Posts Tagged ‘Tasmania’
Wednesday, December 21st, 2011
The following article is sourced from ‘Missing peace in forest war’s coupe de grace‘ by Matthew Denholm, The Australian, 20111022,
^http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/missing-peace-in-forest-wars-coupe-de-grace/story-e6frg6z6-122617.
Forestry clearfell of old-growth in Tasmania’s Styx Valley
(Photo by Editor 20110928, free in public domain, click photo to enlarge)
.
More than two months (on 7th August 2011) after the landmark deal that promised to bring peace to Tasmania’s forests the protests – and the logging – continue unabated.
Funding for the struggling timber industry under the landmark $276 million Gillard-Giddings deal is starting to trickle out, but as yet not one tree has been saved!
Conservationists concede they may end up with nothing to show for 18 months of torturous negotiations, while many in the industry are sceptical that the promised peace will ever be achieved. The key decisions – on how many and which forests will be saved – are bogged down in difficult detail and alleged recalcitrance. Tasmania’s upper house, meanwhile, is lining up to sink the legislation needed to create the new national parks and reserves.
Environment Tasmania’s Phill Pullinger (right) with The Wilderness Society’s Vica Bayley
.
A key conservationist and negotiator, Environment Tasmania director Phill Pullinger, concedes to Inquirer that events could conspire to see money flow to industry without one tree ever being saved.
“To be honest, it is a possibility,” says Pullinger, a Hobart doctor and former young Tasmanian of the year. “It has always been the case that the forest protection couldn’t be permanently delivered until the legislation goes through both houses of the Tasmanian parliament.”
.
That vote is a long way off, probably well into next year. The most immediate hurdle to overcome is a row over whether the state-owned Forestry Tasmania should be allowed to continue logging in 41 coupes (forest areas). All are within 430,000ha of forests set aside for “immediate” interim protection in the Gillard-Giddings deal of August 7, known as the Forests Intergovernmental Agreement or IGA.
Forestry Tasmania insists it needs to log in these coupes, a fraction of the total area, to maintain existing contracts to timber mills. Conservationists argue Forestry Tasmania could and should reschedule logging to less ecologically significant forests. The dispute was being sorted out by an independent rescheduling team appointed by state and federal governments. Inquirer has learned this process has gone badly for conservationists, with only seven of the 41 coupes able to be protected and five already logged. Forestry Tasmania and industry claim there simply is not time to do the rescheduling work – new roads, development of forest practices plans – necessary to shift to new areas quickly enough to meet existing timber contracts.
.
‘It is a fundamental problem that has weakened the (peace) process: you’ve got a government agency that is essentially working against the agreement. And the governments haven’t shown the stomach to pull the agency into line.’’
~ Phill Pullinger, Environment Tasmania, October 2011

Conservationists claim this should have been done months ago, given that Forestry Tasmania was asked by the state government – its owner – to place a moratorium on logging in these forests in March.
“They (FT) have basically for 12 months now deliberately spun the wheels on that; there could easily have been a moratorium delivered six or nine months ago,” Pullinger says. “It is a fundamental problem that has weakened the (peace) process: you’ve got a government agency that is essentially working against the agreement. And the governments haven’t shown the stomach to pull the agency into line.”

Crew-cutting pristine Tasmanian wilderness
.
This is rare intemperate talk from Pullinger, normally diplomatic and restrained as he tries to keep his constituency in the peace tent and the process on track.
It’s a sign things are not going well. Forestry Tasmania, a government business enterprise that reports to a board and is not necessary bound by ministerial direction, denies it has been dragging the chain. While it is the party with the most to lose – up to 572,000ha of native forest it manages for timber production – corporate relations manager Ken Jeffreys insists it is acting in good faith.
“Some people out there seem to think that FT has some maniacal glint in their eye and go out and harvest forests when it has no market because it has nothing better to do,” Jeffreys complains to Inquirer. “That is so far from common sense it’s hard to respond to.“
He insists Forestry Tasmania is happy to abide by the independent reschedulers’ verdict and points out that it has already rescheduled logging out of some contentious coupes. This fight over a handful of coupes has been holding up plans under the IGA for an overall immediate interim conservation agreement between the state, Forestry Tasmania and Canberra to protect the 430,000ha. Under the IGA, this interim agreement would protect those forests while an independent verification team determines the final size and location of the new permanent reserves.
Ancient Myrtle Beech (Nothofagus cunninghamii)
chainsawed in the Upper Florentine Valley, Tasmania
(Photo by Editor 20110928, free in public domain, click photo to enlarge)
.
IGA Independent Verification Team
.
The independent team, overseen by academic Jonathan West, will decide how much forest, of a larger 572,000ha nominated by green groups, is worthy of protection. West’s team will also test industry claims about how much timber it requires to meet existing contracts. Then it must decide how much forest can be protected while providing this resource. The job, which unrealistically is due to be completed by December 31, is the “forest wars” equivalent of deciding where exactly the boundaries of a Palestinian state should be drawn.
Conservation groups believe that most – if not all – of the 572,000ha can be protected, once a developing plantation resource is factored in.
.
Forestry Tasmania’s position

Forestry Tasmania chief, Bob Gordon
– what IGA? It’s logging business as usual to fill ‘orders’.
.
Forestry Tasmania stands by its modelling suggesting that no more than 300,000ha can be protected if it is to deliver on current timber contracts. Some in the industry believe only 250,000ha can be saved from the chainsaws. Neither of the industry figures is unlikely to be enough for conservationists, but may well be too much for Tasmania’s independent-dominated upper house. Several recent votes in the Legislative Council suggest it is opposed to the IGA and to more forest “lock-ups”. Its refusal to pass the reserves would leave conservationists relying on a federal-state conservation agreement to protect those forests.
While such an agreement would ban logging, it is legally uncertain if Forestry Tasmania could ignore this on the basis that it conflicts with its legislative or contractual obligations.
Jeffreys insists Forestry Tasmania would abide by any final agreement, subject to being able to meet those commitments – a big out if Forestry Tasmania decided to dig in for a battle.
.
Tony Burke’s position:
.
Federal Environment Minister Tony Burke
in Tasmania’s Wielangta forest, March 2011
(Photo by Matthew Newton, Source: The Australian )
.
Despite the difficulties, federal Environment Minister Tony Burke remains confident he can pull off the kind of final “win-win” forest peace deal that has eluded so many of his predecessors. He tells Inquirer the alternative is a kind of mutually assured destruction, whereby the forests continue to fall as fast as the jobs.
The number of jobs in Tasmanian forestry has halved since 2008 from 6960 to 3460, due mainly to Japanese paper-makers boycotting woodchips sourced from native forests, Gunns exiting the industry in favour of a plantation-based pulp mill and as a result of the high Australian dollar.
“If you let the markets sort this one out without a co-ordinated strategy from state and federal government … then you end up with a terrible outcome for the Tassie economy … diabolical,” Burke says.
Initially as Forests minister and more recently as Environment Minister, Burke has been involved in the process from the beginning. The first in federal cabinet to twig to the potential to assist industry while securing a historic conservation outcome, he has repeatedly slipped quietly into Tasmania to do his own field work.
The former staffer to Graham Richardson has camped with greenies amid the giant eucalypts of the Styx Valley and toured sawmills and production forests. When the process has looked as if it were imploding, he has intervened with all sides to keep it on track. Inspired to join the ALP by landmark conservation battles such as the Daintree and Kakadu, Burke constantly stresses his desire to also secure a good outcome for jobs and industry.
He believes the (Tasmanian) Legislative Council will take a different view to new reserves when details are developed for a $120m federal regional development fund promised under the IGA. That money, to revitalise timber communities and diversify the Tasmanian economy, is contingent upon state parliament passing the new reserves legislation. No reserves; no $120m.
Burke, himself a former state upper house MP (in NSW), believes this cash for regions will ultimately win over the key 12 independent MLCs.
“Those MPs will have to look in the eyes of a whole lot of their constituents who are out of work and justify their actions,” he says. “I just don’t believe when it comes to it they’ll vote this down. This is the first time we have tried to deal with this issue with an independent process rather than a political fix. The irony this time is: can we stop politics from wrecking it, not from fixing it?”
He warns both sides will need to accept the outcome of the independent verification process. “They are honour-bound to accept the process – they created it,” he says.
This suggests Canberra will not be afraid to impose the verdict of the independent verification team if the two sides cannot embrace it – or at least an agreed variation of it. Such action may well see either side – timber or conservation – walk away.
Certainly, Pullinger won’t promise to accept the outcome if it is not embraced by both sides.
“If the independent verification group comes down and says … we are going to protect just a fraction of these forests … then – expert group or not – I don’t think anyone believes that is going to be able to deliver a lasting agreement.”
.
Editor:
The IGA deal is a deal is a promise. Why are Gillard and Giddings allowing Forestry Tasmania to renege on the deal by continuing to log these now protected native forests in Tasmania’s Styx Valley and southern forests. Why are Gillard and Giddings breaking their promise to Tasmanians?
IGA interim reserves are IGA interim reserves? The IGA offers millions in contractual compensation. So take the compensation Bob Gordon! You can’t have your compensation and interim reserves too!
Leave the bloody old growth alone!
Prime Minister Julia Gillard, 2011
– do I really have to honour that forest deal?
(Photo: The Examiner)
.
Evidence of new logging despite Tasmanian Forests Agreement
.
[Source: ‘ Evidence of new logging despite Tasmanian Forests Intergovernmental Agreement requires urgent government action‘, by the Australian Conservation Foundation, 20110922, ^ http://www.thegreenpages.com.au/news/evidence-of-new-logging-despite-tasmanian-forests-intergovernmental-agreement-requires-urgent-government-action/]
.
Environment Tasmania, the Wilderness Society and the Australian Conservation Foundation have released a report assessing the status of logging in important native forests and photographs that show new logging activity in forest reserves prescribed by the Tasmanian Forests Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA).
“The settlement and retirement of Gunns’ native forest timber quotas has halved the demand for native forest timber from Forestry Tasmania, so there is no need or justification for logging within the forest reserve areas,” said Dr Phill Pullinger of Environment Tasmania.
“Wood supply for remaining sawmills can be provided from outside of the important native forests identified for protection,” Dr Pullinger said.
“Aerial photographs taken in late August and last week show Forestry Tasmania continues to log inside the 430,000 hectares of unique and important forests identified for immediate protection in the IGA,” said Vica Bayley of the Wilderness Society.

