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]

.

 

---

.

Further Reading:

.

[1] Colong Foundation for Wilderness Ltd ^http://www.colongwilderness.org.au/Gardens_of_Stone/GoS2_Swamp_monitoring.htm

.

 

[2]    ‘NPWS confirms long wall mining is a key threatening process‘,  ^http://archive.lee.greens.org.au/index.php/content/view/1345/65/

 

.

[3]    ‘Impacts of Longwall Coal Mining on the Environment in New South Wales‘ report, Total Environment Centre ^http://www.tec.org.au/component/docman/doc_view/201-longwall-rep07 [Read Report]

 

.

[4]   The BushDoctor Pty Ltd,  ^http://www.bushdoctor.com.au/experience_blueMountains.htm

 

.

[5]   The Scientific Committee of NSW, Determination on Longwall Mining, 20050715, ^http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/determinations/LongwallMiningKtp.htm]

.

[6]   ‘Blue Mountains Water Skink Recovery Plan‘, National Parks and Wildlife Service 2001, [Read Plan]

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(click to enlarge photo)

‘There is a proposal by (Queensland-based) Coalpac Pty Ltd to mine coal, using high wall and open cut mining techniques.  This activity would occur within the Ben Bullen State Forest, this forest adjoins the Gardens of Stone, an amazing area containing rock formations called pagodas.

If this destructive mine is approved, at least 1088 ha of old growth forest will be destroyed, with its iconic, rare flora and fauna.  We have an unenviable record of species extinctions, locally and nationally.

Lyrebirds use the sides of the pagodas to nest and raise their young.  The area is home to tiger quolls, powerfull owls and more than 30 native animals, five of which are listed as endangered.

Local residents will not suffer from dust in the air, but they, and others further afield, will have their water supply contaminated.

Please write to Mrs Roza Sage (Liberal Party Member for Blue Mountains electorate) to express your concern about this irreplaceable environment at risk frominappropriatre and unnecessary mining development.’

Anne Dillon, Blackheath.

.

[Source: Blue Mountains Gazette, ‘Threat to forest’, 20110713, page 12, Blue Mountains, New South Wales Australia]

 

.

Further reading:

.

[1]  ^http://fatcanyoners.org/2011/05/14/gardens-of-stone-protest/

Capetree Valley looking toward Pentoney’s Crown,

Gardens of Stone NP

Blue Mountains region, New South Wales, Australia

© Photo by Henry Gold, wilderness photographer

 

.

Gardens of Stone is a national park in the Australian state of New South Wales, 125 km northwest of Sydney. At 15,010 ha it is part of the Greater Blue Mountains Area World Heritage Site. [Wikipedia]

.

Yet much larger and similarly high conservation areas featuring pagodas of the Gardens of Stone and other incredibly rare natural landscapes and ecosystems lie adjacent to this national park. Similar rugged natural areas adjoining the Gardens of Stone National Park span some additional 40,000 hectares, featuring rare and magnificent sandstone escarpments, ancient natural pagodas and plateau country of the north western Blue Mountains – a natural part of the declared Greater Blue Mountains World heritage area park system.

Read below to learn more about proposed protection ‘Stage Two’ …

.

 

---

.

 

The Gardens of Stone Park Proposal Stage Two

.

Joint Media Release 28 November, 2005 by Colong Foundation for Wilderness, Blue Mountains Conservation Society and the Colo Committee:

.
‘Today the Colong Foundation for Wilderness, the Blue Mountains Conservation Society and the Colo Committee launched a new proposal to protect 40,000 hectares. The proposal, centred on the township of Lithgow, is called the Gardens of Stone.

“The Gardens of Stone area is scenically, environmentally and historically unparalleled. Its current low level of protection shows a scandalous disregard of this magnificent heritage. The Gardens of Stone proposal is an innovative approach that will ensure better protection of these unparalleled areas and greatly enhance tourism in the western Blue Mountains-Lithgow region”, said Dr Brian Marshal, President of the Blue Mountains Conservation Society.

“’This area for too long has been taken for granted, yet is truly a national gem. Its geology is dramatic and spectacular, its biodiverisity is fascinatingly diverse, and its cultural history is extensive. It is time at last for the overlooked to be valued and acknowledged. This is a fantastic area that truly deserves reserve status!”, said Haydn Washington, Secretary of the Colo Committee.

“The Gardens of Stone is a place worth saving that has great potential for quiet, family-based recreation. The proposed system of new Gardens of Stone parks will greatly enhance tourism opportunities in the central and western Blue Mountains around Lithgow,” said Keith Muir, director of the Colong Foundation for Wilderness.

The Gardens of Stone has iconic heritage of national significance. The park proposal aims to protect and manage:

• the first three rugged mountain passes west to the interior of Australia;
• the outstanding Aboriginal cultural sites on and around Newnes Plateau;
• the wonderful oil shale mining ruins on spectacular Airly Mesa;
• some of the highest plant diversity in the Blue Mountains; and
• some of the most beautiful and intricate sandstone formations in Australia.

