This article was initially published by Tigerquoll 20090623 on CanDoBetter.net in the aftermath of the devastating Victorian bushfires that climaxed on 7th February 2009:

.

Standby Bombardier 415’s strategically placed during Australian summers – a clear advantage over road-limited fire trucks

– but try telling Australia state governments at budget time and they only cry poor.

But then state government bushfire response record is littered with recurring tragedy and failure – Victoria, Canberra, Perth Hills, Blue Mountains, Eyre Peninsula…

.

We need to dig deeper if we are serious about the bushfire threat, and this doesn’t mean just more charity to prop up the existing but failing system, as Prime Minister Rudd seems to perpetuate. This goes beyond the Victorian Bushfires. Under-resourcing is a fundamental problem with Australian bushfire management nationally.

The bushfire problem is only going to get worse given the trend toward hotter summers, prolonged droughts, climate change, arsonists and millions of houses now situated in bushfire prone areas. The answer is not to destroy vast swathes of bushland, which embers jump anyway sometimes spotting beyond 10km ahead of a fire front.

Detection, response and suppression are the measures of firefighting success criteria. Yet to adequately perform these, current bushfire management remains chronically under-resourced by all levels of government across Australia.

A fleet of Bombardier 415s (formerly Canadair CL-415) is a cost effective proactive investment in bushfire response and without doubt preferable to the $2 billion economic cost of Victoria’s 2009 bushfire catastrophe, ‘after the fact’.

.

Check this out:   ^http://www.aerospace-technology.com/projects/bombardier_415/bombardier_4152.html

Airborne Bushfire Fighting is proven effective

But do Australian bushfire fighters reject such effective airborne options because (1) they seem overkill?,(2) because of  prejudice against American/Canadian tech solutions?,

(3) State Government budget is so limited as to make them fanciful? (4) volunteer fire truck drivers can’t fly them so see their roles threatened?

In the most dangerous bushfire scenarios  – remote ignitions – which is more effective fire trucks or these magnificent machines?

Airborne and ground force attack are not mutually exclusive; as in the military, they are critically interdependent.

.

But also more manoeuvrable water-bombing rotary-wing aircraft like the Erikson Aircrane plus the dropping in of RAFT crews also deserve consideration particularly in rugged terrain, where Bombardiers would not be able to achieve water-bombing runs low enough to be effective.

Remote Ignitions:  Prompt airborne suppression simply works!

.

The cultural problem is that bushfire management is typically fire-truck centric in its thinking, planning and response. And beware of pollies and their devoted fans lobbying red herrings and porkies to try to stimie investigation into these options, when really the debate is simply one of cost.But research needs to precede any investment.

A fire truck moves away from out of control flames from a bushfire in the Bunyip Sate Forest near the township of Tonimbuk, 125 kilometers (78 miles) west of Melbourne, Saturday, Feb. 7, 2009.  Walls of flame roared across southeastern Australia, razing scores of homes, forests and farmland in the sunburned country’s worst wildfire disaster in a quarter century. (Source:  AP Photo, ^http://archive.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/02/bushfires_in_victoria_australi.html)

 

Fire trucks exposed to remote wildfire?  What OH&S standard would permit this operation outside volunteer rural fire fighting?

.

Australia’s peak bushfire research organisation, Bushfire CRC, in its August 2006 report on the merits of aerial suppression made the following key findings:

.

• Aerial suppression can be effective in providing support to ground crews and improving the probability of first attack success by 50 percent or more. (so relies on fast detection of ignitions)
• For an aircraft to provide effective assistance it must be available at call, rapidly dispatched with minimal travel time and with logistical systems in place.
• Air operations effectively integrated into the incident management structure and competent personnel are needed to be available to direct the operations for good outcomes.
• The use of ground resources with initial aerial support is the most economically efficient approach to suppression.
• The use of aircraft for first attack until ground resources reach the fire produces the best suppression outcome.
• Large fixed wing air tankers such as a DC 10 are at a cost disadvantage. This is particularly the case for first attack when fires are small and where water drop accuracy is required.  (…But no-one could argue that Victoria is now at a cost disadvantage without them..the economic bill alone is $2 Billion, which excludes the psychological, social and ecological costs).

Standby Bombardier must be a first strike capability for bushfire fighting

…they are part of the performance solution, not the solution.

.

The airborne response to ignition suppression is just one strategy.  The bushfire management solution is complex.  To be effective in preventing a repeat of Victoria’s tragic and disgraceful 7-Feb-09, demands massive public investment and organisation at a level only national resources can muster.  Don’t deny the legacy of Victoria’s 173 bushfire victims to be remembered as a recurring Armistice Day.  It is unacceptable for governments to dismiss bushfire deaths as a fate of nature.

.

 

~ Tigerquoll, licensed commercial helicopter pilot, Suggan Buggan, Victoria.

.

Ash Wednesday Bushfires in 1983 – approaching Anglesea on Victoria’s Great Ocean Road, Australia

.

 

This article was initially published by Tigerquoll 20090622 on CanDoBetter.net in the aftermath of the devastating Victorian bushfires that climaxed on 7th February 2009, quickly branded by the media as ‘Black Saturday‘:

Ultimate responsibility at the time – Victorian Premier Brumby and Australian Prime Minister Rudd

(and tomorrow is Armistice Day when nearly a hundred years ago people questioned…

‘Ultimate Responsibility‘)

.