“In fact, our report and the new photos show Forestry Tasmania has not rescheduled logging outside this area and has even commenced logging new coupes since the IGA was signed.
“While we are encouraged to see progress on key components of the intergovernmental agreement — including the retirement of Gunns’ wood quota, funding for timber workers and contractors and the independent verification group — we have seen no progress on halting logging inside the nominated forest reserve areas,” Mr Bayley said.
“Environment groups again call on the state government to honour the agreement it has signed by directing Forestry Tasmania to declare the nominated forests as informal reserves and immediately appointing an independent expert to undertake the rescheduling,” said Denise Boyd of the Australian Conservation Foundation.
The report released today is part of environment group signatories’ ongoing commitment to implementing the IGA and will provide governments with verified, accurate information to help achieve the forest protection outcomes of the IGA. The state government must now ensure delivery of the critical plank of the IGA – forest protection.

“We have seen no progress on halting logging inside the nominated forest reserve areas.”
~ Vica Bayley, The Wilderness Society
.
Forest protest continues in Mount Mueller Forest, Styx Valley (Tree Sit, Day 7)
.
Check out The ObserverTree protest website:
^http://observertree.org/

.
Tags: breaking promise, clearfell, Crew-cutting pristine Tasmanian wilderness, Environment Tasmania, Forestry Tasmania, IGA, interim reserves, Julia Gillard, Lara Giddings, Myrtle Beech, Nothofagus cunninghamii, Prime Minister Julia Gillard, Styx Forest, Styx Valley, Tasmania, Tasmanian Forests Intergovernmental Agreement, The ObserverTree, Tony Burke, Upper Florentine Valley Posted in Tasmania (AU), Threats from Deforestation, Threats to Wild Tasmania | No Comments »
Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg
Thursday, December 15th, 2011
“The moment one definitely commits oneself, then providence moves too. All sorts of things occur to help one that would never otherwise occurred. A whole stream of events issues from the decision, raising in one’s favor all manner of unforeseen incidents and meetings and material assistance which no man could have dreamed would have come his way. Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. Begin it now.”
~ attributed to Goethe.
Miranda – Defender of Tasmania’s Forest Heritage
at the foot of ‘The Observer Tree‘
Mount Mueller Forest, Styx Valley, Tasmania
.
One young Tasmanian woman, charged with a deep commitment to her natural island heritage, continues to be prepared to do more to protect Tasmanian old growth forests than most Tasmanians. Miranda Gibson of Still Wild Still Threatened is certainly prepared to do more than the current (read ‘temporary‘) Premier of Tasmania Lara Giddings, and more than the current (read ‘temporary‘) Prime Minister of Australia, Julia Gillard, who have quickly turned their backs on Tasmanians to more populist party-political issues of the day.
.
Tasmania’s Forest Wars
– what the Intergovernmental Agreement is supposed to resolve.
.
Gillard and Giddings in breach of Tasmania’s 2011 Forest Agreement
.
Tasmanians are condemning government delinquency on meeting the conservation goals contained in the Gillard Labor Government’s Forests Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) signed and promised to all Tasmanians in Launceston on 7th August 2011.
Giddings and Gillard
– hollow Labor promises
.
IGA Clause 25 states:
.
‘The State will immediately place the 430,000 ha of native forest identified in Attachment A (other than any areas which are not State forest) from the 572,000 ha nominated by ENGOs through the Statement of Principles process, into Informal Reserves.’
.
IGA Clause 27 states:
.
‘In the event that Forestry Tasmania reports that it cannot meet contractual requirements from production resources outside the nominated 430,000 ha the Governments will undertake the following steps. First, an independent expert will be jointly appointed by the Governments to review scheduling and other relevant data and attempt to reschedule harvesting activities so as to meet the requirements of contracts and maintain the interim protection of 430,000 ha. In the event that the independent expert concludes it is impossible to achieve this, the Commonwealth will compensate the contract holder for the value of lost profits and unavoidable costs.’
.
Gillard’s fly-in to Launceston on 7th August 2011 to sign and celebrate the Tasmanian Forests Intergovernmental Agreement with Labor mate Giddings was not a mere plaque unveiling, it was a Tasmanian landmark agreement to provide certainty for Tasmania’s forestry industry, support local jobs and communities, and protect the state’s ancient forests. It deserves the respect of commitment and follow through on promise.
On the one hand it has funded Forestry and its associated families hundreds of millions and with a dignified exit from logging and transition to alternate trades. On the other hand Gillard’s Forest Agreement guarantees protection for Tasmania’s natural but threatened heritage – its most iconic ancient forests, immediately placing 430,000 hectares of iconic old growth native forest into informal reserve – the Styx, Upper Florentine, Huon, Picton and Weld Valleys and the Great Western Tiers, Tarkine and Wielangta.
.
Gillard’s promise made to the Australian people (Prime Minister Gillard’s official website):
.
‘These forests will not be accessed for harvest while verification takes place.‘.
Well, verification is still taking place. And Bill Kelty, who brokered the deal, seems to have run to the hills.
Such a landmark State-wide agreement that promises a ‘strong foundation‘ is hollow if the leadership waddles off to be distracted by other issue so the day, without the committed delegation of trusted lieutenants to see through on implementation. Predecessor PM Kevin Rudd failed classically on the implementation phase of his policy – insulation being his and Garrett’s multi-million dollar incompetent legacy.
“The Australian and Tasmanian governments are taking too long to implement the intergovernmental agreement. If they can get their act together to offer contractors exit packages then they can honour the conservation agreement as well.” Greens Senator Bob Brown has said. “Four months later not one hectare has been protected and Forestry Tasmania continues to fell these magnificent trees as fast as they can put the roads in. All up, more than 10km2 of our wild forests will be destroyed“, Greens Senator Brown said.
All political leaders, while dancing on mountains of power and influence, pragmatically realise that their time in office is temporary. Status quo is not a characteristic of modern democratic politics. What matters most in political careers is legacy. Australia’s current Prime Minister Julia Gillard is starting to stare that legacy in the face as she allows Premier Lara Giddings to breaking the $276 million promise by backing Forestry Tasmania’s current logging of the 430,000 hectares of old growth forest protected under the Gillard Government’s Agreement.
.
Tasmanian Betrayal
.
Gillard and Giddings have allowed Forestry Tasmania to log the protected 430,000 hectares, ignoring the prescribed compensation requirement. Gillard and Giddings have blatantly reneged on their core promise in the Agreement to cease logging and to protect these forests. Gillard and Giddings have betrayed the Tasmanian and Australian people. They have no mandate to stay in power. Their broken promises are to be their legacies.
.
“Those who cannot work with their hearts achieve but a hollow, half-hearted success that breeds bitterness all around”
~ Abdul Kalam, President of India (b.1931)
Styx Valley Giants being massacred by State logger ‘Forestry Tasmania’
.
Tasmania sells itself as ‘the natural state’. But there is a gap between rhetoric and reality as logging of old-growth forests continues – to international dismay.
“And they have these big logs, and you just know they are coming from old-growth forests…I don’t think I could take living there and seeing them every day knowing (the trees) are going mostly to woodchips.” ~ Larraine Herrick or Tumbarumba, Snowy Mountains, New South Wales.
But the Styx has been, and (is continuing) to be, logged by the timber industry in a state in which questions have been repeatedly raised about whether cronyism, corruption and deception underlie the management of forests. Only discovered in 2002, El Grande was a Eucalyptus regnans with a 19-metre circumference. Last autumn (2003), it was killed when a regeneration burn went wrong. Its demise helped fuel a midwinter protest that drew more than 2000 people to the Styx Valley. There, The Wilderness Society and Greenpeace began a tree-sit, 65 metres up a threatened giant eucalypt called Gandalf Staff.
.
[Source: ‘Tasmania: seeing the wood but not the trees‘, by Melissa Fyfe and Andrew Darby, The Age Newspaper, 20040313, ^http://www.theage.com.au/news/science/tasmania-seeing-the-wood-but-not-the-trees/2004/03/13/1078594604573.html]
.
‘El Grande’
Australia’s largest tree burned to death in 2003 by Forestry Tasmania’s incompetence
.
Tasmanian forests activist organisation Still Wild Still Threatened have called on the Federal and State governments to honour a $276 million forest deal made on 7th August 2011.
“This deal has already seen $35 million delivered to Forestry Tasmania and Gunns Ltd. without protecting a single tree” said Still Wild Still Threatened spokesperson Ali Alishah.
“It is clear that by backing Forestry Tasmania’s destructive practices within the identified 430,000 ha area of high conservation value native forest, the State and Federal Governments are in direct violation of Clauses 25 and 27 of their own Inter Governmental Agreement.” said Mr. Alishah.
.
.
.
The Observer Tree

