Posts Tagged ‘Giant Burrowing Frog’

Rural Fire Service strategy misguided

Friday, March 30th, 2012

This article was initially written by this editor and published in the Blue Mountains Gazette newspaper on 20051005 as a letter to the editor, entitled ‘RFS strategy misguided‘.

19th Century heritage-listed ‘Six Foot Track’

..bulldozed by the Rural Fire Service in July 2005, widened into a convenient Fire Trail for its fire truck crews.

.
It has been revealed that the June bulldozing or grading of the Six Foot Track near Megalong Creek (Blue Mountains, New South Wales) was a mere drop in the Rural Fire Service (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 the Blue Mountains National Park.

Read: [>RFS Fire Trail Policy]

Read: [>RFS Fire Trail Classification Guidelines]

According to the Australian Government’s (then) Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS) website, some $151,195 was granted to the RFS in the Blue Mountains alone, for it to bulldoze and burn 144 hectares of native bushland under the euphemism of “addressing bushfire mitigation risk priorities” (Ed: Read ‘bush arson‘)

‘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).

Glossy Black-Cockatoo

[Source: Dubbo Field Naturalist & Conservation Society
http://www.speednet.com.au/~abarca/black-cockatoo.htm]

.

Giant Burrowing Frog

[Source: Frogs.org.au, ^http://frogs.org.au/community/viewtopic.php?t=4876&sid=0dc45ef08e12cd5e1d27524bca2269f9]

.

Spotted-tailed Quoll

(Dasyurus maculatus)

Blue Mountains top order predator, competing with the Dingo

.

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).

Read: >RFS Policy 2-03 Ecologically Sustainable Development

The ‘Rationale‘ of this RFS ESD policy states at Clause 1.2:

‘The Bush Fire Coordinating Committee, under the Rural Fires Act 1997 Sec 3 (d), is required to have regard to ESD as outlined in the Protection of the Environment Administration Act 1991, which sets out the following principles:

a) The precautionary principle namely, that if there are threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation. In the application of the precautionary principle, public and private decisions should be guided by:

i. careful evaluation to avoid, wherever practicable, serious or irreversible damage to the environment, and
ii. an assessment of the risk-weighted consequences of various options.

b) Inter-generational equity namely, that the present generation should ensure that the health, diversity and productivity of the environment are maintained or enhanced for the benefit of future generations

c) Conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity should be a fundamental consideration in all decisions.

d) Recognising the economic values that the natural environment provides. The natural environment has values that are often hard to quantify but provide a benefit to the entire community. By recognising that the natural environment does have significant economic and social values we can improve decision making for the present and future generations.’

.

Yet the RFS policy on hazard reduction is woefully loose in the ‘Bushfire Co-ordinating Committee Policy 2 /03 on ESD‘ – which (on paper) advocates protecting environmental values and ensuring that ESD commitments are adopted and adhered to by contractors.

Experience now confirms this policy is nothing more than ‘greenwashing’. The RFS wouldn’t know what environmental values were if they drove their fire truck into a Blkue Mountains upland swamp. There is not one ecologist among them.

While 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:

Bush arson (hazard reduction included, escaped or otherwise)
More residential communities encroaching upon bushland.

Under the ‘Blue Mountains Bushfire Management Committee Bushfire Risk Management Plan’ (Ed: their bureaucratic name), key objectives are patently ignored:

‘Ensure that public and private land owners and occupiers understand their bushfire management responsibilities’
‘Ensure that the community is well informed about bushfire protection measures and prepared for bushfire events through Community Fireguard programs’
‘Manage bushfires for the protection and conservation of the natural, cultural, scenic and recreational features , including tourism values, of the area’.

Instead, the Rural Fire Service is content to look busy by burning and bulldozing native bushland. The RFS actively demonises native vegetation as a ‘fuel hazard‘, in the much the same way that ignorant colonists of the 18th and 19th centuries demonised Australia’s unique wildlife as ‘vermin‘ and ‘game‘.

.

Forests NSW (government’s industrial logger of NSW remnant forests).

(Forests NSW did not publish the area burnt, only the cost. As a rule of thumb use $3000/square km)

