‘Satellite Pristine’ – from satellite, Earth’s pristine

October 28th, 2011

From its satellite image, Tasmania is a green ‘apple’ isle

(except the bright ‘apple’ colour dominating Tasmania’s east is grass, long clear-felled forest for farming.

Any wonder why Eastern Tasmania lives in a rain-shadow getting just 600 mm of rainfall a year.)

.

Any State that uses 1080 is backward and internationally sends a message of being so.

It’s tourism marketing should have its brand tarnished so. Tasmania’s ecological image deserves to be as bad as New Zealand’s. NZ’s Department of Conservation drops 1080 indiscriminately out of helicopters in spades.

‘Pure’ New Zealand has a reputation for aerial poison of its native forests using ‘1080 poison’

.

The natural forest vista harbours a sterile faunal ecosystem. Tourism doesn’t care. It’s promotional photos still convey its target ‘pristine’ image, irrespective of the faunal carnage below the tree canopy.

‘Satellite Pristine’ – a ecologically contestable concept, eh?

I am sure that Guantanamo adopted a military ‘spit -and-polish’ image from the front gates too.’

The entrance to Camp Justice, the site of the U.S. war crimes tribunal compound,

at Guantanamo Bay U.S. Naval Base in Cuba (Reuters)

.

by Tigerquoll

Suggan Buggan

Victoria 3885

Australia

.

Tags: 1080 poison, aerial poisoning, Camp Justice, Eastern Tasmania, Guantanamo, New Zealand aerial baiting, New Zealand Apples, rain-shadow, satellite pristine, Tasmanian apples
Posted in Tasmania (AU), Threats from Poaching and Poisoning, Threats to Wild Tasmania | No Comments »

Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Backward chinese TCM drives a Rhino extinct

October 26th, 2011

It’s past time that the barbaric and backward chinese culture of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) was recognised by the world’s civilized countries for what it is, an evil cult against wildlife, and so criminalised along with Female Genital Mutilation forthwith. Neither serve any purpose except barbaric harm.

TCM superstition claims that rhino horns cure typhoid fever, convulsions, cancer, rheumatism, gout, snakebites, hallucinations, headaches, carbuncles, vomiting, food poisoning, and ‘devil possession’. What backward quackery! Even the the rhino’s skin and faeces is used by TCM witchdoctors. Being superstitious and backward is one thing, but such ludicrously is driving and perpetuating the chinese illegal wildlife poaching of rhinos and elephants for their horns. Is this why the chinese regime is spreading its influential tentacles across Africa?

Dried Tiger bone, Moon Bear bile, ground Elephant horn

All packaged and sold in an innocuous TCM grocer,

belying the world’s most barbaric cult against wildlife

.

Today we learn that the last Javan rhino subspecies in Vietnam was found poached for its horn. It is now extinct.

The Javan rhino is Critically Endangered on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. In 2009 only ten individuals of the subspecies Rhinoceros sondaicus annamiticus remained in South Vietnam’s rainforest region.

Javan one-horned Rhinoceros extinct as from yesterday due to poachers paid by the TCM witchdoctor cult

‘Vietnam has lost its fight to save its rare Javan rhinoceros population after poachers apparently killed the country’s last animal for its horn, pushing one of the world’s most endangered species closer to extinction, a conservation group (World Wildlife Fund) said Tuesday (25th October 2011).

Vietnam’s Cat Tien National Park has had no sightings, footprints or dung from live rhinos since the last known animal living there was found dead last April, shot through the leg with its horn chopped off, the WWF said. Genetic analysis of rhino feces had confirmed in 2004 that at least two rhinos were living in the park, raising hopes that Vietnam’s population might survive.

Only 40 to 60 Javan rhinos now remain in Ujung Kulon National Park in Indonesia. They are the last known living members of the species, with none in captivity.

Vietnam’s Javan rhino population had been shrinking for decades as land conversion and a rising local population threatened the animal’s habitat, but poaching and a lack of effective park management and patrols hastened the decline, said Christy Williams, coordinator of WWF’s Asian Elephant and Rhino Program.

“It appears that protection is not being given a high priority by the Vietnamese government,” he said. Park director Tran Van Thanh said that while some of his rangers failed to fulfill their duties, it is impossible for them to stop all of the estimated 100,000 people living near the park from hunting exotic animals when the average farmer there earns around 150,000 dong ($7.50) per day.’

[Source: ‘Javan rhino goes extinct in Vietnam after last rhino poached‘, by Mike Ives, Associated Press, 20111026, ^http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Latest-News-Wires/2011/1026/Javan-rhino-goes-extinct-in-Vietnam-after-last-rhino-poached]

The subspecies Rhinoceros. sondicus inermis once found in Bengal, Assam, and Myanmar is now extinct. The subspecies Rhinoceros sondaicus sondaicus lives only in Ujung Kulon National Park, Java, and has less than 60 individuals remaining.

All these TCM potions and remedies contain a small amount of Rhinoceros horn
© Esmond Bradley Martin

.

The Yin and Yang philosophy may suggest a wholesome healthy balanced approach to alternative medicine, but according to the Australia Herbal Medicine Centre (a Chinese run practice in Sydney’s Chinese-centric Ryde)..”Chinese Herbal Medicines are mainly plant based, but some preparations include minerals or animal products.”

“Some of the conditions which may be treated by Chinese Herbal Medicine include:

Chronic headaches
Skin disorders
Irritable bowel syndrome
Constipation and diarrhoea
Insomnia and fatigue
Common cold and influenza
Anxiety, depression and stress
Allergies
Rheumatoid and osteoarthritis
Premenstrual syndrome and painful menstruation
Excessive menstruation
Infertility
Impotence and prostate disorders
Disorders associated with menopause
Loss of appetite and common digestive disorders
Fluid retention”

[Source: ^http://www.traditionalchinesemedicine.com.au/services-chinese-herbal-medicine-sydney.php]

This all sounds impressive, but question is: Which remedies contain wildlife parts and so require illegal poaching? …sorry not on the label?

TCM is an evil backward cult inciting wildlife poaching and the key driver of wildlife extinctions around the globe. TCM ethically needs to be immediately banned, its barbaric practices made illegal and its products containing animal parts declared illegal wildlife trafficking and so an illegal import. Poaching endangered animals is far worse than mass slaughter of non-endangered animals or even the mass slaughter of humans. Species Extinction is the worst crime on the planet, because a whole species is threatened with extinction, not just a few million humans or so out of 7 billion.

The Sydney Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine [http://www.sitcm.edu.au/] needs to immediately and publicly renounce any use of wild animal parts in its practice, else be immediately criminalised as an ecologically destructive cult.

Rhino Horn is not medicine – chew your nails instead. Go and see a real doctor!

.

Tags: Australia Herbal Medicine Centre, backward chinese, evil cult, Female Genital Mutilation, illegal wildlife trade, Javan Rhino subspecies extinct, rhino poaching, Rhinoceros sondaicus annamiticus, Sydney Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine, TCM, TCM witchdoctor cult, Traditional Chinese Medicine, Tran Van Thanh, Ujung Kulon National Park, Vietnam Rhino extinct, wildlife extinction, world's most barbaric cult, WWF's Asian Elephant and Rhino Program
Posted in Africa, Rhinoceroses, Threats from Poaching and Poisoning | No Comments »

Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Fitzgibbon’s Kangaroo Massacre 9th May 2009

October 26th, 2011

This article was initially published by Tigerquoll 20090514 on CanDoBetter.net:

.

Australia’s Defence Minister, Joel Fitzgibbon MP, has just been handed AUD$26,950,000,000 to unjustifiably escalate Australia’s military aggression, at a time when Federal Treasurer Wayne Swan says the world economy is gripped by the worst recession in 50 years.

Labor’s 2009 Defence White Paper indulges to the extreme, planning for so-called “Defence” (against what?) to receive some $146 billion in additional funding across the life of the White Paper to 2030.

Hypocritically at the same time, Fitzgibbon has rejected spending just $3.5 million to save thousands of Australia’s grey kangaroos fenced in on Defence land at Majura training range just outside Canberra. And at a time when Federal MPs have just awarded themselves another pay rise of $4000 pa for ‘electoral allowances’. It all stinks like British Parliamentary abuses.

Australia’s kangaroos, stressed from people altering their habitat, have been denied their freedom to roam their traditional grazing lands due to it being bulldozed for selfish property development, due to drought, consistent shooting and from uncontrolled bushfires.

Despite wildlife ecologist Dr Dror Ben-Ami telling the review tribunal that the Defence Department has no assessments of any impacts caused by the kangaroos nor that the kangaroos pose any threat to any threatened species on the Majura range, Fitzgibbon has condoned the senseless slaughter of 4000 of a population of 9000 trapped kangaroos be shot in secret, just last Saturday, 9th May 2009. Fitzgibbon approved a similar massacre just on a year ago at the same place – it must be some idea of a sick sport to him!

Fitzgibbon says it is to reduce the kangaroos to ‘sustainable levels‘.

How’s the language?

How is this mass killing different to April 1994 when the Hutu militia hacked thousands of Tutsis to death in Rwanda, or July 1995 in Srebrenica when Serb General Ratko Mladic systematically selected and then massacred 8,372 men and boys ‘of fighting age’ (between the ages of twelve and sixty), or in May 2000 when the Sri Lanka Army used banned cluster bombs from China, multi barrel rocket Launchers killing 2,000 Tamil civilians in the island’s north?

Just four days ago, 378 Tamil civilians were killed after Sri Lankan forces fired a massive barrage of artillery shells at Tamil Tiger rebels. Again the UN stands by – bit like how Pope Pius XII stood back while Hilter’s Nazis massacred millions of Jews during WWII.

In these human massacres, the killers use propaganda to describe their victims such as ‘terrorists’, ‘militants’ and justfity the massacres as ‘ethnic cleansing’. In each of the above human massacres, the UN has stood back and watched.

Like these human massacre, thousands of Australia’s iconic kangaroos, have just as much right to life as humans, yet they are been similarly slaughtered in secret. Defence uses fabricated propaganda like the kangaroos being in “plague proportions” and “hordes” and “pests”, that their “populations have exploded”; that they “compete for pasture”; and the latest ludicrous example; “they are eating endangered species of grass”. All so as to spin the sick aim of “sustainable culling”.

It’s simply a ecological massacre. It has just been done in secret with approval of Joel Fitzgibbon. How is he any different to Sri Lankan Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa?

This tragic massacre deserves to be written into Australia’s history as……’Fitzgibbon’s Massacre‘.

.

Tags: Australia's grey kangaroos, Canberra, Defence Department, Fitzgibbon Massacre, Joel Fitzgibbon, kangaroo cull ACT, kangaroo slaughter, kangaroos shot Canberra, Majura Training Area, roo shooter
Posted in Kangaroos and Macropods, Threats from Poaching and Poisoning | No Comments »

Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Kangaroo rapers and the E.coli time bomb

October 25th, 2011

This article was initially published by Tigerquoll onCanDoBetter.net on 20090524:

Australia’s native kangaroo – targeted by poachers and mass slaughter encouraged by Australian governments

.

The Australian outback town of Mitchell lies in the Western Downs region of southern Queensland on the Warrego Highway just shy of 600 km west of Brisbane on the way to Charleville. Situated on the Maranoa River, the town of Mitchell was named in honour of the 19th Century explorer, and the town emerged as a pastoral town out of the farming of grains, beef and sheep. Tourism has become a strong drawcard to Mitchell and especially to its Great Artesian Spa.