Miranda Gibson on top of The Observer Tree
Totally committed to Tasmanian Forests,
unlike Gillard and Giddings hollow words.
.
Still Wild Still Threatened have this week launched a new tool in the fight to protect Tasmania’s forests today, unveiling the ‘ObserverTree‘, a 17-storey high tree sit and media centre equipped with the technology to record footage of logging operations and stream these images live to the world via the internet.
The Observer Tree is located in the Styx Forest below Mt Mueller, in Tasmania’s western wilderness, part of the 430,000 ha of forest that was supposed to receive immediate protection under the federal-state agreement on forests (the IGA). The Observer Tree is situated at the head of a section of Styx Forest currently targeted for logging by Forestry Tasmania.
‘Observer Tree’ location
^http://observertree.org/2011/12/15/observertree-on-google-maps/
.
Teacher, author and forest activist, Miranda Gibson, has vowed to occupy the tree-platform continuously, until real protection is secured for Tasmania’s forests. Ms Gibson will maintain a daily blog and upload video updates during her stay in the tree, documenting the struggle to protect Tasmania’s forests to concerned people all over the globe.
‘We have used the internet to connect this spectacular patch of threatened Tasmanian forest to the world. The Observer Tree will transmit images and information about the value of the thousands of hectares of forest that remain threatened if Julia Gillard does not keep her word. People across Australia and the globe will have the opportunity to view bear witness to the wasteful destruction of these forests and hear from the people fighting to protect them,’ said Ms Gibson.
For the first time their actual logging will be broadcast live internationally via the web.
Website: ^http://www.observertree.org
Facebook: ^http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/ObserverTree/152795598158969
Download Google Earth (93MB): GoTo: ^http://www.google.com/earth/download/ge/
.
Google Earth’s satellite image of the Observer Tree in dense old-growth, adjacent to Forestry Tasmania’s fresh logging road
(click photo to enlarge)
.
Close up image
(click photo to enlarge)
.
.
Monday: Forestry Tasmania attacks the Styx Forest
.
On Monday 12th December 2011, State forest ‘nazi logger’, Forestry Tasmania, under the command of District Officer (Gauführer) Steve Whitely, rolled in its contracted ‘ecodeath-squad’ into the western end of the magnificent Styx Valley. The targeted forest area is situated at the base of Tasmania’s prominent and wild Mt Mueller on the border of the World Heritage Area. It is situated about 25 km west of the infamous logging town of Maydena.
Directing the logging – Forestry Tasmania’s Steve Whiteley
[Source: Southern Cross Television, 20111214]
.
In true forest nazi style, Forestry Tasmania’s targeted forest area is branded as coupe ‘TN 044B‘.
Logging Nazi in and destroying the Styx Valley Forest
Monday 12th December 2011, in direct breach of Prime Minister Gillard’s Forest Agreement.
.
This ‘Madill’ feller buncher was getting well stuck into the Styx Valley last Monday morning just below the Observer Tree. The hydraulic arm clamps onto the trunk of the tree while a cutting mechanism severs the tree at the stump. The machine then lifts the tree, lowers the tree into a horizontal position, and drops the tree on a bunch of logs piled on the ground. The industrial machinery has all the efficiency of a Nazi death factory.
.