The Victorian Premier Brumby’s Royal Commission into the January-February 2009 bushfires is a mere incident review. If Victoria is to be protected from firestorms in future, it should undertake a root cause analysis, including the numerous past investigations into bushfires, with a view to achieving a cultural shift in rural fire fighting methods, resourcing and emergency management and into ecology management, housing approvals in bushfire prone areas, building design in bushfire prone areas, bush arson criminology and into serious resourcing of rural fire management.

Indeed, given the repeated history of bushfires across Australia and the repeated uncontrolled nature of many of these leading to extensive property damage, the loss of thousands of livestock, widespread ecological destruction, the human lives lost and injuries, and the massive costs incurred every year, the scope of the enquiry should be escalated to a national level.

But the Victorian Commission’s terms of reference focuses on the immediate causes and circumstances of the 2009 Victorian Bushfires. It focuses on the immediate management, response and recovery. This is a start, but the real start occurred in 1939 with the shock of Black Friday. It lead to the Stretton Enquiry, but many large and damaging firestorms have occurred since – so the Stretton Enquiry showed that lessons were either ignored or the application of those lessons were ineffective. The Esplin Inquiry of 2003 identified striking parallels between 1939 and 2002-3 bushfires. Now we have the 2009 Bushfires, but each investigation is disconnected from the previous one, almost as if to intentionally ignore history and any prior lessons learnt. Interstate and overseas, many major bushfires and their subsequent investigations have amassed research, insight and lessons. Why limit the investigation to one event?

Incident investigation will uncover causes and flaws and will likely make specific recommendations in the hope of preventing similar incidents. But root cause analysis goes beyond identifying the symptoms of a problem. But the Commission has not started with identifying the problem.

1. Let’s premise that at the core is the problem of preventing ignitions becoming firestorms.
2. What are the causes of uncontrolled ignitions in the bush.
3. Where are they typically lit?
4. How are ignitions detected by fire authorities?
5. What is the time lapse between ignition and detection?
6. What is the time lapse between detection and response and eventual suppression?
7. Which causes and interventions would mitigate the risk of these ignitions developing into uncontrollable firestorms?
8. Are the ignition detection tools adequate?
9. Are the communications tools adequate?
10. Do we have the right tools and trained personnel in the right places to effectively respond?
11. Is the entire detection, response and suppression system sufficiently integrated to deal with multiple ignitions in extreme conditions across the State at the same time? How would this be achieved?
12. What budget would be required to have such resources and technology in place to achieve this standard?
13. Is the problem indeed too big for Victoria by itself to adequately deal with and so is the problem in fact a national one?
14. How would a satisfactory solution be achieved without causing other problems like ecological damage and local wildlife extinctions?

.

Then implement the recommendations and scientifically monitor their effectiveness.

However, the Commission is looking at what caused the specific ignitions, what damage the specific bushfires caused and specific responses. It will conclude what specifically should have been done in these specific incidents. It will lead to a blame game that will solve nothing. Subsequent ignitions if not predicted, detected, responded to and suppressed to prevent firestorms, will likely have different circumstances in different locations. So how will the problem have been solved by this royal commission?

.

---

.

What about the affected people up in the Bush?

.

Horror, shock, helplessness, anger, loss – loved ones, family, next door neighbours, familiar faces gone.  Then there’s financial loss, bank issues – sympathy first but  then demands, threats and ambivalence.  This is whole livelihoods.  It is devastation.  The initial trauma (community and personal), plus the ongoing trauma (community and personal).

Governments do the obligatory media spin, but as months pass they move on to other priorities.  But the people don’t – whether they end up staying or going, the trauma stays.

This was absolutely catastrophic!  Catastrophic!   No-one can prepare or recover as easy as Government claims.  What is ‘moving on’?

This is War Reparations league!   A war hit here and ordinary people were simply living their ordinary lives in the bush.  Another token bushfire enquiry without bushfire reform is repugnant, ignorant and callous.  How will the Victorian Royal Commission prevent bushfire history repeating itself?

If our society could cope before, we may accept fate.  But knowing the extreme risk in February 2009 and now, fate is no excuse. It is wrong for government to pursue bushfire management nonchalant business-as-usual in Victoria… in Australia.

.

---

.

Footnote

.

My uncle and aunt lost their family home down at Angelsea during the 1983 Ash Wednesday bushfires.   They weren’t insured.  Though they escaped with their lives, they lost everything else.  Thereon they were never really quite the same. They became refugees in their home community.

Anglesea Dreaming – a recollection of one’s youth and holidays

.

 

.

This article was initially published by Tigerquoll 20090620 on CanDoBetter.net in the aftermath of the devastating Victorian bushfires that climaxed on 7th February 2009, quickly branded by the media as ‘Black Saturday‘:

.

Children’s play equipment sits in front of a house destroyed by bushfire in Chum Creek

North Healesville, Victoria, Australia

[Photo: ABC]

.
Pursuing the ‘bunker solution‘ is a dead end that no government will underwrite – think of the risk of failure!

What has been avoided in this Victorian bushfire debate are the fire fighting statistics. Where are the fire fighting operational metrics showing the time between ignition and detection and response and suppression?

Is anyone considering the fundamental task of effective bush fire fighting as a key cause of this disaster? The operational metrics, if indeed collated, would be alarming to the general public. The unprecedented extreme risk of uncontrollable wildfires was known to fire fighting operations management, yet no extraordinary resources were deployed in advance. Hours, not minutes, lapsed between ignitions, detection and responses. As a consequence, suppressions via a tired old truck-centric response methodology was demonstrably grossly inadequate. CFA responses were absolute failures in the tactical response to the February 2009 Victorian Bushfires. The whole show descended into an incompetent stuff up which resorted to the worst case scenario – ‘every man for himself’.