.
“The plant, animal and Aboriginal heritage of the proposal reflect the landscape’s diversity. The proposal’s many rare plants, unique snowgrass-snowgum woodlands, shrub swamps and heathlands are not protected elsewhere, said Mr Washington.

“The Gardens of Stone is a geological wonderland of coloured escarpments, narrow canyons, rock arches, cave overhangs, lonely sandstone peninsulas and remnant forested sand dunes from the last ice age”, Dr Marshall said.

Mr Muir believes that “Heritage-based tourism could draw Lithgow toward a more environmentally sustainable future”.

“The proposal provides an integrated plan of action to protect, manage and interpret the area but recognises the realities of existing coalmining operations”, he added.

[Source: http://www.colongwilderness.org.au/media_releases/media_archive05.htm#MR05112800]

 

.

 

---

.

 

The following article is that by Ian Brown of the Colong Foundation for Wilderness which may be located under the heading ‘Seeing the Gardens by Ian Brown.’ It is based upon a report on the recreational and tourism potential of the Gardens of Stone Stage 2 park proposal, jointly commissioned by the Blue Mountains Conservation Society and the Colong Foundation.)

.

 

‘The Gardens of Stone Park Proposal Stage Two (GoS2) was launched by the Colong Foundation in 2005. It covers an area of 40 000 hectares of sandstone escarpment and plateau in the western Blue Mountains , on the western side of the existing Greater Blue Mountains World heritage area park system. The proposal takes in parts of the upper Capertee Valley , Coxs River headwaters, Turon River headwaters, Newnes Plateau and Blue Mountains western escarpment.

The objective of the GoS2 proposal is to achieve better management and protection of this area’s many important natural and cultural values. The GoS2 park system is proposed to be a mixture of state conservation area (SCA) and national park tenure. SCA status allows underground coal mining to continue.

The GoS2 area’s outstanding conservation values have been well documented in the Colong Foundation’s The Gardens of Stone Park Proposal Stage Two (October 2005). There is no doubt that the area’s scenery and heritage can also offer a diverse range of low impact recreational activities attracting significant visitor numbers, thus expanding the local tourism industry. One purpose of the current study was to show that GoS2 can deliver significant economic benefits to local communities.
.

 

An under-valued landscape

.
‘GoS2 offers the part of the Gardens of Stone landscape that is easily accessed and enjoyed by the general public. The nearby parks offer similar features and experiences, but they tend to be accessible to visitors with bush skills due to more rugged topography. GoS2, which is largely of more subdued terrain, brings the unique landscape of the Gardens of Stone to the majority of people.

 

This article will focus on the northern sectors that make up most of the proposal and which have the greatest potential for improved conservation and recreation management. These include the Airly-Genowlan mesas and Ben Bullen, Wolgan and Newnes State Forests. The other main sector, the western escarpment Crown reserves extending from Hassans Walls at Lithgow to Medlow Bath, is already well developed for recreation with increasingly effective management by local councils.

But the existing management regime over Airly-Genowlan and the state forests can best be characterised as lassez faire in relation to recreation and relatively passive in relation to conservation. The dominant land uses of coal mining and forestry have led to a devaluation of the important natural and cultural heritage values of the area in the public mind. Off-road vehicle activity, particularly trail bike riding, has been allowed by neglect to become the dominant recreation, even though most of it is illegal (unregistered vehicles, unlicensed riders and creating new tracks). This has further alienated less damaging activities such as walking, which mainly takes place on the fringes of the plateaus.

The GoS2 area has not yet been presented or promoted to the public as a great place to enjoy a remarkable landscape. Hence, the strong potential of the GoS2 area for low-impact, nature-based recreation and tourism has been under recognised and under-utilised.”
.

 

A better future

.
‘This can be changed by implementing the GoS2 reserve proposal and advancing a recreation and tourism plan for the area. With the right presentation and promotion, environmentally benign recreational use of GoS2 can be expanded dramatically.The natural and cultural attractions are many, varied, widespread across the area and highly appealing. Some features (e.g. Lost City , Carne Creek gorge, new Hartley mining heritage, Wolgan Valley Rail Trail) have the potential to become iconic attractions. A number of easy wildlife viewing opportunities exist and several Aboriginal heritage experiences are available. 

This alternative vision presents an existing network of touring routes for motor vehicles and bicycles, accessing a range of potential camping areas, bushwalks, lookouts and cultural and wildlife experiences. Most of the proposed places of interest can be linked into a ‘Gardens of Stone Grand Tour’ which could be taken over one to three days by 4WD vehicle or mountain bike.

Although providing for these recreational activities will have some localised impacts, a number of already-disturbed sites can be utilised. Furthermore, the likely impacts are minor when compared to the existing and future impacts of the current recreational regime.