But more recently, Mitchell’s fame has been lowered to infamy with it taking on a reputation for becoming the home of the kangaroo slaughter trade.

.
“You see a lot of utes in Mitchell and the towns just like it that emerge from the roadside only to disappear again as you drive west through southern Queensland on the Warrego Highway. You can tell the ones that are driven by kangaroo shooters. They have racks for guns and long spikes upon which the freshly eviscerated carcasses are placed. One, parked just around the corner, has black steel bullbars with the words “roo raper” cut into them.”

‘Besides the slaughter of Australia’s iconic kangaroos for pet meat and indeed export for human consumption in fancy restaurant,

it is the sanitary conditions that is shocking and a life threatening time bomb’

Following the international biolab standards of Silliker, animal liberation chief, Mark Pearson says “the last time we did swabs here and in Charleville, they were alarmingly high in E.coli.“

‘The chiller doors aren’t locked. When Ben-Ami opens the first, problems are immediately apparent. Bright drips from fresh kills are spotting onto another layer of older, duller, deader blood, which is particularly thick nearest the front. The lip of the door frame is so thick and sticky, the red’s turned a dull, dark brown. Hairs are stuck to it.

.

‘The carcasses are packed as tightly as possible.

They hang from hooks by their legs,

their heads and tails missing,

gaping rents where their stomachs once were,

leg muscles tensed visibly;

severed necks poke into gut cavities;

hundreds of paws hang in a grisly reach towards the bloody floor.

According to their tags,

they’re four days dead.’

“These are quite young ones, heads cut off quite low,” Pearson says, pointing to a nub of spine that’s jutting out just above the shoulder.

“Most of them are cut too far back.” To decapitate in this way requires significantly more effort than using the traditional method, with a slice directly beloiw the jawline. It also makes bad financial sense to remove most of the neck , as harvesters are paid by weight. Proof, claim the activists, that an illegal shot in the jaw or neck has been covered up.

‘Pearson points to the floor. “They’re bringing in new carcasses and hanging them above the floor, which has blood from old carcasses. Blood is a Petri dish for disease and contamination. This is a major breach of any export abattoir standards.” he points to a small grey kangaroo that is caked elbow to paw in blood and dirt. “That’s from the evisceration,” he says. That’s all supposed to fall to the ground. And don’t forget, these would have been on the back [of a ute] for four, five, six hours, and it would have been 20 degrees. When you consider this is export meat…Uh-oh…”

Besides Mitchell, the roo rapers store their roo chillers at Charleville, Augathella and Blackall. The practice in outback Queensland is widespread.

To struggling towns in the outback like Mitchell, kangaroo meat is big business. “The Kangaroo Industry Industry Association of Australia says theirs is a business worth $270 million a year that directly employs about 4000 people” many in remote areas.”

[Source: Sydney Morning Herald, Good Weekend magazine, 20090523]

.
AusHunt, a website dedicated to hunting in Australia and it’s hunters, advocates:

“Kangaroo shooting is a unique job and many people are involved in one way or another in Australia’s kangaroo industry. My advice for the wannabe ‘roo shooter? You’ll need to make a few phone calls to chiller-box operators in various rural centers to evaluate the impact another ‘roo shooter would have there. Then decide on a location.

Before doing anything, take a week off work and go out with a qualified, professional ‘roo shooter and see what is actually involved.

Australia’s kangaroo industry is one of the only jobs in the world where a person can legally shoot wild animals full-time for a living.

Kangaroo shooting is a tough life with long hours, and a certain danger element. Depending on weather conditions (wind, rain), phases of the moon and drought, the kangaroo shooter may have a good or bad night. It can be a very irregular income earner.

Many shooters struggle to make money, some make a living, and a few make good profits of A$100,000/annum +. Dedication is the name of the game …. going out night after night and avoiding the temptations of the local pub. The upside is that the shooter is very independent and can lead an exciting outdoors life, totally using his wits, determination and shooting prowess to make money.

Okay, you like what you see and you’ve done your courses. Move to the rural center that you have selected and get a day job there, whether it be pumping gas or whatever. Then, start looking around for properties on which to shoot and start off by shooting week-ends. See how you go, then move on to fulltime when you know that you can make money. Good luck!”

.

‘Kangaroo harvesting under the spotlight’

Animal welfare activists are hoping public outrage over the slaughter of cattle in Indonesia can be redirected towards a new target – the commercial harvest of kangaroos. But activists’ involvement with research at the University of Technology, Sydney (UTS), has sparked a major scientific blue.

A year ago, animal welfare group Voiceless established THINKK at UTS, specifically to oppose the commercial kangaroo harvest. The unit’s lead scientist, ecologist Dr Dror Ben-Ami, says a lot of information about the kangaroo industry is misrepresented and not researched thoroughly.

This year, the national quota for the commercial harvest of kangaroos is set at around 3.7 million animals, but Dr Ben-Ami fears the real toll may be much higher.

“We estimate that up to a million dependent young are killed inhumanely every year as a result of the kangaroo industry,” he said.

“Those numbers come from industry statistics, in the sense of how many females are killed every year, and from behavioural reproductive ecology knowledge about how many young each female will have.”

There are in fact no industry figures on how many joeys are killed. Their main protection is the commercial shooters licence, which bans the hunting of females with dependent young.

Professor Mike Archer, the dean of science at the University of New South Wales (UNSW), says shooters are aware female kangaroos may be carrying joeys.

“There is an effort made by the shooters. They’re aware of this issue,” he said. He has raised questions about the research being done by THINKK.

“If a group like that were actually based in my university, in the University of New South Wales, we would be having a very serious think about whether they actually belong there,” he said.

“If they publish their own papers, refereed their papers themselves, didn’t quote real experts in the field, we would be very uncomfortable if they were operating in UNSW.”

.

Hygiene fears

Adult kangaroos are shot by night and driven to chillers the next day for processing, leading to another of THINKK’s major concerns – the hygiene of the meat.

In early 2009, Animal Liberation collected samples from unlocked outback chillers, which tested positive for E. coli and salmonella. Several months later, major export destination Russia slapped a ban on kangaroo meat, citing contamination fears.

“If one ate kangaroo meat with high levels of E. coli, you’d have a upset stomach – that would be the case with most people,” Dr Ben-Ami said.

Animal Liberation went on to set up new lab tests of supermarket meat. Dr Ben-Ami says the findings are concerning.

“The results have shown very high levels of E. coli, above alert levels of 1,000 colony-forming units and also a couple of samples came back positive for salmonella,” he said.

There are hundreds of different kinds of E. coli, but only some can be toxic. Animal Liberation’s tests did not establish whether the E. coli found in the kangaroo meat was dangerous.

But UNSW researcher Rosie Cooney says Dr Ben-Ami’s concerns about the contamination of kangaroo meat are overstated.

“A large study done some years ago that looked at over 200,000 carcasses found in fact that the rates of rejection for contamination of kangaroo carcasses were actually considerably less than those for sheep,” she said.
Science ‘under siege’

Dr Cooney and her colleagues believe when it comes to the commercial harvest of kangaroos, the science is now under siege. This has spurred them into action, with a national group of scientists about to publish a critique of THINKK’s claims.

This group says the research proves there is great environmental benefit in encouraging farmers to harvest kangaroos for profit.

“They’re then going to want to value those animals, keep them on their land and importantly, maintain the habitat, the native vegetation, for those creatures as well,” she said.

Dr Ben-Ami says his critics should “write back and engage in academic dialogue, rather than smearing”.

THINKK has today released a new paper arguing against the kangaroo harvest on animal welfare grounds. Their key claim is that that shooters are missing the mark and joeys are being left to die.

[Read Paper]

“We’re taking a native animal out of its natural habitat in great numbers every year and thinking that that has no ramifications, and I think that’s absurd,” he said.

With both sides claiming the science is on their side, the challenge for animal welfare groups is to get kangaroos off the menu.

[Source: ‘Welfare Activists Target Kangaroo Industry‘, by Sarah Dingle and staff, 20110713, ABC Western Queensland, ^http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-07-13/welfare-activists-target-kangaroo-industry/2793878/?site=westqld, accessed 20111025]

.

Would you eat this animal?

Natural resources are at the heart of the booming Australian economy. In particular, the country’s success in selling these economic growth goodies to a ravenous China has transformed the Aussie economy.

China is today Australia’s largest trading partner, buying up iron ore, coal, natural gas, and other industrial minerals to the tune of $55.2 billion a year — or more than 20 percent of Australia’s total exports. So it’s not too surprising that some entrepreneurial Australians want to add another natural resource to that growing list: kangaroo meat. Australia is crawling with the creatures. And China is apparently hungry for them.That’s the plan, anyway, according to this fine feature story from Matt Siegel in the New York Times.“The Chinese have a strong culinary tradition in using wild foods, not just meat, but a wide range of wild foods called yaemei in Cantonese and yewei in Mandarin,” John Kelly, executive director of the Kangaroo Industry Association of Australia, a lobbying group, told Siegel. “Kangaroo will to a large extent just slot right into that existing tradition in much the same way it has in the European markets.”

China sent a government delegation to Australia last December to investigate the health and sanitary conditions of kangaroo producers, the New York Times reports.

And not without reason. Kangaroo meat has come under increasing scrutiny following an E. coli outbreak in 2009, which led to a ban from kangaroo-scarfing Russia. The health scare also triggered a collapse of kangaroo meat exports, which tumbled from $38.4 million in 2008 to just $12.3 million last year.

But the new plan to sell kanga-meat to China comes with other challenges. First off, kanga meat is a hard sell — even to Australians. According to a 2008 study cited by the New York Times, just 14.5 percent of Australians have “knowingly” eaten kangaroo meat, versus the 80 percent who eat beef.

The problem? Kangaroo meat has been commonly used as pet food and as skins for clothing. Moreover, many Aussies view the country’s 25 million roos —who outnumber the 23 million human Australians — as large, destructive, and sometimes dangerous pests.

But the bigger challenge might be taste.

“It’s gamey — think beef plus arm pit,” says Freya Petersen, GlobalPost’s Breaking News Editor and our resident Australian staffer. “It needs to be cooked through but not over-cooked.”

“To me, it smells like pet food because we used to feed it to our dog and cat,” she adds.

Environmentalists and animal rights groups are also worried about the plan.

Australia’s kangaroo population “can’t even deal with the domestic and European consumption,” Nikki Sutterby of the Australian Society for Kangaroos told the New York Times. “How would it deal with a country as large as China starting to eat kangaroo meat?”

The kanga-meat crowd down under, however, remains undeterred.

“I’d expect us to be putting product into China at some time this year,” Kelly told the New York Times, adding that he expected China “at some stage to be a larger market than Russia ever was.”

[Source: ‘Would you eat thsi animal?’, by Thomas Mucha, 20110415, ^http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/macro/kangaroo-australia-china]

.

‘It sure ain’t Easy being Green! About the Kangaroo Coalition coordinator!’

by John Watson, Spectator News Magazine

‘Pat O’Brien became a greenie, and activist, in Condobolin 35 years ago when he saw kangaroos herded together, shot and clubbed to death. Until that moment, he had been “normal”.

The meatworker, who was working his way around Australia with his wife and three kids, did not think about the environment, probably dropped paper on the ground and just lived his own life. However, because of that sight of kangaroos being slaughtered, he has spent the next 35 years fighting for animals and the environment….’

Meanwhile, the Queensland Government tries to legitimise wildlife poaching by using euphemistic language…’The Department’s Commercial Macropod Management Program administers the commerical harvest of macropods in Queensland.’