Only vigilante fire response had a chance of working. Acceptable may be in 1909, but not in a sophisticated 2009 supported by millions in annual funding and research. The response at strategic management level was ‘Keystone Kops‘. The field response was like a tragic Gallipoli – a strategic blunder with good men sent in with too little, too late.

The Marysville community like others didn’t deserve official response approach of ‘too hard basket’ and abandonment. The result was incineration entrapment.

This is the lesson of the incompetence of the CFA, DSE and Emergency Management Australia.  An ignition started in the bush is not an uncontrollable tsunami. But in conditions like that in January 2009 in Victoria, an ignition and more so multiple ignitions become equivalent to a tsunami if conditions, delay and inadequate resources are a combined factors.

The systemic failure to deal with ‘before-the-fact’ (ignition) causes is just as vital in being effective at bush fire fighting. I am not talking about slashing and burning the Aussie bush like an ‘Agent Orange’ sortie over Vietnam to eliminate all threat and wildlife habitat. I am talking about grossly negligent housing approvals in extreme bushfire areas, about grossly negligent property owners building houses out of flammable materials and doing squat about bushfire preparedness, about governments at all levels that fail to prepare bushfire prone populations and that fail to effectively communicate emergency drills to protect their lives, and that fail to provide sufficient resources to stop bushfires killing people.

Police are only this week interviewing residents around Bendigo to try to identify the suspected arsonist of that fire – five months later as a one-off investigation. Why did Brumby wait 5 months to investigate? I wager the arsonist involved could have been detected well in advance had a co-ordinated permanent bush arson squad been established long ago complete with specialist criminologists, psychologists, experienced bush fire investigators, criminal investigators, etc and enough resources to allow them to do their job.

I have no time for political band-aids or government responses that invariably involve millions that do not address the root causes of the problem. The bush itself, as habitat to millions of Australian animals must first be respected as the mutual innocent victim. Bushphobic responses by fanatics calling for scorched earth blanket responses will only fuel greater ecological catastrophe.

.

---

.

Further Reading:

.

[1]   ‘Bushfire bunkers may be death traps’

.

[Source: ABC Radio ‘AM’ Programme adapted by Zoie Jones, 20090511, ^http://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-03-02/bushfire-bunkers-may-be-death-traps/1605846]

.
‘With firefighters on high alert in Victoria, some people in bushfire risk zones have decided to install fire bunkers on their properties.  But there are no regulations controlling the structures and there are concerns some of the fire shelters could be death traps.

Garrie Ferguson, who lives in the bushfire-prone Adelaide Hills, has started selling reinforced concrete water tanks as bushfire bunkers.

“If at the end of your street you only have one way in, one way out, you either run the fire in your car and risk getting killed, you either go back to your house and risk burning in there,” he said.  “Or risk the chance of hopping in underground to something that’s very well protected and try and outride it in there.”

For under $3,000 Mr Ferguson can install a concrete tank that fits six people and comes with metres of underground piping that holds reserve air.  He has sold 14 bunkers in the past two weeks.

“I do actually have a member of the metropolitan fire service that has bought one as well,” he said.

But Mr Ferguson cannot guarantee that people will be safe.  “I can’t guarantee anything at all. Somebody might put 12 people in it, use the oxygen supply and die,” he said.

Another option that some people are turning to, is to install a shipping container into the side of a hill.

Robert Caulfield from the Australian Institute of Architects warns against the temperatures that can be generated inside the containers and the possibility of running out of oxygen.

“It’s quite possible we could end up with fireproof shelters with people absolutely cooked inside it or get suffocated,” he said.  Mr Caulfield says during the bushfires three weeks ago shelters with steel roofs and similar features became glowing hot.

“It really needs a rigorous test on these sorts of things because once you get something generating that sort of heat it will also actually set up convection currents inside it, it can start fires inside the unit and so forth,” he said.

The institute is now calling for an urgent review and testing of the products being sold as fire bunkers.’

.

---

.

[2]   ‘Bushfire Bunkers Report’

.

by the Victorian Bushfire Royal Commission in its Final Report – Section 6.10 ‘Bushfire Bunkers’, p. 190^http://www.royalcommission.vic.gov.au/finaldocuments/volume-2/PF/VBRC_Vol2_Chapter06_PF.pdf]

.

‘In its second interim report the Commission expressed its concern about the lack of regulation for bunkers, the risks of misplaced reliance on bunkers, the demand for bunkers, and the widespread availability of bunker products. It tackled the clear and pressing need for a minimum standard to regulate the design, siting and construction of bunkers by recommending that the Australian Building Codes Board (ABCB) develop a standard as a matter of priority.

The Commission also made recommendations designed to ensure that, in Victoria and nationally, bunkers are regulated under building legislation and the standard developed by the ABCB is referenced as the minimum standard for construction of bunkers.
On 30 April 2010 the ABCB released a performance standard for private bushfire shelters; the standard is available free on the ABCB website. The ABCB advised the Commission that the 2011 edition of the Building Code of Australia will include bunkers and will reference the standard. In the meantime, the Commonwealth and the ABCB will continue to encourage all jurisdictions to adopt the bunker standard by means of interim regulations. On 28 May 2010 the Victorian Government adopted the standard through an amendment to the Building Regulations. The Commission commends this swift action to finalise and adopt the standard.’