The current controversy over government plans to expand private tourism development within national parks has been taken into account, and the GoS2 plan seeks to demonstrate how low-key, low impact visitor facilities can provide the backbone of local tourism without damaging the parks with accommodation and similar developments.

The proposed network of visitor experiences would provide the basis of a whole new nature-based marketing initiative for the western Blue Mountains, promoting the Gardens of Stone as the very distinctive other side of the Blue Mountains. Just two hours from Sydney and with all the services any visitor could need in adjacent towns, GoS2 could become an iconic venue for campers, bushwalkers, tourers, cyclists and nature and heritage enthusiasts. The suite of opportunities creates a sound basis for commercial tourism enterprises such as guided tours and local off-park accommodation.

Such a future could realise significant economic opportunities through visitor expenditure, and for both specialised services (tours, eco-accommodation) and more general commercial activity in the surrounding area.”
.

Economic benefits

.
Estimating tourism to protected areas and resultant economic benefits can be difficult. Based on comparable statistics and studies from NSW, Queensland and Victoria, a conservative upper estimate for tourism to a GoS2 park with the proposed facilities is 50,000 visitors a year. This level of tourism activity has been estimated to produce substantial net benefits to the community in the order of $28M to $38M, depending on the discount rate used. These net benefits may represent a minimum value since management costs savings to Forests NSW have not been able to be included and the levels of timber production and royalties assumed may be conservatively high.The regional economic benefit produced by 50,000 visitors to GoS2 is estimated as a direct spend of around $3M to $4M. Over and above this would be expenditure on park management, and the expansion of commercial tour activities and the establishment of new visitor accommodation in nearby areas which is likely to follow. 

The case for protecting the GoS2 lands for both conservation and direct community benefit is strong. It is now up to the NSW Government to do it.’

.

[Source: http://www.colongwilderness.org.au/features.htm]

.

 

---

.

 

 

 

But the Gardens of Stone are being destroyed by Centennial Coal

 

.

The magnificent rugged and rare geomorphology and high plateau ecosystems of the Bkue Mountains region is under serious irreverible threat of destruction by coal mining. The natural heritage values of the Gardens of Stone are being impacted by coal mining, causing bedrock subsidence, longwall mining is cracking the creekbeds and mine effluent pumping are destroying the natural groundwater acquifers. The rare geodiversity is being destroyed as Centennial Coal’s mining at Angus Place Colliery and Baal Bone Colliery cause cliff falls.

Aboriginal heritage rock art is being fractured. Creeks, rivers and upland swamps such as East Wolgan Swamp are being polluted by heavy metals from Centennial Coal’s mines. The mining is causing surface subsidence, stream flows are disappearing in Kangaroo Creek and the Wolgan River

A media release by the Colong Foundation for Wilderness 27 April 2010, highlighted current threats posed by Coal Mining:

 

 

The Gardens of Stone – a story to break the hardest heart

‘Imagine, New South Wales has its very own Bungle Bungle Range just 2½ hours from Sydney on the western edge of the Blue Mountains. It is a place of superlative scenery and tremendous botanical diversity. Today the Colong Foundation reveals that this little known wonderland called the Gardens of Stone may soon be spoiled if high impact coal mining is not curbed..“The Colong Foundation’s recent report (The impact of coal mining on the Gardens of Stone) documents how the coal industry’s environmental record is being etched and caved onto the Gardens of Stone landscape,” said Keith Muir Director of the Colong Foundation for Wilderness.

“Coal mining has:

• Caused several hundred cliff collapses in the most beautiful part of the Blue Mountains;
• Monitored these cliffs falls for 30 years, rather than acted to reduce the damage;
• Turned (nationally endangered) swamps to dust by cracking near-surface aquifers;
• Poisoned (nationally endangered) swamps with eco-toxic mine effluent;
• Turned the Wolgan River red;
• Claimed an environmental award for providing dirty, saline mine effluent to a power plant that shortly afterwards required a major repairs to its condensers costing tens of millions of dollars;
• Blighted the landscape with a network of roads, pipes, survey lines and power lines;
• Polluted drinking water supplies for Lithgow with nickel.

.The list goes on”, Mr Muir said.“In its monitoring reports to government the coal industry regularly understate the damage caused,” he said. “Mine operations do not work minimise environmental damage and have been largely unresponsive to environmental concerns”, he added.

“Crevasses, cliff falls and rock fractures are spoiling the sandstone beauty of the Gardens of Stone. Yet despite the intense study of mine subsidence for 30 years, the natural geomorphological processes that control cliff falls are not understood”, said Mr Muir.

“The Gardens of Stone in NSW is as spectacular as the Bungle Bungle Ranges, with a far greater floristic diversity. It must not be needlessly degraded by coal mining, as it can be preserved for everyone to enjoy,” Mr Muir said.

The damage can be curbed by reducing mining intensity. Taking such action would actually employ more miners and save this outstanding environment. One colliery has reduced its mining intensity, and a new one is about to start that will be far less damaging than previous operations. The State and Federal Governments should step in to protect from further damage the nationally endangered shrub swamps, the streams, cliffs and the sandstone pinnacles called pagodas that make up this natural wonderland”, Mr Muir said.