.
Foresty Tasmania is operating in direct contradiction of IGA Clauses 25 and 27. The coupes within the 430,000 ha of high conservation value forest are not to be logged under any condition. The IGA prescribes that relevant customers and contractors are to be granted compensation and million have been set aside for this purpose. Foresty Tasmania under Gauführer Steve Whitely is out of control. He is driving ecological apocalypse in Tasmania’s southern forests. He has become a Walter E. Kurtz.
Walter E. Kurtz – unhinged, his methods unsound.
.
Tags: Abdul Kalam, activist, Bill Kelty, El Grande, Forestry Tasmania, Gandalf, Google Earth, Inter Governmental Agreement, Julia Gillard, Lara Giddings, Maydena, Mount Mueller, nazi logger, Observer Tree, old growth forest, Still Wild Still Threatened, Styx Forest, Styx Valley, Tasmania, Tasmanian Betrayal, Tasmanian Forests Intergovernmental Agreement, The Observer Tree, Woodchipping Tasmania Posted in Tasmania (AU), Threats from Deforestation, Threats from Weak Environmental Laws, Threats to Wild Tasmania | No Comments »
Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg
Monday, December 12th, 2011
“I wish to explore what remains for most – and has been for me – a terra incognita, a forbidden place, a heart of darkness that civilised people have long attempted to repress – that is, the wilderness within the human soul and without, in that living profusion that envelops all creation.”
.
~ Max Oelschlaeger, The Idea of Wilderness: From Prehistory to the Age of Ecology (1993)
.
Pinnacle of Mount Wellington, Tasmania
(Photo by Editor 20111001, free in public domain, click photo to enlarge)
.
In 2007, former United States Vice President Al Gore‘s campaign to educate citizens about global warming was portrayed in an award winning documentary film ‘An Inconvenient Truth‘.
The subject matter, global warming, has indeed become an inconvenient truth because the global scale of the problem is such that the powers that be have so far been finding it difficult to comprehend. They have been told that it demands a response so systemic as to be transformational, which is highly inconvenient for them to say the least. The transformational response is mostly inconvenient to the powerful vested interests in polluting industries that are key contributors to global warming – particularly oil, gas, coal, heavy manufacturing, transport and weapons industries.
.
‘Deluded Convenience’
.
On the flip side of this inconvenience of the truth, powerful vested interests understandably, are hell bent on maintaining their convenient business as usual practices, choosing to ignore, reject and deny the truth. It is their short term interests to do so, because change is expensive and threatens to diminish their power, influence and wealth. But in the long term, by perpetuating practices that are shown to be damaging to the Earth’s climate, the imperative of maintaining a convenient business as usual approach is a deluded one, as everyone will be adversely affected by global warming. They are only deluding themselves. Such harmful business-as-usual practice is a ‘deluded convenience‘.
Harmful business-as-usual practices that are contributing to global warming were once branded aspiringly in the 18th, 19th and 20th Centuries as ‘industrial progress‘. The widespread Western culture from Western Europe and the United States has for over three hundred years idolised the ‘civilised’ advances of the Industrial Revolution, capitalism and economics. Western economies now have many conveniences of lifestyle, but attaining them has caused considerable cost to societies and ecology. Globalisation has destroyed family-based enterprises, local markets and village communities and caused wars and immense suffering. Industrialisation has destroyed many forests, rivers, valleys, coastlines and species. These have been the cost of convenience, the cost of civilisation; and we are now paying the price.
.
“It is fairly widely accepted today that environmental destruction ultimately becomes self-destructive as a sick and impoverished global environment in turn sickens and impoverishes the human members of that ecosystem.
..Why, despite warning signs from a stressed global ecosystem, mounting scientific evidence, and public education campaigns, does degradation of the environment continue to persist and mount?”
.
~ Catherine M. Roach, 2003, ‘Mother Nature: Popular Culture and Environmental Ethics.
.
Absolute environmental destruction above Queenstown, Tasmania
.
Bushphobia – a form of deluded convenience
.
Bushphobia is a composite term emanating from Australia, which combines two words ‘bush’ meaning the native forest and scrub environment of Australia’s unique animals and plants, with the non-clinical use of the term ‘phobia’. Phobia (from Greek φόβος, phóbos: fear, phobia) is an anxiety association, a negative attitudes towards, a dislike, disapproval, prejudice, discrimination, or hostility of, aversion to, or discrimination against something. Bushphobia is borne out of learnt acculturation adopting two distinct attitudes:
- A deep fear of the bush due to its propensity to burn and cause horrific wildfires
- A dislike of Australian native vegetation due to its wild untamed appearance which is so different to exotic trees and landscapes that have a more symmetrical and accessible character
An Australian native tree discriminated against by a pro-development Court ruling…because it may be dangerous
^http://www.savethetree.org/
In this case a discrimination against the bush, where the word ‘bush’ is an Australian term for native forest and scrubland. Bushphobia was first used with its modern meaning in 2008 in the Blue Mountains in eastern Australia which represents an intolerance and prejudice against the natural Australian bush vegetation mainly because of its susceptibility to burning in the case of bushfires and the consequential fire threat to life and private property.
The combined meaning is to have a persistent irrational fear specific fear or loathing of the natural (bush) environment. There are three classes of phobias: agoraphobia, social phobia, and specific phobia (Wood 521). Bushphobia is a specific phobia associated with a fear of natural environment.
Bushphobia is a socially learnt fear and loathing toward the bush common amongst rural volunteer bushfire fighting organisations which is instilled in new recruits as part of the training tans assimilation process. Bushphobia has thus become a form of learned cultural prejudice amongst the rural fire fighting fraternity throughout Australia. This attitude becomes deep seated and a motive to regard native forests, not as valued natural assets and habitat for native flora and fauna, but only as a combustible fuel that is prone to burn and thus a menace and ‘hazard’. The standard myth conveyed about the bush that inculcates bushphobia is that if the bush is not destroyed and allowed to grow naturally then the bush will develop into an uncontrollable fuel that in the event of a bushfire will cause an horrific fire storm and Armageddon. The issue of inadequate bushfire fighting capabilities is conveniently ignored.
Those who only see the bush through a bushphobic mindset desire to burn it, bulldoze it and destroy it at any opportunity when weather permits such action to be done safely. Deliberate burning of the bush has become a ‘prescribed burning’ policy of Australian governments at both state and federal level attracting massive resources. In New South Wales prescribed burning is labelled ‘hazard reduction’. History however has shown repeatedly that many prescribed burning activities frequently escape control lines an end up destroying vast areas of bush.
.
.
NIMBYism – a celebration of ‘think globally, act locally’
.
The maxim ‘Think globally, act locally‘ has long passed into the vernacular, urging grassroots activism where thinking about the health of the entire planet is translated into taking action at a local level in one’s own community. The phrase has been originally attributed to Scottish town planner and social activist Sir Patrick Geddes FRSE [1854-1932].
Sir Patrick Geddes (c.1886)
.
At a time in the early 20th Century when industrialisation was dramatically altering the conditions of social life, Geddes recognised the role of architectural amenity on urban life, particularly promoting the happiness, health and comfort of all residents, rather than focusing on roads and parks available only to the rich. He applied this in his design of Edinburgh, Tel Aviv and Bombay. Geddes was an advocate of nature conservation and strongly opposed to industrial pollution. Some historians have claimed he was a forerunner of modern Green politics. At a time of rapid urban growth, Geddes coined the term ‘conurbation’ observing how population growth was pushing large towns to merge into one continuous urban and industrially developed area. In Geddes’ 1915 book “Cities in Evolution” his advocacy of maintaining local character in urban planning is clearly evident:
‘Local character’ is thus no mere accidental old-world quaintness, as its mimics think and say. It is attained only in course of adequate grasp and treatment of the whole environment, and in active sympathy with the essential and characteristic life of the place concerned.’
.
Prominent American environmentalist and mountaineer David Brower [1912 – 2000] and founder of Friends of the Earth (FOE) in 1969 is believed to have been the first to applied the phrase ‘think globally, act locally‘ in an environmental context as the slogan for FOE. Application of ‘think globally, act locally‘ maxim in this environmental context has manifest itself most prevalently when grassroots activism erupts as a result of inappropriate land use development threats. Local residents opposing inappropriate development are following the thinking of Geddes by recognising the important value of local amenity to the health and happiness of local residents. Developers are quick to deride the rights of local residents to defend their neighbourhood amenity, labelling them as NIMBY‘s – an acronym for the phrase “Not In My Back Yard“, first coined in 1980 by British writer Emilie Travel Livezey in an article ‘Hazardous Waste‘.
Nimbyism is used typically by proponents of a development to pejoratively describe opposition by neighbouring residents. Nimbyism, however is simply acting locally to protect the values of one’s neighbourhood. Standing by and watching an inappropriate development proceed is an option, but why stand by? Residents who plan to live in a locality for some time and perhaps for the rest of their lives, have a democratic right and a say in what happens to their locality and this includes a say its preserving or changing the locality’s amenity and character. It is about holding strong principles of community governance and valuing the rights of locals to participate in decisions that directly affect them. Local residents are the stakeholders who will have to live permanently with a development and so are most deserving in having a louder voice in development decisions to balance corporate developers and their investors.
Amusing variants of NIMBY are:
- ‘NIMFYE’ = Not In My Front Yard Either
- ‘NIMTOO’ = Not In My Term Of Office [a favourite of politicians]
- ‘NITL’ = Not In This Lifetime
- ‘NOPE’ = Not On Planet Earth
- ‘NOTE’ = Not Over There Either
- ‘GOOMBY’ = Get Out Of My Backyard [Common in new suburbs that encroach on industrial sites or airports]
- ‘NIABY’ = Not in Anyone’s Backyard
- ‘NUMBY’ = Not Under My Backyard (applicable to mining companies)
.
And this Editor’s favourite:
- ‘BANANA’ = Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything
.
.
‘A recent report has found that nearly 80% of U.S. residents oppose any new development in their community. It’s the highest level of opposition recorded in the report’s six-year history, and the first time since 2008 that the amount of opposition has increased.’
.
[Source: ‘As America Ages, NIMBYism Could Increase, by Nate Berg, The Atlantic Cities, 20111017, ^http://www.theatlanticcities.com/politics/2011/10/as-america-ages-nimbyism-could-increase/306/]
Given that Nimyism is a developer term used derogatorily against residents who dare to question and challenge land use development , the counter-language on the side of residents is ‘property rights‘ and ‘planning democracy‘. Many residents out of frustration with the local planning process decide to form an action group. One organisation well experienced in this quest is Sydney-based Save Our Suburbs.
.
Save Our Suburbs
.
‘Save Our Suburbs (NSW) Inc is a non-profit & non-aligned group of residents, originally formed to fight against forced rezoning and over-development of Sydney’s suburbs. It has grown to include communities who are fighting for better planning and regulation on a range of development issues, including major infrastructure projects such as road tunnels. Sydney’s beleaguered residents have been fighting an endless string of localised battles against increased density developments (‘urban consolidation‘) and badly planned developments such as unfiltered tunnel exhaust stacks. We have been fighting local councils about local rezoning and local developments, and state government departments about the lack of regulation and planning. Residents are usually the losers in these local battles. If we want to effectively protect the environment and heritage of our suburbs, we need to take the fight beyond our local areas into the State Government arena. This can only be achieved by organised and united residents. Save Our Suburbs (NSW) Inc has been formed for this very purpose.
.
Fundamental Objectives:
- Return Planning democracy to New South Wales, by allowing true consultation, and giving planning power back to local councils: The people should decide, not a Planning Dictator!
- End big developer donations to political parties: We want planning decisions based on merit, not on money!
- Save our property rights: Provide just compensation for loss of land, income or amenity, and for change of land use.
- End forced urban consolidation- allow sensible land release, with infrastructure funded by the government: Dump the failed planning policies, designed to favour big developers rather than the community.
Read More: ^http://www.sos.org.au/
.
.
Bushphobia – a ‘case’ of deluded convenience
.
‘Our urban footprint is encroaching further and further into bushland. The amount of land used as space for community living is decreasing as urban settlements have sprawled. This is affecting the opportunities we now have to meet and interact as communities. The consequences of urban sprawl include a decline in the supply of affordable housing, increased bushfire risk for individuals and property and increasing impacts on the environment.’
Historically, much of the development in the Blue Mountains has encroached well into bushland with little regard for environmental impact and often without supporting infrastructure, such as sewerage and transport systems. This dispersed, sprawling development pattern along ridgelines has been added to by post war residential development, creating many of the ‘suburbs’, particularly in the lower Blue Mountains. As all available sites for new development dry up it is likely that existing urban areas will come under increasing pressure for redevelopment.’
[Source: Blue Mountains Council, ^http://www.sustainablebluemountains.net.au/imagesDB/resources/Paper14bOurFuture.pdf, p.4]
An example of current housing encroachment into bushland
Faulconbridge, Blue Mountains, New South Wales, Australia
[Source: Century 21 Real Estate, ^http://www.realestateview.com.au/Real-Estate/faulconbridge/Property-Details-buy-residential-2842241.html
.
A case in point involves the current issue about a significant native tree facing death due to the threat of housing development in the Blue Mountains village of Faulconbridge.
About midway along the conurbated highway corridor through the Central Blue Mountains lies the urban village of Faulconbridge. Like all the other villages and towns along this highway, Faulconbridge residential housing ultimately backs on to the Blue Mountains National Park, which forms part of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.
Faulconbridge juxtapositioned to the Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.
[Source: Google Maps]
.
A local resident action group in St Georges Crescent, Faulconbridge has been recently formed to try to save a significant native tree situated in its natural bush environment from being killed for housing development. The resident group, lead by local Faulconbridge resident Don Cameron, is simply called ‘Save the Tree‘ and a dedicated website has been designed and set up: ^http://savethetree.org
A mature native tree in a forest but on death row
so that property developers can build a house or two.
(St Georges Terrace, Faulconbridge, Blue Mountains, New South Wales Australia,
Source: ^http://savethetree.org)
.
According the website, the subject tree has been listed on Blue Mountains Council’s Register of Significant Trees since August 1985 – #33. The subject land site where the tree stands comprises remnant bushland including the significant tree as well as three locally rare Faulconbridge Mallee Ash trees (Eucalyptus burgessiana), which is a rare species of flora included on the Australian botanical list of Rare or Threatened Plants (ROTAP).
In early 2010, a development application for two dwellings on the site was submitted to council. The proposal included the removal of a considerable amount of the remaining vegetation including the removal of the significant tree. In that same year, numerous residents submitted objections to the development application. As a result of Council’s notification process, fifteen submissions from local residents were received objecting to the development on the following bases:
- Removal of the significant tree from the site
- Clearing and loss of vegetation, including threatened