^http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/wildlife-ecosystems/wildlife/wildlife_permits_and_licences/kangaroo_harvesting.html

‘It’s a poor farm that can’t sustain a few kangaroos.’

.

Tags: Anna Bligh, Charleville, E. coli, export for human consumption in fancy restaurant, kanga meat, Kangaroo Industry Association of Australia, kangaroo meat, kangaroo meat hygiene, kangaroo pet food, kangaroo poaching, kangaroo slaughter trade, Mitchell, Queensland, Rolf Harris, roo raper, roo shooter, Russian kangaroo meat, THINKK, Warrego Highway, wildlife poaching
Posted in Kangaroos and Macropods, Threats from Poaching and Poisoning | No Comments »

Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Drop bear task force poisoning Tasmania

October 25th, 2011

The following article was initially posted by Tigerquoll as a comment on the Tasmanian Times 20100202:

.

1080 ‘blue carrots’

.

Six years ago, the Tasmanian Greens tabled their Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals (Control of Use) Amendment (Ban 1080) Bill 2004 to ban the use of 1080 poison (sodium monofluoroacetate) against native wildlife. But it excluded “persons directly employed with the Fox Task Force, up until the period ending 1 October 2006.”

‘Fox Task Force‘ …what a scam! Talk about dodgy jobs for mates at DPI. All they come up with is shit. It could be Drop Bear shit! They may as well be called it the Drop Bear Task Force and dress ’em up in black special forces attire and give ’em paint guns.

1080 must be banned in Tasmania outright including this fraudulent drop bear mob. I’d like to see an FOI on how much the taxpayer has funded them since they were set up. $10 million? We could have found a cure for the Devil’s face tumor or housed hundreds of homeless youth in Tasmania by now.

Tasmania’s “Department of Primary Industries and Water is the only importer of 1080 into Tasmania and only authorised officers of the Department handle the poison.” So the 1080 buck stps with DPI. DPI’s head needs to show cause, whoever the latest ‘acting’ secretary is! DPI has had so many name changes, ministers and bosses, DPI staff must be running the show. GM Environment was Warren Jones in October, so he can take the can, unless he’s been sacked as well.

According to DPI’s latest annual report, its Environment branch has a mission “to ensure best practice in environmental management and pollution control”…blah blah blah.

Well best practice in environmental management is exercising the precautionary principle, which in lay terms means if you’re not sure don’t intervene. Well ban 1080 until you can deliver a fox to the Hobart Town Hall!

.

Tasmanian native Pademelons killed by 1080 poison

Source: http://www.redbubble.com/people/cradlemountain/art/3160948-why-is-1080-poison-not-good-for-tasmania-and-the-world

.

‘By the year 2000, the Tasmanian Government poisoned 30 million native animals by allowing forest and farming industries to kill all marsupials (other species were sacrificed along with the slaughter).
Here I was collecting bodies and found nine different species affected, dead. This little female wallaby was clasping onto grass and had made a circle in the ground while dying in pain. I could not get the grass out of her little paws.’

A live and healthy native Tasmanian Pademelon

.

1080 is immoral

1080 (sodium monofluroacetate) is a cruel and indiscriminate poison used to ‘remove’ unwanted populations of animals.

Banned in most countries, 1080 is still used liberally throughout Australia and New Zealand to control so-called ‘pest’ species, and reduce ‘browsing damage’ caused by native animals on private land. Its use is indiscriminate, which means that it kills not just the target feral animals but every animal in the area that eats off the forest floor.

1080 poison is a slow killer. When ingested (usually through baited food) the animal suffers a prolonged and horrific death. Herbivores take the longest to die – up to 44hrs, while carnivores can take up to 21hrs before finally succumbing to final effects of the poison. The speed of death is dependent on the rate of the animals metabolism.

.

A Slow & Horrific Death

Witnesses to the deaths of herbivorous animals, such as macropods, have reported:

“Affected wallabies were sometimes observed sitting hunched up, with heads held shakily just above the ground. Generally they appeared non-alert and ‘sick’, with shivering or shaking forelimbs and unsteady balance. Most individuals then experience convulsions, falling to the ground and lying on their backs and sides, kicking and making running motions with their hind legs before dying. Many individuals also ejaculated shortly before death, and, with others, exuded a white froth from their nostrils and mouth.”

Carnivorous animals such as dingoes, dogs, foxes, and cats become very agitated, as they tremble, convulse and vomit.”

[Source: ‘The World League for Protection of Animals’, ^http://wlpa.org/1080_poison.htm]

.

Also, 1080 is indiscriminate, it kills all carnivores including Devils, and endangered quolls and dogs.

“Under state poisons legislation, 1080 is a Schedule 7 poison and is available only to specialised or authorised users who have the skills necessary to handle it safely. Under the Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals Code Regulations 1995, products containing 1080 are also declared to be ‘Restricted Chemical Products’. As such, the products can only be supplied to or used by ‘authorised person(s)’. Individual states set the authorisation criteria taking the APVMA’s and state regulatory requirements into account.

Despite these regulations, poisoning of non-target wildlife and domestic pets is common and farm animal species can also be at risk. In NSW, an estimated 14,000 baits are laid per Rural Land Protection Board per annum, and 2002-2003 figures on 1080 use released by the Tasmanian Government indicated Forestry Tasmania used 23 per cent, farmers 47 per cent, and private forestry 30 per cent. In the same year, the Tasmanian Government also released statistics stating that 97,000 wallabies and brushtail possums had been poisoned by 1080, primarily through baiting programs aimed at targeting browsing and grazing native animals as part of forestry management. Phasing out of 1080 in Tasmanian forests has since commenced.

Canines are particularly susceptible to 1080 and the lethal dose for dogs has been calculated at 0.05mg/kg. Once consumed, it is rapidly absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract, impairing cellular respiration through disruption of the citric acid cycle with resultant CNS anoxia and cardiovascular disturbance. 1080 can also be absorbed from the respiratory tract and through cuts and abrasions.

1080 has no specific antidote and even in animals treated symptomatically, is usually fatal.”

[Source: ‘The Veterinarian’, ^http://www.theveterinarian.com.au/features/article685.asp]

.

1080 poison is as vicious as laying 19th Century steel jaw traps around Hobart parks, or giving kids air rifles to play with at school.

It is incumbent on the public’s trust in the ethics and responsibility of the Tasmanian Government’s Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment (etc) to show proof of foxes or else ban 1080 poison outright across Tasmania.

Else it will be some perturbed fox myth that ends up killing Tasmania’s devils, quolls, wallabies, the forester kangaroo, just like the 19th Century myth that Thylacene’s killed farmers’ sheep so deserving their redneck extinction.

The DPI always claims recent physical evidence of foxes. If so, then show recent proof to the public, not old specimen carcasses from a zoo. Show the Tasmanian public also independent zoological proof that using 1080 cannot harm non-target species!

.

Victoria following Tasmania’s backward example

‘Authorised persons in Victoria can now purchase 1080 pest animal bait products from accredited retailers or licensed perishable bait manufacturers.

Two categories of 1080 pest animal bait products are now available in Victoria:

Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) registered 1080 pest animal bait products (‘shelf-stable bait’) such as dry oats and dried meat baits. Retailers of these baits must have Agsafe Guardian 1080 accreditation.

Perishable 1080 pest animal bait products (‘fresh’ bait) such as carrot and liver, manufactured using 1080 aqueous solution registered with the APVMA for that purpose. These bait products are not registered with the APVMA but are supplied under an APVMA permit. The manufacturer of these bait products is also the retailer. These persons must meet specific training and accreditation requirements and be licensed by the Department of Human Services (DHS).

In order to purchase 1080 pest animal bait products you need to complete a Course in Minimising the Risks in the Use of 1080 Pest Animal Bait Products for Vertebrate Pest Control and obtain a 1080 endorsement to your Agricultural Chemical User Permit (ACUP).

These changes are designed to make it easier for you to purchase 1080 pest animal bait products. They enable users to purchase 1080 pest animal bait products from local accredited retailers during normal business hours, enable a greater range of 1080 pest animal bait products to become available to users, and make the manufacture, supply and use of 1080 pest animal bait products safer.’

[Source: ^http://dpi.vic.gov.au/agriculture/farming-management/chemical-use/agricultural-chemical-use/bait-system, accessed 20111025]

.

South Australia following Tasmania’s backward example

‘The Controlled Substances (Poisons) Regulations,1996 allows land owners access to 1080 baits (sodium fluoroacetate) for the control of rabbits, foxes and dingoes/ wild dogs on their own property.

The current Label, Directions for Use and Material Safety Data Sheet are reproduced here for each bait product.

The Directions for Use include the following documents:

Record of notification of neighbours before commencement of baiting programs
Checklist to be used when a person first receives baits
Poison laid sign design

Authorisation to use the baits requires the land owner (or their agent nominated in writing) to sign an Approval to Possess 1080 Bait form supplied by a Natural Resources Management officer. Non-compliance with the Directions for Use is an offence under the Controlled Substances Act, 1984 and the Agricultural and Veterinary Products (Control of Use) Act, 2002.

For information on the supply and possession of 1080 bait, contact the Environmental Health Branch, Department of Health on (08) 8226 7117 or (08) 8226 7137.

For information or advice on suspected cases of misuse of 1080 bait products or to report that non-target animals may have been poisoned by 1080, contact PIRSA Biosecurity – Rural Chemicals on (08) 8226 0528.

[Source: ^http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/biosecuritysa/nrm_biosecurity/pest_animal/1080_use_in_sa, accessed 20111025]

.

Tags: 1080 poison, DPI, Fox Task Force, sodium monofluoroacetate, Tasmania's "Department of Primary Industries and Water, Tasmanian Pademelon
Posted in Kangaroos and Macropods, Tasmania (AU), Threats from Poaching and Poisoning, Threats to Wild Tasmania | No Comments »

Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Centennial Coal destroying protected swamps

October 24th, 2011

A New South Wales mining company has committed to pay $1.45 million after causing damage to a nationally threatened ecological community.

An investigation by the federal environment department found that the long wall coal mining operations of Centennial Coal on the Newnes Plateau, near Lithgow, New South Wales, had caused a significant impact on the endangered Temperate highland peat swamps on sandstone ecological community.

The mining activities caused a loss of ecosystem function shown by loss of peat, erosion, vegetation dieback and weed invasion in three swamps.

They also caused the formation of a large slump hole, several metres wide and more than one metre deep, at the East Wolgan Swamp.

These changes mean the swamps can no longer serve their important hydrological role of acting as water filters and releasing water slowly to downstream watercourses.

Centennial Coal will pay $1.45 million towards a research program to be administered by the Fenner School of Environment and Society at the Australian National University.

This research program will be of great conservation benefit for these protected swamps and inform better understanding of the impacts of land use change.

The program will map the distribution and extent of the swamps, explore their functions, water dynamics, ecology and history, and look at human impacts on the swamps. It will provide valuable knowledge to protect Temperate highland peat swamps on sandstone and to promote land management practices that minimise impacts on these swamps.

The payment will be made as an ‘enforceable undertaking’ under national environment law—the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

This is an effective way to hold companies accountable for environmental damage without going through lengthy and costly legal proceedings.

This outcome shows the Australian Government takes environmental protection seriously, and will not tolerate companies causing needless damage to the environment.
.

[Source: ‘Mining company to pay for environmental damage’, 20111021, by Justin McKee, ‘Gardens of Stone’ Campaigner, Blue Mountains Conservation Society]

.

