Posts Tagged ‘Nelson Bay River’

Tarkine Wilderness values sanctified by court

Thursday, July 18th, 2013

Tarkine Tasmania - wild unique diverse.

Tarkine Wilderness Values

.

Tasmania’s Tarkine is a vast wilderness region of north west Tasmania covering nearly half a million hectares (the size of Kangaroo Island); a remnant of Gondwanaland and home to the last disease-free stronghold of the Tasmanian Devil.

The Tarkine covers 1,800 km² of  beautiful ancient cool temperate rainforest, as well as around 400 km² of eucalypt forest and a mosaic of other vegetation communities, including dry sclerophyll forest, woodland, buttongrass moorland, sandy littoral communities, wetlands, grassland and Sphagnum communities.  The Tarkine contains a diverse array of landscapes, from giant forests to huge sand-dunes, sweeping beaches, rugged mountains and pristine river systems.  It retains a rare high diversity including:

  • 28 terrestrial mammals
  • 111 land and freshwater birds
  • 11 reptiles
  • 8 frogs
  • 13 freshwater fish
  • 151 species of liverworts
  • 92 species of mosses.

.

The Tarkine provides habitat for over 60 rare, threatened and endangered species of flora and fauna.   Tthe Tarkine is rich in frog species, with eight of Tasmania’s eleven frog species occurring in diverse parts of the Tarkine, including in the Tarkine’s rainforests, in Melaleuca swamps and scrub, and in the coastal lagoons and dune systems. Two threatened frog species, the Green and Golden Frog, and the Striped Marsh Frog, both occur in coastal lagoons, marshes and swamps of the Arthur-Pieman plains.

The Tarkine is particularly important for freshwater crustaceans – which are of global significance (PWS, 2001). One of the largest freshwater crustaceans in the world, the Tayatea, or Giant Freshwater Crayfish, inhabits the north of Tasmania and the Arthur River catchment – with the Tarkine a stronghold. This extraordinary creature, which can live for up to 40 years of age, and grow up to a metre in length, has been adversely affected by clearing of vegetation and recreational fishing, and is now listed as vulnerable.

Tarkine's Giant Freshwater Crayfish -Astacopsis Gouldi (Photo by Ted Mead)
The Tarkine’s Tayatea, or Giant Freshwater Crayfish

.

Tarkine MapThe Tarkine, showing the Tasmanian Government’s 2012 plans for a $34M upgrade of the Murchison Highway,
marketed as ‘tourism development’ but surreptitiously to subsidise increased mining access between the Tarkine and Port Latta.
[Source:  Tasmanian Government, Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources
^http://www.dier.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/81461/01_Murchison_Highway_Upgrades.pdf]

.

Read More:  ^https://www.et.org.au/tarkine-wilderness

.

Tarkine threatened by exploitative greed

.

The backward Tasmanian Government continues to ignore the place, dismissing it as an “unbounded locality” in the Waratah-Wynyard council area, and repeatedly trying to mine it, log it and bulldoze roads through it.  So the name ‘Tarkine’ does not appear in maps, in order that it may be exploited section by section.  Former Environment Minister Tony Burke was hoodwincked by this tactic as he was guided by miners to the denuded sections, and so diluted his pure vision of the Tarkine’s being worthy of protection for the pristine sections.

Such has perpetuated the 19th Century/early 20th Century  ^Robber Baron mentality that has long followed American industrialisation over the past two centuries.  On the back of the Robber Barons, the post-war Baby Boomer – “the most self-righteous, self-important, incredibly arrogant generation of all time” [^Source], has bulldozed into oblivion 75% of Tasmanian Nature, 80% of Australian Nature and exterminated Tasmania’s endemic Thylacine.

Still in Tasmania, inherited Taswegian attitudes and addictive exploitation die hard.

.

Industrial Robber BaronsIndustrial Robber Barons

.

However, many of the Tarkine’s unique values are threatened by destructive activities such as new mining, logging, and illegal activities such as poaching and arson, and less than 5% of the Tarkine is protected as a National Park. The Tarkine’s future as a wild place hangs in the balance.

The Tarkine is the home to the last disease free population of the Tasmanian Devil. The Tasmanian Devil is being pushed to extinction by the fatal Devil Facial Tumour Disease. This disease has been estimated to have killed 80% of the Tasmanian Devil population in the past decade. As such the habitat of the Tarkine is critical to survival of this iconic species in the wild.  Threats such as mining, logging and roading place the future of the Devil at risk..

Tasmanian Devil Road Kill (Rhys Allen)
Tasmanian Devils heading towards extinction, following the Thylacine.
Token funding in dribs and drabs by the Tasmanian Government toward Save the Tasmanian Devil Programme
pales in the face of the Tasmanian Government encouraging ongoing destruction of  the Devil’s critical habitat.
[Source:  Photo by Rhys Allen in article ‘Tarkine mines could be last straw for Tasmanian devils’, 20130115, by Hamish McCallum, Head, Griffith School of Environment at Griffith University, ^http://theconversation.com/tarkine-mines-could-be-last-straw-for-tasmanian-devils-114839]

.

Protecting the Tarkine

.

The campaign to protect The Tarkine began in the 1960s, when a formal conservation proposal was put forward by the then Circular Head Mayor Horace (Jim) Lane for the establishment of a ‘Norfolk Range National Park’.  But Lane’s proposal was not realised.

From the late 1990s, the region came under increasing national and international scrutiny in a similar vein to the environmental protests surrounding Tasmania’s Franklin River and Queensland’s Daintree Rainforest.   The case for protecting the Tarkine was significantly advanced with the Federal Government’s Forestry Package in 2005 adding 70,000 hectares to reserves in the Tarkine.

The environmentalist organisation Tarkine National Coalition, headed by Scott Jordan, has proposed the Tarkine be officially declared a national park, and with the support of many Tasmanians, wishes to ultimately see the Tarkine properly internationally protected as a World Heritage listed area for all time.

Scott Jordan in The TarkineScott Jordan in The Tarkine

.

In December 2009, the Tarkine was listed as a National Heritage Area following an Emergency National Heritage Listing sought by the Tarkine National Coalition to stop a proposed Tarkine Road, which would have coursed through old growth forest and detrimentally affected the natural values of undisturbed areas.

In 2013, while 80% of the Tarkine is now protected from logging, only 5% is protected from mining, and the Tasmanian Government still wants its tourist road bulldozed through it to destroy its wilderness values for tourism exploitation.

In December 2010, the incoming Federal Environment Minister Tony Burke allowed the emergency listing to lapse in the face of numerous mining proposals in the Tarkine.

.

Further Reading:    ^http://tarkine.org/

.

Threats from Mining

.

The west coast region of Tasmania has a sad history of exploitative mining since the industrial Robber Baron era of the late 19th Century, when tin was discovered at Mount Bischoff, setting of a mining boom.    Cooper was mined from Mount Lyell and smelted at nearby Queenstown from the 1890s.  Zinc and lead were mined at Mt Read near Rosebery and nickel from Avebury near Zeehan, both along the southern fringe of the Tarkine.  Gold has been from the Henty mine, mixed base metals from the Hellyer mine, and later iron ore extracted in large open cut pits at Savage River in the heart of The Tarkine.

Since 1965, ‘Savage River Mines‘ has been carving up a large slice of The Tarkine from its open-cut magnetite mine.

 

Savage River Mine, Waratah (Mineral Resources Tasmania)Savage River Mine
Irrevocably carving out Tarkine wilderness, currently operated by Grange Resources Limited

.

Ironically, nearby Savage River National Park is recognised for its wilderness values:

.

<< The park protects the largest contiguous area of cool temperate rainforest surviving in Australia and acts as a refuge for a rich primitive flora, undisturbed river catchments, high quality wilderness, old growth forests, geodiversity and natural landscape values.

The western portion of the park includes the most extensive basalt plateaux in Tasmania that still retains a wholly intact forest ecosystem. The upper Savage River, which lends the park its name, runs through a pristine, rainforested river gorge system. The park contains habitat for a diverse rainforest fauna and is a stronghold for a number of vertebrate species which have suffered population declines elsewhere in Tasmania and mainland Australia.

The parks remoteness from human settlement and mechanised access, its undisturbed hinterland rivers and extensive rainforest, pristine blanket bog peat soils and isolated, elevated buttongrass moorlands ensure the wilderness character of the park. Like the vast World Heritage listed Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area to its south, the area is one of the few remaining temperate wilderness areas left on Earth. >>   

.

[Sources:  ‘Mining’, University of Tasmania, ^http://www.utas.edu.au/library/companion_to_tasmanian_history/M/Mining.htm; ‘Tasmania’s Mines’, Mineral Resources Tasmania (Tasmanian Government, ^http://www.mrt.tas.gov.au/portal/page?_pageid=35,831205&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL;  ‘Savage River National Park’, Parks and Wildlife Service Tasmania, ^http://www.parks.tas.gov.au/?base=3732]

.

Robert Carl StichtAmerican Robber Baron Robert Carl Sticht (1856-1922)
American metallurgist and General Manager of Mount Lyell Mining and Railway Company
Elitist exploiter of copper mining and smelting from Mount Lyell on Tasmania’ wild west coast

.

Tasmania's once rainforest long denuded by copper mining around QueenstownSticht’s Mining Legacy to Tasmania
– a denuded moonscape above Queenstown caused by sulphuric acid associated with the copper mining and smelting.
The people of Queenstown were not left wealthy after the copper mine closed – the company profits went offshore – sound familiar?

.

In 2013, there are ten new mines proposed for the Tarkine over the next five years, and the campaign to prevent this onslaught of destruction is heating up. Nine of these mines are Pilbara style open cut mines. The first two companies to submit for permits are Venture Minerals for their three proposed tin and iron ore mines at Mt Lindsay, and Shree Minerals for their proposed Nelson Bay River iron ore mine.

.

2011:   Open Cut Mine proposed by Indian company, Shree Minerals

.

Indian-owned mining conglomerate, Shree Minerals, has proposed to develop an open pit magnetitie/hematite mine and processing plant near Nelson Bay River , approximately seven kilometres east of Temma village in northwest Tasmania.   The proposed mine will target 4 million tonnes of the resource over a 10 year period producing 150,000 tonnes of product per year.