Bush Fire Management Committee	Reserve / Activity Name	NSW Allocation
Clarence Zone	Dalmorton SF	$30,000
Future Forests	Swan	$20,050
Future Forests	Tindall	$10,680
Future Forests	Tooloom	$10,425
Future Forests	Mazzer	$7,341
Future Forests	Kungurrabah	$4,435
Future Forests	Morpeth Park	$3,773
Future Forests	Loughnan	$3,155
Future Forests	Inglebar	$3,000
Future Forests	Lattimore	$2,604
Future Forests	Byrne	$1,755
Future Forests	Ziull 4	$1,677
Future Forests	Lejag	$1,670
Future Forests	Ziull 2	$1,600
Future Forests	Bates	$1,563
Future Forests	Ziull 3	$1,454
Future Forests	Envirocom	$1,410
Future Forests	Morgan	$1,361
Future Forests	McNamara	$1,279
Future Forests	Neaves	$967
Future Forests	Zuill	$872
Future Forests	Boyle	$807
Future Forests	Fitzpatrick	$791
Future Forests	Morrow	$785
Future Forests	Morrow	$785
Future Forests	Morrow	$785
Future Forests	Wallwork	$665
Future Forests	Smith	$665
Future Forests	Wilson	$622
Future Forests	Jarramarumba	$600
Future Forests	Hession	$597
Future Forests	Edwards	$563
Future Forests	Maunder	$558
Future Forests	Kuantan	$515
Future Forests	Billins	$484
Future Forests	Cox	$475
Future Forests	Paterson	$461
Future Forests	Gladys	$415
Future Forests	O’Keefe	$371
Future Forests	Woodcock	$369
Future Forests	Pratten	$346
Future Forests	Truswell	$323
Future Forests	Divine	$323
Future Forests	Hastings	$323
Future Forests	White	$300
Future Forests	Miller	$300
Future Forests	Koop	$300
Future Forests	Lacy	$277
Future Forests	Nosrac	$277
Future Forests	Tully	$277
Future Forests	Baker	$277
Future Forests	Yaganegi	$277
Future Forests	Siezowski	$254
Future Forests	Zuill	$254
Future Forests	Atcheson	$254
Future Forests	Dissevelt	$254
Future Forests	Hoy	$254
Future Forests	Woods	$254
Future Forests	Dawson	$254
Future Forests	Hagan	$254
Future Forests	Skelly	$231
Future Forests	Robards	$231
Future Forests	Maunder	$231
Future Forests	Day	$231
Future Forests	O’Connell	$231
Future Forests	Kompara	$231
Future Forests	Carmen	$231
Future Forests	Maurer	$231
Future Forests	Cunin	$208
Future Forests	GCC	$208
Future Forests	White	$208
Future Forests	Hayer	$208
Future Forests	Southgate	$208
Future Forests	Peck	$208
Greater Taree	Kiwarrak SF	$40,000
Hastings	Cowarra SF	$30,000
Hastings	Caincross SF	$4,000
Hume	Clearing fire trails	$100,000
Hume	New FT	$6,000
Hunter	Pokolbin SF	$13,600
Hunter	Myall River SF	$12,800
Hunter	Myall River SF	$12,800
Hunter	Heaton SF	$12,400
Hunter	Bulahdelah SF	$6,100
Hunter	Watagan SF	$3,200
Hunter	Awaba SF	$3,200
Hunter	Myall River SF	$3,100
Macquarie	Warrengong	$16,250
Macquarie	Vulcan & Gurnang	$11,519
Macquarie	Kinross SF	$8,800
Macquarie	Mount David	$6,101
Macquarie	Newnes SF	$5,199
Macquarie	Printing 25 fire atlas’	$2,048
Macquarie	Black Rock Ridge	$447
Mid-Nth Coast – Taree	Knorrit SF	$36,000
Mid-Nth Coast – Taree	Yarratt SF	$16,000
Mid-Nth Coast – Wauchope	Boonanghi SF	$37,000
Mid-Nth Coast – Wauchope	Northern Break	$9,000
Mid-Nth Coast – Wauchope	Caincross SF	$3,000
Mid-Nth Coast – Wauchope	Western Break	$2,000
Monaro	Clearing fire trails	$114,685
North East	Thumb Creek SF	$46,000
North East	Candole SF	$29,535
North East	Various State Forests	$20,000
North East	Mt Belmore SF	$12,115
North East	Candole SF	$8,900
North East	Lower Bucca SF	$5,500
North East	All North Region	$3,300
North East	Wild Cattle SF	$3,000
North East	Orara East SF	$1,900
Northern -Casino	Barragunda	$11,522
Northern -Casino	Yaraldi 2003	$8,847
Northern -Casino	Yaraldi 2004	$3,207
Richmond Valley	Bates	$20,000
Richmond Valley	Whiporie SF	$13,154
Richmond Valley	Swanson	$12,000
Richmond Valley	McNamara	$10,180
Richmond Valley	Whiporie SF	$9,582
Southern	Pollwombra FT	$6,360
Southern-Eden	Various – whole district	$112,019
Tamworth	Nundle SF	$40,000
Walcha	Nowendoc SF	$30,000
Walcha	Styx River SF	$20,000
		$1,073,482

i.e. Approximately an area 20km x 20km

.

NSW Department of Lands (what native vegetation’s left).

