources outside the nominated 430,000 ha the Governments will undertake the following steps. First, an independent expert will be jointly appointed by the Governments to review scheduling and other relevant data and attempt to reschedule harvesting activities so as to meet the requirements of contracts and maintain the interim protection of 430,000 ha. In the event that the independent expert concludes it is impossible to achieve this, the Commonwealth will compensate the contract holder for the value of lost profits and unavoidable costs.’
.
Gillard’s fly-in to Launceston on 7th August 2011 to sign and celebrate the Tasmanian Forests Intergovernmental Agreement with Labor mate Giddings was not a mere plaque unveiling, it was a Tasmanian landmark agreement to provide certainty for Tasmania’s forestry industry, support local jobs and communities, and protect the state’s ancient forests. It deserves the respect of commitment and follow through on promise.
On the one hand it has funded Forestry and its associated families hundreds of millions and with a dignified exit from logging and transition to alternate trades. On the other hand Gillard’s Forest Agreement guarantees protection for Tasmania’s natural but threatened heritage – its most iconic ancient forests, immediately placing 430,000 hectares of iconic old growth native forest into informal reserve – the Styx, Upper Florentine, Huon, Picton and Weld Valleys and the Great Western Tiers, Tarkine and Wielangta.
.
Gillard’s promise made to the Australian people (Prime Minister Gillard’s official website):
.
‘These forests will not be accessed for harvest while verification takes place.‘.
Well, verification is still taking place. And Bill Kelty, who brokered the deal, seems to have run to the hills.
Such a landmark State-wide agreement that promises a ‘strong foundation‘ is hollow if the leadership waddles off to be distracted by other issue so the day, without the committed delegation of trusted lieutenants to see through on implementation. Predecessor PM Kevin Rudd failed classically on the implementation phase of his policy – insulation being his and Garrett’s multi-million dollar incompetent legacy.
“The Australian and Tasmanian governments are taking too long to implement the intergovernmental agreement. If they can get their act together to offer contractors exit packages then they can honour the conservation agreement as well.” Greens Senator Bob Brown has said. “Four months later not one hectare has been protected and Forestry Tasmania continues to fell these magnificent trees as fast as they can put the roads in. All up, more than 10km2 of our wild forests will be destroyed“, Greens Senator Brown said.
All political leaders, while dancing on mountains of power and influence, pragmatically realise that their time in office is temporary. Status quo is not a characteristic of modern democratic politics. What matters most in political careers is legacy. Australia’s current Prime Minister Julia Gillard is starting to stare that legacy in the face as she allows Premier Lara Giddings to breaking the $276 million promise by backing Forestry Tasmania’s current logging of the 430,000 hectares of old growth forest protected under the Gillard Government’s Agreement.
.
Tasmanian Betrayal
.
Gillard and Giddings have allowed Forestry Tasmania to log the protected 430,000 hectares, ignoring the prescribed compensation requirement. Gillard and Giddings have blatantly reneged on their core promise in the Agreement to cease logging and to protect these forests. Gillard and Giddings have betrayed the Tasmanian and Australian people. They have no mandate to stay in power. Their broken promises are to be their legacies.
.
“Those who cannot work with their hearts achieve but a hollow, half-hearted success that breeds bitterness all around”
~ Abdul Kalam, President of India (b.1931)
Styx Valley Giants being massacred by State logger ‘Forestry Tasmania’
.
Tasmania sells itself as ‘the natural state’. But there is a gap between rhetoric and reality as logging of old-growth forests continues – to international dismay.
“And they have these big logs, and you just know they are coming from old-growth forests…I don’t think I could take living there and seeing them every day knowing (the trees) are going mostly to woodchips.” ~ Larraine Herrick or Tumbarumba, Snowy Mountains, New South Wales.