.

 

---

.

 

.

 

New mining prospect for Capertee

[Article from the local newspaper, The Lithgow Mercury, 20080705]

.

‘The Capertee community could benefit from a significant economic boost in the near future, including the direct creation of 80 jobs, if Centennial Coal’s Airly Project proceeds. Airly is an 80 million tonne coal resource located approximately 3 km north east of the Capertee township and is a project acquired by Centennial Coal in 1997 with an existing planning consent (originally granted in 1993).

There had been previous activity on the site including underground mining to obtain a bulk sample and verify mining conditions. Further work required to establish a trial mine commenced in April 1998. A Trial Mine Phase commenced in December 1998 when about 70,000 tonnes of coal was extracted over a 12 month period. An access road and other surface works were also completed.

“Lately, locals will have noticed an increase in traffic movement around Airly as a variety of visitors to the site complete studies, update data and review planning and engineering options for the site,” Centennial’s General Manager: Projects, Richard Tacon said.

“The proposed mine design would include the construction of a rail loading facility to ensure all coal from the site can be transported by rail.

“We anticipate the internal assessment process will be finalised over the next few months placing Centennial in a position to formalise a decision to proceed with the project,” Mr Tacon said.

“If Centennial does decide to proceed with this project, we will inform the community, place an utmost priority on minimising environmental impacts and strictly comply with the appropriate planning laws.”

[Source: http://www.lithgowmercury.com.au/news/local/news/general/new-mining-prospect-for-capertee/804919.aspx ]

.

 

 

.

 

---

 

.

 

Wolgan Road Project

.

On Centennial Coal’s website, under ‘Operations’ there is mention of a proposed Wolgan Road Project to be located within the Angus Place Colliery Lease. The project area is approximately 14km northwest of Lithgow, approximately 5km to the east of Mount Piper Power Station and 4km north of Wallerawang Power Station.

 

The area contains a small shallow coal resource between the underground workings of Wallerawang and Angus Place, with an estimated mine reserve of approximately 4.9 million tonnes, recoverable by open cut methods. Further detailed work including geotechnical investigations, environmental management assessment, community consultation and detailed mine planning would need to be completed before the requisite approvals could be sought.

 

[Source: http://www.centennialcoal.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=46&Itemid=54, accessed 20110126]

 

Sounds inoccuous enough, except that the Angus Place Colliery Lease is not ‘north west‘, but north of Lithgow. This places it within the Wolgan River catchment in sensitive escarpment country within the proposed Gardens of Stone NP Stage Two.

 

 

Map from the 2008 NSW Coal Industry Profile.

 

 

 

.

 

---

.

 

Centennial Coal’s Environmental Claims

.

Centennial Coal on its website under the heading of ‘Environmental Management‘ claims that Centennial’s Directors and Management are:

“committed to continual improvement in environmental and community management and performance.”

Centennial recognises the importance of effectively managing the environmental impacts associated with each mine and, over the years, has developed an Environmental Policy that commits the Company to continual improvement in its environmental management and performance.

 

‘Impact of Coal Mining on the Gardens of Stone’

©2010 Colong Foundation for Wilderness

 

 

.

CENTENNIAL COAL’S VISION

“To conduct our business in an efficient and environmentally responsible manner, that is compatible with the expectations of our Shareholders, government, employees and the community.”

 

‘Impact of Coal Mining on the Gardens of Stone’

©2010 Colong Foundation for Wilderness

.

.

 

CENTENNIAL COAL’S GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

.
1. Appropriate decisions are made

 

2. Risk management strategies are implemented based on clear science and valid data

3. Stakeholders are identified and respected

4. Environmental impacts are recognised and minimised

5. Legal obligations are known and respected

6. Environmental management is integrated into our business

7. Environmental performance is continually improved

8. Natural resources are used efficiently

9. Performance is assessed and reported

 

‘Impact of Coal Mining on the Gardens of Stone’

©2010 Colong Foundation for Wilderness

.

.

The Centennial Environmental Vision and logo designed to assist in raising the awareness and visibility of the group’s environmental effort, seeks to deliver two messages:

• Firstly, that the environment matters to Centennial, ie it is a fundamental part of Centennial’s business; and
• Secondly, environmental matters, or elements of the biophysical environment (air, plants and animals, ground/soil and water) that sustain society can be affected by Centennial’s activities if not appropriately managed

 

‘In a “branding” sense, the motto ” environment matters” is designed to be a distinctive reminder of Centennial’s aims and commitments.’

 

[Source: http://www.centennialcoal.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4:environmental-management&catid=10:who-we-are&Itemid=12]

Such is this company’s calculated greenwashing

to the extent of strategic misinformation,

so long as it exploits,

scams impunity from its heavy metal contamination,

inflicts irreversible bedrock subsidence….