- Species of vegetation, and screening of the development
- Impacts on streetscape
- The lot should become public land
- Overdevelopment of the site and the bulk and scale of the development
- The proposed development is out of character with the surrounding development
- Proposed subdivision into 2 lots
- Loss of environmental features of the site
- Increased stormwater impacts and local flooding
- Pedestrian and traffic safety
- Reduced building setbacks
.
[Source: Blue Mountains Council, Ordinary Meeting of 28th June 2011, Section: ‘Using Land for Living’, Item 20, Ordinary Meeting, 28.06.11, p.212, 20. 11/85977. Development Application no. X/443/2010 for a detached dual occupancy consisting of a single storey dwelling and a two storey dwelling…Faulconbridge]
.
Council Planning assessed the Environmental Impacts of the proposed development as follows:
‘There are currently three (3) Faulconbridge Mallee Ash (Eucalyptus burgessiana) located on the subject allotment. This is a rare species of flora which is on the list of Rare or Threatened Plants (ROTAP) published by the CSIRO. While it is acknowledged that Eucalyptus burgessiana are a rare plant, they are not listed as a threatened species under either the Threatened Species Conservation Act or the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.
‘There are also a number of other indigenous trees on the property including a large Eucalyptus Sclerophylla x Eucalyptus Piperita hybrid which is listed as a significant tree in DCP 9 Significant Trees. The proposed development will result in the removal of much of the vegetation on the site including two (2) of the Eucalyptus Burgessianna and the significant tree. The site also contains a number of significant rock outcrops which are identified by the LEP as a significant natural feature.’
.
The proposed development has been sited to avoid as far as practical impacts on those outcrops. In particular, it is noted that the development has been designed to ensure that both the dwellings and the vehicular driveways are predominantly clear of the two most significant features, being the outcrop adjacent the frontage with St Georges Crescent and the outcrop toward the centre of the lot.
Clause 44(4) provides a hierarchy for considering any adverse environmental impact which may result from any development. This clause requires that any development should be designed and sited so as to have no adverse environmental impact. However the clause goes on to provide that where an adverse environmental impact cannot be avoided and no practicable alternative is available, it is necessary to consider the proposed use of the land with reference to the zone objectives of the land. In this respect, while it would be possible to reduce the impacts if the development was confined to a single dwelling only, it is considered that there are no practicable alternatives that would allow all the rare species and the significant tree to be retained and at the same time, allow the permitted use as a detached dual occupancy.
.
It should also be noted that the significant tree has been assessed as not being viable for retention in any case as the result of extensive decay throughout the trunk. This matter is discussed in more detail in the body of the report.’
.
Biodiversity incremental degradation encouraged by Council Planners
.
The matters for consideration are:
‘ The need to prevent adverse impacts on the near pristine conditions of these subcatchments’
.
Council Planning Response:
‘The proposed development is located on an existing vacant lot within the urban area. There will be a significant amount of vegetation removal but this is unavoidable to provide for development of this site. The site will be revegetated and landscaped.’
(Editor: ‘revegetated’ permits destruction of native bushland in favour of creating an exotic urban garden complete with fertiliser and associated runoff).
Both dwellings will be connected to the sewer.
It is considered that the proposed development will not have any adverse impact on the condition of the Grose River Sub-catchment.
(Editor: What is ignored is the collective impact of multiple development applications on Blue Mountains biodiversity and catchments. The planning guidelines fails to factor the collective death by a thousand cuts).
The proposed development is located clear of the areas of surface rock on the property and has been designed to minimise cut and fill by the use of drop edge beams. While the development will result in the removal of two (2) of the Rare or Threatened Plants listed trees, the site is not part of a contiguous area of bushland and it not considered that their removal will have a significant impact on the species.’
– – –
On 28th June 2011, following Blue Mountains Council’s planning assessment, councillors voted unanimously at a General Meeting to refuse the development application on the basis that it breached Council’s local planning laws. The meeting was addressed by: Don Cameron, Robert Leslie, Rama Decent, Terry Barrett.
A motion was moved by Councillors Searle and McLaren that the Development Application No. X/443/2010 be refused on the following grounds:
- The proposed development is contrary to the objectives for the ‘Living-General’ zone under LEP 2005 in that it does not maintain and improve the character of the area, or respond to the environmental characteristics of the site;
- The proposed development, including the removal of the significant majority of existing trees and other vegetation from the site, will have an unacceptable adverse impact on the established landscape character of the locality;
- The proposed development will have an unacceptable adverse environmental impact and is contrary to the provisions of Clause 44 of LEP 2005 in that it has not been designed and sited to minimise impacts on the rare species of plant Eucalyptus Burgessiana and the destruction of rock outcrops on the property;
- The proposed two storey component of the development will be visually prominent and have an unacceptable impact on the existing streetscape when viewed from St Georges Crescent;
- The proposed development is an over development of the site in terms of the height, bulk and scale of the two storey dwelling fronting St Georges Crescent;
- The proposed development does not comply with Clause 2, Part 1, Schedule 2 – Locality Management within the Living Zones, of LEP 2005 by reason that the rear dwelling encroaches onto the 4 metre secondary street frontage setback to Adeline street, and the Council is not satisfied that the objection lodged pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 is well founded or that compliance with the standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances;
- The proposed stormwater management measures proposed are not adequate, given the potential run-off from the proposed development of the land as a dual occupancy; and Confirmed Minutes Ordinary Meeting 28 June 2011, p.21 of 28
- The grant of development consent will be contrary to the public interest.
.
Upon being put to the Council meeting, the motion was carried unanimously.
Not content with this unanimous decision, the owners of the site appealed against the Council democratic umpire, and in September 2011 the appeal case was heard by The Land & Environment Court of New South Wales.
Specialist arborists gave conflicting reports on the health and viability of the said tree, perhaps according to their respective client motivations. Yet the arborists of opposing parties were engaged as expert witnesses of the Court and so legally presumed to be independent. But legal presumption conveniently ignores contractual undertaking, so the evidence was likely biased to the respective parties.
In the interim findings, the Acting Senior Commissioner agreed that the tree could be removed, notwithstanding its status as a Significant Tree. (Editor: for whose convenience?)
A final ruling on the case will be made after the applicants have submitted a complying landscape plan. One won’t be surprised if the ultimate outcome is from dense mature intact bush to a clearfelled, bulldozed site, and the Court will somehow justify this in favour of the property owners as it normally does.
More information and analysis on this case will be presented in future.
.
.
Further Reading:
.
[1] ‘ The Idea of Wilderness: From Prehistory to the Age of Ecology’, by Max Oelschlaeger, ^ http://yalepress.yale.edu/book.asp?isbn=9780300053708
‘How has the concept of wild nature changed over the millennia? And what have been the environmental consequences? In this broad-ranging book Max Oelschlaeger argues that the idea of wilderness has reflected the evolving character of human existence from Paleolithic times to the present day. An intellectual history, it draws together evidence from philosophy, anthropology, theology, literature, ecology, cultural geography, and archaeology to provide a new scientifically and philosophically informed understanding of humankind’s relationship to nature.
Oelschlaeger begins by examining the culture of prehistoric hunter-gatherers, whose totems symbolized the idea of organic unity between humankind and wild nature, and idea that the author believes is essential to any attempt to define human potential. He next traces how the transformation of these hunter-gatherers into farmers led to a new awareness of distinctions between humankind and nature, and how Hellenism and Judeo-Christianity later introduced the unprecedented concept that nature was valueless until humanized. Oelschlaeger discusses the concept of wilderness in relation to the rise of classical science and modernism, and shows that opposition to “modernism” arose almost immediately from scientific, literary, and philosophical communities. He provides new and, in some cases, revisionist studies of the seminal American figures Thoreau, Muir, and Leopold, and he gives fresh readings of America’s two prodigious wilderness poets Robinson Jeffers and Gary Snyder. He concludes with a searching look at the relationship of evolutionary thought to our postmodern effort to reconceptualize ourselves as civilized beings who remain, in some ways, natural animals.’
.
[2] Save Our Suburbs, ^ http://www.sos.org.au/
.
[3] Save The Tree, ^ http://savethetree.org
.
Tags: act locally, an inconvenient truth, blue mountains, Blue Mountains City Council, bushphobia, civilisation, conurbation, David Brower, deluded inconvenience, Emilie Travel Livezey, environmental destruction, Eucalyptus burgessiana, Eucalyptus sclerophylla, Faulconbridge, Faulconbridge Mallee Ash, FOE, Friends of the Earth, globalisation, Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area, Grose River Sub-catchment, housing encroachment, industrial progress, industrialisation, local character, local residents, Mother Nature, Mount Wellington, NIMBYism, Not In My Backyard, Queenstown, Rare or Threatened Plants (ROTAP), revegetated, rights of locals, Save Our Suburbs, savethetree.org, Significant Tree, Sir Patrick Geddes, Tasmania, terra incognita, The Land & Environment Court of New South Wales, think globally, urban consolidation, wilderness Posted in Blue Mountains (AU), Tasmania (AU), Threats from Development, Threats from Greenwashing, Threats from Weak Environmental Laws | No Comments »
Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg
Wednesday, December 7th, 2011
The following article was ‘borrowed’ from CanDoBetter.net under the title ‘The Tarkine Wilderness under threat‘ by author Vivienne Ortega dated 20111207:
.
‘Tasmania’s Tarkine Wilderness Endangered!’
The Tarkine region is located in the north-west of Tasmania. The area encompasses 447,000 hectares of wilderness including the Southern Hemispheres largest single tract of temperate rain forest, a wild coastline with an extraordinary wealth of Aboriginal Cultural Heritage sites. It’s the habitat for over 50 threatened species. The extensive rainforests, beautiful river gorges, buttongrass mountain tops, flowering heathlands and long wild beaches combine to make the Tarkine one of the world’s great treasures.
These rainforests are important for their flora which has links to the ancient continent of Gondwana, and for their lichens and fossils which help tell the story of Australia’s ancient flora and its evolution. The Tarkine is a sensitive region rich in mega-diversity. It’s one of the world’s last remaining temperate rain-forests, the home of the Tasmanian Devil and many other precious species.
.
Tarkine National Heritage a must
How many places on Earth still look like this?
What an incredible asset of eco-experience (not dodgy eco-tourism) wild Tasmania offers the world’s discerning explorer?
.
The Tarkine must be put on the National Heritage List. The heritage assessment of The Tarkine will help ensure that the heritage values are considered in decision-making, so heritage protection is balanced with the social and economic aspirations of the Tasmanian community. Short-term economic benefits should not be at the expense of the un-quantifiable value of ancient woodlands, rugged coastlines, and forest habitat destruction. Mining companies like Venture Minerals are desperate to exploit the minerals beneath Tasmania’s environmentally significant Tarkine area.
Enter the Tin Men
.
Demand for metals superior to Tasmania’s ecology?
.
Chinese demand for base metals such as gold, iron, tin, zinc, lead, copper is at an all time high, and this would mean logging, pollution, roads, and heavy traffic destroying the landscape and pristine rivers.
Environment Minister Tony Burke was called on to immediately include the Tarkine on the emergency National Heritage Listing amid concerns about the impact on the Tasmanian devil population of a revised tourist road project. He denied that he made a promise to do so. His predecessor, Peter Garrett, first gave the Tarkine wilderness a one-year emergency listing, which Mr Burke let expire. Since then he has let a British mining company test drill in the area. Mr Burke says the new plan for a tourist road is not the same as the original 132-kilometre loop road plan that was subject to a now lapsed emergency listing. One road is not similarly destructive an another? Mining and road proposals threaten to carve up Tasmania’s unprotected the Tarkine wilderness area, local defenders say.
Venture Mineral’s Mt Lindsay tin, tungsten and iron mining proposal, coupled with the revival of the controversial Tarkine link road proposal, should have given Mr Burke grounds to reinstate Tarkine’s emergency National Heritage listing. Heritage listings would not stop mining, but developments would have to pass more rigorous and critical environmental tests.
The Mount Lindsay tin project is the largest of several mines planned around the Tarkine in an emerging new Tasmanian environmental battle. The Tarkine National Coalition said up to nine new open cut mines are in development there. Venture Minerals predict $1 billion in revenue, with more than 500 jobs in construction and 200 in operation. Surely the threats of mining are enough reasons for an emergency heritage listing for the Tarkine?
Mr Burke says the principle that a heritage listing automatically locks out all development is wrong. He says with or without a heritage listing, environmental protection remains. “Developments” and “protection” are inherently contradictory. Mr Jordan who heads the Tarkine National Coalition says Mr Burke’s decision to lift the heritage listing means other mining companies will not be scrutinised as closely as Beacon Hill Resources. The whole area should be protected as a national park.
The interests of miners are being placed above the Minister’s obligations to the environment. All three proposed mining projects will have secured Commonwealth environmental permits during the 18 month period he had at his disposal, allowing them to avoid scrutiny against National Heritage criteria. They will also be allowed to continue exploration drilling and associated access roading without need for Commonwealth assessments.
The mining will cause havoc to the pristine condition of the area. There is nothing “sustainable” now. It’s just window-dressing. What about the costs and long term damage of these industries and jobs? Mr Burke is supposed to represent the environment, not the mining industries. As with his population strategy, that come to nothing, he is now abrogating his duty to protect one of the last temperate rain-forest areas in the world.
.It is wrong to destroy sacred and holy places to plunder their riches, and the same applies to Nature’s sacred places.
A proud colonial relic of a Tasmanian old growth forest raped, pillaged and plundered
…and today colonial logger descendants, hanging on to the past, are paupers.
(Photo by editor 20110928, free in public domain – click to enlarge, then click to enlarge again)
.
.
Please email a demand to the ultimate decision maker of our temporary time:
Australia’s current Environment Minister: Tony.Burke.MP@aph.gov.au
.
Monday, December 5th, 2011
The following comments were posted by Tigerquoll 20111102, on Tasmanian Times to the article ‘Tasmania’s longest running forest blockade celebrates 5-year milestone‘, by Miranda Gibson, Still Wild Still Threatened (20111101), which began…
.
‘Today “Camp Flozza” celebrates its fifth birthday. The forest blockade has been running continuously for the past five years, holding off logging operations in the Upper Florentine Valley’. [Read More].
Styx Valley Holocaust
– old-growth clearfelled by Forestry Tasmania
(Photo by editor 20110929 – free in public domain)
(Click photo to enlarge, then click again to enlarge again)
.
“A Conservation Agreement halting logging in 430,000 hectares is now over-due. The Intergovernmental Agreement signed in August explicitly states that logging operations must be rescheduled or where this is not possible compensation given. Every hectare of forest lost in this area now represents a complete breach of the promises made by the government.”
.
~ Miranda Gibson, Still Wild Still Threatened
.
.
Of old growth defenders:

“Here’s to the crazy ones, the misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers, the round pegs in the square holes… the ones who see things differently—they’re not fond of rules… You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them, but the only thing you can’t do is ignore them because they change things… they push the human race forward, and while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius, because the ones who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world, are the ones who do.”
~ Steve Jobs [1955-2011]
History will recount – the steadfast commitment by these forest defenders to hold their ground, to dig in, in the face of an overwhelming enemy, compares to the dusty amateurs that became the rats of Tobruk.
.
Of old growth rapers:
Styx Valley hillside clearfelled – beyond Forestry Tasmania’s locked gates.
(Photo by editor 20110929 – free in public domain)
(Click photo to enlarge, then click again to enlarge again)
.
A morally-wise person would not put down an animal because it was injured. Moral civilized society has evolved the ‘Veterinary’ profession – a highly skilled field, more highly qualified than human ‘General Practice Medicine’ – why?
In the wild, a female mammal may kill an impaired offspring only to save its remaining healthy young scarce food to survive.
In Tasmania, old growth forests are becoming scarcer by the day, and yes this is still occuring in the 21st Eco-Century, not the 19th Timbergetting Century.
But in the selfish eyes of industrial loggers, any broken branch justifies the clearfell and scorched earthing of old growth forests by the hectare, which are innocuously relegated as ‘coupes’.
What then is a coupe? A forest coupe is earmarked for logging. A selected section of an intact, pristine native old growth forest is earmarked by Forestry Command for ‘harvesting‘, read ‘logging‘, read ‘forest ecology slaughter‘, read ‘forest wildlife habitat destruction‘. Yet to the logger mind forest reads as plunderable timber, and these days as low grade commodity woodchip to greedy asian profiteers, only to sustain a diehard, got-no-where-to-go desperate logger culture. The log-till-I-drop logger mentality is no different to morbidly obese American juveniles confessing dependence on Maccas Big Macs.
I fear loggers would do same to their grandparents once impaired.
‘Corporate industrialism’ is worse than Herbert Spencer’s ‘survival of the fittest’ mindset. It is self-serving Forest Eugenics – evident in Forestry Tasmania’s programmed conversion of native Tasmania into plantations and the scourge of its genetically modified Eucalyptus nitens now exterminating Tasmania’s next condemned species – the Tasmanian Devil.
Beware the Forest Nazis lurking in the privets.