But the Styx has been, and (is continuing) to be, logged by the timber industry in a state in which questions have been repeatedly raised about whether cronyism, corruption and deception underlie the management of forests. Only discovered in 2002, El Grande was a Eucalyptus regnans with a 19-metre circumference. Last autumn (2003), it was killed when a regeneration burn went wrong. Its demise helped fuel a midwinter protest that drew more than 2000 people to the Styx Valley. There, The Wilderness Society and Greenpeace began a tree-sit, 65 metres up a threatened giant eucalypt called Gandalf Staff.
Tasmanian forests activist organisation Still Wild Still Threatened have called on the Federal and State governments to honour a $276 million forest deal made on 7th August 2011.
“This deal has already seen $35 million delivered to Forestry Tasmania and Gunns Ltd. without protecting a single tree” said Still Wild Still Threatened spokesperson Ali Alishah.
“It is clear that by backing Forestry Tasmania’s destructive practices within the identified 430,000 ha area of high conservation value native forest, the State and Federal Governments are in direct violation of Clauses 25 and 27 of their own Inter Governmental Agreement.” said Mr. Alishah.
.
.
.
The Observer Tree
Miranda Gibson on top of The Observer TreeTotally committed to Tasmanian Forests, unlike Gillard and Giddings hollow words.
.
Still Wild Still Threatened have this week launched a new tool in the fight to protect Tasmania’s forests today, unveiling the ‘ObserverTree‘, a 17-storey high tree sit and media centre equipped with the technology to record footage of logging operations and stream these images live to the world via the internet.
The Observer Tree is located in the Styx Forest below Mt Mueller, in Tasmania’s western wilderness, part of the 430,000 ha of forest that was supposed to receive immediate protection under the federal-state agreement on forests (the IGA). The Observer Tree is situated at the head of a section of Styx Forest currently targeted for logging by Forestry Tasmania.
Teacher, author and forest activist, Miranda Gibson, has vowed to occupy the tree-platform continuously, until real protection is secured for Tasmania’s forests. Ms Gibson will maintain a daily blog and upload video updates during her stay in the tree, documenting the struggle to protect Tasmania’s forests to concerned people all over the globe.
‘We have used the internet to connect this spectacular patch of threatened Tasmanian forest to the world. The Observer Tree will transmit images and information about the value of the thousands of hectares of forest that remain threatened if Julia Gillard does not keep her word. People across Australia and the globe will have the opportunity to view bear witness to the wasteful destruction of these forests and hear from the people fighting to protect them,’ said Ms Gibson.
For the first time their actual logging will be broadcast live internationally via the web.
Google Earth’s satellite image of the Observer Tree in dense old-growth, adjacent to Forestry Tasmania’s fresh logging road
(click photo to enlarge)
.
Close up image
(click photo to enlarge)
.
.
Monday: Forestry Tasmania attacks the Styx Forest
.
On Monday 12th December 2011, State forest ‘nazi logger’, Forestry Tasmania, under the command of District Officer(Gauführer) Steve Whitely, rolled in its contracted ‘ecodeath-squad’ into the western end of the magnificent Styx Valley. The targeted forest area is situated at the base of Tasmania’s prominent and wild Mt Mueller on the border of the World Heritage Area. It is situated about 25 km west of the infamous logging town of Maydena.
Directing the logging – Forestry Tasmania’s Steve Whiteley
[Source: Southern Cross Television, 20111214]
.
In true forest nazi style, Forestry Tasmania’s targeted forest area is branded as coupe ‘TN 044B‘.
Logging Nazi in and destroying the Styx Valley Forest
Monday 12th December 2011, in direct breach of Prime Minister Gillard’s Forest Agreement.
.
This ‘Madill’ feller buncher was getting well stuck into the Styx Valley last Monday morning just below the Observer Tree. The hydraulic arm clamps onto the trunk of the tree while a cutting mechanism severs the tree at the stump. The machine then lifts the tree, lowers the tree into a horizontal position, and drops the tree on a bunch of logs piled on the ground. The industrial machinery has all the efficiency of a Nazi death factory.
.
.