Bush Fire Management Committee	Reserve / Activity Name	Treatment Area Ha / Other	Treatment Area (km2)
Baulkham Hills	Porters Rd / Cranstons Rd		5
Baulkham Hills	Porters Rd / Cranstons Rd (2)		4
Baulkham Hills	Pauls Road Trail		5
Baulkham Hills	Mount View Trail		1
Baulkham Hills	Idlewild		2
Baulkham Hills	Maroota Tracks Trail		7
Baulkham Hills	Yoothamurra Trail		1
Baulkham Hills	Kellys Arm Trail		3
Baulkham Hills	Dargle Ridge Trail		5
Baulkham Hills	Dargle Trail		3
Baulkham Hills	Days Road Trail		3
Baulkham Hills	Dickinsons Trail		6
Baulkham Hills	Fingerboard Trail		3
Baulkham Hills	Floyds Road Trail		8
Baulkham Hills	Neichs Road Trail		4
Bega	Eden Strategic Fire Trail		3
Bega	Illawambera Fire Trail		1
Bega	Merimbula/Turu Beach Strategic Protection		2
Bega	Yankees Gap		2
Bega	Millingandi Special Protection (Trail)		1
Bega	Wallagoot Strategic Protection (Trail)		1.2
Bega	South Eden Strategic Protection (Trail)		1
Bega	Merimbula/Pambula Strategic Protection (APZ)		1
Bega	Pacific St Tathra		0.5
Bland	Bland Villages (FTM)		2
Bland	Water Tower Reserve FTM		3
Blue Mountains	Cripple Creek Fire Trail Stage 2		5
Blue Mountains	Cripple Creek Fire Trail Complex		5
Blue Mountains	Caves Creek Trail		0.4
Blue Mountains	Edith Falls Trail		2
Blue Mountains	Boronia Rd – Albert Rd Trails		1
Blue Mountains	Perimeter Trail – North Hazelbrook		1.5
Blue Mountains	McMahons Point Trail – Kings Tableland		7
Blue Mountains	Back Creek Fire Trail		3.2
Blue Mountains	Mitchell’s Creek Fire Trail		3.5
Bombala	Gibraltar Ridge Fire Trail		11
Bombala	Burnt Hut Fire Trail		5
Bombala	Merriangah East Fire Trail		12
Bombala	Bombala Towns & Villages (Trails)		10
Campbelltown	St Helens Park – Wedderburn Rd (Barriers)		0.3
Campbelltown	Barrier / Gate
Campbelltown	Riverview Rd Fire Trail		0.65
Canobolas	Calula Range FTM
Canobolas	Spring Glen Estate FTM
Cessnock	Neath South West Fire Trail		2
Cessnock	Neath South East Fire Trail		1.5
Cessnock	Neath North Fire Trail (2)		1
Cessnock	Gates – Asset Protection Zones
Cessnock	Signs – Asset Protection Zones
Cessnock	Signs – Fire Trails
Cessnock	Kearsley Fire Trail		0.5
Cessnock	Neath – South (Trail)		4
Cessnock	Neath – North (Trail)		2
Clarence Valley	Bowling Club Fire Trail		1
Clarence Valley	Brooms Head Fire Trail		0.2
Clarence Valley	Ilarwill Village		0.3
Cooma-Monaro	Chakola Fire Trail		21
Cooma-Monaro	Good Good Fire Trail		12
Cooma-Monaro	Inaloy Fire Trail		19
Cooma-Monaro	Cowra Creek Fire Trail		4
Cooma-Monaro	David’s Fire Trail		2.1
Cooma-Monaro	Clear Hills Fire Trail		5
Cooma-Monaro	Mt Dowling Fire Trail		16
Cooma-Monaro	Towneys Ridge Fire Trail		6
Cunningham	Warialda Periphery 2		20
Cunningham	Upper Bingara Fire Trail
Dungog	Dungog Fire Trail Signs
Far North Coast	Byrangary Fire Trail		1
Far North Coast	Main Arm Fire Trail (NC67)		2
Far North Coast	Burringbar Fire Trail (NC69)		1
Far North Coast	Mill Rd Fire Trail (NC95)		1
Far North Coast	Broken Head Fire Trail (NC68)		0.5
Far North Coast	New Brighton Fire Trail (NC44)		0.5
Far North Coast	Mooball Spur Fire Trail		1
Far North Coast	Palmwoods Fire Trail (NC06)		0.5
Gloucester	Coneac Trail		6
Gloucester	Moores Trail		6
Gloucester	Mt Mooney Fire Trail		6
Gosford District	Signs – Fire Trails
Great Lakes	Ebsworth Fire Trail		1
Great Lakes	Tuncurry High Fire Trail		0.6
Great Lakes	Monterra Ave Trail – Hawks Nest		0.7
Greater Argyle	Browns Rd Komungla		12
Greater Argyle	Greater Argyle Fire Trail Maintenance
Greater Argyle	Cookbundoon Fire Trail		2
Greater Taree District	Tinonee St Road Reserve		0.25
Greater Taree District	Beach St SFAZ – Wallabi Point		0.35
Greater Taree District	Sth Woodlands Dr – SFAZ		1.3
Greater Taree District	Cedar Party Rd – Taree		2
Hawkesbury District	Sargents Road (2) ?tenure		0.75
Hawkesbury District	Parallel Trail (2)		2.5
Hawkesbury District	Parallel Trail (1)		1.1
Hornsby/Ku-ring-gai	Tunks Ridge, Dural		1
Hornsby/Ku-ring-gai	Radnor & Cairnes Fire Trail		0.5
Hornsby/Ku-ring-gai	Binya Cl, Hornsby Heights		1.5
Shellharbour District	Saddleback – Hoddles Trail		3
Shellharbour District	Rough Range Trail		1
Lake Macquarie District	Kilaben Bay Fire Trail		1.5
Lake Macquarie District	Gates – Access Management
Lake Macquarie District	Signs – APZ
Lake Macquarie District	Signs – Fire Trails
Lithgow	Wilsons Glen Trail		6.1
Lithgow	Kanimbla Fire Trail No 314		7.8
Lithgow	Camels Back Trail No 312		4.5
Lithgow	Crown Creek Trail No 206		7
Lithgow	Capertee Common Trail No 203		3
Lower Hunter Zone	Access Infrastructure – All Districts
Lower North Coast	Cabbage Tree Lane Fire Trail, Kempsey		1.5
Lower North Coast	Bullocks Quarry Fire Trail		0.66
Lower North Coast	Perimeter Protection, Main St, Eungai Creek, Nambucca		0.6
Mid North Coast	Urunga Lagoon, Bellingen		4
Mid North Coast	Wenonah Head, Bellingen		4
Mudgee	Munro’s Fire Trail		24
Mudgee	Munro’s Fire Trail		5.25
Penrith	Londonderry/Castlereagh		6
Port Stephens	Bobs Farm Fire Trails		4
Port Stephens	Salamander Way Fire Trail		1.5
Port Stephens	Gan Gan Hill West Fire Trail		1.2
Port Stephens	Nelson Bay – Gan Gan Hill (Trail)		1.5
Port Stephens	Taylors Beach Fire Trail		1
Port Stephens	Nelson Bay – Wallawa Rd (SFAZ)		0.7
Port Stephens	Taylors Beach East Fire Trail		3.5
Port Stephens	Nelson Bay – Wallawa Rd (Gates)
Port Stephens	Port Stephens Fire Trail Signs
Port Stephens	Corlette – Salamander Way (Trail)		1
Shoalhaven	APZ Access Works
Snowy River	Southern Boundary Fire Trail		3
Snowy River	Somme Valley Fire Trail		5
Sutherland District	Forbes Creek North Trail		1.3
Sutherland District	Still Creek Complex (Trail)		3.8
Sutherland District	Mannikin Trail		1.5
Sutherland District	Viburnum Trail		0.8
Sutherland District	Mill Creek Complex		2.6
Sutherland District	Loftus Creek Complex		1.9
Sutherland District	Cranberry Trail		0.8
Sutherland District	Turella Trail		0.8
Sutherland District	Freemantle Trail		0.4
Sutherland District	Illaroo Trail		0.7
Sutherland District	Yala East Trail		0.9
Sutherland District	Bunyan Fire Trail		1.2
Sutherland District	Rosewell Service Trail		0.5
Sutherland District	Belarada Service Trail		0.3
Sutherland District	Belbowrie Service Trail		0.3
Sutherland District	Leawarra Fire Trail		0.9
Sutherland District	McKenzie Service Trail		0.7
Sutherland District	Walsh Close Trail		0.7
Sutherland District	Yala West Trail		0.7
Sutherland District	Barnes Cres Service Trail		0.6
Sutherland District	Illumba Trail		0.5
Sutherland District	Penrose Trail		0.5
Sutherland District	Tatler Place Trail		0.5
Sutherland District	Torumba Service Trail		0.5
Sutherland District	Friendship Trail		0.4
Sutherland District	Kippax – Rosewall Trail		0.4
Sutherland District	Tallarook Service Trail		0.4
Sutherland District	Billa Service Trail		0.3
Sutherland District	Chestnut Trail		0.2
Sutherland District	Croston Rd Trail		0.3
Sutherland District	Kingswood Rd Trail		0.3
Sutherland District	Roebourne Trail		0.3
Sutherland District	Whimbrel Service Trail		0.3
Sutherland District	Shearwater Trail		0.1
Tamworth	Moore Creek Dam Reserve		3.5
Tamworth	Moore Creek Dam Reserve		1
Tumut	Bundarbo Fire Trail (Stage 1)		30
Tumut	Yammatree Reserve		2
Tumut	Thomas Boyd Track Head		2
Tumut	Tumut Bush Common		5
Tumut	Batlow Hill		2
Tumut	Rimmers Ridge – Adelong
Tumut	Bangadang		7
Upper Lachlan	Upper Lachlan Fire Trail Maintenance
Upper Lachlan	Isabella Fire Trail		10
Wagga Wagga	Silvatite Reserve (Trails)		5
Wagga Wagga	Wagga Wagga Towns & Villages (Trails)		10
Wagga Wagga	Kyeamba Gap		4
Wagga Wagga	San Isadore		3
Warringah/Pittwater	Sandy Trail		0.1
Warringah/Pittwater	Lovett Bay Trail		2.5
Warringah/Pittwater	Elvina Bay Trail		1.5
Warringah/Pittwater	Aumuna Cooyong Trail		0.2
Wingecarribee	P3 Fire Trail		6
Wingecarribee	Weir Fire trail		3.8
Wingecarribee	Lukes Fire trail		0.1
Wollondilly	Bargo Weir Fire Trail		10
Wyong District	YMCA North / South Link Fire Trail		2
Wyong District	YMCA South / Kanangra Dr Fire Trail		2
Wyong District	Lake Munmorah Fire Trails		3.25
Wyong District	Hyles St Fire Trail, Chittaway Pt		0.1
Wyong District	Big “T” and YMCA Link Fire Trails		1.5
Wyong District	Lake Road Fire Trail, Chittaway Point		0.1
Wyong District	Big “T” Fire Trail – Crangan Bay		1.1
Wyong District	Wyong APZ Signs
Wyong District	Lake Road Fire Trail, Tuggerah		1
Wyong District	Doyalson North, 219-225 Pacific Hway (Trail)		0.8
Yass Valley	Yass Valley Fire Trail Maintenance
			565.16