Editor: If the New South Wales (NSW) Government agency responsible and accountable for environmental protection of threatened species cannot do its job and it takes the federal government agency to do its job for it , then the NSW agency is redundant and should be dissolved and responsibility handed to the federal government.

.

Swamp on Newnes Plateau, Blue Mountains region

‘Blue Mountains Swamps are a biologically diverse plant community that occurs nowhere else in the world. The vegetation in these swamps range from low buttongrass clumps to large shrubs such as Hakea and Grevillea species. The swamps provide essential habitat to several Threatened Species, such as the Blue Mountains Water Skink (Eulamprus leuraensis) and the Giant Dragonfly (Petalura gigantea).

Blue Mountains swamps play a vital part in maintaining the water flows in the areas creeks and waterfalls, by storing water and slowly releasing it over time. Swamps also act as filters, purifying water prior to the release into creeks. Other threatened species such as Epacris hamiltonii and Microstrobos fitzgeraldii rely on the continued seepage from hanging swamps for survival in their specialized habitats.

There are less than 3,000 ha of Blue Mountains Swamp in existence. As they predominantly comprise many small areas, they are very susceptible to edge effects.’.[Source: Blue Mountains Council, ^http://www.bmcc.nsw.gov.au/sustainableliving/environmentalinformation/livingcatchments/swampsandswampcare]

.

Swamps on Newnes Plateau provide critical habitat for the endangered Blue Mountains Water Skink

‘The Blue Mountains Water Skink (Eulamprus leuraensis) is a medium sized semi- aquatic lizard. It is one of Australia’s rarest lizards, and has only been found in 30 locations in the middle and upper Blue Mountains in New South Wales. Surveys suggest that the Blue Mountains Water Skink is restricted to an isolated, highly fragmented habitat of sedge and shrub swamps that occur between Newnes in the north and west and Hazelbrook in the south and east. Potential habitat to the south and northwest of known sites may extend the range of this species, however further survey work is required to determine whether the species utilises these areas.

The small number and apparent isolation of known populations, in conjunction with the limited geographic distribution of the Blue Mountains Water Skink make it vulnerable to the operation of threatening processes. Clearing for urban development and associated disturbance to habitat has resulted in the reduction of the area of known and potential habitat and the apparent extinction from areas where this species previously occurred. The small size of some swamps increases the risk of loss of one or more of the populations, and recolonisation of disjunct areas appears unlikely (LeBreton 1994c).

Possible threats include urban development (some locations are almost completely surrounded by houses and other locations have land zoned for further development adjacent to them), pollution and sedimentation (including stormwater run-off), alterations to hydrological regimes (through construction of roads, tracks, plantations and mining subsidence), weed invasion, visitor disturbance (trail bikes, 4WD) and predation by cats.

This recovery plan describes our current understanding of the Blue Mountains Water Skink and documents the research and management actions undertaken to date. The plan also identifies the parties responsible for the management actions required to ensure the ongoing viability of the species in the wild.

Known distribution of the Endangered Blue Mountains Water Skink

.

‘The species has been listed as Endangered for the following reasons. It is an ecological specialist and is restricted to a highly fragmented montane swamp habitat. Many populations appear isolated and the small size of some swamps makes them vulnerable to ‘edge effects’ and increases the risk of loss of one or more populations through chance events. The ability of the Blue Mountains Water Skink to recolonise an area in the event of a local extinction may be low as a result of the discontinuity of the habitat and the apparently limited scope for dispersal (LeBreton 1996). These factors in conjunction with the limited geographic distribution of the Blue Mountains Water Skink make it particularly vulnerable to the operation of threatening processes.

A substantial number of known sites are located wholly or partially in national park (17 locations). The most significant threat facing these populations may be further urbanisation of adjacent areas as several of the sites occur in close proximity to residential areas or areas zoned for residential development. Other threats may include disturbance by visitors, invasion by weeds, inappropriate fire regimes and predation by cats.

Eight populations are recorded at Newnes Plateau on land managed by SFNSW. These populations may also face threats from weed invasion, inappropriate fire regimes and predation by cats. They could also face threats associated with timber harvesting activities and mining subsidence.’
.

[Source: The Recovery Plan for the Blue Mountains Water Skink (Eulamprus leuraensis), NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 200106, ISBN 0 7313 6283 7, ^http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/recovery/blue-mtns-water-skink/index.html]

.

Longwall Mining declared a ‘Key Threatening Process’ since 2005…hello!

.In 2005, the Scientific Committee, established by the Threatened Species Conservation Act, has made a Final Determination to list Alteration of habitat following subsidence due to longwall mining as a KEY THREATENING PROCESS in Schedule 3 of the Act. Listing of key threatening processes is provided for by Part 2 of the Act.The Scientific Committee has found that:

1. Longwall mining occurs in the Northern, Southern and Western Coalfields of NSW. The Northern Coalfields are centred on the Newcastle-Hunter region. The Southern Coalfield lies principally beneath the Woronora, Nepean and Georges River catchments approximately 80-120 km SSW of Sydney. Coalmines in the Western Coalfield occur along the western margin of the Sydney Basin. Virtually all coal mining in the Southern and Western Coalfields is underground mining.

2. Longwall mining involves removing a panel of coal by working a face of up to 300 m in width and up to two km long. Longwall panels are laid side by side with coal pillars, referred to as “chain pillars” separating the adjacent panels. Chain pillars generally vary in width from 20-50 m wide (Holla and Barclay 2000). The roof of the working face is temporarily held up by supports that are repositioned as the mine face advances (Karaman et al. 2001). The roof immediately above the coal seam then collapses into the void (also known as the goaf) and a collapse zone is formed above the extracted area. This zone is highly fractured and permeable and normally extends above the seam to a height of five times the extracted seam thickness (typical extracted seam thickness is approximately 2-3.5 m) (ACARP 2002). Above the collapse zone is a fractured zone where the permeability is increased to a lesser extent than in the collapse zone. The fractured zone extends to a height above the seam of approximately 20 times the seam thickness, though in weaker strata this can be as high as 30 times the seam thickness (ACARP 2002). Above this level, the surface strata will crack as a result of bending strains, with the cracks varying in size according to the level of strain, thickness of the overlying rock stratum and frequency of natural joints or planes of weakness in the strata (Holla and Barclay 2000).

3. The principal surface impact of underground coal mining is subsidence (lowering of the surface above areas that are mined) (Booth et al. 1998, Holla and Barclay 2000). The total subsidence of a surface point consists of two components, active and residual. Active subsidence, which forms 90 to 95% of the total subsidence in most cases, follows the advance of the working face and usually occurs immediately. Residual subsidence is time-dependent and is due to readjustment and compaction within the goaf (Holla and Barclay 2000). Trough-shaped subsidence profiles associated with longwall mining develop tilt between adjacent points that have subsided different amounts. Maximum ground tilts are developed above the edges of the area of extraction and may be cumulative if more than one seam is worked up to a common boundary. The surface area affected by ground movement is greater than the area worked in the seam (Bell et al. 2000). In the NSW Southern Coalfield, horizontal displacements can extend for more than one kilometre from mine workings (and in extreme cases in excess of three km) (ACARP 2002, 2003), although at these distances, the horizontal movements have little associated tilt or strain. Subsidence at a surface point is due not only to mining in the panel directly below the point, but also to mining in the adjacent panels. It is not uncommon for mining in each panel to take a year or so and therefore a point on the surface may continue to experience residual subsidence for several years (Holla and Barclay 2000).

4. The degree of subsidence resulting from a particular mining activity depends on a number of site specific factors. Factors that affect subsidence include the design of the mine, the thickness of the coal seam being extracted, the width of the chain pillars, the ratio of the depth of overburden to the longwall panel width and the nature of the overlying strata; sandstones are known to subside less than other substrates such as shales. Subsidence is also dependent on topography, being more evident in hilly terrain than in flat or gently undulating areas (Elsworth and Liu 1995, Holla 1997, Holla and Barclay 2000, ACARP 2001). The extent and width of surface cracking over and within the vicinity of the mined goaf will also decrease with an increased depth of mining (Elsworth and Liu 1995).

5. Longwall mining can accelerate the natural process of ‘valley bulging’ (ACARP 2001, 2002). This phenomenon is indicated by an irregular upward spike in an otherwise smooth subsidence profile, generally co-inciding with the base of the valley. The spike represents a reduced amount of subsidence, known as ‘upsidence’, in the base and sides of the valley and is generally coupled with the horizontal closure of the valley sides (ACARP 2001, 2002). In most cases, the upsidence effects extend outside the valley and include the immediate cliff lines and ground beyond them (ACARP 2002).

6. Mining subsidence is frequently associated with cracking of valley floors and creeklines and with subsequent effects on surface and groundwater hydrology (Booth et al. 1998, Holla and Barclay 2000, ACARP 2001, 2002, 2003). Subsidence-induced cracks occurring beneath a stream or other surface water body may result in the loss of water to near-surface groundwater flows. If the water body is located in an area where the coal seam is less than approximately 100-120 m below the surface, longwall mining can cause the water body to lose flow permanently. If the coal seam is deeper than approximately 150 m, the water loss may be temporary unless the area is affected by severe geological disturbances such as strong faulting. In the majority of cases, surface waters lost to the sub-surface re-emerge downstream. The ability of the water body to recover is dependent on the width of the crack, the surface gradient, the substrate composition and the presence of organic matter. An already-reduced flow rate due to drought conditions or an upstream dam or weir will increase the impact of water loss through cracking. The potential for closure of surface cracks is improved at sites with a low surface gradient although even temporary cracking, leading to loss of flow, may have long-term effects on ecological function in localised areas. The steeper the gradient, the more likely that any solids transported by water flow will be moved downstream allowing the void to remain open and the potential loss of flows to the subsurface to continue. A lack of thick alluvium in the streambed may also prolong stream dewatering (by at least 13 years, in one case study in West Virginia, Gill 2000). Impacts on the flows of ephemeral creeks are likely to be greater than those on permanent creeks (Holla and Barclay 2000). Cracking and subsequent water loss can result in permanent changes to riparian community structure and composition.

Longwall Mining Consequences

Total Environment Centre, ^http://www.tec.org.au/component/docman/doc_view/201-longwall-rep07

.

7. Subsidence can also cause decreased stability of slopes and escarpments, contamination of groundwater by acid drainage, increased sedimentation, bank instability and loss, creation or alteration of riffle and pool sequences, changes to flood behaviour, increased rates of erosion with associated turbidity impacts, and deterioration of water quality due to a reduction in dissolved oxygen and to increased salinity, iron oxides, manganese, and electrical conductivity (Booth et al. 1998, Booth and Bertsch 1999, Sidle et al. 2000, DLWC 2001, Gill 2000, Stout 2003). Displacement of flows may occur where water from mine workings is discharged at a point or seepage zone remote from the stream, and in some cases, into a completely different catchment. Where subsidence cracks allow surface water to mix with subsurface water, the resulting mixture may have altered chemical properties. The occurrence of iron precipitate and iron-oxidising bacteria is particularly evident in rivers where surface cracking has occurred. These bacteria commonly occur in Hawkesbury Sandstone areas, where seepage through the rock is often rich in iron compounds (Jones and Clark 1991) and are able to grow in water lacking dissolved oxygen. Where the bacteria grow as thick mats they reduce interstitial habitat, clog streams and reduce available food (DIPNR 2003). Loss of native plants and animals may occur directly via iron toxicity, or indirectly via smothering. Long-term studies in the United States indicate that reductions in diversity and abundance of aquatic invertebrates occur in streams in the vicinity of longwall mining and these effects may still be evident 12 years after mining (Stout 2003, 2004).8. The extraction of coal and the subsequent cracking of strata surrounding the goaf may liberate methane, carbon dioxide and other gases. Most of the gas is removed by the ventilation system of the mine but some gas remains within the goaf areas. Gases tend to diffuse upwards through any cracks occurring in the strata and be emitted from the surface (ACARP 2001). Gas emissions can result in localised plant death as anaerobic conditions are created within the soil (Everett et al. 1998).