.

---

.

[3]   ‘Fire Bunkers: Interim Regulations Released’

by Fire Protection Association of Australia, ^http://a.cdn.fpaa.com.au/docs/Fire%20Bunkers.pdf [Read Document]

.

---

.

[4]   ‘Bushfires Royal Commission makes early recommendations for fire bunker standards’

.

by Geraldine Mitchell, 20090921, ^http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/special-reports/early-guidelines-for-bushfire-bunkers/comments-fn4chuwg-1225777637531]

.

‘The bushfires Royal Commission will make early recommendations for building standards as Victorians rush to install bunkers and rebuild their homes in high- risk areas.  Commission chairman Bernard Teague has just announced the commission will not wait until the release of its final report next year to make the recommendations.

Commissioner Teague said evidence in relation to building standards indicated changes needed to be made before the next bushfire season.  He said recommendations would focus on the regulation of bushfire bunkers, changes to the new building standard and a revision of the Standards Australia handbook.  Further hearings will be held on Friday, October 30 and recommendations are expected to be released before the end of the year.  Last month the commission heard bushfire survivors rebuilding homes in ravaged areas were making risky decisions as officials wrangled over the best building standards.’

.

Comment by ‘Les’ 20090926:

‘As a base standard the existing bunkers or dug outs at Surrey Rd, Powelltown, or the intersection of Warburton to Woodspoint Rd and Rd 7 Upper Yarra, or on top of Mount Ritchie off Rd 10 in the O’Shannasy, should be looked at (being) maintained!  As to the base level add 10% to February 7th, and budget to maintain them, problems occur when Government Agencies start cutting maintenance costs because nothing has eventuated for 5 years.’

.

---

.

[5] ^Fire bunkers could have helped in the Victorian fires

.

[6]    ^How misconceptions about bushfire bunkers may cost lives

.

[7]    Wildfire Safety Bunkers, ^http://www.wildfiresafetybunkers.com.au/

.
[8]    ‘Death Trap or LifeSaver? ‘, ^http://www.firesheltersaustralia.com.au/media/Bushfire%20Shelters.pdf [Read Document]

.

[9]    ‘Bushfire Bunkers – A Summary of Products and Concepts‘, by the Royal Commission into the 2009 Victorian Bushfires,  [Read Report]

.

[10] ‘Bushfire survivor shares tale of escape‘, transcript of interview by ABC 7:30 Report, 20090212, ^http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2008/s2490128.htm [See video]

..

---

.

The following article is a selected summary of relevant information sourced from the Tasmania Times (TT) online newspaper from articles and reader comments (October 2011) concerning the revelation that Tasmanian Premier Lara Giddings unnecessarily paid $34.5 million of taxpayers money to industrial logger Gunns as compensation for it exiting native forestry.

 

Tasmanian Premier Lara Giddings (2011-  )

What will be her legacy ~ accountable and faithful to the people of Tasmania?

.

The Charge:

.

Previously secret communications between Gunns and Forestry Tasmania, obtained by the Liberals under Right to Information laws, blows a massive hole in (Tasmanian Labor Premier) Lara Giddings’ claim that she had no option but to pay Gunns’ $34.5 million in compensation for exiting native forestry.   (NOTE:  The $34.5 million = 23m for Gunns residual rights and $11.5m to settle the dispute with FT.)

A letter, dated 18 April 2011, from Gunns Chairman Chris Newman, to Forestry Tasmania Chairman Adrian Kloeden, reveals that Gunns not only wrote to Forestry Tasmania to formally terminate their native wood supply contracts (917 and 918) in April this year, they also offered to terminate the contracts on a “full release and indemnity basis.”

In part, the letter reads: “Gunns therefore wishes to terminate CoS 917 and 918…To the extent that FT requires formal notice, please treat this letter as notice of termination under clauses 3.3(b)(i) of Cos917 and 3.3(b)(ii) of CoS918.

.

“While Gunns remains ready, willing and able to perform its contractual obligations under CoS 917 and 918 during the notice period, we consider than an immediate separation would be in the interests of Gunns, FT and the Tasmanian forestry industry generally…“I therefore propose CoS 917 and 918 be terminated on a full release and indemnity basis in respect of any and all outstanding issues.”

.

Mr Newman also offered to help Forestry Tasmania gain access into the (immoral and greedy) Chinese Woodchip Market, including introducing FT to Gunns’ customers and also offered to hand over roading infrastructure to the value of $200 million over to Forestry Tasmania.

Asian appetite for woodchips cares squat about the forest source,

cares squat about the means.

 

Tasmanians understand:  Asian corporate culture is single bottom line:

Personal ends justifying any eco-social means to maximise personal economic wealth!

.

---

.

A Tasmanian Case to Answer:

Tasmania’s traditional Coat of Arms

‘Ubertas et Fidelitas’? …”fertility and faithfulness”

.

The significance of this letter cannot be under-estimated. Under the hand of Gunns’ chairman, Gunns voluntarily wrote to Forestry Tasmania to terminate its contracts ‘immediately’ on the 18th of April 2011 requesting an ‘immediate separation’ which clearly would have extinguished the Premier’s so-called “residual rights”.