i.e. Approximately an area 24km x 24km

. .

Tags: Blue Mountains National Park, Bulldozing Six Foot Track, bush arson, Bush Fire Coordinating Committee, Bushfire Mitigation Programme, controlled burning, Department of Transport and Regional Services, DOTARS, Ecologically Sustainable Development, Fire Trail Strategy, Giant Burrowing Frog, Glossy Black-Cockatoo, hazard reduction, Megalong Creek, prescribed burning, RFS, Rural Fire Service, Six Foot Track, spotted-tailed quoll
Posted in Birds (Australian), Blue Mountains (AU), Quolls, Reptiles, Threats from Bushfire, Threats from Greenwashing | 1 Comment »

Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg

Nippon Paper’s ‘Reflex’ brand still “pure”?

Friday, August 26th, 2011

Who does one believe?…

Greenwash Tick

.

Tuesday 23-Aug-2011:

‘Paper manufacturer loses green credentials’

by Liz Hobday, ABC News, 20110823, ^http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-23/paper-manufacturer-loses-green-credentials/2851982/?site=melbourne, accessed 20110825]

.
The Wilderness Society says Australian Paper cannot meet environmental standards. The manufacturer of Reflex paper has lost part of its international environmental certification, after withdrawing from an audit of its wood supplies.

The Forest Stewardship Council was auditing Australian Paper, to check that the wood used to make Reflex paper is not sourced from high conservation value forests.

Luke Chamberlain from the Wilderness Society says the company withdrew from the process, because it cannot meet environmental standards.

“The makers of Reflex paper get their wood from the Victorian State Government native forest logging arm VicForests,” he said.

“VicForests log in endangered species habitat. They log old growth forests in East Gippsland and the central highlands”

Australian Paper says its products are not sourced from high conservations value forests threatened by logging.

Shaun Scallan from Australian Paper says they withdrew because the audit process changed while it was underway.

“We pulled out because of a change in the definition of part of the standard late in the piece, which did not allow us enough time to then satisfy that changed definition,” he said.

.

Meanwhile the same Shaun Scallan of Australian Paper just the day prior on Monday 22 August 2011 posts his media release:

‘Australian Paper retains FSC Chain of Custody Certification’…?

by Shaun Scallan, Australian Paper, 20110822, ^http://australianpaper.com.au/media/2478/AP%20FSC%20audit%20release%20FINAL%20Aug%2022_2011.pdf, accessed 20110825

‘Australian Paper has successfully retained Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) Chain of Custody certification (FSC-C002059) in its latest audit. Auditor Rainforest Alliance confirmed that under the certification Australian Paper may continue to produce FSC-certified product based on sourcing of material from FSC-certified operations and recycled content, as allowed under the FSC rules for Mixed and Recycled product.

“We are pleased to have retained our FSC Chain of Custody certification,” Australian Paper CEO Mr Jim Henneberry said.
“Australian Paper has held Chain of Custody certification since 2006. However, we have decided to remove the Controlled Wood component from our certification at this time as there has been uncertainty around the interpretation of key elements of the standards.”

“Advice received by Rainforest Alliance from FSC International around the interpretation of the Standard was received after the physical audit had been completed. This left insufficient time for us to address and so we elected to withdraw Controlled Wood from our certification.” Mr Henneberry said.

Australian Paper remains committed to ensuring that fibre supplies come from internationally recognised, third party certified sources and also regards the Australian Forestry Standard and PEFC as benchmark certifications under this policy. The majority of wood supplied to Australian Paper is certified to the Australian Forestry Standard.

“We are also continuing to consult with a wide range of stakeholders as part of our Future Fibre Strategy review,” Mr Henneberry said.
“It is vital that we achieve the best balance between the environment, the health of regional communities and our ongoing competitiveness. We look forward to sharing outcomes from this review in due course.”

.

Meanwhile, we have the boss of Nippon Paper (the Japanese company that owns the misnomer ‘Australian Paper’) declaring Nippon Paper is going gang-busters to become a top global pulp and paper company…(at any cost?)

‘Since I was appointed president of Nippon Paper Group, Inc. in 2008, I have been pursuing “growth-oriented management.” This means exploring every possibility with a consistently positive stance, actively seizing opportunities, achieving the growth needed to become one of the top pulp and paper companies worldwide, as set out in the Group Vision 2015, and developing corporate value that meets the expectations of all stakeholders.’ ~ President of Nippon Paper Group, Yoshio Haga. [Source: ^http://www.np-g.com/e/about/president.html]

.

Meanwhile, the stated Charter of Nippon Paper Group includes:

‘6. Active involvement with environmental issues assures that…’

.

‘We shall promote afforestation projects, to create and make effective use of sustainable forest resources.’
‘We shall promote energy conservation, the use of wastepaper and other measures to effectively use resources that are limited in quantity.’
‘We shall manage and reduce all types of discharge and waste generated in the course of corporate activities.’
‘We shall research and develop manufacturing technologies, and products and services that are in harmony with the environment.’