.

[Ed:  This is in The Tarkine, but of course the term is deliberately omitted]

.

Parent company, Shree Minerals and Fuels, is headquartered at 51 M.I.G., Jain Mandir Road, Shanti Nagar, Housing Board, Katni, Madhya Pradesh, India.  It is was established by millionaire, Vishwanath Garodia, and is currently owned by Vijay Garidia.   The Shree Minerals Board of Directors is currently made up of  Chairman Mr Sanjay Loyalka, Mr. Arun Kumar Jagatramka, Mr Mahendra Pal, Mr Andy Lau and Mr Amu Shah.

[Sources:  ^http://www.shreemineralsandfuels.com/owners-profile.html; ^http://www.shreeminerals.com/scripts/page.asp?mid=11&pageid=13]

.

<< Shree Minerals has lodged a Development Application with a supporting Development Proposal and Environmental Management Plan (DPEMP) to Circular Head Council… (and) the Australian Government has declared the proposal a controlled action which will require assessment and approval under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.  This process will occur separately from the State Government process (which has approved the mine).  >>

400,000 tonnes a year

.

[Source:  Tasmanian Government, ‘Shree Minerals Ltd Nelson Bay River Mine, (undated), ^http://epa.tas.gov.au/regulation/shree-minerals-ltd-nelson-bay-river-mine]

.

Male Babyboomers still selfishly exploiting the planetTasmanian Baby Boomer politicians in 2012 with Indian chairman of Shree Minerals, Sanjay Loyalka
[Source:  Tasmanian Minerals Council, ^http://www.tasmanianmining.com.au]

.

<< With Tasmanian approvals in hand for mining at Nelson Bay River (NBR), Shree Minerals awaits Commonwealth Government approval, which is expected soon. Meanwhile, drilling will commence at NBR in November.

Shree Minerals (ASX:SHH) has re-affirmed that it is awaiting Commonwealth approvals for mining to commence at its Nelson Bay River Iron Project (NBR) in Tasmania.

Tasmanian approvals were received from:

– Circular Head Council, Tasmania;
– Environmental Protection Authority (EPA), Tasmania; and,
– Mineral Resources Tasmania (MRT) grant of Mining Lease

Shree said it expects a final decision from the Australian Commonwealth Government under EPBC Act, for which the final EIS has been published following response to submission received as a result of public exhibition of Draft EIS.  Further that it expects to receive approval and a final decision is now expected soon.

Other highlights included:

– Grant of Mining Lease from Mineral Resources Tasmania (MRT) for mining at NBR has been received
– Maiden Reserves published and DSO mine plan for first 2 years finalised (October 2012).
– The 2011/12 fieldwork at Mt.Sorell has identified encouraging signs for the presence of Volcanic Hosted Massive

The production schedule for the first two years comprises mining of DSO iron ore.  The DSO requires no further beneficiation to produce a marketable product. It only requires crushing and screening. Two separate DSO pits are planned in the first two years (comprising DSO South Pit and DSO North Pit, which is within the BFO resources) with following total resultant pit quantity of 815,000 tonnes at 57.5% iron (Fe):

The DSO is a first, lucrative stage of mining at NBR.  It involves minimal CAPEX and no infrastructure CAPEX.

Development stages at NBR

Development of the project involves three stages. The first stage is to develop two relatively shallow opencut mines to produce direct shipping grade hematite ore.

This direct shipping ore (DSO) only requires crushing and sizing to produce the DSO product. Each pit will produce a separate grade of DSO product.

The south pit has a higher DSO grade and will be mined first with the product transported to Port Latta for export. The north DSO pit, situated above the main magnetite orebody will follow. It has a lower DSO grade.

Stage two involves the continuation of mining of the northern DSO opencut. Here the stage one DSO hematite oxide cap is surrounded by lower grade ore considered to have the potential to be processed to produce a commercial beneficiated oxide product (BFO). Processing the BFO material is considered to be stage two of the project.

Stage three of the project involves the opencut mining of the deep magnetite orebody beneath the oxide cap. This magnetite ore will require processing to produce commercial grade magnetite products and the BFO processing plant will be modified to achieve this objective.

Earlier studies demonstrated that the magnetite ore can produce two products, a dense media magnetite (DMM) product suitable for coal washery applications or a blast furnace pellet (BFP) magnetite product.

Suppliers are few in number for the higher value DMM product and mining generally occurs on a small scale. This would suit the Nelson Bay Iron Project.

Shree is planning to commence drilling at the NBR and Rebecca Creek tenements during the second week of November.  Documentation for approval to drill ~3500 m to improve resource category and further extension of resources and geotechnical studies at the Project was submitted to the Minerals and Resources Tasmania.  >>

Heavy Metal Table
The Mine’s expected Heavy Metal products/tailings cocktail
(Copper, Lead, Chromium, Cadmium, Cobalt, Nickel and Zinc, as well as Arsenic and sulphuric acid)

.

[Source:  ‘Is Shree Minerals the next iron ore producer in Australia?’,  20121029, by Proactive Investors, ^http://www.proactiveinvestors.com.au/companies/news/35093/is-shree-minerals-the-next-iron-ore-producer-in-australia-35093.html]

.

Shree Mining Gloat

.

<< Shree Minerals chairman Sanjay Loyalka presented to over 175 investors this week at the ‘Stars in 2013′ investor forum in Sydney – and outlined the company’s pathway to production. Shree is positioned to become Australia’s next iron ore producer when the company commences production from the Nelson Bay River Project in Tasmania in mid-2013.

Shree Minerals presented to brokers, fund managers and investors this week in Sydney at Proactive Investors “Stars in 2013” investor forum – and focused on how the company will become Australia’s next iron ore producer.  The production schedule for the first two years comprises the mining of DSO iron ore, which requires no further beneficiation to produce a marketable product.

Shree is targeting iron ore production in mid-2013 from the Nelson Bay River Project which is located in the west coast of Tasmania, in an area rich with infrastructure which includes being close to roads and port.

Shree has a memorandum of understanding with nearby miner Grange Resources for use of port Latta, and has an off-take contract MOU in-place with a large international trading house.

All approvals are in place for developing the mine including; Environmental Protection Authority (EPA), Tasmania; Mineral resources Tasmania (MRT) grant of Mining Lease; and Commonwealth Government under EPBC Act.

Highlighting the prospectivity of the area, it hosts world class mines including Grange Resources’ Savage River, Vedanta’s Mt Lyell, Unity Mining’s Henty and MMG’s Roseberry and Avebury.

Shree’s Nelson Bay River Project has a goethite-hematite Inferred Resource of 1.4 million tonnes, magnetite Resources of 7.8 million tonnes at 38.3 DTR, and is capable of producing highgrade concentrates to produce Blast Furnace (BF) Pellets and Dense Media Magnetite (DMM).  Importantly there is the opportunity for resource growth, considering that the current resource is only based on limited drilling at the north end of the Aeromagnetic Anomaly as the company focus in last two years has been the on permitting process and project development.

This exploration potential provides the opportunity for a substantial increase in scale and mine life.

The Nelson Bay River Project differentiates itself from other iron ore projects as it does not require large CAPEX in infrastructure, and importantly there is a local workforce available, which cuts costs compared to other producers who use the fly-in-fly-out model.  >>

.

[Source:  ‘Shree Minerals’ Sanjay Loyalka outlines path to iron ore production in front of 175 investors’,  20130125, by Proactive Investors, ^http://www.proactiveinvestors.com.au/companies/news/38728/shree-minerals-sanjay-loyalka-outlines-path-to-iron-ore-production-in-front-of-175-investors-38728.html]
 

.

Aug 2012:   Tasmanian EPA recklessly approves Dark Side Ecology

.

EPA Tasmania

.

<< The Tarkine National Coalition (TNC) has reacted with disbelief to the Tasmanian EPA’s approval of the Shree Minerals Nelson Bay River mine despite clearly incomplete and fraudulent information tendered by the proponent.

.

‘Shree EIS a mismatch of omissions, flawed assumptions and misrepresentations’

.

The Shree Minerals’ Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Nelson Bay River open cut iron ore mine as a mismatch of omissions, flawed assumptions and misrepresentations. Key data on endangered orchids were missing, and projections on roadkill impacts on Tasmanian devil and Spotted tailed quoll were based on fanciful data known to contradict the company’s independent Traffic Impact Assessment.

.

Scott Jordan (TNC):

.

“The EPA seems to have abandoned rational science and accepted Shree Minerals’ assertion that a 1km long 220 metre deep open cut pit extending 170 metres below the level of the adjacent Nelson Bay River wont impact on hydrology.

The EPA also has chosen to accept Shree Minerals blatant contradictions and misrepresentations in the data relating to projections of Tasmanian devil roadkill from mine related traffic by accepting projections substantially lower than Shree Minerals’ own expert produced Traffic Impact Assessment.  This increase of traffic will, on the company’s formulae, result in up to 32 devil deaths per year, not the 3 per year in presented in the data accepted by the EPA.”

.

This failure comes within days of Federal Environment Minister Tony Burke’s decision to absolve himself of responsibility for conducting environmental assessments by allowing the Tasmanian Government to conduct the EPBC assessments for mining projects in the Tarkine.

“Is this really the assessment regime that Tony Burke want to oversee the protection of the environment in the Tarkine?”, asks Jordan.  Decisions on Commonwealth environmental approvals and local council approvals have not been granted at this point. Unlike the Venture Minerals projects, the Shree Minerals also has a concurrently running Commonwealth assessment.  >>

.

Senator Christine Milne, leader of the Australian Greens:

.

“The Tasmanian Government EPA’s approval of the Shree Minerals mine confirms exactly why Tony Burke is wrong to trust this agency with the assessment of new mines in the Tarkine. Shree Minerals has no friends in the Tasmanian mining industry.  The company fudged their data on likely impacts on the Tasmanian Devil – yet here they are securing Tasmanian Government approval.