Somehow justified by

‘temporary jobs, temporary jobs, temporary jobs’.

.

…an ethical investment?

.

 

 

 

 

 

---

.

 

Further Reading:

.

[1] Gardens Of Stone Stage 2 Proposal, ^http://bluemountains.org.au/gos2.shtml

.

[2] The Impact of Coal Mining on the Gardens of Stone [read full publication],

http://www.colongfoundation.org.au
.

[3] Gardens of Stone National Park – Draft Plan of Management [read full publication]

http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/parks/PoMDraftGardensOfStoneNP.pdf

.

[end of article]

 

---

.

Background

.

On  Thursday 7th  July 2005, while volunteering as Honorary Director of the Colong Foundation for Wilderness, the editor took a phone call at the Colong office from a Medlow Bath resident, who reported in that the Rural Fire Service had extensively graded the Six Foot Track in late June 2005.    In the resident’s opinion the grading had occurred to such an extent that substantial damage had been caused to native flora, riparian zones and so warranted community reaction.

That same day I contacted the legal manager of the Six Foot Track, Jon Guyver of the Lands Department, based at Orange and heard his view, learning that the grading was requested by the Rural Fire Service and authorised by the Trustee using grant funding from the Federal Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS).  I then phoned Greg Wardell, acting BM head of the Rural Fire Service to hear his view.  In each case there is a strong sense of righteousness in the grading.  The justification for the grading was to create a Primary Fire Trail, but this RFS action breached many of the conservation provisions of Six Foot Track Conservation and Management Plan 1997, including the Policy 7.2 (d).  [Refer References below].

On Sunday 10th July at the resident’s request I undertook a first hand inspection of the track, using topographical map ‘Katoomba 8930-1S’ and proceeded to Grid square 66 South, 48 East, which shows the Six Foot Track following the winding Megalong Creek south-westerly.  On return that evening, I emailed the following report to the Blue Mountains Conservation Society’s Land User Officer:

“Noticeable evidence of grading activity starts at a bend in the track NE of the words ‘SIX FOOT TRACK’ .  There is the remains of a stone fireplace here, as well as bush and topsoil graded into the bush toward the creek.  Between this site and the concrete bridge at Devils Hole Creek I counted 6 fresh mitre drains.  Between Devils Hole Creek and the locked gate [Grid Ref  642458] passed the horse paddocks, I counted another 15 fresh mitre drains, before reaching Corral Creek.  I didn’t continue west beyond Corral Creek.

There are three obvious environmental impacts from this bulldozing activity:

1. Over-clearing of bushland
2. Leaving topsoil exposed to rain and erosion
3. Grading bush and topsoil into the Corral Creek

The disregard and disrespect for Aboriginal culture in the area appears to have been totally ignored/discounted.  You are very right in bringing this issue to the attention of the public, stakeholders and authorities.  Your efforts deserve recognition by the Blue Mountains conservation community.

Having this primary data, I agree that this environmental destruction deserves to be made very public and the process abuse exposed.  The voluntary RFS are not a law unto themselves.  RFS culture needs a wake up call to its unchecked environmental accountability.”

---

.

On Sunday 17th July, the Land Use Officer of the local Blue Mountains Conservation Society drafted a letter to the General Manager of the Blue Mountains Council which read as follows:

RE:  Nellies Glen Rd – Six Foot Track  – Breach of development consent conditions

“The Society wishes to raise  two questions about the recent  work undertaken on a section of  Nellies Glen Road, which forms part of the Six Foot Track.  The section in question is:

Legality of  Re-location of a section of Road

• • A section of the road was rerouted.  Extensive clearing has been undertaken.
  • It does not  appear that  the Dept Lands is exempt from the provisions of the LEP  when  widening or re-locating a road.
  • LEP 91 clause 17.7 exempts the Crown from  “carrying out of any development required in  connection with the construction, reconstruction, improvement, maintenance or repair of any Classified Road, except the  widening, realignment, or relocation  of such road”

Furthermore as the Six Foot Track  is listed in Schedule 2 of LEP 91 as Heritage item MG6,   Clause 25 applies.Clause 25.1 statesA person shall not, without the consent of the Council, in respect of  a  building work, relic, place or tree that  is  a heritage item  –

(a) demolish  or alter the building or  work; or   …..

(c) damage or despoil the place or tree; or

(d) damage or remove any tree or horticultural features on the land  on which the building, work, or relic is situated or on the land  which comprises the place.”

Did council give consent to the widening and re-location of the section of the Six Foot Track?   If consent was given, was  a heritage assessment undertaken?   If  no consent was given,  what steps does council intend to take to penalise the land manager and/or to require  restoration?

Pollution of Watercourses

The Society understands that Council  has regulatory powers to enforce the NSW Protection of the Environment Operations Act.

We request that Council investigates the

• Excavation of mitre drains within 10m of creeklines
• Extensive clearing of vegetation around the constructed within  20m of watercourses, causing  sediment to  flow into the  creek.”