[Source: ^http://www.np-g.com/e/about/charter.html#shead2]

Editor: It is suspicious when a Japanese company is more than content to log and irrevocably destroy another country’s old growth forests, while Japan’s own old growth forests around Mt Fuji remain sacrosanct.

‘In spite of the abundant natural resources, logging is not commonly practiced in the forests of Japan. Japan Forests are venerated and protected since they provide essential soil cover and help in water conservation. All Species are encouraged to grow in the Forests in Japan , from the broad-leaved deciduous to the evergreen coniferous types. There are also many forests which grow near volcanic areas, destroyed and then rejuvenated every time an eruption occurs. The Aokigahara Forest at the base of Mount Fuji is one such forest. Locals as well as tourist camp, trek and hike through these dense forests of Japan to explore their unusual natural beauty.

‘Some Japan Forests are designated as Sacred Forests . These forests generally contain an ancient religious Shrine, usually worshiping the Shinto religion and are protected from trespassing and destruction. These forest shrines are still venerated as national treasures.

Some of the sacred forests in Japan are-

The Forest of the Yahiko Jinja has many trees like the Cedar, Cypress and Oaks. The Shrine has a sacred Chinquapin tree as well.
The Forest of Atsuta Jinja is an important Shinto Shrine, housing one the three important Shinto relics – the holy sword of Kusanagi-no-tsurugi. The forest has evergreens like the Japanese Camellia Sakaki, camphor trees, Ilex and Japanese Honeysuckle.
The Forest of Kashima Jingu has over 800 species of trees like varieties of Cedar, Fir and Oak. The Kashima Jingu is an important shrine of the Kanto Area. The forest has been designated as a Wildlife Protection area for the rare birds in the region.
The Forest of Shimogamo Jinja covers over 495 hectares and has many different species of deciduous trees like the Zelkova, the Elm and the Hackberry. The Shrine itself has 53 buildings which have been designated as National Heritage Architecture.
The Forest of the Kirishima Jingu covers and area of 887 hectares. Located near the Mount Kirishima Volcano, the forest has been destroyed and then recovered for over 60 times.
The Forest of the Kasuga Taisha is home to the beautiful podocarpus Nagi. The forest also contains many species of evergreens and shrubs. Trees like the Kasuga, the Andromeda and the Ichii also grow there. People from all over Japan visit the venerated shrine in the quarterly pilgrimages.‘

[Source: ^http://www.mapsofworld.com/japan/japan-tourism/forests-in-japan.html]

Japan’s sacred Aokigahara Forest

.

Ethics question for Yoshio Haga (President of Nippon Paper Group):

What moral right do the Japanese have to consider their own native old growth Aokigahara Forest more sacred than Australia’s sacred native old growth forests such as those across East Gippland?

Stump of Brown Mountain’s sacred 600 year old Mountain Ash old growth tree.

It was logged by VicForests in November 2008 for Nippon Paper’s Reflex Paper.

.

In light of VicForests recent civil prosecution in the Victorian Supreme Court, Nippon Paper Group’s association with VicForests calls into question the reputation of Nippon Paper Group and its brand Reflex Paper:

‘VicForests has been stopped from harvesting certain coupes in the Brown Mountain forest in East Gippsland containing old growth forest

– habitat for rare and threatened species – until the completion of steps implementing the precautionary principle.’

.

‘Environment East Gippsland Inc v VicForests – The precautionary principle in action’

22 November 2010:

[Source: Blake Dawson (Lawyers), ‘Environment Matters’, 20111122, ^http://www.blakedawson.com/Templates/Publications/x_article_content_page.aspx?id=60457, accessed 20110825]

.

In Brief:.

‘The Victorian Supreme Court decision in Environment East Gippsland Inc v VicForests firmly embeds the approach to the precautionary principle laid down in Telstra Corporation Limited v Hornsby Shire Council (2006).’
‘The case makes it clear that the precautionary principle can be the subject of an enforceable obligation.’
‘The case also makes it clear that the precautionary principle applies both at the strategic and operational stages of a project or undertaking.’
‘The fact that VicForests complied with its forestry approvals was not enough to satisfy the Court that it had met its obligations with regard to the precautionary principle.’

‘In Environment East Gippsland Inc v VicForests [2010] VSC 335 conservation group Environment East Gippsland (EEG) won a landmark injunction against VicForests, a state-owned timber business with responsibility for commercial timber harvesting in Victoria’s state forests.

VicForests has been stopped from harvesting certain coupes in the Brown Mountain forest in East Gippsland containing old growth forest – habitat for rare and threatened species – until the completion of steps implementing the precautionary principle.

In this case, Justice Osborn of the Supreme Court of Victoria undertook a thorough analysis of the application of the precautionary principle in the context of a detailed legislative regime aimed at balancing biodiversity protection and commercial timber harvesting. The case embeds the approach to the precautionary principle laid down by Chief Justice Preston of the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales, in Telstra Corporation Limited v Hornsby Shire Council (2006) 67 NSWLR 256.’

The lead-up to the litigation

‘The Brown Mountain forests in Victoria’s East Gippsland contain old growth forests and provide habitat for rare and threatened species such as the Powerful Owl, the Spotted-tailed Quoll (mainland Australia’s largest marsupial carnivore) and the Long-footed Potoroo. However, these areas are also amongst the most productive timber harvesting forests in Victoria and play a crucial role in Victoria’s sustainable timber industry.

In 2006, the Victorian State Government committed to increasing the conservation parks and reserves within the broader Brown Mountain area. Nevertheless, in 2008 commercial logging in the Brown Mountain area began.

After numerous studies of the area indicated the presence of important threatened and rare species, EEG requested the Minister for Environment and Climate Change, Gavin Jennings, to make an interim conservation order to conserve critical habitat of the endangered Long-footed Potoroo, Spot-tailed Quoll, Sooty Owl, Powerful Owl and Orbost Spiny Crayfish at Brown Mountain. The Minister did not grant a conservation order, but instead increased the conservation area surrounding Brown Mountain.

Having failed to obtain undertakings from VicForests that it would not proceed to log the Brown Mountain coupes, EEG sought interlocutory injunctive relief. An interlocutory injunction restraining logging was granted by Justice Forrest on 14 September 2009 (see our article Environmental litigation heats up with some significant wins for public interest litigants in our 2 October 2010 edition of Environment Matters ), pending the outcome of the full proceedings before Justice Osborn in the Supreme Court of Victoria.’