Foresty Tasmania is operating in direct contradiction of IGA Clauses 25 and 27. The coupes within the 430,000 ha of high conservation value forest are not to be logged under any condition. The IGA prescribes that relevant customers and contractors are to be granted compensation and million have been set aside for this purpose. Foresty Tasmania under Gauführer Steve Whitely is out of control. He is driving ecological apocalypse in Tasmania’s southern forests. He has become a Walter E. Kurtz.
‘Today “Camp Flozza” celebrates its fifth birthday. The forest blockade has been running continuously for the past five years, holding off logging operations in the Upper Florentine Valley’. [Read More].
Styx Valley Holocaust– old-growth clearfelled by Forestry Tasmania
(Photo by editor 20110929 – free in public domain)
(Click photo to enlarge, then click again to enlarge again)
.
“A Conservation Agreement halting logging in 430,000 hectares is now over-due. The Intergovernmental Agreement signed in August explicitly states that logging operations must be rescheduled or where this is not possible compensation given. Every hectare of forest lost in this area now represents a complete breach of the promises made by the government.”
.
~ Miranda Gibson, Still Wild Still Threatened
.
.
Of old growth defenders:
“Here’s to the crazy ones, the misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers, the round pegs in the square holes… the ones who see things differently—they’re not fond of rules… You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them, but the only thing you can’t do is ignore them because they change things… they push the human race forward, and while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius, because the ones who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world, are the ones who do.”
~ Steve Jobs [1955-2011]
History will recount – the steadfast commitment by these forest defenders to hold their ground, to dig in, in the face of an overwhelming enemy, compares to the dusty amateurs that became the rats of Tobruk.
.
Of old growth rapers:
Styx Valley hillside clearfelled – beyond Forestry Tasmania’s locked gates.
(Photo by editor 20110929 – free in public domain)
(Click photo to enlarge, then click again to enlarge again)
.
A morally-wise person would not put down an animal because it was injured. Moral civilized society has evolved the ‘Veterinary’ profession – a highly skilled field, more highly qualified than human ‘General Practice Medicine’ – why?
In the wild, a female mammal may kill an impaired offspring only to save its remaining healthy young scarce food to survive.
In Tasmania, old growth forests are becoming scarcer by the day, and yes this is still occuring in the 21st Eco-Century, not the 19th Timbergetting Century.
But in the selfish eyes of industrial loggers, any broken branch justifies the clearfell and scorched earthing of old growth forests by the hectare, which are innocuously relegated as ‘coupes’.
What then is a coupe? A forest coupe is earmarked for logging. A selected section of an intact, pristine native old growth forest is earmarked by Forestry Command for ‘harvesting‘, read ‘logging‘, read ‘forest ecology slaughter‘, read ‘forest wildlife habitat destruction‘. Yet to the logger mind forest reads as plunderable timber, and these days as low grade commodity woodchip to greedy asian profiteers, only to sustain a diehard, got-no-where-to-go desperate logger culture. The log-till-I-drop logger mentality is no different to morbidly obese American juveniles confessing dependence on Maccas Big Macs.
I fear loggers would do same to their grandparents once impaired.
‘Corporate industrialism’ is worse than Herbert Spencer’s ‘survival of the fittest’ mindset. It is self-serving Forest Eugenics – evident in Forestry Tasmania’s programmed conversion of native Tasmania into plantations and the scourge of its genetically modified Eucalyptus nitens now exterminating Tasmania’s next condemned species – the Tasmanian Devil.
Beware the Forest Nazis lurking in the privets.
Holocaust is what the Nazis didThis is what Forestry Tasmania did recently to The Tarkine.
.
‘Forest Eugenics’ is what Forestry Tasmanian ‘scientists‘ are doing today – GM-modified Eucalypt nitens plantations replacing native Old Growth
.
Is this where GM Nitens (shining gum) is taking Tasmanian ecology – to ‘elite forests’?– superior growth rate, disease resistant, herbicide resistant, but perhaps the GM-exterminator of Tasmanian Devils.
“..this awe-inspiring, largely unknown part of Australia – a wilderness that has survived, virtually untouched, for over 65 million years from its Gondwana heritage, but which is today under increasing threat from Man.”