This is supported by the advice of Forestry Tasmania Managing Director Bob Gordon In a subsequent Ministerial Brief dated 10 May 2011 from to Bryan Green, where Mr Gordon informs the Minister that this offer to terminate on a “full release and indemnity basis” from Gunns would “extinguish” the need to negotiate in good faith new terms of agreement for supply, the so-called “residual rights” that Ms Giddings has claimed as the reason for the $34.5 million in compensation.

.

Given this correspondence, it appears inconceivable that Lara Giddings could have been advised by the Solicitor-General that the Government was obliged to pay Gunns to extinguish the contracts.  Ms Giddings now has no option but to release the Solicitor-General’s advice on the matter.

Tasmania’s Resources Minister has played down correspondence between Gunns and Forestry Tasmania, which the Opposition says raises questions about Gunns’ right to government compensation for pulling out of state forests.  The Opposition obtained a letter between Gunns and FT under Freedom of Information Laws, which shows Gunns offered to terminate its contracts.  Liberal spokesman Peter Gutwein says it contradicts the Premier’s argument, that she had no choice but to pay Gunns.

“The Premier now has no leg to stand on,” he said.

.

---

.

Community insights and informed analysis:

‘If all the above is genuine, and I can see no reason why it should not be, then the matter needs to be taken further. Much further. Lara and her “advisers” need to peruse all correspondence, memoranda and diary notes etc from Gunns in relation to their claim as to why there should be a payment to them by the taxpayers. Should there be a deliberate deception, or a deception by deliberate ommission that resulted in a serious financial advantage to Gunns then all avenues of recourse should be explored. If criminal charges are appropriate then so be it. It all would depend on the nature of the claims/submissions put forward by Gunns. There should also be cross referencing with any correspondence on the matter by Forest Tasmania. A formal investigation is surely warranted and the reason for the indecent haste in coughing up the taxpayer’s hard earned to Gunns and FT needs now to be justified.

Oh Lara. What a patsy you are. Your only contributions to the negotiations in this “complex” matter were to first publicly announce that “…we need Gunns..”, and secondly to publicly announce that you had $45 million in the “envelope” to resolve the “complex” matter. Brilliant.   Just brilliant Lara.’
~ Len Fulton (a Tasmanian commenting to TT) 20111003

Woodchip stockpile – same colour as the chainsawed ancient Myrtle above

.

‘Very interesting documents.  Regardless of whether you support the pulp mill or not there is something extremely fishy about this payment to gunns and all australian taxpayers should be screaming for the tabling for scrutiny of all documentation regarding the justification of this payment.  Just on these produced documents and the fact that gunns had already closed down x no. of mills dismissed employees and placed triabunna on an approx. 8 week closure at the time the payment of compensation was dubious let alone some $34mil for the remaining life of the contract/s.  This has a bad smell about it – now this previously “keep quiet” info is out Mr Gutwein what are you going to do about it?’
~ Ian  (a Tasmanian commenting to TT) 20111003

.

‘Liberal complacence has helped foster the culture that has allowed our government to use excuses like “commercial in confidence” to not keep the public informed.  So while Peter Gutwein is bouncing up and down on this issue, will he actually do anything, or remain as noticeable as a fly on the backside of an elephant?
~ Salamander  (a Tasmanian commenting to TT) 20111003

.

‘Very revealing letter.  I’ve previously argued that, if required, the Government should be prepared to buy back Gunns timber rights. Now, it seems, there was no need to buy them back at all because they had already formally relinquished them.  This sheds a very nasty light on the way the Government rushed to pay Gunns double the initial offer. It also brings up questions about the $25 million that FT were apparently owned and why the Government felt it necessary to settle this matter to “avoid expensive legal arguments”.
The expense argument always seemed spurious. When there’s $25 million in dispute, surely it’s worth thrashing the matter out in court? On the other hand, the trouble with courts is that all the facts are likely to come out.  I bet the Greens are having some interesting discussions at the moment! On the one hand there’s nothing to be gained by pulling the pin on Lala, but on the other hand, how far can they afford to let their reputation be trashed before they’ll never be able to recover the ground lost?’
~  Steve  (a Tasmanian commenting to TT) 20111003

‘So Mr Gutwein, what are you going to do about it?

Are you quite rightly going to demand the return of all the ill-gotten monies from Gunns Ltd and Forestry Tasmania?  Are you also going to demand FT collects monies owed by Gunns Ltd to them?  Are you going to demand all the IGA (Julia Gillard’s Intergoverment Agreement) monies be shared amongst everyone except these two companies as was intended?’
~ Russell Langfield (a Tasmanian commenting to TT) 20111003

.

‘This isn’t the first or the biggest apparent fraud Tasmania has seen – the land swap was far bigger and the pulp mill approval business was more blatant – but it’s still very unusual to see the LibLabs falling out on something like this.  The Tas justice system was magnificent in snatching Bryan Green from disaster,  but do they have they the moxie to save the government’s bacon here?  I suspect that Tas Inc’s closets are too dank to support an explosion, but I hope I’m wrong.’

~ John Hayward (a Tasmanian commenting to TT) 20111003

.

‘These damning documents show that the potential financial scam perpetrated upon the Australian and Tasmanian taxpayer is even worse than that stated by Peter Gutwein.  Firstly, a further 10% GST has been added to the payments made to Gunns and FT increasing the amount paid in so-called settlement to $37.95M.  On top of that, FT has effectively written off the $13.5M balance of the $25 million reputedly owed to it by Gunns under the ‘take or pay‘ provisions of its wood supply contracts bringing the total amount gifted by the taxpayer to at least $51.45 million.