The legislative regime

‘Logging of state forests in Victoria is regulated by a complex scheme of legislation, codes of practice, management plans and procedures, described by Osborn J as “labyrinthine”. The principal legislation includes the Forests Act 1958 (Vic) (Forests Act), Sustainable Forests (Timber) Act 2004 (Vic) (SFT Act), Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 (Vic) and Conservation, Forests and Lands Act 1987 (Vic).’

Responsibilities for timber harvesting and forestry management

‘VicForests is a state-owned corporation, established in 2004 to undertake the harvesting of timber in Victoria’s state forests. The Secretary to the Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) has overarching responsibility for managing state forests and timber harvesting within forests under the Forests Act.’

Legal challenge

‘EEG sought an injunction restraining VicForests from harvesting four coupes at Brown Mountain containing old growth forest. It also sought declarations that timber harvesting within the coupes by VicForests in accordance with the current forestry regime would be unlawful.

EEG argued that the current conservation measures for the Brown Mountain coupes did not meet the requirements of the regulatory system, which addresses the preservation of conservation values and in particular the protection of endangered species. EEG also argued that VicForests had failed to implement the precautionary principle.

VicForests took issue with EEG’s standing to sue. Further, it denied the presence of a number of endangered species and argued that the logging of the Brown Mountain coupes would take place under a legislative framework that adequately protects endangered species and would, therefore, be lawful. It also argued that it was DSE’s responsibility to stipulate any further requirements for habitat protection in accordance with the regulatory regime.’

EEG’s standing

‘Following the settled High Court authority that standing to bring such proceedings depends on the plaintiff’s “special interest” in the subject matter of the litigation (Australian Conservation Foundation v Commonwealth (2000) 200 CLR 591), Osborn J was satisfied that EEG had a relevant “special interest” because:

EEG uses the coupes to a greater degree than the general public (for example, the group has a “Valley of the Giants Old Growth Forests Walk” through the affected coupes);
EEG’s predecessor was involved in the consultative process for the formulation of the applicable forest management plan; and
the government has previously recognised EEG’s status as a body representing this sector of the public interest.’

.

The precautionary principle [Ed: once again]

.

‘The VicForests case firmly embeds in Australian environmental jurisprudence the approach to the precautionary principle laid down by Chief Justice Preston of the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales, in Telstra Corporation Limited v Hornsby Shire Council (2006) 67 NSWLR 256 (Telstra). Justice Osborn’s decision in VicForests is the first Supreme Court application of the Telstra principles.

The precautionary principle is integrated throughout the Victorian forestry regime’s many instruments.

Following Preston CJ’s two-fold test in Telstra, Osborn J stressed that the precautionary principle is a test of common sense. There must be:

a threat of serious or irreversible environmental damage; and
scientific uncertainty as to the environmental damage.

Justice Osborn stated:

Once both of these conditions or thresholds are satisfied, a precautionary measure may be taken to avert the anticipated threat of environmental damage, but it should be proportionate … [The] degree of precaution appropriate will depend on the combined effect of the seriousness of the threat and the degree of uncertainty.

It is a “wherever practicable” test.

In practice, this meant that once the two-fold test was satisfied by EEG, VicForests had the onus of proving that the threat posed by logging the coupes did not exist or was negligible. Because it could not do this, the question then became:

whether the threat was able to be addressed by adaptive management measures (in this case the requirement for surveys and management zone reviews); and
whether the measure alleged to be required (here the permanent injunction against logging the coupes) was proportionate to the threat in issue.

Justice Osborn carefully examined the legislative regime and held that it is not intended that VicForests only apply the precautionary principle at the strategic planning stage:

VicForests is specifically required to apply it [the precautionary principle] having regard to the results of monitoring and research as they come to light during operations. … The requirements of the precautionary principle fall to be considered in the light of the whole of the evidence bearing on these matters as it now is and not as it was at the time VicForests completed planning.

Justice Osborn stressed, however, that the precautionary principle sits within a wider statutory regime that takes into account principles of sustainable development.

He held that unless VicForests complied with the requirements of the applicable Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act Statements and with conditions stated in the relevant allocation order (under the Forests Act) and the Timber Release Plan (under the SFT Act), logging at Brown Mountain would be unlawful.

This meant that VicForests could not rely on its current approvals to log the coupes because DSE had not, for example, changed zonings in the coupes to reflect the presence of threatened species. VicForests had an ongoing, active duty to apply the precautionary principle, which included responding to new information as it became available.

Importantly, Osborn J stressed that the precautionary principle can be the subject of an enforceable obligation.’

Outcome

‘Justice Osborn ordered that VicForests stop harvesting until various measures had been completed to respond to the detection of endangered species and to implement a precautionary approach with respect to their potential extinction. The required measures included:

creating or amending special management zones, special protection zones and retained habitat areas to protect the Long-footed Potoroo, Greater Gliders and Yellow-bellied Gliders (as relevant);
undertaking further surveys for the Giant Burrowing Frog, Large Brown Tree Frog and Spotted-tailed Quoll; and
completing a current review of the Powerful Owl and Sooty Owl Management Areas,

to the satisfaction of the Director, Biodiversity Policy and Programs, DSE.

The difficulty for the Court in formulating its orders was that the power to act on the evidence of rare and endangered species and implement the required legislative and policy changes lies not with VicForests, against whom the injunction was sought, but with DSE.

Justice Osborn overcame this difficulty by stopping VicForests from logging until certain actions are undertaken, these actions being DSE responsibilities. VicForests had maintained throughout proceedings that it would comply with any changes to the regulatory regime made by DSE, and this was accepted by the Court.

Significance of the decision

This case firmly embeds the approach to the precautionary principle laid down by Chief Justice Preston in Telstra Corporation Limited v Hornsby Shire Council (2006) 67 NSWLR 256.

Justice Osborn’s decision makes it clear that:

The precautionary principle can be the subject of an enforceable obligation.
Parties having an obligation to apply the precautionary principle cannot demonstrate compliance with the principle solely through departmental approval of their actions or relevant approvals under the regulatory regime; the precautionary principle is an active obligation that applies throughout operations, requiring parties to respond to new information as it arises.
The precautionary principle applies throughout all stages of operation, not just the strategic planning (or approvals) stage.

The decision has broader implications because:

The precautionary principle is embedded in many other statutory regimes in Victoria and around Australia, apart from the Victorian legislative regime for forestry and the protection of endangered species. The decision has implications for any statutory regime in which the principle is enshrined.
Although VicForest is a state-owned enterprise operating within a highly regulated environment, there is scope for the decision to be applied to other types of entities operating within industries where the precautionary principle is relevant.