.
~ Robert Purves, June 2010, in Foreword of the book ‘The Tarkine’, edited by Ralph Ashton and published by Allen & Unwin, [Available at ^http://www.allenandunwin.com/default.aspx?page=94&book=9781742372846]
.The Tarkine’s mystical beauty of an ancient Giant Myrtle (Nothofagus cunninghammii)
.
Urgent press releases from the local champions trying to save The Tarkine:
We all know the Tarkine is an environmental jewel – but when mining companies look at this special place, they see the glint of valuable metals instead. Gold, iron, tin, zinc, lead, copper – you name it and chances are it can be found in the mineral-rich bedrock beneath the Tarkine.
With Australia in the grip of an extraction bonanza, and Chinese demand for base metals at an all time high, the pressure to open up the Tarkine to mining is building. So far, 12 mines have been proposed for the Tarkine over the next two years, along with 56 licences for mineral exploration in the area. If even a fraction of these mines go ahead, this wild land of rugged coastline, pristine rivers and forested hills could be compromised – criss-crossed with exploration tracks and roads and dotted with waste dumps, pits and trenches.
The Tarkine is of huge environmental significance. It is one of the largest remaining tracts of temperate rainforest on earth, and home to a huge variety of species including:
Tasmanian devils
Tasmanian wedge- tailed eagles
Spotted-tailed quolls
Southern bell frogs
White goshawks
Giant freshwater lobster
Eastern barred bandicoots
Orange-bellied parrots
and the Huon pine.
.
Tasmania’s Giant Freshwater Lobster (Astacopsis gouldi)
It is found only in northern Tasmanian streams (particularly in The Tarkine) and rivers flowing into Bass Strait.
It is found nowhere else in the world, yet is threatened by illegal fishing, land clearing and forestry.
(Source: Matthew Denholm, Tasmania Correspondent, The Australian, 20111109)
The Tarkine’s wild, rugged coastline – there’s no land between this point and the South American coast – boasts some of the cleanest air in the world. Because of these values (above ground), the Tarkine has long been the subject of a community-driven National Park proposal. In addition, in 2010, a report by the Australian Heritage Commission recommended that 430,000 hectares of the Tarkine be granted National Heritage status.
But Environment Minister Tony Burke has refused to implement this recommendation, claiming a need for further assessment and consultation. For decades, environmentalists have been working to protect the Tarkine. Some campaigns have been lost – like the road to nowhere in the mid 1990s – others have been won. Now, with the Tasmanian Forest Agreement progressing, it looks like the area may at last be protected from logging.
.Logging and ‘scorched earthing’ of old-growth rainforest in The Tarkine
(October 2009, Environment Tasmania)
.
But mining remains as a threat in this pristine region.
Savage River Open Cut Mine in the north of The Tarkine
.
It’s not hard to predict what will happen over the coming months: mining companies will pressure the Tasmanian Government to allow these mines to go ahead, dressing their arguments up in the usual disguise by claiming that mining is essential for jobs.
But putting industry ahead of the environment is an approach that has failed for decades and a new approach is needed. The Wilderness Society is involved with a coalition of groups calling for the creation of a Tarkine National Park.
With your support, the Wilderness Society will be standing up for an Australia that values the Tarkine not for the metals that can be extracted by destroying it, but for the precious environmental qualities that it has when left intact.
‘Tarkine National Coalition has reacted angrily to the latest chapter in Environment Minister Tony Burke’s campaign of misinformation regarding the Tarkine National Heritage assessment. The Minister made comment on ABC Mornings (936 Tasmania) that he did not have in his possession any report from the Australian Heritage Council supporting a permanent listing of the Tarkine.
This is at odds with our reading of the Australian Heritage Council report from September 2010 which supported the permanent listing of 433,000 hectares it had assessed as having National Heritage Values. Minister Burke has refused to publicly release this report, despite FOI requests from the ABC last year.