Tasmanians must be told why, and on whose advice, was Gunns’ termination offer made on 18 April 2011 not accepted by FT and what part did the Premier and her Deputy play in this?  What was the role of the Solicitor General and what were the circumstances that led to the Premier claiming the need for payment to extinguish Gunns’ “residual rights”?

What is the legal precedence and basis for the taxpayer settling a financial dispute between a private company and GBE over which the Minister has limited jurisdiction and no apparent financial control?  The scale of this matter is beyond the scope of the feeble Integrity Commission and is so serious that it demands a full criminal investigation.

Finally, given that the release of this documentation has the potential to bring down the Government, the motives of the usually recalcitrant FT for being so forthcoming to the Shadow Minister for Forestry’s request are extremely suspect and demand that FT is put into administration pending the outcome of investigations.’
~ PB  (a Tasmanian commenting to TT) 20111003

.

‘As per Chris Newman, Gunns ….“I will not recount Gunns’ various complaints of defective performance and non-performance by FT ….”  Why? Not consistent with Gunns previously pretending the woodchip driven industry was sustainable let alone ‘worlds best practice’! Can the public see a copy of those complaints? Surely they are not all ‘commercial in confidence’.

“The reputation and marketability of Tasmanian native forest woodchip product is, and has always been directly affected by FT’s forestry management practices …”  You forgot to add … and Gunns greedy easy street deal to woodchip bio diverse forests into oblivion.  “FT was aware of the damage that its forestry practices were causing to the reputation of Tasmanian woodchip products …”  Oh so FT’s forestry practices haven’t been a beautiful shining example afterall … I’m shocked at having been so deceived!!  “Gunns therefore wishes to terminate CoS 917 and 918, noting our agreement that construction of the pulp mill did not commence by 30 November 2010.” You mean Gunns deliberately didn’t make a commencement of the mill to get out of the contract or used the companys own incompetence and failure to grab a government payout?

“Ünless a commercial resolution can be reached, I fear that these disputes will ultimately result in court proceedings.”  Is that called holding the state to ransom … or bribery perhaps?

“I therefore propose that CoS 917 and 918 be terminated immediately on a full release and indemnity basis in respect of any and all outstanding issues.”  So that’s what Gunns meant as per their ASX market update.

“3. Mutual release between the company and Forestry Tasmania from certain current and future claims arising out of those agreements.”  “At the same time, FT will receive the benefit of a substantial infrastructure, worth in excess of $200 million, established by Gunns in anticipation of harvesting pulpwood from State Forests pursuant to CoS 917 and 918.”  Is that where the touted $200 million figure for the so-called locking up of native forests originally came from? And you mean to say those native state forests being established, (albeit in reality little more than plantations) after wiping out the original diverse forests, weren’t actually being grown for future sawlogs, but indeed for nothing but pulpwood … thought so!

Bobby Gordon to embattled Bryan Green …. “It is unlikely the exchange of letters between Gunns and FT will become public.” … Why, something to hide perhaps? Obviously Labors Braddon office shredder mustn’t have been available.

“In the event that stakeholders become aware of the termination notice, Forestry Tasmania intends to release the following statement….” Is that called conspiring?

Let’s call it as it is, the $23 million for ‘residual rights’ and the Labor Gov gifting Gunns $11.5m to virtually pay itself via FT wasn’t to buy back HCV state native forests, it was hush money!  Gunns are undoubtedly as successful as a trap door in a canoe.  Gunns would be better off to start manufacturing butchers chopping blocks on wheels which they could pass around to their shareholders, directors, contractors, workers and political allies. Afterall, apparently they are attributing any future succusses on continuing to mobilize a self-serving carvery …

Citizens’ justice – doing away with privilege, the French way

[Source: http://www.toonpool.com/user/589/files/it_chops_383035.jpg]

.

Caught in an avalanche of their own making, Gunns have at least successfully pulped themselves …Gunns and Forestry Tasmania and indeed blokes like Bryan Green and the Tasmanian Labor Government have been treating the public like fools for far too long … just desserts is the same ridicule and contempt they have shown the state of Tasmania.’
~ Claire Gilmour  (a Tasmanian commenting to TT) 20111003

.

‘Other than the pyrotechnic display contained in this letter there are other incendiary devices. Such as the Gunns Chairman admitting that “construction of the pulp mill did not commence by 30 November 2010”  That’s very different from the findings of EPA director Schaap. There is also a clear accusation that FT abused its monopoly position in the Tasmanian pulp wood market.’
~ Karl Stevens  (a Tasmanian commenting to TT) 20111003

.

‘Has Gutwein called the Federal Police? If not, why not?

His inference is that The Commonwealth, and the State of Tasmania has been defrauded and if so it is very difficult to see how the Premier and Prime Minister are not parties to the act. In the absense of that call to the police being made, Mr Gutwein is nothing but another useless mouth we are feeding for no discernable benefit. Time to piss, Peter, or get off the bloody pot.If you don’t, many of us will return to our default position which is that we are governed by a coalition of liblab with the greens used as a smoke screen.’

‘Your party’s voting record backs that view to the hilt.. On reflection I would go further: Either it is fraud and therefore conspiracy to commit fraud, or it is extortion. Either way, it has all the hallmarks of something the federal police should be investigating. Why the Feds?  Aside from the obvious reason it is federal money involved. My bet is that Gutwein will do nothing substantial because the bottom line is the Libs are run by TasInc who want the mill built right or wrong by anyone because they can make a dollar out of it.  They fund both wings of the liblab machine. Such is the nature of party representatives. They know what the voters want, but serve the party interests first because that is where their loyalty lies. You get what you vote for.  That gaping hole in the mills risk profile has not and will not go away regardless of any of this. It just keeps getting larger.’
~ Simon Warriner (a Tasmanian commenting to TT) 20111004

.