Furthermore, a decision of the Supreme Court of Victoria has strong precedent value, and is likely to be adopted by the Supreme Courts of other States, and perhaps even higher courts or courts with federal jurisdiction.

Action points

Parties under an obligation to apply the precautionary principle need to be aware that:

to implement the precautionary principle as per the principles laid down in Telstra, parties need to ask:
- is there a real threat of serious or irreversible damage to the environment?
- if yes, is it attended by a lack of full scientific certainty (in the sense of material uncertainty)?
- if yes, is the threat non-existent or negligible?
- if no, is the threat able to be addressed by adaptive management and is the measure alleged to be required proportionate to the threat in issue?
the principle must be applied at both the strategic decision making stage of a project, and throughout the operational stage; and
it may not be sufficient to simply obtain and comply with project approvals – parties need to proactively respond to new information as it arises throughout the operational stage.’

.

..

.

Editor: The legal doctrine of ‘restraint of trade’ sought to be applied in the commercial exploitation and destruction of old growth forests, is an invalid excuse. It is a contemptible euphemism for a ‘right to rape’ old growth ecology that is being contrived by commercial lawyers profiting from the exploiters ~ a case of the morally bankrupt collaborating with the damned.

[6] Ethical Paper website, ^http://www.ethicalpaper.com.au/

[7] My Environment website, ^http://www.myenvironment.net.au/

.

– end of article –

Tags: Aokigahara Forest, Atsuta Jinja, Australian Forestry Standard, Australian Paper, Chain of Custody certification, deforestation, East Gippsland, EEG, endangered species habitat, Environment East Gippsland, Environment East Gippsland Inc v VicForests, Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act, Forest Stewardship Council, Forestry Standard Certification, FSC, FSC audit process, FSC Chain of Custody Certification, FSC International, FSC-C002059, Future Fibre Strategy, Giant Burrowing Frog, Greater Glider, Greenwash Tick, Kashima Jingu, Kasuga Taisha, Kirishima Jingu, Large Brown Tree Frog, Leadbeaters Possum, Logging, Long-footed Potoroo, Maryvale Pulp Mil, My Environment, Nippon Paper Group, PEFC, Powerful Owl, precautionary principle, pulp and paper, Rainforest Alliance, Reflex Paper, restraint of trade, right to rape, sacred forest, Shimogamo Jinja, Shinto religion, Sooty Owl, The Wilderness Society, Timber Release Plan, Toolangi State Forest, TWS, VicForests, Yahiko Jinja, Yellow-bellied Glider
Posted in Gippsland (AU), Owls, Potoroos, Quolls, Reptiles, Threats from Deforestation | No Comments »

Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg

Habitat Topics

Recommended Links

Action Bioscience

Activists Rights

African Wild Dog Conservancy

African Wildlife Foundation

Amazon Rainforest

Ancient Forest Alliance

Animal Defenders International

Animal Info. on Endangered Animals

Animal Justice Party

Antarctic Ocean Alliance

Arid Lands Environment Centre

ARKive (endangered species)

Australia World Heritage List (UNESCO)

Australia's Threatened Species

Australian Conservation Foundation

Australian Fauna.com

Australian Geographic

Australian Native Plant Society

Australian Paper Watch

Australian Platypus Conservancy

Australian Registry of Wildlife Health

Australian Seabird Rescue

Australian Stable Population Party

Australian Student Environment Network

Australian Wildlife Carers Network

Australian Wildlife Conservancy

Australians for Animals

Badger Protection League

Badger Trust

Badger Watch and Rescue

Bagheera (Endangered species)

Ballaarat Wildlife Park

Biodiversity International

Birdlife Australia

Birdlife International

Birdwatch Ireland

Blue Marine Foundation

Blue Mountains Bird Observers

Blue Mountains Birding

Blue Mountains Conservation Society

Blue Mountains Wildplant Rescue Service

Bob Irwin Wildlife Fund

Bookend Trust

Born Free Foundation

Borneo Orangutan Survival Foundation

Botanical Gardens Conservation International

Buffalo Field Campaign

Buffalo Field Campaign blog

Bush Heritage Australia

Bush Warriors

Butterfly Conservation

Cairns and Far North Environment Centre

California Gray Whale Coalition

Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society

Cat Action Treasury

Cave Hill Conservation Campaign

Center for Earth Jurisprudence

Center for Plant Conservation

Chipstop

CITES

Coalition Against Duck Shooting

Code Green Tasmania

Colong Foundation for Wilderness

Conservation Council ACT Region

Conservation Council of South Australia

Conservation Council of Western Australia

Conservation Evidence

Conservation International

Convention on Biodiversity

Cool Forests

CREO (recent extinctions)

Cruelty Free Shop (The)

CSIRO Publishing

Cybec Foundation

David Suzuki Foundation

Defenders for Wildlife

Defenders of Wildlife (savewolves)

Devils in Danger

Eaglehawk Wildlife Rehabilitation Centre

Earth Justice

Earthcare St Kilda Inc.

Earthwatch Institute Australia

Earthways

Earthways Foundation

ECO

Eco Ranger

Ecology Project International

Ecos Magazine

EDGE of Existence Programme

EnAct International

Endangered Species Link

Endangered Wildlife Trust

Environment East Gippsland

Environment Institute ANZ

Environment Tasmania

Environment Victoria

Environmental Defenders Offices

Environmental Defense Fund

Environmental Law Foundation

Environs Kimberley

Essex Badger Protection Group

Ethical Paper

Eurobodalla Regional Botanic Gardens

F.A.M.E.

Fauna & Flora International

Film Makers for Conservation

Florentine Protection Society Inc.