“The ball is now in Tony Burke’s court. He should reject Shree’s mine, which still has to pass federal environmental approvals tests.  He must reverse his decision to let Venture Mineral’s three mines be assessed by the Tasmanian Government.

“By not heritage listing the Tarkine, Tony Burke has washed his hands of responsible environmental protection and approval of the Tarkine rainforest and the threatened Tasmanian Devil, and now we see the consequences.”

.

The  Tasmanian Greens will write to Tasmania’s Environment Protection Authority seeking further information over a decision to approve an iron ore mine at Nelson Bay River. >>.

Alex Schaap, Tasmanian EPA DirectorAlex Schaap, Tasmanian EPA Director
Under fire over nondisclosure of a heavy metals spill from a tailings dam spill at Grange Resources Savage River mine into surrounding waterways in early 2013.
[Source:  ‘Tasmania’s Environment Protection Agency is on notice’, 20130318, by Isla Macgregor, Tasmanian Public and Environmental Health Network, ^http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/article/tasmanias-environment-protection-agency-is-on-notice/]

.

Greens Member for Braddon (Tasmania), Paul O’Halloran MP:

.

“Serious concerns have been raised about the reliability and accuracy of information provided to the EPA by the mine proponent, Shree Minerals.  The public should be able to have full confidence in the capacity of agencies like the EPA to independently assess these controversial mining projects and to test the accuracy and rigour of the data they are provided.

“Critical details regarding the impact on threatened species appear to be missing or inconsistent with previously released data, and the potential hydrological impacts have not been fully assessed.  “When you consider that the mine itself will be well below the level of the nearby Nelson Bay River, it’s hard to see how this will not impact on the area’s hydrology.

“If the Commonwealth uses the same questionable data for its assessment for the project, then the Tasmanian public will be rightly sceptical when their final decision is handed down.” >>

.

[Sources:  ‘EPA’s approval of Shree Minerals’ incomplete environmental reports a farce’, 20120801, by Scott Jordan, Campaign Coordinator Tarkine National Coalition, ^http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/article/epas-approval-of-shree-minerals-incomplete-environmental-reports-a-farce/]; ‘ Greens seek answers over Shree Minerals Assessment’, by Paul O’Halloran MP, Greens Member for Braddon, 20120727, ^http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/article/epas-approval-of-shree-minerals-incomplete-environmental-reports-a-farce/]

.

Sep 2012:   Mainland unions weigh into Tarkine v Mining debate

.

National Secretary of the Australian Workers’ Union Paul Howes discusses the union’s campaign to promote mining in Tasmania.

.

Paul Howes in TasmaniaNational Secretary of the Australian Workers’ Union Paul Howes addressing a rally in Hobart,
with Tasmanian Premier Lara Giddings in the background.
[Source:  ^http://www.tasmanianmining.com.au]

.

ABC Television Transcript:

.

<< EMMA ALBERICI, PRESENTER:   To discuss the AWU’s campaign, I was joined earlier in our Hobart studio by the union’s national secretary, Paul Howes.

Paul Howes, welcome to Lateline.

PAUL HOWES, NATIONAL SECRETARY, AUSTRALIAN WORKERS’ UNION:   Thanks, Emma.

EMMA ALBERICI:   The Federal Environment Minister Tony Burke on the Tarkine issue has indicated he’s not predisposed to wholesale heritage listing. So what exactly are your concerns there?

PAUL HOWES:   There is a very large campaign being run at the moment by the Greens and GetUp in particular, aiming to have the entire north-western region of Tasmania, known as the Tarkine, listed for World Heritage listing.

That would potentially close two existing mines, would have the impact of not having the go-ahead for a number of new mines in the region which need to be developed.

At the moment north-west Tasmania has unemployment of around 8.4 per cent, when you compare that to the national average of 5.2 per cent, you can see how hard times are in that part of Tasmania.

And to lose a minerals industry would be devastating for the entire state, but particularly for the north-west.

The mines in question and the potential mines in question take up less than 1 per cent of the land mass of the Tarkine and whilst we accept there are many areas of the Tarkine that should be protected and should be locked up from future development, we are concerned that this large-scale campaign will pressure the Federal Government into actually granting a listing which would potentially shutdown this very important industry for north-west Tasmania.

And our members that work in the sector have been concerned for a long time, their voices haven’t been heard in the debate, and that’s why they asked us to run this campaign so that their voices can be heard on the national stage about what they believe should continue to happen in the Tarkine, which is having nature and the mining industry co-existing as it has done for 120 years.

.

EMMA ALBERICI:   On the process of heritage listing, you would be aware that current mines are not affected and current applications for mines equally are not affected?

PAUL HOWES:   Well that’s not the case.

EMMA ALBERICI:   It’s certainly the case as Tony Burke’s office explained it to us.

PAUL HOWES:   If you look at the issue, for example, of Rosebery. Rosebery isn’t subject to the … the current mining operations at Rosebery isn’t subject to the listing, but Rosebery needs a new tailings dam, that new tailings dam has to be built in an area which would be subject to the listing.

If the new tailings dam can’t be built then Rosebery would should, equally for Savage River. Savage River needs to expand and move into new parts of ore bodies that would be in areas where that listing applies.

Look, I’m very hopeful and I think that Tony Burke will make the right decision, but equally it’s important that the voice of Tasmanian miners and Tasmanian communities in the north-west of the state are heard in this debate.

As we have seen in the proposals put forward by the national Tarkine coalition, if they were successful in their proposal a whole range of potential mines and exploration zones would be locked up. So that’s why we need to ensure that when the Federal Government makes a decision, that it does the right thing for the environment, everyone agrees with that, but we don’t hurt the Tasmanian economy and create a situation where we’ve had intergenerational mining in that part of Tasmania for 120 years being wiped off the map for the sake of frankly an ideological agenda being driven by a few.

.

EMMA ALBERICI:   But Paul Howes, we do have to make the distinction here, no-one is suggesting mining’s going to be wiped off the map in Tasmania. You say yourself these are potential mines, these are not current mines, nor are they mines under current assessment.

PAUL HOWES:   Yes, they are Emma. They are currently under assessment.

EMMA ALBERICI:   Well if they are under assessment Tony Burke’s office tell us they are not affected by the heritage listing. Who is right?

PAUL HOWES:   Hopefully that will be the case but the campaign being run by the national Tarkine coalition and by the Greens would have the effect, if it were successful, in shutting down, for example, the venture minerals site. That’s the outcome.

Now we are providing the alternative voice, which is saying these areas equate to roughly 1 per cent of the land mass of the Tarkine and we believe that those areas should be excluded. In terms of the current mines, as I explained only just a few minutes ago, yes, it is true to say that the existing mine site at Savage River and the existing mine site at Rosebery isn’t covered by the proposal, but where those mines have to expand just slightly down the road is covered by the proposal.

And if those expansions can’t go ahead, then the existing mine sites won’t be viable. It’s not just a simple matter of getting out the map and looking at where the current mining operations take place and where the proposed ones have been, there is the case that if the national Tarkine coalition’s proposal goes ahead, you would see the mine life of a mine like Rosebery being cut drastically short.

I’m not in the business of running campaigns when we don’t have to, I would be more than happy to see a sensible campaign run by the environmental lobby that would actually result in carving out the minerals zones. But if you just log on to the national Tarkine coalition website, yourself, you’ll see that a large part of their campaign is about stopping the potential mines that should go ahead in the next couple of years, from actually happening.

.

EMMA ALBERICI:   Some of the current approvals being sought are possibly going to endanger… possibly going to put at risk some endangered species. You would accept surely that some of those do need protection?

PAUL HOWES:   Absolutely and once again, we are talking about an environmental footprint of less than 1 per cent of the Tarkine region. You are talking about areas which have been portrayed, particularly by GetUp, for example, as saying as being virgin or untouched rainforest, where it’s just not the case.

There has been widespread mining activity across the Tarkine for 120 years. Many of the areas that have actually featured in GetUp ads are actually areas which used to be mining facilities. In fact there was a famous ad that GetUp ran in The Sydney Morning Herald with a picture of the Environment Minister Tony Burke looking at a tree – he was standing on an old mining trail.

The point is that, yes, we need to do what we can to protect endangered species and yes we should lock up those areas of the region that deserve environmental protection, but we should also look at the facts in the cold hard light of day and recognise that there is the ability to have sustainable mining practices engaged right across that region and at the same time do the right thing by the environment.

.

EMMA ALBERICI:   If we can move on to the Greens more broadly, you’ve been attacking them for the better part of the last few months pretty consistently. Is this part of a deliberate strategy to sort of re-establish Labor as an entity in its own right, to kind of divorce itself from the Greens on the political stage?

PAUL HOWES:   In terms of the campaign that we have launched here in Hobart today, it’s a campaign that members of my union asked us to run, and I’m responding to the wishes of our members. That’s what membership based organisations do. Our union does campaign against companies, against governments and against political parties which pose direct threats to the job security of our members.

In the form of the Greens, whilst there are many policies that I do agree with the Greens on, overall their economic policies are ones which would lead to wide sections of the membership of the AWU being left out of work. That’s why we have been, for a very long period of time – it predates even my time as secretary of the union – been very strident and forthright in our criticism of a lot of the policies.

I’m pleased that we have seen over the last few months more people in the Labor movement stepping up to the plate, actually taking on the Greens, actually calling into question many of their policies which for too long have gone unquestioned. Ultimately I do think they should be held to account. I don’t think the Labor Party needs to differentiate itself because ultimately the Labor Party is a separate party.

The Labor Party and the Labor movement has very different values to the values of the Greens and whilst there might be some similarities in some areas, at the end of the day the type of Australia that the Labor movement wants to see and the type of Australia the Greens want to see are two very different types of Australia.

.

EMMA ALBERICI:   Recently you have compared the Greens to One Nation and to the DLP. Have you gone too far there? What is it about the Greens that you fear?

PAUL HOWES:   I don’t fear the Greens. Things that I fear I normally run away from. I don’t fear the Greens.

EMMA ALBERICI:   You clearly fear their impact on your party.

PAUL HOWES:   What I have said is I think it’s incumbent upon the Labor movement to actually take up the fight to the Greens, that we shouldn’t shy away from articulating the alternative vision that we see for this country.