9. Subsidence due to longwall mining can destabilise cliff-lines and increase the probability of localised rockfalls and cliff collapse (Holla and Barclay 2000, ACARP 2001, 2002). This has occurred in the Western Coalfield and in some areas of the Southern Coalfield (ACARP 2001). These rockfalls have generally occurred within months of the cliffline being undermined but in some cases up to 18 years after surface cracking first became visible following mining (ACARP 2001). Changes to cliff-line topography may result in an alteration to the environment of overhangs and blowouts. These changes may result in the loss of roosts for bats and nest sites for cliff-nesting birds.

10. Damage to some creek systems in the Hunter Valley has been associated with subsidence due to longwall mining. Affected creeks include Eui Creek, Wambo Creek, Bowmans Creek, Fishery Creek and Black Creek (Dept of Sustainable Natural Resources 2003, in lit.). Damage has occurred as a result of loss of stability, with consequent release of sediment into the downstream environment, loss of stream flow, death of fringing vegetation, and release of iron rich and occasionally highly acidic leachate. In the Southern Coalfields substantial surface cracking has occurred in watercourses within the Upper Nepean, Avon, Cordeaux, Cataract, Bargo, Georges and Woronora catchments, including Flying Fox Creek, Wongawilli Creek, Native Dog Creek and Waratah Rivulet. The usual sequence of events has been subsidence-induced cracking within the streambed, followed by significant dewatering of permanent pools and in some cases complete absence of surface flow.

11. The most widely publicised subsidence event in the Southern Coalfields was the cracking of the Cataract riverbed downstream of the Broughtons Pass Weir to the confluence of the Nepean River. Mining in the vicinity began in 1988 with five longwall panels having faces of 110 m that were widened in 1992 to 155 m. In 1994, the river downstream of the longwall mining operations dried up (ACARP 2001, 2002). Water that re-emerged downstream was notably deoxygenated and heavily contaminated with iron deposits; no aquatic life was found in these areas (Everett et al. 1998). In 1998, a Mining Wardens Court Hearing concluded that 80% of the drying of the Cataract River was due to longwall mining operations, with the balance attributed to reduced flows regulated by Sydney Water. Reduction of the surface river flow was accompanied by release of gas, fish kills, iron bacteria mats, and deterioration of water quality and instream habitat. Periodic drying of the river has continued, with cessation of flow recorded on over 20 occasions between June 1999 and October 2002 (DIPNR 2003). At one site, the ‘Bubble Pool”, localised water loss up to 4 ML/day has been recorded (DIPNR 2003). Piezometers indicated that there was an unusually high permeability in the sandstone, indicating widespread bedrock fracturing (DIPNR 2003). High gas emissions within and around areas of dead vegetation on the banks of the river have been observed and it is likely that this dieback is related to the generation of anoxic conditions in the soil as the migrating gas is oxidised (Everett et al. 1998). An attempt to rectify the cracking by grouting of the most severe crack in 1999 was only partially successful (AWT 2000). In 2001, water in the Cataract River was still highly coloured, flammable gas was still being released and flow losses of about 50% (3-3.5 ML/day) still occurring (DLWC 2001). Environmental flow releases of 1.75 ML/day in the Cataract River released from Broughtons Pass Weir were not considered enough to keep the river flowing or to maintain acceptable water quality (DIPNR 2003).

12. Subsidence associated with longwall mining has contributed to adverse effects (see below) on upland swamps. These effects have been examined in most detail on the Woronora Plateau (e.g. Young 1982, Gibbins 2003, Sydney Catchment Authority, in lit.), although functionally similar swamps exist in the Blue Mountains and on Newnes Plateau and are likely to be affected by the same processes. These swamps occur in the headwaters of the Woronora River and O’Hares Creek, both major tributaries of the Georges River, as well as major tributaries of the Nepean River, including the Cataract and Cordeaux Rivers. The swamps are exceptionally species rich with up to 70 plant species in 15 m2 (Keith and Myerscough 1993) and are habitats of particular conservation significance for their biota. The swamps occur on sandstone in valleys with slopes usually less than ten degrees in areas of shallow, impervious substrate formed by either the bedrock or clay horizons (Young and Young 1988). The low gradient, low discharge streams cannot effectively flush sediment so they lack continuous open channels and water is held in a perched water table. The swamps act as water filters, releasing water slowly to downstream creek systems thus acting to regulate water quality and flows from the upper catchment areas (Young and Young 1988).

13. Upland swamps on the Woronora Plateau are characterised by ti-tree thicket, cyperoid heath, sedgeland, restioid heath and Banksia thicket with the primary floristic variation being related to soil moisture and fertility (Young 1986, Keith and Myerscough 1993). Related swamp systems occur in the upper Blue Mountains including the Blue Mountains Sedge Swamps (also known as hanging swamps) which occur on steep valley sides below an outcropping claystone substratum and the Newnes Plateau Shrub Swamps and Coxs River Swamps which are also hydrologically dependent on the continuance of specific topographic and geological conditions (Keith and Benson 1988, Benson and Keith 1990). The swamps are subject to recurring drying and wetting, fires, erosion and partial flushing of the sediments (Young 1982, Keith 1991). The conversion of perched water table flows into subsurface flows through voids, as a result of mining-induced subsidence may significantly affect the water balance of upland swamps (eg Young and Wray 2000). The scale of this impact is currently unknown, however, changes in vegetation may not occur immediately. Over time, areas of altered hydrological regime may experience a modification to the vegetation community present, with species being favoured that prefer the new conditions. The timeframe of these changes is likely to be long-term. While subsidence may be detected and monitored within months of a mining operation, displacement of susceptible species by those suited to altered conditions is likely to extend over years to decades as the vegetation equilibrates to the new hydrological regime (Keith 1991, NPWS 2001). These impacts will be exacerbated in periods of low flow. Mine subsidence may be followed by severe and rapid erosion where warping of the swamp surface results in altered flows and surface cracking creates nick-points (Young 1982). Fire regimes may also be altered, as dried peaty soils become oxidised and potentially flammable (Sydney Catchment Authority, in lit.) (Kodela et al. 2001).

14. The upland swamps of the Woronora Plateau and the hanging swamps of the Blue Mountains provide habitat for a range of fauna including birds, reptiles and frogs. Reliance of fauna on the swamps increases during low rainfall periods. A range of threatened fauna including the Blue Mountains Water Skink, Eulamprus leuraensis, the Giant Dragonfly, Petalura gigantea, the Giant Burrowing Frog, Heleioporus australiacus, the Red-crowned Toadlet, Pseudophryne australis, the Stuttering Frog Mixophyes balbus and Littlejohn’s Tree Frog, Litoria littlejohni, are known to use the swamps as habitat. Of these species, the frogs are likely to suffer the greatest impacts as a result of hydrological change in the swamps because of their reliance on the water within these areas either as foraging or breeding habitat. Plant species such as Persoonia acerosa, Pultenaea glabra, P. aristata and Acacia baueri ssp. aspera are often recorded in close proximity to the swamps. Cliffline species such as Epacris hamiltonii and Apatophyllum constablei that rely on surface or subsurface water may also be affected by hydrological impacts on upland swamps, as well as accelerated cliff collapse associated with longwall mining.

15. Flora and fauna may also be affected by activities associated with longwall mining in addition to the direct impacts of subsidence. These activities include clearing of native vegetation and removal of bush rock for surface facilities such as roads and coal wash emplacement and discharge of mine water into swamps and streams. Weed invasion, erosion and siltation may occur following vegetation clearing or enrichment by mine water. Clearing of native vegetation, Bushrock removal, Invasion of native plant communities by exotic perennial grasses and Alteration to the natural flow regimes of rivers and streams and their floodplains and wetlands are listed as Key Threatening Processes under the Threatened Species Conservation Act (1995).

The following threatened species and ecological communities are known to occur in areas affected by subsidence due to longwall mining and their habitats are likely to be altered by subsidence and mining-associated activities:

Endangered Species

Epacris hamiltonii a shrub
Eulamprus leuraensis Blue Mountains Water Skink
Hoplocephalus bungaroides Broad-headed Snake
Isoodon obesulus Southern Brown Bandicoot
Petalura gigantea Giant Dragonfly
.

Vulnerable species

Acacia baueri subsp. aspera
Apatophyllum constablei
Boronia deanei
Cercartetus nanus Eastern Pygmy Possum
Epacris purpurascens var. purpurascens
Grevillea longifolia
Heleioporus australiacus Giant Burrowing Frog
Ixobrychus flavicollis Black Bittern
Leucopogon exolasius
Litoria littlejohni Littlejohn’s Tree Frog
Melaleuca deanei
Mixophyes balbus Stuttering Frog
Myotis adversus Large-footed Myotis
Persoonia acerosa
Potorous tridactylus Long-nosed Potoroo
Pseudophryne australis Red-crowned Toadlet
Pteropus poliocephalus Grey-headed Flying Fox
Pterostylis pulchella
Pultenaea aristata
Pultenaea glabra
Tetratheca juncea
Varanus rosenbergi Rosenberg’s Goanna

Endangered Ecological Communities

Genowlan Point Allocasuarina nana Heathland
Newnes Plateau Shrub Swamp in the Sydney Basin Bioregion
O’Hares Creek Shale Forest
Shale/Sandstone Transition Forest

Species and populations of species not currently listed as threatened but that may become so as a result of habitat alteration following subsidence due to longwall mining include:

Acacia ptychoclada
Almaleea incurvata
Darwinia grandiflora
Dillwynia stipulifera
Epacris coricea
Grevillea acanthifolia subsp. acanthifolia
Hydromys chrysogaster Water rat
Lomandra fluviatilis
Olearia quercifolia
Pseudanthus pimelioides

16. Mitigation measures to repair cracking creek beds have had only limited success and are still considered experimental (ACARP 2002). Cracks less than 10 mm wide may eventually reseal without active intervention provided there is a clay fraction in the soil and at least some water flow is maintained. Cracks 10-50 mm wide may be sealed with a grouting compound or bentonite. Cracks wider than 50 mm require concrete (ACARP 2002). Pattern grouting in the vicinity of Marhnyes Hole in the Georges River has been successful at restoring surface flows and reducing pool drainage following fracturing of the riverbed (International Environmental Consultants 2004). Grouting of cracks also appears to have been relatively effective in Wambo Creek in the Hunter Valley. Installation of a grout curtain in the Cataract River, however, has been only partially successful and it was concluded in 2002, after rehabilitation measures had taken place, that the environment flows released from Broughtons Pass Weir by the Sydney Catchment Authority were insufficient to keep the Cataract River flowing or to maintain acceptable water quality (DIPNR 2003). Mitigation measures themselves may have additional environmental impacts due to disturbance from access tracks, the siting of drilling rigs, removal of riparian vegetation, and unintended release of the grouting material into the water. Furthermore, even measures that are successful in terms of restoring flows involve temporary rerouting of surface flows while mitigation is carried out (generally for 2-3 weeks at each grouting site). Planning for remediation measures may also be hampered by the lack of predictability of some impacts, and difficulties gaining access to remote areas where remedial works are needed. The long-term success of mitigation measures such as grouting is not yet known. It is possible that any ongoing subsidence after grouting may reopen cracks or create new ones. Further, it is not yet known whether the clay substance bentonite, which is often added to the cement in the grouting mix, is sufficiently stable to prevent shrinkage. Grouting under upland and hanging swamps that have no definite channel is probably not feasible.17. Empirical methods have been developed from large data sets to predict conventional subsidence effects (ACARP 2001, 2002, 2003). In general, these models have proved more accurate when predicting the potential degree of subsidence in flat or gently undulating terrain than in steep topography (ACARP 2003). A major issue identified in the ACARP (2001, 2002) reports was the lack of knowledge about horizontal stresses in geological strata, particularly those associated with river valleys. These horizontal stresses appear to play a major role in the magnitude and extent of surface subsidence impacts. The cumulative impacts of multiple panels also appear to have been poorly monitored. The general trend in the mining industry in recent years toward increased panel widths (from 200 up to 300 m), which allows greater economies in the overall costs of extraction, means that future impacts will tend to be greater than those in the past (ACARP 2001, 2002).18. In view of the above the Scientific Committee is of the opinion that Alteration of habitat following subsidence due to longwall mining adversely affects two or more threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or could cause species, populations or ecological communities that are not threatened to become threatened.’

by Dr Lesley Hughes, Chairperson, Scientific Committee, Proposed Gazettal date: 15/07/05
[Source: ^http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/determinations/LongwallMiningKtp.htm]

.