‘Having also read all the FOI it is interesting to see that Gunns had already terminated the wood supply agreements and that after the 15th of October the agreements were finalised.  Also the $200 million of roading and bridge assets that they told FT they would be giving them would have reverted to FT ownership after 45 days under the agreement anyway.  It appears that the rush to give Gunns money was important because after the 25 th October there would have been no reason to pay them anything.  The briefing docs to Bryan Green show that he was fully cognisant of the deal ending.’
~ Pete Godfrey (a Tasmanian commenting to TT) 20111004

.

.

---

.

Subsequent revelations…

.

‘No advice on $34.5m Gunns deal: Tony Burke’

.

[Source:  Matthew Denholm, Tasmania correspondent, The Australian, 20111022, ^http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/no-advice-on-345m-gunns-deal-tony-burke/story-e6frg6nf-1226173569723]

.

Federal taxpayers paid $34.5 million to Gunns to extinguish its rights to log Tasmania’s native forests without Canberra first seeking advice on whether the payment was legally required.  Federal Environment Minister Tony Burke told The Weekend Australian he had not sought legal advice on whether the payments were necessary to extinguish Gunns’ contractual rights.

“I didn’t seek any advice on that,” Mr Burke said.  “Legal advice on that was sought by the Tasmanian government.”

The state Liberals claim the payment was not legally required because Gunns had already voluntarily handed back the contracts to harvest 210,000 cubic metres of sawlogs each year.  Tasmania’s Labor-Green government, which brokered the payment to Gunns, is refusing to release its own legal advice on the issue.  However, Premier Lara Giddings insists the advice backs its stance that the payment was needed to remove Gunns’ “residual rights” over the vital contracts.

Their surrender was key to the protection of 430,000 hectares of forests under the $276 million federal-state forest peace deal signed by (Prime Minister) Julia Gillard in August (2011).  However, Gunns had said it was leaving native forest logging regardless and documents obtained by the Liberals under state right-to-information laws show that on April 18 the company gave “formal . . . notice of termination” of the contracts.

Despite this, on September 15 deeds signed by the Tasmanian government granted $23 million in funds provided by Canberra to Gunns and a further $11.5 million—also federally sourced—to Forestry Tasmania. Mr Burke said yesterday the money had been provided to the Tasmanian government to “facilitate” the peace deal, also known as the Intergovernmental Agreement on Forests.  Late yesterday, federal Agriculture Minister Joe Ludwig and Tasmanian Deputy Premier Bryan Green announced an additional$45 million voluntary exit package for Tasmanian forestry contractors. “This package will assist eligible contractor businesses to exit the native forest harvest, haulage and silvicultural contracting sectors,” he said.

Meanwhile, Forestry Tasmania continues in earnest its wholesale massacre and incineration

of Tasmanian Old Growth for woodchipping pittance

(Upper Florentine Forest old growth, photo taken 28th September 2011)

.

---

.

‘Minister dodging questions on Forestry handout. Mill buyers. Gunns quizzed’

.

[by Kim Booth MP Greens Forestry spokesperson MR, 20111019, ^http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/article/minister-dodging-questions-on-latest-forestry-handout/]

.

The Tasmanian Greens today said the Forestry Minister Bryan Green has failed to explain to the Tasmanian people why he approved another $1.1 million in public funding to prop up the failing forestry industry.  Greens Forestry spokesman Kim Booth said there’s no credibility to the Minister’s claim that the industry could afford the transportation costs to Triabunna, but somehow could not afford to go the remaining 146 kilometres to Bell Bay without receiving public subsidisation.

.

“If the woodchipping industry is so unviable that it cannot even afford to pay the cost of transporting logs 146 kilometres, it is about time that the Minister realised that the industry is just not viable,” Mr Booth said.

 

“The Minister must first justify then explain why he thinks woodchippers of native forests should be paid with public funds and should take priority at a time when other areas are having to do it tough by cutting services.”

 

“As for the question of the supposed ‘log jam,’ the question must be asked why Forestry Tasmania is causing these trees to be cut down if the operators cannot even afford to transport them to the point of sale?”

 

“Every other transport business in the state must survive on its own resources, and there’s no doubt that all the other struggling transport operators in Tasmania would love a handout.  So why is the woodchipping industry treated so differently?”

 

“How many million dollars of public money will this Minister rob from the public purse and give to his industry darlings before he wakes up to the fact that public money if for public benefits like healthcare, not to prop up unviable private businesses.”

..The Tasmanian Government’s logo…’explore the possibilities’…at what cost?

A return to Tasmania’s traditional coat of arms would be very appropriate.

.

---

.

Further Reading:

.

[1]    ‘Explosive letter confirms Gunns voluntarily gave up contracts‘, Tasmanian Times, 20111005, ^http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/article/explosive-letter-confirms-gunns-voluntarily-gave-up-contracts/

[2]   ‘More questions over Gunns’ rights buyout‘, 20111003, ^http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-10-04/2011041011-gunns-rights-buyout-questioned/3207848?section=tas

[3]   Letter from Mr Newman and subsequent Ministerial Brief:  Gunns_letter_and_Ministerial_briefing.pdf   [Read Letter] [4]   The full Right to Information documents requested by Peter Gutwein MP, Forestry Tasmania, (Part 1), (Part 2)

[5}  ‘Hush Lara Hush‘, by Peter Henning, Tasmanian Times, 20110520, ^http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/article/hush-lara-hush/

•

.