Now as I said, there are many Greens policies which are similar to views that I hold, but ultimately on the key questions about work, the value of work, the type of economy we have, which is I think fundamental to the nature of what it is to be Australian – the Greens and the Labor movement are worlds apart.

My view has been for a long time that we should articulate that, we should take up that fight and that we should actually demonstrate that our values are different, their values are theirs.

Now of course, voters will be free to choose between the two, but we actually need to articulate those differences in our views and policies proudly and strongly.

.

EMMA ALBERICI: Is there a fear that voters won’t be able to see a difference between the two?

PAUL HOWES: I think occasionally that might be the case. I think of late, we have seen substantial differences. I was proud to be standing on the steps of Tasmanian Parliament today with the Tasmanian Premier Lara Giddings, who was very strongly backing our campaign about the Tarkine.

That clearly demonstrates she disagrees strongly with her colleagues in the minority government here in Tasmania, and that’s important. It’s important to traditional Labor voters, particularly in rural and regional Tasmania and important to working-class Labor voters right across the country to know that the Labor Party – still right across the nation, stands up for the values of work and believes in the need to have a diversified economy.

Ultimately, what the Labor Party does in government, state or federal, is up to them. But as a member of the Labor movement and our union has strongly believed for a long time that this is a fight that’s worth having.

.

EMMA ALBERICI: Finally, the new government in Queensland has today slashed just shy of 3,000 jobs in its Health Department.

What intelligence are you getting from your Queensland colleagues about how much further the job cuts are likely to go?

PAUL HOWES: We are very proud to represent over 10,000 workers in the Queensland Health Department and we are disappointed that Campbell Newman today in his announcement hasn’t articulated where these job cuts are going to happen.

We fear that it will be frontline workers in the hospitals that will be cut. If that happens, we will see a decrease in patient care right across Queensland. What we are seeing here is an aggressive and scary attack on services right across Queensland, but particularly in the Health Department.

Queensland Health has had a lot of problems for a long period of time, but cutting staff, stripping back services, outsourcing essential services across Queensland hospitals, is not the way to resolve issues in Queensland Health.

In fact, it will send Queensland Health back into the dark ages and frankly, we are fearful, in fact we are very strongly fearful and we suspect that this is only the beginning of deeper and harder cuts to come from Campbell Newman, once again betraying his promises to the Queensland people that he made right before the election.

.

EMMA ALBERICI: Right Paul Howes we have to leave it there but thank you very much for your time.

PAUL HOWES: Thank you, Emma. >>

.

[Source:  ‘Paul Howes locks horns with the Greens over anti-mining campaign’,  20120907, Australian Broadcasting Corporation (television), Reporter Emma Alberici, ^http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2012/s3585805.htm]

.

Paul Howes[Source:  Kudelka’s view,
^http://www.themercury.com.au/article/2012/05/12/327401_tasmania-news.html]

.

Dec 2012:  Burke approves Shree Mine based on dodgy submission

.
Tony Burke selling the Tarkine for mining
Federal Environment Minister, Tony Burke in The Tarkine

.

<< Environment Minister, Tony Burke, today approved Shree Mineral’s Nelson Bay River Magnetite and Hematite Mine in north-west region of Tasmania with 29 strict conditions.

.

Mr Burke:

.

“The approval conditions will ensure the mine will be built and operated in strict accordance with national environment law. By imposing these 29 approval conditions I am satisfied the project can now go ahead without any unacceptable impacts on matters of national environment significance such as nationally listed threatened and migratory species and their habitat.

In making my approval I am requiring Shree Minerals to comply with a number of key environmental conditions and actions. My decision is based on a thorough and rigorous assessment of the proposal, with extensive opportunity for public consultation.

Key aspects of the approval conditions include:

  • the development of a site-wide management plan for the protection of nationally threatened species at the mine site and for travel to and from the mine site
  • the undertaking of targeted pre-clearance surveys for the nationally listed masked-owl, spot-tailed quoll, Tasmanian devil and Tasmanian wedge-tailed eagle
  • environmental awareness training for all staff, contractors and visitors to the site.

.

“In addition I am requiring Shree Minerals to take specific actions to mitigate and avoid the threat of road kill to nationally threatened species, especially the Tasmanian devil.

I am requiring that mine vehicles travel only during daylight hours and abide by appropriate speed limits within and to and from the mine site and that they provide bus transport to limit the amount of traffic on nearby roads.

I am also requiring that Shree Minerals report all deaths of nationally threatened species from road kill caused by the operation of the mine. This information will be recorded on their website and updated at least every three months.

If reported road kill is in excess of predicted levels, the conditions require that Shree Minerals pay additional compensation or provide new resources for further environment programs to support threatened species in and near the site.

“I am also requiring Shree Minerals to fund and resource a Tasmanian Devil monitoring strategy on the mine site. The strategy will need to involve at least ten infrared monitoring cameras and be consistent with the work being done by Save the Tasmanian Devil Program.”

.

Each year Shree Minerals is required to report on their compliance with the approval conditions and publish this information on their website.>>

.

[Source:  ‘Environment Minister Approves Shree Minerals Nelson Bay River Mine’ (media release), The Hon Tony Burke MP, Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, 20121218, ^http://www.environment.gov.au/minister/burke/2012/mr20121218.html]

.

Burke allows mining disturbance to colour his purist view:

  “I was expecting to see a pristine area pretty much covered in rainforest. The truth of the industrial history and current industrial activity in the Tarkine was quite different to those images”

.

Tony Burke in The TarkineTony Burke considers a plan for world heritage listing during a visit to the Tarkine
[Source:  Photo by Peter Mathew, ‘Labor accused of betraying Tarkine forests by favouring mining in heritage decision’, by Matthew Denholm, The Australian (with AAP), 20130208, ^http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/tony-burke-backs-away-from-tarkine-protection/story-fn59niix-1226573268457]

.

Burke lets mining wounds open up Tarkine to circling vultures

.

<<The large expanse of land known as the Tarkine is currently host to around 60 mineral exploration licences, with 10 mines proposed for development over the next few years. The mineral rich area is also largely undisturbed, with temperate rainforests, open plains, diverse flora, and a stronghold of healthy Tasmanian Devils. The approval of the Nelson Bay River magnetite mine marks the beginning of a new chapter in the Tasmanian discourse over the benefits of exploiting natural resources over the preservation of unique natural heritage.

There are existing mines in the Tarkine region on the West Coast of Tasmania; the iron ore mine in Savage River managed by Grange Resources, the Hellyer Mine managed by Bass Metals and the Rosebery Mine managed by MMG.

A long history of mining in the area is coming face to face with a growing awareness of its unique natural and cultural significance.

Yesterday’s approval of a magnetite mine adjacent to the Nelson Bay River by Federal Environment Minister Tony Bourke is the first of several proposed new mining ventures in the area, after nearly twenty years of no new mining approvals in the state.

The interest in superior steel products is creating an increased demand for magnetite across Australia, which, after being processed, provides a consistently higher iron content in comparison to hematite ore.

The magnetite mined from the proposed open cut pit is also used to create magnetic iron oxides used in magnetic storage, for example in the magnetic layer of hard disks.

Twenty-nine conditions from Federal Environment Minister Tony Burke accompany the approval of Shree Minerals’ Nelson River Bay mangenite mine, largely directed at protecting native flora and fauna.

Included in the environmental conditions are $48,000 fines if Tasmanian Devils are killed by vehicle movement, if more than two are killed within a 12 month period.

As Tasmania takes a respite from the ongoing debate over how to restructure a floundering forestry industry, reactions to the magnetite mine approval have been swift.

Leon Compton spoke to some stakeholders in the approval on Statewide Mornings, beginning with Ian Woodward, principal environmental scientist for Tasmanian firm Pitt and Sherry, who prepared the environmental assessment report.

“In terms of the environmental significance, both the state and commonwealth assessments have been very comprehensive.”

“There are no threatened plant species on the site, there is a very low likelihood of threatened fauna, there might be one or two Tasmanian Devils that use the area.”

Shree Minerals has also committed to road transport movement during the day time, and limited speed conditions.

“Minister Burke’s concerns were confined to threatened species listed under Federal legislation, the EPA’s assessment in the Tasmanian jurisdiction was very much more comprehensive and considered all environmental matters including ground disturbance, water management, potential for acid drainage and how that would be mitigated and managed.”

The mine footprint is about 150 hectares, and will consist of two open cut pits that are designed to contain the possibility of acid generating materials being uncovered.

Exposed rock can generate acid as it oxidises, and there are examples of acidic poisoning of rivers from previous mining activities in the region.

Most famously, the King River is described as the most polluted river in Australia, a result of mining prctices at Mount Lyell on its tributary, the Queen River.

The Whyte River and Savage River, which both flow into the Pieman River, and the Arthur River at the northern end of the Tarkine, all suffer from acidity as a result of previous mining practices.

Scott Jordan, from the Tarkine National Coalition, believes that the proposed mine will have a massive effect upon the hydrology on the area around the site.

“This mine will be 225 metres deep, it will be 170 metres below the level of the adjacent Nelson Bay River, it will 60 metres below sea level.”

“In the referal that went to the Commonwealth, there were 16 Commonwealth listed threatened species identified within the five kilometre radius of the site.”

He questioned the assertions made by Pittt and Sherry regarding Tasmanian Devil numbers and the traffic impact assessment.

“They submitted to the Commonwealth that there would be an increase in road traffic affecting Tasmanian Devils of 32 percent, when in fact the Traffic Impact Assessment tells them that they would be looking at about 320 per  cent.”

Asked why we have yet to hear from state green cabinet members, Mr Jordan said, “These decisions are made by a minister, they are not made by a cabinet, and so I would expect that the Green members of cabinet are just as upset about this as I am, and I expect that we will see them voicing that concern.”

Leon Compton also spoke with Circular Head Mayor Daryl Quilliam who vouched for the benefits of the proposed mine for the region.

“It’s not only good for our area, it’s good for Tasmania becvause of the investment that is happening overseas and good for the region in that jobs will be created right along the North West Coast.”