Tags: blue mountains, Blue Mountains Conservation Society, Blue Mountains Sedge Swamps, Blue Mountains Water Skink, Centennial Coal, Colong Foundation for Wilderness, East Wolgan Swamp, enforceable undertaking, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, Epacris hamiltonii, Fenner School of Environment and Society, Giant Dragonfly, hanging swamps, long wall coal mining, loss of ecosystem function, Microstrobos fitzgeraldii, Newnes Plateau, Subsidence due to longwall mining, threatened ecological community
Posted in Blue Mountains (AU), Threats from Mining | No Comments »

Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Ta Ann greenwashing and destroying Tasmania

October 23rd, 2011

It starts with a natural forest that due to ‘humanity’ has become rare, threatened and endangered

~ Tasmania’s ancient wild Weld Forest

.

Tasmanian Old Growth Eucalypt Forests destroyed by Forestry Tasmania and onsold to Ta Ann

http://www.huon.org/

Malaysian industrial logger ‘Ta Ann Tasmania‘ (Ta Ann) has overtaken the monolithic Gunns Ltd as the biggest baddest logger of Tasmanian native Eucalypt forests and is busy enticing new overseas markets to flog Tasmanian Eucalypt timber.

Ta Ann claims that it exports rotary peeled veneer manufactured only from regrowth and plantation Eucalypt logs supplied by Forestry Tasmania, boasting its logging operations and timber products as environmentally sustainable.

But the reality is that Ta Ann is sourcing timber from Tasmanian old growth forests, from world heritage value and high conservation value forests.

As many Tasmanians are well familiar, Tasmanian Government impune Forestry Tasmania has an internal cultural penchant do anything to log and flog Tasmanian forests to perpetuate its own survival. Tasmanian legislation allows it to log, slaughter and rule with impunity like a forestry Mugabi, Gaddafi or Pol Pot. Forestry Tasmania is accountable only unto itself.

In 2008, AusIndustry even awarded Ta Ann winner of the Emerging Exporter Award for building its new flooring ply market in Japan flogging Tasmanian Eucalypt forest timber, all on the presumption that Ta Ann’s chain-of-custody certification was assured and legitimate. But was it and is it?

Tasmania’s big business biased history has shown that the promise of lots of local jobs by alluring big business causes dizzy evangelism by naive high school politicians, which then abandon ethics and Tasmanian community pride for the promise of the big buck. Traditional Tasmanian timber asset and its passionate local craftsmanship have been repeatedly betrayed by short-termism party politicians to cheap asian woodchipping mentality.

The latest Tas-rapist is ‘Ta Ann’ owned by exploitative unscrupulous Malaysian logger mogul Abdul Hamed Sepawi. He treats Sarawak indigenous locals like scum, so why would he feel any different to Tasmanians? – be it old growth forests, timber workers, their families, Tasmania’s economy or rural society?

Indigenous Sarawak of Borneo seeing their forests go to Abdul’s Malaysian industrial loggers

.

Abdul is into logging Tasmanian forests for his own empire. Those Tasmanians participating in Ta Ann operations are not only feeding an asian mogul’s personal wealth, they are selling Tasmania’s unique forest assets, accepting pittance pay, and watching the asian mogul smile.

Malaysian’s Logger Mogul… Greedy Abdul

One day Tasmanians working in forestry will acknowledge that the radial feral greenies are not their adversaries but indeed more Tasmanian patriotic than their asian logging employers and Tasmanian Labor’s soul-selling politicians.

It is time Tasmania’s skilled woodcraftsmen had their say over the unethical, self-perpetuating and uncontrolled smiling eco-rapists of Forestry Tasmania and its exploitative asian logging moguls.

Smiles of the asian woodchipper and Tasmanian soul seller

.

Based on the claim of ‘forestry certification’ legitimacy, Ta Ann has been locally encourage to build its second timber mill at rural Smithton in north-west Tasmania to supply emerging flooring ply/veneer markets in Malaysia, Japan and China.

[Source: ^http://www.exportawards.gov.au/Resources/Case-Studies/Ta-Ann-Tasmania/default.aspx]

.

However, Tasmania’s forest campaigners Jenny Weber and Peg Putt have exposed Ta Ann Tasmania’s timber source to some of their customers in Japan, in alliance with Japanese forest campaign organisation JATAN. Meetings have been held with flooring manufacturer Panasonic Electric Works and Japan’s largest house building companies, Sekisui House and Daiwa House.

Huon Valley Environment Centre’s Jenny Weber with International Forests and Climate campaigner and former leader of the Tasmanian Greens Peg Putt, also met with Japanese and international NGO’s who are focused on forest protection, whilst visiting Japan. A media conference was held in Tokyo.

‘Huon Valley Environment Centre released a report in October that exposes Ta Ann has sourced timber in Tasmania from world heritage value, old growth and high conservation value forests. Ta Ann and their Japanese partner claim that their timber from Tasmania is only sourced from plantations and regrowth forests. Our message to the customers of Ta Ann was that the source of the company’s timber has been misrepresented,’ Huon Valley Environment Centre’s Jenny Weber said.

Companies such as Panasonic Electric Works, Sekisui House and Daiwa House have set goals to procure environmentally friendly timber, whose production does not contribute to large scale logging, nor harm biodiversity or the climate.

‘Informing these companies about the ecologically destructive logging practices in Tasmania and the reality that Ta Ann is sourcing timber from old growth, world heritage value and high conservation value forests was a shock to the companies who believe the timber source is environmentally friendly, who had been misled and in some cases thought that Ta Ann’s veneer was plantation grown,’ Jenny Weber said.

‘Even worse Ta Ann is standing in the way of full protection of 572,000 hectares identified for reservation in the Intergovernmental Agreement on Tasmania’s forests, and this company is implicated in environmental and human rights abuses in Sarawak. It was important to inform Japanese customers of the potential reputational damage involved in their relationship with Ta Ann,’ Peg Putt said.

‘Ta Ann in Tasmania is now going to be a focus of our campaign, following our successful collaboration with Australia NGO’s over the woodchip trade between Tasmania and Japan. I have visited forests in Tasmania that have been logged for Ta Ann in Tasmania, and witnessed the forest destruction on many occasions,’ said Akira Harada of JATAN.

[Source: ‘Tasmania’s forest campaign goes global – Ta Ann Exposed to Customers in Japan, 20111015, Huon Valley Environment Centre, Tasmania]

.

Forestry Tasmania Coupe HA045E was Eucalypt old growth

Ta Ann received timber from this coupe, which therefore annuls its ‘Sustainable Timber’ Certification

Read the Huon Valley Environment Centre’s 2011 Report: ^http://bit.ly/mRlUbs

.

The Huon Valley Environment Centre’s 2011 Report needs to be investigated by the Forestry Stewardship Council (FSC) Australia with the support of the Australian Government, because the report calls into question the credibility of Australia’s timber exports having a certification chain-of-custody. If the Huon Valley Environment Centre’s report is true, and there is no doubt that it isn’t, then Ta Ann’s business model is relying upon a fraud, meaning its entire market risks unraveling, along with the 120 or so Tasmanian timber jobs it supposedly supports.

FSC certification and labeling is supposed to guarantee to end consumers that such timber products and materials have been harvested, processed and manufactured in a sustainable fashion – complying with sound forest management standards and principals. The FSC label is the gold standard in forest management and sustainable wood products.

FSC products are denoted by the FSC label. The right to use this label on a product means that a company must comply with all of the FSC requirements for management and operations. The requirements set forth by the FSC are based on 10 principles and 56 criteria.

The principles that guide FSC certification are as follows:

Principle 1. Compliance with all applicable laws and international treaties
Principle 2. Demonstrated and uncontested, clearly defined, long–term land tenure and use rights
Principle 3. Recognition and respect of indigenous peoples’ rights
Principle 4. Maintenance or enhancement of long-term social and economic well-being of forest workers and local communities and respect of worker’s rights in compliance with International Labour Organisation (ILO) conventions
Principle 5. Equitable use and sharing of benefits derived from the forest
Principle 6. Reduction of environmental impact of logging activities and maintenance of the ecological functions and integrity of the forest
Principle 7. Appropriate and continuously updated management plan
Principle 8. Appropriate monitoring and assessment activities to assess the condition of the forest, management activities and their social and environmental impacts
Principle 9. Maintenance of High Conservation Value Forests (HCVFs) defined as environmental and social values that are considered to be of outstanding significance or critical importance
Principle 10. In addition to compliance with all of the above, plantations must contribute to reduce the pressures on and promote the restoration and conservation of natural forests.
.

FSC Chain of Custody Certification

Chain of custody (CoC) certification allows manufacturers who process and trade in timber and other non-timber forest materials to trace and account for the FSC certified wood in their products. Companies with FSC CoC certification can label products with the FSC label if they comply with the standards.

[Source: ^http://www.green3dhome.com/GoGreen/FSCCertificationandLabeling.aspx]

Gardening guru Peter Cundall prepared to be arrested for Tasmanian Principle

to defend Tasmania’s Forests and Tasmania’s democracy protesting against a pulp mill.

(19 Nov 2009)

Watch on You Tube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVRhUtJBjxc

.

If the Huon Valley Environment Centre’s report is true then it would mean that Forestry Tasmania is complicit in Sustainable Timber Certification fraud and it would make Australia’s Emerging Exporter Award a joke.

Australia’s Emerging Exporter Award is a national Australian programme jointly run by The Australian Trade Commission (Austrade) and the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI), which recognises and honours exporters who have achieved sustainable export growth through innovation and commitment. It celebrates and highlights the valuable contribution that exporters make to Australia’s economy, and encourages other companies to engage in international business. The programme objectives even states that it is to ‘promote Australia’s leading exporters to the same status and public recognition as sporting and entertainment heroes’. So Ta Ann is up there with Donald Bradman?

But Ta Ann Tasmania is a Malaysian multinational corporation and all profit go to overseas to its Malaysian logging mogul, Abdul Hamed Sepawi. Ta Ann, has not only been destroying rainforests in Sarawak but has been invited to pillage Tasmanian old growth Eucalypt forests by yours truly, Forestry Tasmania. So how can this venture be beneficial for Australia except for the so-called ‘export revenue’ making government export performance look good on paper?