Forest and Bird

Forest Media

Forest Network

Forest Peoples Programme

Forest Policy Research

Forest Protection Portal

Forest Rescue

Foundation for Critical Thinking

Foundation for National Parks and Wildlife

Foundation for Rabbit-Free Australia

Four Paws International

Friends of Five Forests

Friends of Narrabeen Lagoon Catchment

Friends of the Box-Ironbark Forests

Friends of the Earth (UK)

Friends of the Earth Australia

Gilbert's Potoroo Action Group

Ginninderra Catchment Group

Global Raptor Information Network

Global Trees Campaign

Goongerah Environment Centre

Great Barrier Reef Blog

Green Belt Movement

Greenpeace Australia

Gunns 20 Case

Habitat Destruction

Habitat Network

Hancock Watch

Hawk Mountain Sanctuary

Healesville Sanctuary

Help for Wildlife

Herts and Middlesex Badger Group

Humane Society International

Huon Valley Environment Centre

Iberia Nature

Indigenous Flora and Fauna Association

Inland Rivers Network

Institute of Wildlife Research

International Anti Poaching Foundation

International Fund for Animal Welfare

Intl Community of Ecopsychology

Intl Union for Conservation of Nature

Invasive Species Council

IUCN Red List of Threatened Species

Kakapo Recovery

Kanuguba

Keep the Habitat

Kew Gardens

Keystone Conservation

Kimberley (Save the Kimberley)

Kimberley Wildlife Carers and Associates

Kimberley Wildlife Rescue

Lake Pedder Restoration Committee

Lawyers for Forests

Leicestershire & Rutland Wildlife Trust

Linnean Society of London

Markets for change

Mass Extinctions

Melbourne Water Catchment Network

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

Molonglo Catchment Group

Moon Bears (Korea)

My Environment

National Birds of Prey Trust

National Geographic

National Geographic Network

National Geographic Wild

National Institute for Amazonian Research

National Parks Association of NSW

National Parks Conservation Assoc.

Native Forest Action

Native Forest Network

Native Forests

Natural Edge Project

Natural History Museum

Natural Resources Defense Council

Nature

Nature and Society Forum

Nature Conservation Council of NSW

Nature Conservation Trust

Nature's Crusaders

Naturschutzbund Deutschland

Nepenthes (defending rainforest)

North East Forests Alliance

NZ Birds

NZ Ecological Restoration Network

NZ Ecological Society

NZ Native Forests Restoration Trust

NZ Trust for Conservation

Observer Tree

Orangutan Foundation International

Otway Ranges Environment Network

Our Common Ground (Tasmania)

Photos and Feathers

Preserve Our Islands

Primate Info Net

Purves Environmental Fund

Queensland Conservation Council

Quercus

Race Against Extinction

Rainforest Action Network

Rainforest Rescue

Rainforests (mongabay global website)

RAMSAR Convention on Wetlands

Raptor & Wildlife Refuge of Tasmania Inc.

Rhino Resource Center

Rising Tide Australia

Royal Forest & Bird Protection Society

Royal Society for the Protection of Birds

Sahara Conservation Fund

Save America's Forests

Save Biogems

Save Ralph's Bay Inc.

Save the Badger

Save the Blue Tier

Save the Cassowary

Save the Kimberley

Save the Koala

Save the South Sister

Save the Tasmanian Devil Program

Saving Rhinos

Saving Species

Sea Shepherd

Sierra Club

Sierra Forest Legacy

Six Degrees

Smithsonian Museum (Natural History)

Society for Conservation Biology

Society of Wildlife Artists

South East Forest Rescue

South East Region Conservation Alliance

Southern ACT Catchment Group

Still Wild Still Threatened

Strait 4 Devils

Sussex Wildlife Trust

Ta Ann

Taiga Rescue Network

Tarkine National Coalition

Taronga Conservation Society Australia

Tasmanian Conservation Trust Inc.

Tasmanian Land Conservancy

Tasmanians Against the Pulp Mill Inc.

Terra Nature

The Central Highlands Alliance

The Change Agency

The Forest Activist Network

The Forest History Society

The Kerulos Center

The Kimberley Toadbusters

The Last Stand

The Last Tree

The Monkey Sanctuary

The Nature Conservancy

The Rainforest Information Centre

The Wild Foundation

The Wilderness Society

THINKK

Tigers in Crisis

Total Environment Centre

TRAFFIC (wildlife trade)

Tree Council (Ireland)

Tree Council (UK)

Tree Project

Trees for Life

Trees Not Gunns

Trust for Nature

UN Environment Programme

UN FAO on Global Forests

UNESCO World Heritage

University of Ulster (Natural Science)

Vegan Society (The)

Victorian Rainforest Network

Voiceless

Vulturejam

W.I.R.E.S.

Water S.O.S. Tasmania

Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists

Western Alliance for Nature

Western Wolves

Wielangta Forest

Wild Futures

Wilderness Truths

Wildlife Art Society of Australasia

Wildlife Australia

Wildlife Conservation Society

Wildlife Mismanagement

Wildlife New Zealand

Wildlife Preservation Society of Australia

Wildlife Protection Association of Australia

Wildlife Trust of South and West Wales

Wildlife Victoria

Wildscreen

Wolli Creek Protection Society

Wolves and Humans Foundation

Wombat Awareness Organisation Ltd

Woodland Trust

World Commission on Protected Areas

World Database on Protected Areas

World Land Trust

World Rainforest Movement

World Society for the Protection of Animals

World Wildlife Fund

WWF New Zealand

The Habitat Advocate

Posts Tagged ‘Giant Burrowing Frog’

Rural Fire Service strategy misguided

.

.

.

.

.

Further Reading:

.

National Park and Wildlife Service (NSW) Bush Arson:

.

NSW Local Government Areas (LGAs)

.

Forests NSW (government’s industrial logger of NSW remnant forests).

.

NSW Department of Lands (what native vegetation’s left).

. .

Nippon Paper’s ‘Reflex’ brand still “pure”?

.

.

.

‘Paper manufacturer loses green credentials’

“VicForests log in endangered species habitat. They log old growth forests in East Gippsland and the central highlands”

.

.

‘Australian Paper retains FSC Chain of Custody Certification’…?

.

.

.

‘6. Active involvement with environmental issues assures that…’

.

.

What moral right do the Japanese have to consider their own native old growth Aokigahara Forest more sacred than Australia’s sacred native old growth forests such as those across East Gippland?

.

.

‘VicForests has been stopped from harvesting certain coupes in the Brown Mountain forest in East Gippsland containing old growth forest

– habitat for rare and threatened species – until the completion of steps implementing the precautionary principle.’

.

.

.

‘Environment East Gippsland Inc v VicForests – The precautionary principle in action’

.

The lead-up to the litigation

The legislative regime

Responsibilities for timber harvesting and forestry management

Legal challenge

EEG’s standing

.

The precautionary principle [Ed: once again]

.

Outcome

Significance of the decision

Action points

.

..

.

Further Reading:

.

.

Habitat Topics

Reader Visits:

Recent

Supporting Us

The Friends of Katoomba Falls Creek Valley Inc. in The Gully

The Gully Collection

The Gully in Snow

Save Atlas Campaign

The Friends Archive: War and Peace with the Blue Mountains ‘hysterical’ Society

Habitat Threats – all articles

Contact Us

Conservation Issues

Copyright Conditions

Articles History

Search

Recommended Links