 

.

---

.

‘RFS Bulldozes Six Foot Track’

[written by editor and published in the Blue Mountains Gazette, 27th July 2005].

.

 

Six Foot Track, Megalong Valley

Photo © 2005 L. Mitchell

.

This is what a bulldozer can do midweek when nobody’s watching.

The Six Foot (Bridle) Track is a State icon, first negotiated on horseback in 1887 as a shortcut from Katoomba to Jenolan Caves. The track is ‘protected’ under the Central Tablelands Heritage Trust by the Department of Land and Water Conservation.  The area holds important Aboriginal cultural value.  The Track passes through a significant River Oak Forest vegetation community and the topsoils along this river valley are particularly sandy, and once exposed are highly susceptible to erosion and weed infestation.

RFS choice of contractor has bulldozed the heritage Six Foot Track out to a 66 foot speedway and fresh mitre drains to channel the new runoff problem into Megalong Creek.  Once the rains come and the exposed topsoil’s washed into the creek, flat chance the bush’ll come back.

This is not fire trail ‘maintenance’. This is road making.  How ‘strategic’ anyway is a track deep in a bush valley over two kilometres from Katoomba?  Strategic for arsonists perhaps.  Anyone else would need development consent to bulldoze bush – and probably would be rightly rejected.  The privileged exemption status granted to the RFS is for times of emergency.  It is not a carte blanche for cowboy contractors.

This sad muddy bog left at the Corral Creek crossing is testament to the loose procedural controls of the bushfire committee.  Such actions cannot help the RFS’ otherwise high community standing.

.

Aboriginal stone artifact found along the recently graded Six Foot Track July 2005.

Photo © 2005 L. Mitchell

 

.

---

.

Following the publishing of my letter,  correspondence from the Blue Mountains Conservation Society’s (ConSoc) Land Use Subcommittee, of which I was an active member, when silent.

My email to the Subcommittee on 14th August read as follows:

Re: LUC Meeting Item 2 ‘Firetrails

“Can someone please advise what actions may have been taken since the RFS bulldozing events in late June on the Six Foot Track (SFT) and on the track
on Fairy Bower Reserve at Mount Piddington (and possibly other bush tracks we are yet to find out about).

The minutes of the LUC August meeting indicated that ConSoc is to write to RFS “again”, so this suggest correspondence has already been made.  I would appreciate any copies of correspondence please.  What was the outcome (agreed actions) of the midweek meeting between ConSoc, >the RFS and trustee Jon Guyver back on or around 14 Jul 05?

Has the RFS agreed to remediate the bulldozing of the SFT site with endemic plantings, sediment controls?

Has the RFS or Jon Guyver been able to provide any minutes or correspondence regarding the decision making of the bushfire committee to authorise the bulldozing in June?

The silence on this has been ‘Council-esk’ and no public comment appears forthcoming from the RFS.”

.

Regulation of the Six Foot Track

“As per the previous LUC meeting on 13 Jul 05, I have enquired into the possible existence of a trust deed governing management and legal conditions concerning the control of the Six Foot Track.

The Land Department Office in Orange confirms no trust deed as such exists, but rather the SFT is governed by a Reserve Trust under the provisions of
the NSW ‘Crown Lands Act 1989’ and ‘Crown Lands (General Reserves) By Law 2001’ as Reserve No. 1001056.

Jon Guyver is the official administrator of the Six Foot Track Heritage Trust and he has provided me with a copy of the relevant sections of the Act, a complete set of the By laws applicable to the SFT and the Six Foot Track Conservation Management Plan Volumes I and II.  The latter cost me $22.  Lyn has indicated that she already has a copy of the Plan of Management – I assume this is the same. Volume I is 137 pages and Volume II is 142 pages.  I am presently reading through Volume I.

From my reading so far, the bulldozing breaches the Management Plan’s ecologically sustainable development principles,  although “the plan is
intended to serve as a guide to conservation and management of the entire Track, but is not a statutory plan which is binding” (Vol. I, p 8).

Jon says he is commissioning an updated version, so I suggest it would be useful for ConSoc to participate in the drafting of this updated version.”

.

[No answer was received from ConSoc, yet on 16th August the editor received a warning from a leading figure within the ‘conservation movement’:  “Please do not cast aspersions against RFS people in Con Soc.”]

---

.

Then on Tuesday 23rd August, the editor emailed the following researched feedback to the Blue Mountains Conservation Society:

“All,  Way back on 7-Jul-05, a call was made to the Colong Foundation advising that the Six Foot Track had been severely bulldozed near Megalong Creek.  As a member based in Katoomba, I have followed this up, along with enquiries by other ConSoc LUC members.

I proceeded to acquire first hand information, walked to the site and have obtained extensive documentation from the trustee on the Plan of Management
and legislation governing the Track.   I am still yet to find out what actions others have taken.  I am still yet to receive a response to my email below.