Holocaust is what the Nazis did
This is what Forestry Tasmania did recently to The Tarkine.
.
‘Forest Eugenics’ is what Forestry Tasmanian ‘scientists‘ are doing today –
GM-modified Eucalypt nitens plantations replacing native Old Growth
.
Is this where GM Nitens (shining gum) is taking Tasmanian ecology – to ‘elite forests’?
– superior growth rate, disease resistant, herbicide resistant, but perhaps the GM-exterminator of Tasmanian Devils.
.
Tags: Camp Flozza, Eucalyptus nitens, Forestry Tasmania, Intergovernmental Agreement, Logging, old growth, Still Wild Still Threatened, Styx Valley Holocaust, Tasmania, Tasmanian forest eugenics, Tasmanian Times, The Tarkine, Upper Florentine Valley Posted in Tasmania (AU), Threats from Deforestation, Threats to Wild Tasmania | No Comments »
Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg
Sunday, December 4th, 2011
“..this awe-inspiring, largely unknown part of Australia – a wilderness that has survived, virtually untouched, for over 65 million years from its Gondwana heritage, but which is today under increasing threat from Man.”
.
~ Robert Purves, June 2010, in Foreword of the book ‘The Tarkine’, edited by Ralph Ashton and published by Allen & Unwin, [Available at ^http://www.allenandunwin.com/default.aspx?page=94&book=9781742372846]
.
The Tarkine’s mystical beauty of an ancient Giant Myrtle (Nothofagus cunninghammii)
.
Urgent press releases from the local champions trying to save The Tarkine:
.
.
‘New threats to the Tarkine’
.
(Source: The Wilderness Society, Tasmania, ^http://www.wilderness.org.au/regions/tasmania/new-threats-to-the-tarkine)
We all know the Tarkine is an environmental jewel – but when mining companies look at this special place, they see the glint of valuable metals instead. Gold, iron, tin, zinc, lead, copper – you name it and chances are it can be found in the mineral-rich bedrock beneath the Tarkine.
With Australia in the grip of an extraction bonanza, and Chinese demand for base metals at an all time high, the pressure to open up the Tarkine to mining is building. So far, 12 mines have been proposed for the Tarkine over the next two years, along with 56 licences for mineral exploration in the area. If even a fraction of these mines go ahead, this wild land of rugged coastline, pristine rivers and forested hills could be compromised – criss-crossed with exploration tracks and roads and dotted with waste dumps, pits and trenches.
The Tarkine is of huge environmental significance. It is one of the largest remaining tracts of temperate rainforest on earth, and home to a huge variety of species including:
- Tasmanian devils
- Tasmanian wedge- tailed eagles
- Spotted-tailed quolls
- Southern bell frogs
- White goshawks
- Giant freshwater lobster
- Eastern barred bandicoots
- Orange-bellied parrots
- and the Huon pine.
.
Tasmania’s Giant Freshwater Lobster (Astacopsis gouldi)
It is found only in northern Tasmanian streams (particularly in The Tarkine) and rivers flowing into Bass Strait.
It is found nowhere else in the world, yet is threatened by illegal fishing, land clearing and forestry.
(Source: Matthew Denholm, Tasmania Correspondent, The Australian, 20111109)
[Read Recovery Plan]
.
Environmental jewel
The Tarkine’s wild, rugged coastline – there’s no land between this point and the South American coast – boasts some of the cleanest air in the world. Because of these values (above ground), the Tarkine has long been the subject of a community-driven National Park proposal. In addition, in 2010, a report by the Australian Heritage Commission recommended that 430,000 hectares of the Tarkine be granted National Heritage status.
But Environment Minister Tony Burke has refused to implement this recommendation, claiming a need for further assessment and consultation. For decades, environmentalists have been working to protect the Tarkine. Some campaigns have been lost – like the road to nowhere in the mid 1990s – others have been won. Now, with the Tasmanian Forest Agreement progressing, it looks like the area may at last be protected from logging.
. Logging and ‘scorched earthing’ of old-growth rainforest in The Tarkine
(October 2009, Environment Tasmania)
.
But mining remains as a threat in this pristine region.
Savage River Open Cut Mine in the north of The Tarkine
.
It’s not hard to predict what will happen over the coming months: mining companies will pressure the Tasmanian Government to allow these mines to go ahead, dressing their arguments up in the usual disguise by claiming that mining is essential for jobs.
But putting industry ahead of the environment is an approach that has failed for decades and a new approach is needed. The Wilderness Society is involved with a coalition of groups calling for the creation of a Tarkine National Park.
With your support, the Wilderness Society will be standing up for an Australia that values the Tarkine not for the metals that can be extracted by destroying it, but for the precious environmental qualities that it has when left intact.