“The Minister is clearly failing in his responsibilities here, and is spinning mistruths to try and cover up his complicity in promoting mining in the Tarkine wilderness reserves,” said Tarkine National Coalition spokesperson Scott Jordan.
The Minister received this report two months before allowing the Tarkine’s Emergency National Heritage Listing to lapse. He then sent the AHC back to reassess the area, with a substantial budget cut and no capacity to complete the work before 2013. This will effectively shepherd up to ten new mine proposals through an EPBC process that cannot in the absence of a listing, legally consider impacts on National Heritage Values such as wilderness, rainforest, geological significance (fossil sites and karst systems), aesthetic character, Indigenous or European cultural heritage.
This mirrors the strategy applied by the Minister at the controversial Brighton By-pass in southern Tasmania and at James Price Point in northern WA, where once EPBC assessments were underway, a National Heritage Listing was applied that could have no legal effect on those ongoing assessments.
Independent advice from Andrew Macintosh, Associate Director of the ANU Centre for Climate Law and Policy confirms that the AHC report does in fact refer to a permanent listing, and advises that the AHC’s terms of reference only allow it to report on whether an area has National Heritage Values and prevents it from making ‘qualified’ or ‘preliminary’ findings. The correspondence from Mr Macintoshcan be downloaded below..
“It becomes impossible to have reasonable dealings with a Minister who won’t stick to the rules, and won’t tell the truth”. “The Minister must immediately release the Australian Heritage Council’s Tarkine report from September 2010”.
.
Emergency National Heritage Listing
The TNC and partner groups (WWF, Australian Conservation Foundation, The Wilderness Society, Tasmanian Conservation Trust, Environment Tasmania and North West Environment Centre) resubmitted a Emergency National Heritage Listing nomination last week, triggered by the threats to National Heritage Values of the Mount Lindsay and other mining proposals.
The resubmitting of the Tarkine Road proposal by the Tasmanian Government called into play a promise made by Minister Burke last December that if the Tarkine Road was resubmitted, that he would immediately re-list the Tarkine. The Minister has failed to deliver on this promise.
“The failure to reapply a Tarkine Emergency National Heritage Listing in response to the Tarkine Road referral clearly shows this Minister’s contempt for the responsibilities of his office, and clearly tells us that any promises he makes are worthless”.
“The key difference between this proposal and the former proposal is not the alterations to the route, but the fact that a mining company now needs this route for transporting product to ports”.
Federal Environment Minister, Tony Burke, must explain why he will allow the assessment of mining proposals to occur in the Tarkine before acting on advice before him to permanently heritage list the region, Australian Greens Deputy Leader, Christine Milne said today.
“Minister Burke today claimed on ABC local radio to have no information leading to the emergency heritage listing of the Tarkine, but failed to mention a report buried in his department recommending the Tarkine be listed.
“The Environment Minister is playing into the hands of mining companies, who are no doubt jubilant of the 2013 deadline given to the Australian Heritage Council to determine whether permanent heritage listing should be put in place.
“By 2013, all ten of the mining proposals will be submitted to the department and any subsequent heritage listing will have no effect on their operations. The wilderness, geological and cultural values of the Tarkine will not be assessed.
“It is like putting on a seatbelt after your car has crashed.
“Minister Burke’s job has moved from a focus on natural and heritage values to one of being solely concerned with bleeding monetary value from the places he is supposed to protect.
“Peter Garrett placed emergency heritage listing on the Tarkine following the state government’s previous attempt at building a road, and now, with a similar application before him, as well as ten mining applications that will be seriously impinged by such a listing, we have Minister Burke reneging on his promise to heritage list the region should another road proposal be made.
“This ongoing, seven year process to determine heritage listing the Tarkine has become an embarrassment to Australia whose governments persistently fail to recognise the value of this natural jewel.
.
“Minister Burke has everything at his disposal for immediately placing the Tarkine on the National Heritage list.
Act now, Minister Burke, before these mines have your name all over them.”
Tasmania as seen by miners – exploitative ‘below-ground’ values
.