Avid Gazette readers may have come across a small press release from someone in the Gazette’s Mountain Murmurs on 13-Jul-05.  After no news, I submitted
my letter of 27-Jul-05 alerting the Mountains community to inappropriate destruction of native habitat and important heritage values of the Six Foot Track [the editor changed my heading].  The thrust of my message was to try to highlight the cause of the problem in an effort to prevent it re-occurring.  I referred to the “loose procedural controls of the bushfire committee.”  Last week, three mixed response letters arrived, one targeting the contractor, but all ignoring the problem source – the actions of the bushfire committee.  Still no public statement has come from the RFS, despite this public call for accountability.

I note that ConSoc’s latest Hut News (Aug-05, p3) contains a useful account of the “informative gathering” on 21-Jul-05 by representatives of various stakeholder organisations agreeing on the need for rehabilitation work.  But what is still unaccounted for are the actions of the bushfire committee. 

Is this bushfire committee made up of these same representatives?

Well, in the absence of feedback, I have continued my investigations and discovered that the underlying cause is the Bushfire Mitigation Programme
of the federal government Department of Transport and Regional Services.  I direct you to the following website, the introductory extract and the
attached spreadsheet that lists the following ‘Fire Trails’ in the Blue Mountains for targeting as well as another undisclosed areas of the Blue Mountains National Park.

Question is, have all these locations been subjected to similar bulldozing that we don’t know about yet?

The Six Foot Track bulldozing is a drop in the ocean.  The RFS Bushfire Assessment Code refers to complying with the >principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development, which seems nothing more than greenwashing.

Reserve / Activity Name    Treatment Area (km)    NSW Allocation

• Cripple Creek Fire Trail Stage 2    5kma   $15,000.00
• Cripple Creek Fire Trail Complex    5 km   $10,909.09
• Caves Creek Trail    0.4 km   $5,000.00
• Edith Falls Trail    2 km  $2,040.00
• Boronia Rd – Albert Rd Trails    1km    $1,360.00
• Perimeter Trail – North Hazelbrook    1.5km    $1,360.00
• McMahons Point Trail – Kings Tableland    7km    $1,000.00
• Back Creek Fire Trail    3.2 km   $816.00
• Mitchell’s Creek Fire Trail    3.5km    $204.00
• Northern Strategic Line -Primary    8km    $11,000.00
• De Faurs Trail – Mt Wilson -Primary    2.8km    $7,540.00
• Mitchell’s Creek Fire Trail – Primary    3.5km    $1,836.00
• Nellies Glen Fire Trail    2.8 km   $1,360.00
• Back Creek Fire Trail – Primary    3.2km    $1,224.00
• Mt Piddington Trail – Hornes Point    N/A    $950.00
• Blue Mountains NP    42 km   $15,246.00
• Blue Mountains NP    8.3 km   $3,000.00
• Blue Mountains NP    23 km   $8,350.00
• Blue Mountains NP    10 km   $18,000.00
• Blue Mountains NP    12 km   $45,000.00.

SOURCE:  http://www.dotars.gov.au/localgovt/bmp/docs/NSW_BMP_Projects_04-05.xls

The site goes on to explain:

“Fire trails are important resources in the facilitation of prevention and mitigation works. An effective fire trail network increases options available in implementing hazard reduction to protect communities and their social, cultural, environmental and economic assets.

In September 2004 the Prime Minister announced the allocation of $15 million for a Bushfire Mitigation Programme, over three years, for the construction, maintenance and signage of fire trail networks to assist local communities to better prepare for bushfires.

About the Programme

The Bushfire Mitigation Programme is a national programme aimed at identifying and addressing bushfire mitigation risk priorities across the nation.  It funds construction and maintenance of fire trails and associated accessibility measures that contribute to safer, sustainable communities better able to prepare, respond to and withstand the effects of bushfires.  The specific objective of the programme is to enhance the effectiveness of fire trail networks and as a result increase the:

• Safety of fire fighting personnel involved in a fire suppression effort;
• Rapidity with which fire suppression agencies are able to access a fire; and
• Type of resources that can safely be made available to a fire suppression effort.

The programme is administered by the Australian Government Department of Transport and Regional Services. “

.

[Again, no answer was received from ConSoc.]

---

---

.

‘Six Foot Track Abused’

[Published by the editor in the Blue Mountains Gazette, 31st August 2005, page 12].

.

 

The June bulldozing or grading of the Six Foot Track near Megalong Creek was not only wrong, unnecessary and excessive; it breached the statutory provisions of the Crown Lands Act 1989 under Crown Lands (General Reserves) Bylaw 2001, which prescribes rules for the Track’s environmental protection, heritage and public recreation.

For instance, By-law 23 (2) (n) prohibits conduct in the reserve involving defacing or removing or disturbing any rock, sand, soil, stone or similar substance.  It appears no written consent was provided by the Trustee of the Six Foot Track Heritage Trust to the RFS.