Asked about the environmental concerns Mr Quilliam said, “Everybody is welcome to their opinion, and that is fine, but you’ve got to stop and realise that there has been five or six years of planning for this mine, and just to go through the rigorous process it goes through now, all those environmental issues have been looked at.”

“Mines are not like they used to be 40 or 50 years ago, where you just dig a hole and leave a hole.”

Mr Quilliam discounted the area as the last refuge of the Tasmanian Devil, and cited Woolnorth as being more likely as that region.

“If there are protests, well I am sorry, but our local people, and I would say 80 to 85 percent of our local people are supporting that mine, will need to protest against them as well.”

Mr Quilliam called for people to work together to protect the region, and thinks that there is no reason why all values cannot be upheld. >>

.

[Source:  ‘Tarkine focus on Nelson Bay River’, 20121219, by Tim Walker (Cross Media Reporter), ABC, ^http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2012/12/19/3657638.htm]

.

Tasmanian Devil’s extinction by a thousand cuts

.

<< Just a week before Christmas, Environment Minister Tony Burke approved Shree Minerals’ mine near Temma in the Tarkine region of north-west Tasmania. Perhaps he hoped the announcement would get lost in the Christmas and New Year “silly season”, because this approval is likely to be extraordinarily controversial: the mine is in an area currently proposed for World Heritage listing and is also in the last remaining stronghold of the Tasmanian devil.

The Tasmanian devil is threatened with extinction by an infectious cancer. Since its first discovery in north-eastern Tasmania in 1996, the cancer has inexorably spread westward, reducing Tasmanian devil populations by at least 80%.

Only the north-west remains undiseased. There are indications that the devil populations in the north-west have slightly different genetic composition from those in the remainder of Tasmania and may perhaps harbour some individuals with genotypes resistant to this lethal disease.

Tony Burke’s press release and his approval of 18 December explicitly recognise the threat that this mine will pose to Tasmanian devils: the developers are required to donate $350,000 to the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program Appeal to compensate for the mine’s unavoidable impact.

Within the limited area of the mine site itself, there will certainly be impacts on wildlife, including devils. More seriously, the ore will need to be trucked out by road for about 150km. Almost all of this distance will be through habitat of undiseased Tasmanian devils.

As scavengers, devils are particularly susceptible to being killed on roads, as they feed on the carcasses of other animals, such as possums or wallabies, which have previously been run over. As anyone who has driven in Tasmania will know, roadkill of Tasmanian Devils is not new. The problem is that its impact on the viability of the species as a whole is much greater now than it has been in the past, given that roadkill is additional to mortality imposed by facial tumour disease. This and other proposed mines will substantially increase total vehicular traffic in the remote north west of Tasmania.

The approval contains several conditions intended to mitigate this threat of roadkill to devils. These include an obligation to report all incidents of roadkill, a requirement that most travel to and from the mine site must occur during daylight hours and reduced speed limits of 50 km/h or less close to the mine site. But most of the distance mine trucks will travel through devil habitat on their way to port will be outside the reduced-speed-limit area.

A penalty of $48,000 will be applied to each Tasmanian devil in excess of two per year killed on the road by mine vehicles. This sounds a strong disincentive in principle, but I wonder what will happen in practice. There will be an even stronger incentive for vehicle operators to simply throw a carcass off the road into the bush rather than admit to killing a devil and incurring this substantial financial penalty.

More generally, this example highlights a problem with Australian environmental regulation. Up to 10 mine developments are currently proposed for the Tarkine area. The impact of each one individually might perhaps be acceptable in terms of increased risk of impacts on Tasmanian devil populations. But the impact of all 10 in aggregate will certainly be much less acceptable.

If mines are evaluated individually, we risk a scenario of “death by 1000 cuts”. The appropriate way to evaluate the risk would be to take all of the proposed developments together and assess whether the joint effect of all can be handled without unacceptable risk to biodiversity conservation.

The fact that this mine development has been approved individually does not give me confidence this approach will be taken. >>

.

Thylacene TrophyDifferent animal, same attitude

.

[Source:  ‘Tarkine mines could be last straw for Tasmanian devils’, 20130115, by Hamish McCallum, Head, Griffith School of Environment at Griffith University, ^http://theconversation.com/tarkine-mines-could-be-last-straw-for-tasmanian-devils-11483]

.

Feb 2013:  Tony Burke refuses Tarkine heritage listing

.

In December 2009, with wide recognition of its National Heritage values, The Tarkine was granted Emergency National Heritage listing by former Federal Environment Minister Peter Garrett, however this lapsed in December 2010 .

Despite the Australian Heritage Council (AHC) already recommending a 433,000 hectare National Heritage Area, Minister Burke has instructed the AHC to reassess the Tarkine. The reassessment deadline was extended to December 2013.

 

<<..Despite a 2010 Australian Heritage Commission recommendation for the listing of 433,000 hectares of the Tarkine, Mr Burke said on Friday he would only recognise its Aboriginal heritage.

Mr Burke said he had tried to find a boundary that would incorporate the natural values without delivering unacceptable social and economic outcomes.

”I simply haven’t been able to find a way to recognise the natural heritage values with a boundary that will find a balance,” he said.  ”For this reason I have decided to only put the indigenous values on the national heritage list.”

Mr Burke said he acknowledged that his decision was not the outcome for the Tarkine that many groups were seeking.  He said part of the Tarkine’s coastline would be entered on the National Heritage List as the Western Tasmania Aboriginal Cultural Landscape.

The decision was warmly backed by the local MHR and parliamentary secretary for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Sid Sidebottom.  ”Minister Burke has listened carefully to my representations on behalf of our region, and to the delegations of union members – particularly from the Australian Workers Unions – and of my local mayors,” Mr Sidebottom said.
The AWU under secretary Paul Howes mounted an ”Our Tarkine – Our Future”  campaign promoting job opportunities in the region.

The move drew praise from a local MP, but sparked an angry response from Greens leader Christine Milne, who said the Minister had ”abandoned the Tarkine to the mining and timber industries”.  Ms Milne said she was ”devastated”: ”If anyone has any doubt as to who is running the environment portfolio in Australia the answer is very clear: the mining industry.
”I have been campaigning for the Tarkine for a very long time . . . Tony Burke has completely sold out the environment for logging and mining.”

She called on Mr Burke to release the heritage council’s latest recommendations, made in a report to the government last December.  >>

.

[Source:  ‘No’ to Tarkine environment listing’,  20130208, by Andrew Darby (Hobart correspondent for Fairfax Media) with Jonathan Swan, ^http://www.smh.com.au/environment/no-to-tarkine-environment-listing-20130208-2e2bo.html]

.

Apr 2013:  Conservationists find a qualified doctor to save the wounded Tarkine

.

<< Mining in Tasmania’s Tarkine region is being challenged as conservationists take their battle to the federal court.

The Tarkine National Coalition has lodged a case in the Federal Court seeking a review on Federal Environment Minister Tony Burke’s decision approving Shree Minerals iron ore mine.

Campaign co-ordinator Scott Jordan said Burke approved the mine without knowing the impacts it could have on the endangered Tasmanian devil.

“We will argue that Minister Burke has not acted in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, and as such the approvals granted are invalid,” Jordan said.  “This mine should not have received approval, and we are asking the court to rule against it. “

Debate erupted over the application for mining developments in the region last year, with Federal Environment Minister Tony Burke rejecting a National Heritage listing for the area.

Debate continues to rages between environmental groups who want mining developments halted and companies and potential employees who say opening up the Tarkine region to mining is crucial in the future economic prosperity of Tasmania.

Earlier this year, Tasmania’s Premier Lara Giddings said three new mining projects were expected in the region following Burke’s rejection of the National Heritage listing.

Giddings said she expected Venture Minerals’ proposal for a $200 million tin mine at Mount Lindsay to be approved, creating 1000 jobs.

She said that developments like Venture’s Riley Creek mine and the approved Shree Metals mine at Nelson Bay were signs that mining investment would grow in Tasmania now that the “dark cloud” of the Tarkine national heritage nomination had been removed.

Environmentalists argue that open-cut mining will destroy the area and say that any decision to expand mining will result in irreversible contamination.  >>

.

[Source:  ‘Federal Court fight to stop Tarkine mine’, 20130404, by Vicky Validakis,  Mining Australia, ^http://www.miningaustralia.com.au/news/federal-court-fight-to-stop-tarkine-mine]

.

Desperate times again drive Tasmanians to burn their house to stay warm

.

<< The Deputy Premier has defended the Labor-Greens Government at a pro-development and pro mining rally in north-west Tasmania.

The Unlock Tasmania Rally in Smithton yesterday heard from eight industry speakers, including representatives from the mining industry, and the Farmers and Graziers Association.

Organiser Joan Rylah estimates more than 3,000 people attended.  Ms Rylah says the State Government has been influenced by minority fringe groups, while the majority’s concerns have been ignored.  “These people are feeling that they have not been heard,” she said.

The Deputy Premier Bryan Green also addressed the crowd.  He says times are tough, but the minority government is not to blame.

[Ed:  Yes it is]

“It is an easy target,” he said. Mr Green says he shares the crowd’s frustrations at the court injunction launched by conservationists, banning work at the Shree Minerals mine at Nelson Bay River in the Tarkine until a legal hearing next week. >>

.

[Source:  ‘North-west rally backs development’, 20130624,  ABC, ^http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-24/pro-miners-rally-for-development/4774734?section=tas]

.

Jul 2013:  Court overrules Burke’s Bias

.

Federal Court of AustraliaFederal Court of Australia
~ such an apt emblem

.

<< A conservation group (Save the Tarkine) has stopped an open cut iron ore mine in Tasmania’s Tarkine region which it says threatened the Tasmanian devil.  The Federal Court has ruled that the Federal Environment Minister’s approval of Shree Minerals’ open cut mine at Nelson Bay River was invalid.

Then minister Tony Burke approved the mine last December, imposing nearly 30 conditions to protect the devil and other threatened species.

The far north-west is considered one of the last disease-free areas for the state’s devil population.

Environmental group Save the Tarkine sought a judicial review of the decision, arguing Mr Burke did not act in accordance with the Environment Protection Act.