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

.

 

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:

.

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!

.

.

---

.

Further Reading:

.

[1]  ^http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Latest-News-Wires/2011/1026/Javan-rhino-goes-extinct-in-Vietnam-after-last-rhino-poached

[2]  ^http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2009/11/23/dogs_sniff_out_rhinos_of_vietanm/

[3]  ^http://www.asianscientist.com/topnews/wwf-traditional-chinese-medicine-rhino-horn-cancer-cure-cites-meeting/

[4]  ^http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/video/2011/oct/25/javan-rhino-extinct-vietnam-wwf-video?newsfeed=true

[5]  ^http://www.rhinoconservation.org/2010/01/15/is-surge-in-illegal-rhino-horn-trade-linked-to-chinas-designation-of-tcm-as-strategic-industry/

[6]  ^http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/01/does-protecting-endangered-rhinos-conflict-with-traditional-chinese-medicine.php

[7]  ^http://www.greenfudge.org/2011/08/22/tcm-quackery-fuels-brutal-rhino-poaching/

[8]  ^http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/asian-bear-bile-remedies-barbarism-or-medicine/

[9] ^http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-02-06/female-circumcision-happening-in-australia/2594496

.

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‘.

.

---

.

.

Further Reading:

.

[1]  ‘Roo cull eases pressure on reserves‘, by Margaret Burin,  ABC Local, 20110628, ^http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/06/28/3255317.htm?site=canberra

‘Nearly 2,500 kangaroos were killed during the three week cull in Canberra’s nature reserves….’
.

[2]   ‘Kangaroo Shooting: the largest land-based commercial wildlife slaughter in the world‘, by Animals Australia, ^http://www.animalsaustralia.org/issues/kangaroo_shooting.php

‘Each night in remote areas of the Australian outback thousands of kangaroos graze peacefully, stand up on hearing an approaching vehicle, stare into a blinding spotlight, and are shot for their meat and skins.

The commercial kangaroo kill ‘quota’ for 2009 (the number permitted to be killed) is just under 4 million kangaroos….’

.

[3]  ‘New Report Exposes the Grubby Reality of the Kangaroo Industry‘, by Animals Australia, ^http://www.animalsaustralia.org/issues/kangaroo_shooting.php

‘A new report ‘A Shot in the Dark – a report on kangaroo harvesting’, commissioned by Animal Liberation (NSW) was released in May 2009

outlines problems of hygiene in the kangaroo meat industry, sustainability of kangaroo populations and animal welfare.  The report estimates some ‘440,000 dependent young kangaroos are either clubbed to

death or left to starve after their mothers are killed’.  Read Report: ^http://www.kangaroo-protection-coalition.com/shotinthedark.html

.

[4]  ‘Australia officials want to kill 3,000 kangaroos‘, by Rob Griffith, Associated Press, 20070514,^http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18656748/ns/world_news-

 

asia_pacific/t/australia-officials-want-kill-kangaroos/#.Tqb-pbKLNhU

‘CANBERRA, Australia — Authorities said Monday they want to shoot more than 3,000 kangaroos on the fringes of Australia’s capital, noting the animals were growing in population and eating through the grassy habitats of endangered species.’

A cull of about 800 kangaroos in the Canberra area in 2004 also brought a large outcry from animal activists.  In 2003, authorities ordered the killing of 6,500 eastern grays at the Puckapunyal military base, 62 miles north of Melbourne. A year earlier,

 

a similar shooting operation killed more than 20,000 kangaroos on the base.’

.
[5]   ‘The life and death of Kangaroos‘, by Ray Drew May 2008, ^http://www.kangaroolives.com/inhumanity.htm

‘On Monday May 19, 2008, government contractors started killing the kangaroos on a former naval base in Canberra, Australia. By May 29 they (514) were dead. This, in a diary in reverse, is their story and the fight to save them. ALL OF THE KANGAROOS IN THE PHOTOGRAPH ABOVE ARE NOW DEAD. THEY WERE NEEDLESSLY KILLED IN THE LAST WEEK OF MAY 2008, following a world wide campaign to save them….’

.

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….’

READ MORE: ^http://www.kangaroo-protection-coalition.com/coordinator.html

.

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.’

.

---

.

Further Reading:

.

[1]    ‘A Shot in the Dark‘, ^http://www.wildlifeadvocate.com/pdf/a_shot_in_the_dark.pdf ,    [Read Report] [2]    National Kangaroo Protection Coalition, ^http://www.kangaroo-protection-coalition.com/

[3]     THINKK (The Think Tank for Kangaroos), University of Technology Sydney, ^http://thinkkangaroos.uts.edu.au/

[4]    No Kangaroo Meat website, ^http://www.nokangaroomeat.org/

[5]    ‘Kangaroo Harvesting under the spotlight‘, ABC TV ‘730 Programme’, 20110713, ^http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2011/s3268904.htm

[6]    Australian Society For Kangaroos, ^http://www.australiansocietyforkangaroos.com/not_so_green.html

[7]   Read the original comments to the initial article by Tigerquoll on the CanDoBetter.net website:  ‘Kangaroo rapers of Mitchell (Qld) and the E.coli time bomb‘

.

.