The bulldozing also breached the Six Foot Track Conservation and Management Plan of 1997 (two volumes totalling 279 pages).  Section 2.1.1 prescribes the need for ecologically sustainable development principles to be followed for all management and planning associated with the Track.   Bulldozing or grading is not ecologically sustainable.  Policy Statement (7.2) (d) states that the physical elements of the Track including examples of the original alignment, works and sites of Aboriginal and European significance and remnant stands of vegetation should be retained and conserved wherever possible.  Numerous threatened species of flora and fauna are recorded as likely present in the Six Foot Tack environs and are listed in Volume I of the Plan.  The Plan also states at Section 8.2.5 that “Where development consent is not required an environmental impact statement should be undertaken where there is likely to be an adverse impact on the environment.”

The Plan proposes the following general management objectives for the Six Foot Track:

(1)    To ensure that all management decisions fully recognise the considerable cultural and heritage significance of the Six Foot Track

(2)    To seek to recover and retain the Track’s original character by the preservation and restoration of identified sites and Track features.

.

---

.

Reader feedback at the time:

.

.

---

.

RFS Strategy Misguided

[Published by the editor in the Blue Mountains Gazette, 5th October 2005]

It has been revealed that the June bulldozing or grading of the Six Foot Track near Megalong Creek was a mere drop in the RFS Bushfire Mitigation Programme.  Across the Blue Mountains, some twenty natural reserves including the Six Foot Track were targeted under the RFS 2004-05 fire trail strategy – Edith Falls, McMahons Point, Back Creek Cripple Creek plus some 95 hectares inside our National Park.  According to the federal Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS) website, $151,195 was granted to the RFS in the Blue Mountains alone, bulldozing 144 hectares of bush in the name of “addressing bushfire mitigation risk priorities.”

The Six Foot Track Conservation and Management Plan 1997, Vol II lists numerous vulnerable species of fauna recorded near Megalong Creek – the Glossy Black-Cockatoo (Clyptorhynchus lathami), Giant Burrowing Frog (Heleioporus australiacus), Spotted-tailed Quoll (Dasyurus maculatus).  The RFS contractors wouldn’t have had a clue if they were within 100 metres or 1 metre of rare, vulnerable or threatened species.

The RFS is not exempt from destroying important ecological habitat; rather it is required to have regard to the principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD). Yet the RFS policy on hazard reduction is woefully loose on the ‘Bushfire Co-ordinating Committee Policy 2/03’ on ESD – advocating protection of environmental values and ensuring that ESD commitments are adopted and adhered to by contractors.  Experience now confirms this policy is nothing more than ‘green-washing’.

The critical value of dedicated RFS volunteer fire-fighters fighting fires is without question. What deserves questioning is the unsustainable response of the RFS ‘old guard’ to fire trails and hazard reduction with token regard for sensitive habitat.  Repeated bushfire research confirms that bushfires are mostly now caused by arson and that the prevalence of property damage is a result of more residential communities encroaching upon bushland.

.

---

.

Reader feedback at the time:

.

.

Aftermath

.

Following the above publicity and the on site survey of the grading damage by Andrew Scott on behalf of the trustee (Department of Lands -Soil Conservation Service), soil remediation of the Six Foot Track was carried out later in 2005 at a taxpayer cost estimated at $27,000.  The RFS has continued to contract out its grading of thousands of kilometres of fire trails across New South Wales, federally funded by the  Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS).  In 2008,  DOTARS ceased online publishing the details of its funded fire trails activities.

The Blue Mountains Conservation Society Land Use Subcommittee (LUC) effectively ostracised the editor from all LUC meeting notifications, minutes and communications despite the editor emailing repeated requests for inclusion (all records remain on file).   The logical conclusion drawn from this action is that due to the involvement by key influential members of ConSoc with the local Rural Fire Service and Blue Mountains Council’s Blue Mountains Bushfire Management Committee a conflict of interest existed in which the vested interest of the latter held sway.  The Land Use Officer subsequently joined Blue Mountains Council.   The editor (as Honorary Director) was also reprimanded by the Director of the Colong Foundation for Wilderness for taking a principled stand against ConSoc’s condoning of damaging bushfire management practices.

This issue has become a regrettable chapter in one’s exposure to questionable principles of the NSW conservation movement.  On 19th January 2009, on principle the editor resigned from both ConSoc and the Colong Foundation for Wilderness to embark on designing an independent voice in The Habitat Advocate website.   In November 2010, the editor renewed his membership with the Colong Foundation for Wilderness.

.

---

.

References

1. Report for Restoration of Six Foot Track August 2005.pdf
2. BMCS BF policy 18 Sept Final
3. BFCC 01-03 fire trail guidelines
4. Six Foot Track Conservation and Management Plan Vol.1 s7.2.jpg
5. Six Foot Track Heritage Trust letter 20050802s.jpg
6. Six Foot Track Heritage Trust letter-20050802 Page 2.jpg
   

.

– end of article –