Save the Tarkine

The group’s Scott Jordan was in the Federal Court in Melbourne to hear the judgement.

“It’s a great day for the Tarkine and it’s a great day for the Tasmanian Devil that was placed under threat by this mining proposal,” he said.  “The Minister’s been given a clear message; that short cuts to get mines over the line in the Tarkine won’t be tolerated.”

Save the Tarkine has flagged it will continue to fight any other proposed mines in the area.

“They shouldn’t be taking short cuts to get mining projects up like the Tarkine. This is an area that shouldn’t be mined,” Mr Jordan said.

The $20 million project was expected to employ 70 workers and was the first mine approved in Tasmania in 26 years.

A spokesman for the new Federal Environment Minister, Mark Butler, says the decision is being examined.  “The Minister will carefully consider the court’s decision before proceeding further,” he said.

.

Ruling disappoints Tasmanian Premier and local Circular Head Mayor

.

Tasmania’s Premier Lara Giddings says it is disappointing.

“We would have hoped to have seen Shree Minerals go ahead,” she said.”  “We see it as economically sustainable, environmental sustainable and important investment that will help create jobs in the mining industry.  “We will now of course review the Federal Court decision and see what Government can do to assist that company.”

Circular Head mayor Daryl Quilliam has called it a sad day for the whole state.  “While I respect the court’s decision…I just think it gives any investors who want to invest in Tasmania, probably puts a query for them and whether they’re going to continue to invest in Tasmania,” the mayor said.

Circular Head mayor Daryl QuilliamCircular Head mayor Daryl Quilliam
Same Baby Boomer age group, same Baby Boomer mindset

.

Despite the ruling, he is optimistic Shree will proceed with its plans.  “I expect that they’ll have to deal with some issues that have been raised by the court and I wouldn’t expect that it’ll knock it in the head completely.”  “But it will certainly slow up the process and I just hope that they continue on and do whatever is necessary to make it valid.”

Tasmanian Liberal Senator Eric Abetz says most sensible Tasmanians would want the mine to go ahead.

“It is important for our state to harness our mineral wealth and our forestry wealth and the Government has been busy in destroying job opportunities in both areas and in the one area where they’ve made an exception, they’ve mucked it up,” he said.

Eric Abetz Tasmanian Eric Abetz MP
Same Baby Boomer age group, same Baby Boomer mindset

.

The Commonwealth will pay the legal bill from the court challenge. >>

.

Read Federal Court Ruling: 

.

Case Citation:   ‘Tarkine National Coalition Incorporated v Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities [2013] FCA 694’

^http://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2013/2013fca0694

.

[Source:  ‘Federal Court ruling halts Shree Mineral’s $20m Tarkine mine’, 20130717, by Zoe Edwards, ^http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-17/court-decides-tarkine-mine27s-fate/4825230]

.

The industrial fight persists to exploit the last of Natural Tasmania

.

<< The Federal Court’s decision to halt work on an iron ore mine in Tasmania’s remote Tarkine region has spooked the industry, but the State Government has vowed to help fight it.

In December, the then Federal Environment Minister Tony Burke approved $20 million plans by Shree Minerals to build an open cut mine in the north west, the last disease-free stronghold of the Tasmanian devil.

Justice Shane Marshall has upheld a claim by the lobby group Save the Tarkine that Mr Burke did not properly take into account conservation advice about the endangered species and ruled its approval invalid.

Terry Long of the Minerals Council says it could scare off potential investors.  “It’s been challenged on a detail in the court and knocked over. So from Tasmania’s point of view it’s a worry into the future, I mean it’s going to be difficult to get people to take on projects in the state under the circumstances.”

But Tasmania’s Resources Minister, Bryan Green, is viewing the ruling as a setback that can be resolved easily.  Mr Green says he will be asking the new Environment Minister, Mark Butler, to quickly reconsider the project, taking into account the conservation report on the Tasmanian Devil.  “This is a setback but it’s not the end of the process by any stretch of the imagination.

“Because from what I can see, based on the Federal Court’s decision, other than this administrative error the approvals process is sound,” said Mr Green.

The Premier Lara Giddings believes the mining proposal is economically and environmentally sustainable.  “We will now of course now review the Federal Court decision and see what Government can do to assist that company to be able rectify any problems that the Federal Court has identified and ensure we can get that investment back on the right track,” said Ms Giddings.

The Greens leader Nick McKim does not think the Federal Court decision paints Tasmania as a risky place to invest.  “The decision says nothing about the investment environment in Tasmania and says everything about the need for the Commonwealth Minister to follow a lawful process,” he said.

.

Jobs blow for struggling region

.

The mine was expected to employ seventy workers.  The earthmoving contractor, Rodney Collins, says he employs 10 people and was looking to recruit more.  He says the court’s decision is a kick in the guts.  “You know there’s (sic) thirty new people who can’t have a job and at the moment after today we don’t know what we’re going to do with the people working for us at the moment,” he said.

Another three Tarkine mining projects are awaiting approval.   Shree Minerals says it “followed the approval process to the letter of the law and beyond, with the best possible scientific advice.  “For the project to be set aside on appeal is disappointing in the extreme.”

The (new) Environment Minister replacing Tony Burke, Mark Butler MP, now with the title Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Water; says he is carefully considering the court’s ruling before deciding his next step.  >>

.

[Source:  ‘fight-to-restore-tarkine-mine-approval, 20130717, ABC, ^http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-17/fight-to-restore-tarkine-mine-approval/4826860]

.

Tasmanian Minerals Council can’t help itself’

.

<< Calls by Tasmanian Minerals Council chief Terry Long, Tasmanian Deputy Premier Bryan Green and Braddon MP Sid Sidebottom for some kind of technical or administrative fix to yesterdays Federal Court decision to set aside approvals for the Nelson Bay River mine in the Tarkine, are both uninformed and an example of the kind of corrupted process that resulted in the Federal Court decision.

“The failure of the Minister and his department to consult the Approved Conservation Advice was not an administrative oversight.  The Approved Conservation Advice is the key source of advice on which the Minister must rely to determine how best to protect the Tasmanian devil in any assessment,” said Save the Tarkine Campaign Coordinator, Scott Jordan.

“You can’t just add it to the appendix after the event and publish the same decision. The court didn’’t say the Minister forgot to list it, it actually said the Minister failed to consult it at all,”

“The comments by Long, Green and Sidebottom show an example of trying to solve a problem by repeating the action that created it”.

“The Minister must either let the court decision stand as the final judgement, appeal to the full bench of the Federal Court, or go back to the start of the process and conduct a proper legal assessment.    Anything short of this will end up back before a court on exactly the same grounds”. >>

[Source:  ‘No quick fix for Tarkine mine’, 20130718, media release by Scott Jordan, Campaign Coordinator, Save the Tarkine]

.

Tasmanian Devil in log

.

Further Reading:

.

[1]    >Environmental-Assessment-Report-Shree-Nelson-Bay-River-Magnetite-Mine-EPA-2012.pdf  (4.8MB, 50 pages, PDF)

.

[2]   >Tasmania’s Tarkine vulnerable to reckless mining

.

[3]   >Save the Tarkine from Venture Minerals

.

[4]   >Miners eyeing off The Tarkine, just don’t get it!

.

[5]  >Shree Minerals invasion into the fragile Tarkine

.

[6]  >Tasmania’s white raptor endangered in Tarkine

.

[7]  >Tasmania’s Tarkine Wilderness ENDANGERED!

.

[8]  >Tarkine’s above ground values are for eternity

.

[9]  >Tasmania’s Tarkine threatened by tin mining

.

Save the Tarkine from Venture Minerals

Tuesday, April 16th, 2013

.

<Federal environment minister Tony Burke has rejected National Heritage listing for Tasmania’s precious Tarkine Wilderness.

.

Burke’s Ten New Mines!

.

On 8th February 2013, Burke announced 10 new mines proposed over the next five years for the Tarkine Wilderness. Nine of these 10 mines will be open cut leaving scars of devastation in an area of north-western Tasmania.

Savage River Mine already scarring The Tarkine Wilderness

.

“The Tarkine is one of the world’s great wild places.

It is an expansive 447,000 hectare wilderness area of recognised World Heritage significance in the North-West corner of Tasmania, Australia’s island state. The Tarkine contains remarkable natural and cultural values, including one of the world’s most significant remaining tracts of temperate rainforest,” said the Tarkine National Coalition.

The Tarkine is a place of unique natural and cultural significance and was nominated for World Heritage listing by the Australian Senate in 2007.

The Tarkine has been recognised by prominent bodies including the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, the Tasmanian Department of Parks, Wildlife and Heritage and environment groups such as The Wilderness Society and the Australian Conservation Foundation.

The Australian government has recognised the Tarkine’s outstanding national significance through listing the Tarkine on the register of the National estate.

As the Tarkine National Coalition says:

.

Burke only “listed a paltry 4% of the 433,000 hectares recommended to him by the inquiry”

.

Since February 8, Burke has granted the first two of 10 mining permits to Venture Minerals for three iron mines at Mount Lindsay and granted Shree Minerals an iron ore mine proposed for Nelson Bay River.

Successive environment ministers have failed to put forward an assessment by the Australian Heritage council for Heritage listing with UNESCO leaving these areas of “outstanding natural and cultural value” vulnerable to the policies of Burke.

A national day of action on 14th February 2013 and a campaign in local media helped to expose the plight of the now endangered Tarkine and reverse this environmentally catastrophic decision.

Venture Minerals and Shree Minerals are driven by the profits to be made from these proposed mining ventures in the Tarkine. But the Tarkine has far more long-term value as a wilderness area and should continue to benefit all.>>

.

[Source:  ‘Mining approved in the Tarkine’, 20130219, by Rachel Christensen, ^http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/53374]

.

Tarkine Wilderness
(Peter Walton, Tasmania Expeditions)

.

So in the absence of government responsibility, Dr Bob Brown has just been announced as new patron of rebranded Save the Tarkine campaign.

The Tarkine National Coalition is pleased to make two exciting announcements that we believe will help increase the national profile of this important campaign.