Selected comments readers of Tasmanian Times:
.
by Barnaby Drake (20111202):
“The key difference between this proposal and the former proposal is not the alterations to the route, but the fact that a mining company now needs this route for transporting product to ports”.
‘Is it not just as I predicted? All infrastructure for these mining companies will be paid for by us. Here the original estimate was for $24 Million as a starters. Expect the real cost to be dramatically understated so that they can get their approval before announcing the usual blow-out! And that’s just the start of it. That also means that the Tourism budget will take the hit, but strangely, Forestry will also be able to us this road as the Tarkine is no longer protected. It will then be discovered by TasPorts that they need to upgrade their port facilities somewhere in the West to benefit the local inhabitants and they require another Sqillion Dollars and of course, create a couple of thousand jobs, etc.
Hallelujah! The economy has been saved. Your pensions are safe. A new mining tax will see us all happy and prosperous and MP’s will be able to have their blocked salary increases paid. A replay of the famous once Gunns proposals.
All we need now is an education bus to train the kiddies for the future. Utopia!’
. by John Hayward (20111202):
‘The Minister would see his responsibility as being to himself, his party, and to their major political contributors. His apparent dishonesty, or ignorance, is merely a consequence of these priorities.’
.
by Russell Langfield (20111202):
‘Can anyone name a promise Environment Minister Burke has kept, or a decision being made which favoured the environment over business interests?’
.
Salamander (20111202):
‘Burke likes to make out he is a man of the people, and responds when he gets enough signals from the people to act for the environment. Yesterday he was complaining about the hijacking of his twitter account by tweets about the Tarkine – but still he won’t do what the people want. Seems to me we have a puppet whose strings are completely controlled by corporations.’
.
by Pete Godfrey (20111203):
‘There is no money for hospitals, police, mobile phones for police, anything that is good for people, but there is always money available for Forestry and Mining. From what I can recall every mine venture that has received grants from the government has failed. All we ever get back is the privelege of cleaning up the mess and a hole in the ground. Part of the Tarkine have already been destroyed comprehensively by Forestry Tasmania, it is time to protect the rest from both of these rapacious subsidy collectors.’
.
by Pete Godfrey (20111203):
‘Unless you count building a road for Mining and Logging access to the area as a grant. I do.
What will happen is that he industry will start up, then say “oh it is not viable without some subsidies” then we put our hand in the the till and hand over heaps of money. Just like all the other mining ventures on the west coast. The companies accept the money then close the mine down not long after.
You can guarantee that the government will pay in the end.
We will pay for the new “mining and forestry road”
We will upgrade port facilities.
We will pay for road damage and bridge damage. Which is what the original Tarkine loop road proposal was about, it was to rebuild two bridges that have washed away before, the Tayatea bridge being one of them.
We may not hear of incentive grants to attract the miners but you can bet that a certain minister from the west will be handing grants out like lollies.’
‘If the Tarkine were to be joined to the world heritage area, a vast reserve would be created, stretching from just a few kilometres south of Tasmania’s north coast all the way to its south-western extremity.
If this were to happen, it would, in my opinion, be among the top half-dozen natural areas remaining in the world. And properly managed, it would bring wealth to Tasmanians into the foreseeable future.’
.
~ Tim Flannery, contribution in ‘The Tarkine‘ (2010), edited by Ralph Ashton, and published by Allen & Unwin.
Grey Goshawk (white morph) (Accipiter novaehollandiae)
[Photo courtesy of Ákos Lumnitzer with permission, ^http://www.amatteroflight.com/]
Click photo to enlarge.
Play call of Grey Goshawk
Source: ^http://www.aviceda.org/audio/?p=248
Volunteer Tasmanian Environmentalist, Scott Jordan
Industrial Miner, Alan Daley
Savage River Mine
This is on the northern boundary of the Tarkine
Tasmania’s Queenstown
Left behind by 19th and 20th Century industrial miners
This is south of the Tarkine
Grey Goshawk spreading its wings in flight
The real Christmas experience without cutting down a tree.