‘Ta Ann is the biggest hardwood timber company in the world in terms of market capitalization. It has been able to achieve this through its close ties with the corrupt Chief Minister of Sarawak, Abdul Taib, whose vast wealth and power has been amassed through the strategic distribution of timber concessions. Taib is also finance minister and planning and resource management minister.

Earlier this month (March 2011) , the European NGO “Bruno Manser Fonds” (founded by the Swiss activist of Bruno Manser who lived in the jungle with the Penan from 1984 to 1990 and shared their struggle before mysteriously disappearing in Sarawak in 2000) released a blacklist of 49 companies in 8 countries (10 of them based in Australia) and is urging anti-corruption and anti-money laundering authorities in these countries to investigate any improprieties.

This is being reported in the Malaysian press as follows: “According to Malaysia’s Democratic Action Party (DAP), Taib has failed to account for a staggering 4.8 billion Malaysian ringgits (1.58 billion US dollars) of Sarawak state funds over the past three years alone. In 2007, the Tokyo tax authorities uncovered a massive corruption scheme that involved the payment of kickbacks to the Taib family. In return, nine Japanese shipping companies had received export licences to carry logs to Japan, Sarawak’s largest timber export market.” . And so on.

Ta Ann Holding’s chairman is Taib’s cousin, Abdul Hamed Sepawi. In 2008, Forbes listed Sepawi as the 30th richest man in Malaysia. Ta Ann holds 408,366 hectares of timber concessions, including the Raplex and Pasin timber concessions, which were previously controlled by Taib. They are also heavily engaged in the establishment of industrial tree plantations and oil palm plantations on Native Customary Land In Malaysia.

As Tasmania’s main newspaper, The Mercury reported on Sat Nov 8 2008 p11: “Ta Ann was lured to Tasmania by the cheap timber price offered by Forestry Tasmania. Ta Ann chairman Datuk Hamed Sepawi told Tasmanian media in 2006 that hardwood from this state was cheaper than wood from Malaysian and Indonesian forests…. Ta Ann’s deal with the State Government locked in the price it would pay for the timber at the 2006 level for the next 15 years.”

Ta Ann has a wood supply contract for 265,000 m3 a year. It is estimated that Ta Ann is paying approximately US$50 per cubic meter for these logs at a fixed price and then selling the product for US$387 per cubic meter.’

[Source: The Southern Forests Convergence: Conservation in Tasmania’ by John Seed, <Living Green Magazine, ^http://www.livinggreenmag.com/archives/climate_nature/southern_forests.html]

.

The Huon Valley Environment Centre and Still Wild Still Threatened are Tasmanian grassroots conservation organisations committed to ending logging in Tasmania’s old-growth forests.

“Our organisations are committed to continuing the campaign to call for the immediate protection of all native forests in Tasmania, including a moratorium on the globally significant high-conservation-value forests and a swift transition out of native forest logging in Tasmania.” ~ Jenny Weber
.

Three protests were held around Hobart yesterday (26th March 2011) as part of the 10-day vigil by the Huon Valley Environment Centre and Still Wild Still Threatened groups to stop logging in old-growth forests.

Four protesters were arrested outside the Ta Ann Hobart office yesterday morning during a sit-in demonstration against Ta Ann’s alleged illegal activity in Sarawak.

[Source: ‘Police anger over protest‘, by Brian Ward, Hobart Mercury, 20110326, ^http://www.themercury.com.au/article/2011/03/26/217591_tasmania-news.html]

.

Tasmanian protests ongoing to save Tasmanian Forests

Ta Ann’s mill at Smithton

This morning, grassroots forest groups the Huon Valley Environment Centre, Still Wild Still Threatened and Code Green have taken action at the Ta Ann veneer mill in Smithton. Twelve conservationists entered the site at 6am and two activists are locked on to machinery, halting operations. The protestors are displaying a banner reading ‘Ta Ann terminating Tasmanian forests‘.

Ta Ann’s mill carved into the forests in Tasmania’s Huon Valley

.

This action takes place in response to Ta Ann’s role in blocking a solution for Tasmania’s forests. Grassroots environment groups are raising concerns over yesterday’s Intergovernmental Agreement on forest.

“We are aware of Ta Ann’s shocking environmental and human rights practices in Sarawak and we are raising the question to the State and Federal government – why is this exploitative Malaysian company allowed to continue destroying our forests and threaten Tasmania’s chance to move forward to a sustainable industry?” said Code Green spokesperson, Joanna Pinkiewicz.

“Yesterday’s agreement guarantees Ta Ann’s contract until at least 2027.

This Malaysian logging giant has a deplorable record in (Indonesia’s) Sarawak and are now entrenching large scale clear felling of native forests in Tasmania”

~ Huon Valley Environment Centre spokesperson Jenny Weber.

“The intergovernmental Agreement leaves open over 140,000 hectares of identified high conservation value forest to potential logging. Contracts with companies such as Ta Ann could jeopardise the future protection of high conservation value forests, with further reductions to the reserve area still on the table” said Still Wild Still Threatened spokesperson Miranda Gibson.

“While we look forward to seeing high conservation value forests protected, the real hurdles are yet to come. This agreement is a first step that has not yet guaranteed formal protection of these forests, that is long overdue” said Ms Weber.

[Source: ‘Ta Ann Mill Shut Down‘, 201108122, ^http://hornbillunleashed.wordpress.com/2011/08/12/22368/]

.

Tasmania’s Weld Valley – being logged by Ta Ann

(Photo by Rob Blakers)

http://www.water-sos.org/rob-blakers4.html

.

Human Plea

.

Tags: 572000 hectares, Abdul Hamed Sepawi, Chain of Custody certification, Daiwa, eco-rapists, Emerging Exporter Award, Forestry Stewardship Council, Forestry Tasmania, FSC International, Huon Valley Environment Centre, Intergovernmental Agreement, JATAN, log and flog Tasmanian Rorests, old growth forest, Panasonic Electric Works, Peter Cundall, Sarawak, Sekisui, Ta Ann Tasmania
Posted in Kalimantan (ID), Tasmania (AU), Threats from Deforestation, Threats to Wild Tasmania | 1 Comment »

Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg

One Response to “Ta Ann greenwashing and destroying Tasmania”

Jon Perrett says:

November 26th, 2011 at 11:29 am

People like Jenny Weber and Peg Putt and other environmental crusaders are the heros of our age.
Ta ann and other international logging companies that purposely exploit the system and lie about their activities and the ignorant Government agencies that support them will go down in history as the great destroyers of our age.
To those that expose Ta ann and their activitites, myself and my family thank you.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

The Stihl Saw Nutter of Tasmanian Forests

October 21st, 2011

Stihl Concrete Saw

Stihl Saw Nutter – contracted with Forestry Tasmania, October 2008

(Click photo above to play video in YouTube, turn up your PC volume)

.

Stihl President – Fred Whyte

(Billings Gazette)

.

In September 2010, Fred J. Whyte, president of STIHL Inc., was elected chairman of the Outdoor Power Equipment Institute (OPEI) during the association’s 58th annual meeting in Coeur D’Alene, Idaho.

“I am honored to again represent STIHL and the outdoor power equipment industry as chairman of the OPEI board,” said Whyte.

“In this next year, we hope to accomplish a lot, especially in the realm of educating the public on the safe and efficient use of outdoor power equipment. We are seeing gains in the market, which should be welcome news to all OPEI members. Let’s hope we return to our market prosperity with new sustainable programs and products that will lead us into the next generation.”

[Source: Stihl USA, ^http://www.stihlusa.com/pressrelease/september10_FJWOPEI_corporate.aspx]

.

Two years prior (2006) …’Defending Tasmania’s ancient forest’

[Source: Tasmanian Times, 20061106, ^http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/article/defending-tasmanias-ancient-forest/ ]

‘This week has marked a new chapter in the defence of Tasmania’s ancient forests with 17 arrests in the Weld Valley, Southern Tasmania.The arrests occured whilst community members were trying to prevent an access road that will allow the chainsaws into majestic ancient forests.The Weld Valley has now become one of the largest resistance campaigns for Tasmania’s forests in the last decade. Community outrage at this senseless devastation is challenging the Tasmanian and Australian governments to give these wilderness forests the protection they deserve.

For more than a year, forest defenders built and lived in a beautiful conservation haven that worked to hold the chainsaws and bulldozers at bay. Camp Weld, had a full size replica Pirate ship (the Weld Ark), a bush cabin and the entire infrastructure needed to provide shelter and support to friends of the forest. The camp had a village style atmosphere and was open to all comers who wanted to help the forests in their plight. Camp Weld members faced not only the hostility of the weather, the driving rain, winter dark and snow but also the very real hostility and threats from logging industry supporters.

‘Through the year, Camp Weld faced gun shots, car burnings and physical threats from loggers coming directly into camp.’

All this was greeted with the strength and commitment of non-violent action and this peaceful response is a testament to the bravery and beauty of the people who lived there.

On Wed 15th November 2006, more than 60 Police raided the camp with one immediate arrest and a lone tree-sitter escaping to her lofty perch.Everyone else was ordered to leave or face arrest under a new media and public exclusion zone placed around a 10 kilometre radius of this state owned forest. For the next 6 days a set of rolling actions began and continue, flowing from the anger at the loss of such a direct action icon and the coming loss of these wondrous forests. People climbed tree-sits, stood in front of machines and some forest defenders locked theselves on to machinery. These actions occurred day after day as the arrest tally climbed to the present 17.

For 5 days, the lone tree sitter ‘Pixie’ sat in her high platform watching the events unfold..

Two other forest defenders spent nights in jail as Police used legal tactics to try and prevent the arrestees from returning to the forests. The Tasmanian government has funded this operation to secure access for Gunns Ltd, providing large numbers of police, security, a 24 hour mobile operations base and satellite communications equipment, all to ensure that the bulldozers get into the forest. Yet despite these obstacles people continue to challenge the destruction in a peaceful and defiant manner.

.

Classic non-violent style

On two separate occasions, a community walk in was staged to defy the archaic exclusion zone created on public land. The first walk in had 40 people, the second over 100. These were great days for the forests as smiling people walked past security and police, in classic non-violent style. The strength in numbers meant that the police were unable to implement the exclusion zone procedures, which involves individually approaching each person in the zone. The veil over this hideous environmental crime had been lifted.This type of protest has occurred because of the continued failure of the Regional Forest Agreement (RFA) and the subsequent Community Forest Agreement, which were set up under the pretence to solve the forest debate in Tasmania. In fact, things in the forest have gotten worse, roads continue to be cut into high conservation value forests and logging is planned for many high conservation value forests and wilderness areas across the state. A downturn in the woodchip market has not deterred the world largest hardwood woodchipper, Gunns Ltd from continuing their devastation of the island’s wildlife and trees. Their aggressive response to criticism is to sue conservationists and environmental groups with a blanket multi-million dollar civil case.This almost billion dollar company and its $65million man, John Gay, have a strangle hold on the states politicians and its old growth forests.

The Weld Valley is a shining example of places ignored by the chainsaw mandate of the RFA; it is an ancient forested valley of towering trees, moss filled rainforest gullies, snow-capped mountains, wide plains, crystal clear streams and wild Weld river. The original Tasmanians wandered this valley some 20,000 years ago evidence of their lives still remain in the national park protected ‘Bone Cave’ in the upper Weld. The potential for more sites or caves remains unexplored in much of the logging slated lower Weld Valley. While some 80% is protected in the South West World Heritage Area, the remaining forests suffer a very different fate to those separated by the imaginary protection line.