“Today we are unveiling the new Save the Tarkine branding that we will campaign under”, announced Campaign Coordinator, Scott Jordan.  “We believe that brand, Save the Tarkine will help the public more easily identify this important campaign, and let them know in clear terms what our mission is.”

To support this rebranding, a new Tasmanian devil inspired logo has been adopted  (see above).

Tarkine National Coalition Incorporated remains as the registered legal entity, with campaigns to be conducted under the registered trading name Save the Tarkine.

Save the Tarkine are also thrilled to announce that Dr Bob Brown has accepted our invitation to become patron of the campaign.

“Bob is no stranger to the Tarkine, having fought for it’s protection both in and out of the parliament. We are thrilled that Bob has agreed to accept the role of patron, and we look forward to sharing Bob’s passion for the Tarkine with all of Australia”.

“I’m honoured to be first patron of Save the Tarkine”, said Dr Brown in Launceston.  “I first walked the Tarkine forty years ago looking for Tasmanian Tigers, and if protected the Tarkine will create hundreds, if not thousands of jobs in the future.  If mined it will end up another post-industrial waste dump”.

..

.

<<The Tarkine is a vast, continuous and largely untouched wilderness of exceptional and rare diversity. Covering an area of around 450,000 hectares in Tasmania’s north-west, it is a place worthy of World Heritage protection yet, unbelievably, remains inadequately protected and vulnerable to being carved up by the mining and forestry industries.

This book is the authors’ tribute to this last of the last frontier experiences on earth.>>

.

‘Tarkine – Wild and Sacred’

by S & E Bartley

40 Degrees South Publishing

RRP:$29.95 Paperback 144 pp
ISBN 9780987243195

.

[Source/Purchase:  ^http://www.fortysouth.com.au/writers-market/book/161]

.

Shree Minerals invasion into the fragile Tarkine

Monday, February 27th, 2012
This article is by Scott Jordan, Campaign Coordinator Tarkine National Coalition, initially entitled ‘Shree Minerals’ Impact Statement documentation critically non-compliant‘ dated 20120222..
Shree Minerals – foreign miners pillaging Tasmania’s precious Tarkine wilderness
(Photo courtesy of Tarkine National Coalition, click photo to enlarge)

 

.
Tarkine National Coalition has described the Shree Minerals’ Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed Nelson Bay River open cut iron ore mine as a mismatch of omissions, flawed assumptions and misrepresentations.

Key data on endangered orchids is missing,

and projections on impacts on Tasmanian Devil and Spotted-tailed Quoll

are based on flawed and fanciful data.

Spotted-tailed Quoll

.

The EIS produced by the company as part of the Commonwealth environmental assessments has failed to produce a report relating to endangered and critically endangered orchid populations in the vicinity of the proposed open cut mine. The soil borne Mychorizza fungus is highly succeptible to changes in hydrology, and is essential to the germination of the area’s native orchids which cannot exist without Mychorizza. Federal Environment Minister Tony Burke included this report as a requirement in the project’s EIS guidelines issued in June 2011.

Australia’s Minister for Environment
Tony Burke

.

“Shree Minerals have decided that undertaking the necessary work on the proposal is likely to uncover some inconvenient truths, and so instead of producing scientific reports they are asking us to suspend common sense and accept that a 220 metre deep hole extending 1km long will have no impact on hydrology.” said Tarkine National Coalition spokesperson Scott Jordan.

Utter devastation
A magnetite mine at nearby Savage River

.

“It’s a ridiculous notion when you consider that the mine depth will be some 170 metres below the level of the adjacent Nelson Bay River.”

TNC has also questioned the company’s motives in the clear contradictions and misrepresentations in the data relating to projections of Tasmanian devil roadkill from mine related traffic. The company has used a January-February traffic surveys as a current traffic baseline which skews the data due to the higher level of tourist, campers and shackowner during the traditional summer holiday season.

Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources (Tasmania) (DIER) data indicates that there is a doubling of vehicles on these road sections between October and January.

The company also asserted an assumed level of mine related traffic that is substantially lower than their own expert produced Traffic Impact Assessment.

The roadkill assumptions were made on an additional 82 vehicles per day in year one, and 34 vehicles per day in years 2-10, while the figures the Traffic Impact Assessment specify 122 vehicles per day in year one, and 89 vehicles per day in ongoing years.

“When you apply the expert Traffic Impact Assessment data and the DIER’s data for current road use, the increase in traffic is 329% in year one and 240% in years 2-10 which contradicts the company’s flawed projections of 89% and 34%”.

“This increase of traffic will, on the company’s formulae, result in up to 32 devil deaths per year, not the 3 per year in presented in the EIS.”
“Shree Minerals either is too incompetent to understand it’s own expert reports, or they have set out to deliberately mislead the Commonwealth and State environmental assessors.”
“Either way, they are unfit to be trusted with a Pilbara style iron ore mine in stronghold of threatened species like the Tarkine.”

The public comment period closed on Monday, and the company now has to compile public comments received and submit them with the EIS to the Commonwealth.

.
.

Discovery of Tasmanian devil facial tumour disease in the Tarkine

Media Release 20120224

.
Tarkine National Coalition has described the discovery of Tasmanian Devil Facial Tumour Disease (DFTD) at Mt Lindsay in the Tarkine as a tragedy.


“The Tarkine has been for a number of years the last bastion of disease free devils, and news that the disease has been found in the south eastern zone of the Tarkine is devastating news”, said Tarkine National Coalition spokesperson Scott Jordan.

“It is now urgent that the federal and state governments step up and take immediate action to prevent any factors that may exacerbate or accelerate the transmission of this disease to the remaining healthy populations in the Tarkine”.

“The decisions made today will have a critical impact on the survival of the Devil in the wild. Delay is no longer an option – today is the day for action.”

“They should start by reinstating the Emergency National Heritage Listing and placing an immediate halt on all mineral exploration activity in the Tarkine to allow EPBC assessments.”

.

NOTE:   EPBC stands for Australia’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

.

.

.

 

Proposed Mine Site Plan (Direct Shipping Ore) with flows to enter tributaries of Nelson River
(Source: Shree Minerals EIS, 2011)

.

“The Nelson Bay Iron Ore Project (ELs 41/2004 & 54/2008) covers the Nelson Bay Magnetite deposit with Inferred Mineral Resources reported to Australasian Joint Ore Reserves Committee (JORC) guidelines. Drilling will look to enlarge the deposit and improve the quality of the resource, currently standing at 6.8 Million tonnes @ 38.2% magnetite at a 20% magnetite cut off. In addition exploration work will look follow up recent drilling of near surface iron oxide mineralisation in an attempt delineate direct shipping ore. Exploration of additional magnetic targets will also be undertaken.”

[Source:  Shree Minerals website, ^http://www.shreeminerals.com/shreemin/scripts/page.asp?mid=16&pageid=27]

.

The Irreversible Ecological Damage of Long Wall Mining

.

Impacts of Longwall Coal Mining on The Environment‘    >Read Report  (700kb)

[Source: Total Environment Centre, NSW, 2007, ^http://www.tec.org.au/component/docman/doc_view/201-longwall-rep07]
.

 

Mining Experience in New South Wales – Waratah Rivulet

[Source:  ^http://riverssos.org.au/mining-in-nsw/waratah-rivulet/]

.

The image belows show the shocking damage caused by longwall coal mining to the Waratah Rivulet, which flows into Woronora Dam.

Longwalls have run parallel to and directly under this once pristine waterway in the Woronora Catchment Special Area.  You risk an $11,000 fine if you set foot in the Catchment without permission, yet coal companies can cause irreparable damage like this and get away with it.

Waratah Rivulet is a third order stream that is located just to the west of Helensburgh and feeds into the Woronora Dam from the south. Along with its tributaries, it makes up about 29% of the Dam catchment. The Dam provides both the Sutherland Shire and Helensburgh with drinking water. The Rivulet is within the Sydney Catchment Authority managed Woronora Special Area there is no public access without the permission of the SCA. Trespassers are liable to an $11,000 fine.

.

Longwall Mining under Waratah Rivulet

 

Metropolitan Colliery operates under the Woronora Special Area. Excel Coal operated it until October 2006 when Peabody Energy, the world’s largest coal mining corporation, purchased it. The method of coal extraction is longwall mining. Recent underground operations have taken place and still are taking place directly below the Waratah Rivulet and its catchment area.

In 2005 the NSW Scientific Committee declared longwall mining to be a key threatening process (read report below). The Waratah Rivulet was listed in the declaration along with several other rivers and creeks as being damaged by mining. No threat abatement plan was ever completed.

In September 2006, conservation groups were informed that serious damage to the Waratah Rivulet had taken place. Photographs were provided and an inspection was organised through the Sydney Catchment Authority (SCA) to take place on the 24th of November. On November 23rd, the Total Environment Centre met with Peabody Energy at the mining company’s request. They had heard of our forthcoming inspection and wanted to tell us about their operation and future mining plans. Through a PowerPoint presentation they told us we would be shocked by what we would see and that water had drained from the Rivulet but was reappearing further downstream closer to the dam.

The inspection took place on the 24th of November and was attended by officers from the SCA and the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC), the Total Environment Centre, Colong Foundation, Rivers SOS and two independent experts on upland swamps and sandstone geology. We walked the length of the Rivulet that flows over the longwall panels. Although, similar waterways in the area are flowing healthily, the riverbed was completely dry for much of its length. It had suffered some of the worst cracking we had ever seen as a result of longwall mining. The SCA officers indicated that at one series of pools, water levels had dropped about 3m. We were also told there is anecdotal evidence suggesting the Rivulet has ceased to pass over places never previously known to have stopped flowing.

It appeared that the whole watercourse had tilted to the east as a result of the subsidence and upsidence. Rock ledges that were once flat now sloped.  Iron oxide pollution stains were also present. The SCA also told us that they did not know whether water flows were returning further downstream. There was also evidence of failed attempts at remediation with a distinctly different coloured sand having washed out of cracks and now sitting on the dry river bed or in pools.

Also undermined was Flat Rock Swamp at the southernmost extremity of the longwall panels. It is believed to be the main source of water recharge for the Waratah Rivulet. It is highly likely that the swamp has also been damaged and is sitting on a tilt.

TEC has applied under Freedom of Information legislation to the SCA for documents that refer to the damage to the Waratah Rivulet.

During the meeting with Peabody on 23rd November, the company stated its intentions sometime in 2007 to submit a 3A application under the EP&A Act 1974 (NSW) to mine a further 27 longwall panels that will run under the Rivulet and finish under the Woronora Dam storage area.

This is very alarming given the damage that has already occurred to a catchment that provides the Sutherland Shire & Helensburgh with 29% of their drinking water. The dry bed of Waratah Rivulet above the mining area and the stain of iron oxide pollution may be seen clearly through Google Earth.

.

The Bigger Picture

In 2005 Rivers SOS, a coalition of 30 groups, formed with the aim of campaigning for the NSW Government to mandate a safety zone of at least 1km around rivers and creeks threatened by mining in NSW.

The peak environment groups of NSW endorse this position and it forms part of their election policy document.

.

Longwall Mining under or close to Rivers and Streams:

.

Seven major rivers and numerous creeks in NSW have been permanently damaged by mining operations which have been allowed to go too close to, or under, riverbeds. Some rivers are used as channels for saline and acid wastewater pumped out from mines. Many more are under threat. The Minister for Primary Industries, Ian Macdonald, is continuing to approve operations with the Department of Planning and DEC also involved in the process, as are a range of agencies (EPA, Fisheries, DIPNR, SCA, etc.) on an Interagency Review Committee. This group gives recommendations concerning underground mine plans to Ian Macdonald, but has no further say in his final decision. A document recently obtained under FOI by Rivers SOS shows that an independent consultant to the Interagency Committee recommended that mining come no closer than 350m to the Cataract River, yet the Minister approved mining to come within 60m.

The damage involves multiple cracking of river bedrock, ranging from hairline cracks to cracks up to several centimetres wide, causing water loss and pollution as ecotoxic chemicals are leached from the fractured rocks.

.

Aquifers may often be breached.

.

Satisfactory remediation is not possible. In addition, rockfalls along mined river gorges are frequent.  The high price of coal and the royalties gained from expanding mines are making it all too tempting for the Government to compromise the integrity of our water catchments and sacrifice natural heritage.

.

Longwall Mining in the Catchments

.

Longwall coal mining is taking place across the catchment areas south of Sydney and is also proposed in the Wyong catchment. Of particular concern is BHP-B’s huge Dendrobium mine which is undermining the Avon and Cordeaux catchments, part of Sydney’s water supply.

A story in the Sydney Morning Herald in January 2005 stated that the SCA were developing a policy for longwall coal mining within the catchments that would be ready by the middle of that year. This policy is yet to materialise.

The SMP approvals process invariably promises remediation and further monitoring. But damage to rivers continues and applications to mine areapproved with little or no significant conditions placed upon the licence.

Remediation involves grouting some cracks but cannot cover all of the cracks, many of which go undetected, in areas where the riverbed is sandy for example.

Sometimes the grout simply washes out of the crack, as is the case in the Waratah Rivulet.

The SCA was established as a result of the 1998 Sydney water crisis. Justice Peter McClellan, who led the subsequent inquiry, determined that a separate catchment management authority with teeth should be created because, as he said “someone should wake up in the morning owning the issue” of adequate management.

An audit of the SCA and the catchments in 1999 found multiple problems including understaffing, the need to interact with so many State agencies, and enormous pressure from developers. Developers in the catchments include mining companies. In spite of government policies such as SEPP 58, stating that development in catchments should have only a “neutral or beneficial effect” on water quality, longwall coal mining in the catchments have been, and are being, approved by the NSW government.

Overidden by the Mining Act 1992, the SCA appears powerless to halt the damage to Sydney’s water supply.

.

Alteration of habitat following subsidence due to longwall mining – key threatening process listing

[Source: ‘Alteration of habitat following subsidence due to longwall mining – key threatening process listing’, Dr Lesley Hughes, ChairpersonScientific Committee, Proposed Gazettal date: 15/07/05, Exhibition period: 15/07/05 – 09/09/05on Department of Environment (NSW) website,^http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/determinations/LongwallMiningKtp.htm]

.

NSW Scientific Committee – final determination

.

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.

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.

.

References

.

ACARP (2001) ‘Impacts of Mine Subsidence on the Strata & Hydrology of River Valleys – Management Guidelines for Undermining Cliffs, Gorges and River Systems’. Australian Coal Association Research Program Final Report C8005 Stage 1, March 2001.

ACARP (2002) ‘Impacts of Mine Subsidence on the Strata & Hydrology of River Valleys – Management Guidelines for Undermining Cliffs, Gorges and River Systems’. Australian Coal Association Research Program Final Report C9067 Stage 2, June 2002.

ACARP (2003) ‘Review of Industry Subsidence Data in Relation to the Influence of Overburden Lithology on Subsidence and an Initial Assessment of a Sub-Surface Fracturing Model for Groundwater Analysis’. Australian Coal Association Research Program Final Report C10023, September 2003.

AWT (2000) ‘Investigation of the impact of bed cracking on water quality in the Cataract River.’ Prepared for the Dept. of Land and Water Conservation Sydney South Coast Region. AWT Report no. 2000/0366.

Bell FG, Stacey TR, Genske DD (2000) Mining subsidence and its effect on the environment: some differing examples. Environmental Geology 40, 135-152.

Benson DH, Keith DA (1990) The natural vegetation of the Wallerawang 1:100,000 map sheet. Cunninghamia 2, 305-335.

Booth CJ, Bertsch LP (1999) Groundwater geochemistry in shallow aquifers above longwall mines in Illinois, USA. Hydrogeology Journal 7, 561-575.

Booth CJ, Spande ED, Pattee CT, Miller JD, Bertsch LP (1998) Positive and negative impacts of longwall mine subsidence on a sandstone aquifer.

Environmental Geology 34, 223-233.

DIPNR (2003) ‘Hydrological and water quality assessment of the Cataract River; June 1999 to October 2002: Implications for the management of longwall coal mining.’ NSW Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Environment, Wollongong.

DLWC (2001) ‘Submission to the Commission of Inquiry into the Proposed Dendrobium Underground Coal Mine Project by BHP Steel (AIS) Pty Ltd, Wollongong, Wingecarribee & Wollondilly Local Government Areas’. Department of Land and Water Conservation, July 2001.

Elsworth D, Liu J (1995) Topographic influence of longwall mining on ground-water supplies. Ground Water 33, 786-793.

Everett M, Ross T, Hunt G (eds) (1998) ‘Final Report of the Cataract River Taskforce. A report to the Upper Nepean Catchment Management Committee of the studies of water loss in the lower Cataract River during the period 1993 to 1997.’ Cataract River Taskforce, Picton.

Gibbins L (2003) A geophysical investigation of two upland swamps, Woronora Plateau, NSW, Australia. Honours Thesis, Macquarie University.

Gill DR (2000) Hydrogeologic analysis of streamflow in relation to undergraound mining in northern West Virginia. MSc thesis, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia.

Holla L (1997) Ground movement due to longwall mining in high relief areas in New South Wales, Australia. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 34, 775-787.

Holla L, Barclay E (2000) ‘Mine subsidence in the Southern Coalfield, NSW, Australia’. Mineral Resources of NSW, Sydney.

International Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd (2004) ‘Pattern grouting remediation activities: Review of Environmental Effects Georges River Pools 5-22. May, 2004’.

Jones DC, Clark NR (eds) (1991) Geology of the Penrith 1:100,000 Sheet 9030, NSW. Geological Survey, NSW Department of Minerals and Energy.

Karaman A, Carpenter PJ, Booth CJ (2001) Type-curve analysis of water-level changes induced by a longwall mine. Environmental Geology 40, 897-901.

Keith DA (1991) Coexistence and species diversity in upland swamp vegetation. PhD thesis. University of Sydney.

Keith DA (1994) Floristics, structure and diversity of natural vegetation in the O’Hares Creek catchment, south of Sydney. Cunninghamia 3, 543-594.

Keith DA, Benson DH (1988) The natural vegetation of the Katoomba 1:100,000 map sheet. Cunninghamia 2, 107-143.

Kodela PG, Sainty GR, Bravo FJ, James TA (2001) ‘Wingecarribee Swamp flora survey and related management issues.’ Sydney Catchment Authority, New South Wales.

Keith DA, Myerscough PJ (1983) Floristics and soil relations of upland swamp vegetation near Sydney. Australian Journal of Ecology 18, 325-344.

NPWS (2001) ‘NPWS Primary Submission to the Commission of Inquiry into the Dendrobium Coal Project’. National Parks and Wildlife Service, July 2001.

Sidle RC, Kamil I, Sharma A, Yamashita S (2000) Stream response to subsidence from underground coal mining in central Utah. Environmental Geology 39, 279-291.

Stout BM III (2003) ‘Impact of longwall mining on headwater streams in northern West Virginia’. Final Report, June 2003 for the West Virginia Water Research Institute.

Stout BM III (2004) ‘Do headwater streams recover from longwall mining impacts in northern West Virginia’. Final Report, August 2004 for the West Virginia Water Research Institute.

Young ARM (1982) Upland swamps (dells) on the Woronora Plateau, N.S.W. PhD thesis, University of Wollongong.

Young ARM (1986) The geomorphic development of upland dells (upland swamps) on the Woronora Plateau, NSW, Australia. Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie N.F. Bd 30, Heft 3,312-327.

Young RW, Wray RAL (2000) The geomorphology of sandstones in the Sydney Region. In McNally GH and Franklin BJ eds Sandstone City – Sydney’s Dimension Stone and other Sandstone Geomaterials. Proceedings of a symposium held on 7th July 2000, 15th Australian Geological Convention, University of

Technology Sydney. Monograph No. 5, Geological Society of Australia, Springwood, NSW. Pp 55-73.

Young RW, Young ARM (1988) ‘Altogether barren, peculiarly romantic’: the sandstone lands around Sydney. Australian Geographer 19, 9-25.

.

error: Content is copyright protected !!