These remaining forests of the lower Weld Valley have been recognized by local and international environmental groups, the United Nations and even Tasmania’s Parks and Wildlife as having equal conservation status to the rest of the valley. Viewed as a single wilderness area, the Weld Valley is a unique landform which has a rare combination of outstanding biological, geological and cultural features naturally linked by continuous forest to the World Heritage Area.
Direct action has always been an area of last resort for conservationist. Brave and often reluctant heroes staff this front line with sometimes little more than their own bodies. Placing lives on hold and committing all for the forests. Basing actions on non-violent principles, that has served people and social movements like Gandhi, the Suffragettes, the Civil Rights struggle and our own Franklin River campaign. As long as companies like Gunns Ltd are allowed, by governments, to ignore community concern and run rampant through our ancient forests with chainsaws and bulldozers then there will always be people willing to stand in their defence.’
.
[Adam Burling is a founding member of the Huon Valley Environment Centre, a part time advisor to Senator Bob Brown and a Gunns 20 defendant.]

.

Tags: activists, Camp Weld, Caterpillar, Community Forest Agreement, Direct action, forester violence, Forestry Tasmania, Fred Whyte, Logging, Martin Bryant, old growth forest, Outdoor Power Equipment Institute, stihl chainsawing old-growth, STIHL Inc., Stihl President, Stihl Saw, Stihl Saw Nutter, Stihl woodchipping old growth, Tasmanian Police, Weld Valley, William Adams, World Heritage Area, www.stihlusa.com
Posted in Tasmania (AU), Threats from Deforestation, Threats to Wild Tasmania | No Comments »

Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Habitat Topics

Recommended Links

Action Bioscience

Activists Rights

African Wild Dog Conservancy

African Wildlife Foundation

Amazon Rainforest

Ancient Forest Alliance

Animal Defenders International

Animal Info. on Endangered Animals

Animal Justice Party

Antarctic Ocean Alliance

Arid Lands Environment Centre

ARKive (endangered species)

Australia World Heritage List (UNESCO)

Australia's Threatened Species

Australian Conservation Foundation

Australian Fauna.com

Australian Geographic

Australian Native Plant Society

Australian Paper Watch

Australian Platypus Conservancy

Australian Registry of Wildlife Health

Australian Seabird Rescue

Australian Stable Population Party

Australian Student Environment Network

Australian Wildlife Carers Network

Australian Wildlife Conservancy

Australians for Animals

Badger Protection League

Badger Trust

Badger Watch and Rescue

Bagheera (Endangered species)

Ballaarat Wildlife Park

Biodiversity International

Birdlife Australia

Birdlife International

Birdwatch Ireland

Blue Marine Foundation

Blue Mountains Bird Observers

Blue Mountains Birding

Blue Mountains Conservation Society

Blue Mountains Wildplant Rescue Service

Bob Irwin Wildlife Fund

Bookend Trust

Born Free Foundation

Borneo Orangutan Survival Foundation

Botanical Gardens Conservation International

Buffalo Field Campaign

Buffalo Field Campaign blog

Bush Heritage Australia

Bush Warriors

Butterfly Conservation

Cairns and Far North Environment Centre

California Gray Whale Coalition

Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society

Cat Action Treasury

Cave Hill Conservation Campaign

Center for Earth Jurisprudence

Center for Plant Conservation

Chipstop

CITES

Coalition Against Duck Shooting

Code Green Tasmania

Colong Foundation for Wilderness

Conservation Council ACT Region

Conservation Council of South Australia

Conservation Council of Western Australia

Conservation Evidence

Conservation International

Convention on Biodiversity

Cool Forests

CREO (recent extinctions)

Cruelty Free Shop (The)

CSIRO Publishing

Cybec Foundation

David Suzuki Foundation

Defenders for Wildlife

Defenders of Wildlife (savewolves)

Devils in Danger

Eaglehawk Wildlife Rehabilitation Centre

Earth Justice

Earthcare St Kilda Inc.

Earthwatch Institute Australia

Earthways

Earthways Foundation

ECO

Eco Ranger

Ecology Project International

Ecos Magazine

EDGE of Existence Programme

EnAct International

Endangered Species Link

Endangered Wildlife Trust

Environment East Gippsland

Environment Institute ANZ

Environment Tasmania

Environment Victoria

Environmental Defenders Offices

Environmental Defense Fund

Environmental Law Foundation

Environs Kimberley

Essex Badger Protection Group

Ethical Paper

Eurobodalla Regional Botanic Gardens

F.A.M.E.

Fauna & Flora International

Film Makers for Conservation

Florentine Protection Society Inc.

Forest and Bird

Forest Media

Forest Network

Forest Peoples Programme

Forest Policy Research

Forest Protection Portal

Forest Rescue

Foundation for Critical Thinking

Foundation for National Parks and Wildlife

Foundation for Rabbit-Free Australia

Four Paws International

Friends of Five Forests

Friends of Narrabeen Lagoon Catchment

Friends of the Box-Ironbark Forests

Friends of the Earth (UK)

Friends of the Earth Australia

Gilbert's Potoroo Action Group

Ginninderra Catchment Group

Global Raptor Information Network

Global Trees Campaign

Goongerah Environment Centre

Great Barrier Reef Blog

Green Belt Movement

Greenpeace Australia

Gunns 20 Case

Habitat Destruction

Habitat Network

Hancock Watch

Hawk Mountain Sanctuary

Healesville Sanctuary

Help for Wildlife

Herts and Middlesex Badger Group

Humane Society International

Huon Valley Environment Centre

Iberia Nature

Indigenous Flora and Fauna Association

Inland Rivers Network

Institute of Wildlife Research

International Anti Poaching Foundation

International Fund for Animal Welfare

Intl Community of Ecopsychology

Intl Union for Conservation of Nature

Invasive Species Council

IUCN Red List of Threatened Species

Kakapo Recovery

Kanuguba

Keep the Habitat

Kew Gardens

Keystone Conservation

Kimberley (Save the Kimberley)

Kimberley Wildlife Carers and Associates

Kimberley Wildlife Rescue

Lake Pedder Restoration Committee

Lawyers for Forests

Leicestershire & Rutland Wildlife Trust

Linnean Society of London

Markets for change

Mass Extinctions

Melbourne Water Catchment Network

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

Molonglo Catchment Group

Moon Bears (Korea)

My Environment

National Birds of Prey Trust

National Geographic

National Geographic Network

National Geographic Wild

National Institute for Amazonian Research

National Parks Association of NSW

National Parks Conservation Assoc.

Native Forest Action

Native Forest Network

Native Forests

Natural Edge Project

Natural History Museum

Natural Resources Defense Council

Nature

Nature and Society Forum

Nature Conservation Council of NSW

Nature Conservation Trust

Nature's Crusaders

Naturschutzbund Deutschland

Nepenthes (defending rainforest)

North East Forests Alliance

NZ Birds

NZ Ecological Restoration Network

NZ Ecological Society

NZ Native Forests Restoration Trust

NZ Trust for Conservation

Observer Tree

Orangutan Foundation International

Otway Ranges Environment Network

Our Common Ground (Tasmania)

Photos and Feathers

Preserve Our Islands

Primate Info Net

Purves Environmental Fund

Queensland Conservation Council

Quercus

Race Against Extinction

Rainforest Action Network

Rainforest Rescue

Rainforests (mongabay global website)

RAMSAR Convention on Wetlands

Raptor & Wildlife Refuge of Tasmania Inc.

Rhino Resource Center

Rising Tide Australia

Royal Forest & Bird Protection Society

Royal Society for the Protection of Birds

Sahara Conservation Fund

Save America's Forests

Save Biogems

Save Ralph's Bay Inc.

Save the Badger

Save the Blue Tier

Save the Cassowary

Save the Kimberley

Save the Koala

Save the South Sister

Save the Tasmanian Devil Program

Saving Rhinos

Saving Species

Sea Shepherd

Sierra Club

Sierra Forest Legacy

Six Degrees

Smithsonian Museum (Natural History)

Society for Conservation Biology

Society of Wildlife Artists

South East Forest Rescue

South East Region Conservation Alliance

Southern ACT Catchment Group

Still Wild Still Threatened

Strait 4 Devils

Sussex Wildlife Trust

Ta Ann

Taiga Rescue Network

Tarkine National Coalition

Taronga Conservation Society Australia

Tasmanian Conservation Trust Inc.

Tasmanian Land Conservancy

Tasmanians Against the Pulp Mill Inc.

Terra Nature

The Central Highlands Alliance

The Change Agency

The Forest Activist Network

The Forest History Society

The Kerulos Center

The Kimberley Toadbusters

The Last Stand

The Last Tree

The Monkey Sanctuary

The Nature Conservancy

The Rainforest Information Centre

The Wild Foundation

The Wilderness Society

THINKK

Tigers in Crisis

Total Environment Centre

TRAFFIC (wildlife trade)

Tree Council (Ireland)

Tree Council (UK)

Tree Project

Trees for Life

Trees Not Gunns

Trust for Nature

UN Environment Programme

UN FAO on Global Forests

UNESCO World Heritage

University of Ulster (Natural Science)

Vegan Society (The)

Victorian Rainforest Network

Voiceless

Vulturejam

W.I.R.E.S.

Water S.O.S. Tasmania

Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists

Western Alliance for Nature

Western Wolves

Wielangta Forest

Wild Futures

Wilderness Truths

Wildlife Art Society of Australasia

Wildlife Australia

Wildlife Conservation Society

Wildlife Mismanagement

Wildlife New Zealand

Wildlife Preservation Society of Australia

Wildlife Protection Association of Australia

Wildlife Trust of South and West Wales

Wildlife Victoria

Wildscreen

Wolli Creek Protection Society

Wolves and Humans Foundation

Wombat Awareness Organisation Ltd

Woodland Trust

World Commission on Protected Areas

World Database on Protected Areas

World Land Trust

World Rainforest Movement

World Society for the Protection of Animals

World Wildlife Fund

WWF New Zealand

.

.

.

.

.

Leave a Reply

.

.

Rhino Horn is not medicine – chew your nails instead. Go and see a real doctor!

.

.

Further Reading:

.

Leave a Reply

.

.

.

.

Further Reading:

.

Leave a Reply

.

‘Besides the slaughter of Australia’s iconic kangaroos for pet meat and indeed export for human consumption in fancy restaurant,

it is the sanitary conditions that is shocking and a life threatening time bomb’

.

‘The carcasses are packed as tightly as possible.

They hang from hooks by their legs,

their heads and tails missing,

gaping rents where their stomachs once were,

leg muscles tensed visibly;

severed necks poke into gut cavities;

hundreds of paws hang in a grisly reach towards the bloody floor.

According to their tags,

they’re four days dead.’

.

.

‘Kangaroo harvesting under the spotlight’

.

Hygiene fears

.

.

Would you eat this animal?

.

.

‘It sure ain’t Easy being Green! About the Kangaroo Coalition coordinator!’

‘It’s a poor farm that can’t sustain a few kangaroos.’

.

.

Further Reading:

.

.

Leave a Reply

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

1080 is immoral

.

A Slow & Horrific Death

.

.

.

Victoria following Tasmania’s backward example

.

.

South Australia following Tasmania’s backward example

.

.

Further Reading:

.

Leave a Reply

.

.

.

.

.

Swamps on Newnes Plateau provide critical habitat for the endangered Blue Mountains Water Skink