.
‘Burke’s broken promise misleads the public’
.
(by Scott Jordan, Campaign Coordinator, Tarkine National Coalition, 20111202, Tasmanian Times online newspaper, ^http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/article/burkes-broken-promise-misleads-the-public/)

‘Tarkine National Coalition has reacted angrily to the latest chapter in Environment Minister Tony Burke’s campaign of misinformation regarding the Tarkine National Heritage assessment. The Minister made comment on ABC Mornings (936 Tasmania) that he did not have in his possession any report from the Australian Heritage Council supporting a permanent listing of the Tarkine.
This is at odds with our reading of the Australian Heritage Council report from September 2010 which supported the permanent listing of 433,000 hectares it had assessed as having National Heritage Values. Minister Burke has refused to publicly release this report, despite FOI requests from the ABC last year.
“The Minister is clearly failing in his responsibilities here, and is spinning mistruths to try and cover up his complicity in promoting mining in the Tarkine wilderness reserves,” said Tarkine National Coalition spokesperson Scott Jordan.
The Minister received this report two months before allowing the Tarkine’s Emergency National Heritage Listing to lapse. He then sent the AHC back to reassess the area, with a substantial budget cut and no capacity to complete the work before 2013. This will effectively shepherd up to ten new mine proposals through an EPBC process that cannot in the absence of a listing, legally consider impacts on National Heritage Values such as wilderness, rainforest, geological significance (fossil sites and karst systems), aesthetic character, Indigenous or European cultural heritage.
This mirrors the strategy applied by the Minister at the controversial Brighton By-pass in southern Tasmania and at James Price Point in northern WA, where once EPBC assessments were underway, a National Heritage Listing was applied that could have no legal effect on those ongoing assessments.
Independent advice from Andrew Macintosh, Associate Director of the ANU Centre for Climate Law and Policy confirms that the AHC report does in fact refer to a permanent listing, and advises that the AHC’s terms of reference only allow it to report on whether an area has National Heritage Values and prevents it from making ‘qualified’ or ‘preliminary’ findings. The correspondence from Mr Macintoshcan be downloaded below..
“It becomes impossible to have reasonable dealings with a Minister who won’t stick to the rules, and won’t tell the truth”. “The Minister must immediately release the Australian Heritage Council’s Tarkine report from September 2010”.
.
Emergency National Heritage Listing
The TNC and partner groups (WWF, Australian Conservation Foundation, The Wilderness Society, Tasmanian Conservation Trust, Environment Tasmania and North West Environment Centre) resubmitted a Emergency National Heritage Listing nomination last week, triggered by the threats to National Heritage Values of the Mount Lindsay and other mining proposals.

The resubmitting of the Tarkine Road proposal by the Tasmanian Government called into play a promise made by Minister Burke last December that if the Tarkine Road was resubmitted, that he would immediately re-list the Tarkine. The Minister has failed to deliver on this promise.
“The failure to reapply a Tarkine Emergency National Heritage Listing in response to the Tarkine Road referral clearly shows this Minister’s contempt for the responsibilities of his office, and clearly tells us that any promises he makes are worthless”.
“The key difference between this proposal and the former proposal is not the alterations to the route, but the fact that a mining company now needs this route for transporting product to ports”.
.

.
.
‘Burke places money and mines before Tarkine’
.
by Senator Christine Milne, Tasmanian Times online newspaper, ^http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/article/burkes-broken-promise-misleads-the-public/]
.
Federal Environment Minister, Tony Burke, must explain why he will allow the assessment of mining proposals to occur in the Tarkine before acting on advice before him to permanently heritage list the region, Australian Greens Deputy Leader, Christine Milne said today.
“Minister Burke today claimed on ABC local radio to have no information leading to the emergency heritage listing of the Tarkine, but failed to mention a report buried in his department recommending the Tarkine be listed.
“The Environment Minister is playing into the hands of mining companies, who are no doubt jubilant of the 2013 deadline given to the Australian Heritage Council to determine whether permanent heritage listing should be put in place.
“By 2013, all ten of the mining proposals will be submitted to the department and any subsequent heritage listing will have no effect on their operations. The wilderness, geological and cultural values of the Tarkine will not be assessed.
“It is like putting on a seatbelt after your car has crashed.
“Minister Burke’s job has moved from a focus on natural and heritage values to one of being solely concerned with bleeding monetary value from the places he is supposed to protect.
“Peter Garrett placed emergency heritage listing on the Tarkine following the state government’s previous attempt at building a road, and now, with a similar application before him, as well as ten mining applications that will be seriously impinged by such a listing, we have Minister Burke reneging on his promise to heritage list the region should another road proposal be made.
“This ongoing, seven year process to determine heritage listing the Tarkine has become an embarrassment to Australia whose governments persistently fail to recognise the value of this natural jewel.
.
“Minister Burke has everything at his disposal for immediately placing the Tarkine on the National Heritage list.
Act now, Minister Burke, before these mines have your name all over them.”

Tasmania as seen by miners – exploitative ‘below-ground’ values
.
Selected comments readers of Tasmanian Times:
.
by Barnaby Drake (20111202):
“The key difference between this proposal and the former proposal is not the alterations to the route, but the fact that a mining company now needs this route for transporting product to ports”.
‘Is it not just as I predicted? All infrastructure for these mining companies will be paid for by us. Here the original estimate was for $24 Million as a starters. Expect the real cost to be dramatically understated so that they can get their approval before announcing the usual blow-out! And that’s just the start of it. That also means that the Tourism budget will take the hit, but strangely, Forestry will also be able to us this road as the Tarkine is no longer protected. It will then be discovered by TasPorts that they need to upgrade their port facilities somewhere in the West to benefit the local inhabitants and they require another Sqillion Dollars and of course, create a couple of thousand jobs, etc.
Hallelujah! The economy has been saved. Your pensions are safe. A new mining tax will see us all happy and prosperous and MP’s will be able to have their blocked salary increases paid. A replay of the famous once Gunns proposals.
All we need now is an education bus to train the kiddies for the future. Utopia!’
.
by John Hayward (20111202):
‘The Minister would see his responsibility as being to himself, his party, and to their major political contributors. His apparent dishonesty, or ignorance, is merely a consequence of these priorities.’
.
by Russell Langfield (20111202):
‘Can anyone name a promise Environment Minister Burke has kept, or a decision being made which favoured the environment over business interests?’
.
Salamander (20111202):
‘Burke likes to make out he is a man of the people, and responds when he gets enough signals from the people to act for the environment. Yesterday he was complaining about the hijacking of his twitter account by tweets about the Tarkine – but still he won’t do what the people want. Seems to me we have a puppet whose strings are completely controlled by corporations.’
.
by Pete Godfrey (20111203):
‘There is no money for hospitals, police, mobile phones for police, anything that is good for people, but there is always money available for Forestry and Mining. From what I can recall every mine venture that has received grants from the government has failed. All we ever get back is the privelege of cleaning up the mess and a hole in the ground. Part of the Tarkine have already been destroyed comprehensively by Forestry Tasmania, it is time to protect the rest from both of these rapacious subsidy collectors.’
.
by Pete Godfrey (20111203):
‘Unless you count building a road for Mining and Logging access to the area as a grant. I do.
What will happen is that he industry will start up, then say “oh it is not viable without some subsidies” then we put our hand in the the till and hand over heaps of money. Just like all the other mining ventures on the west coast. The companies accept the money then close the mine down not long after.
You can guarantee that the government will pay in the end.
We will pay for the new “mining and forestry road”
We will upgrade port facilities.
We will pay for road damage and bridge damage. Which is what the original Tarkine loop road proposal was about, it was to rebuild two bridges that have washed away before, the Tayatea bridge being one of them.
We may not hear of incentive grants to attract the miners but you can bet that a certain minister from the west will be handing grants out like lollies.’
.
Maclays Swallowtail (Graphium Macleyanum), a native to The Tarkine
© Photo by Marja-Liisa, Helsinki (‘mliisa’s photostream’ on flickr, AU-2100 from Lynette,
^http://www.flickr.com/photos/25816219@N00/1921054368/
.
‘If the Tarkine were to be joined to the world heritage area, a vast reserve would be created, stretching from just a few kilometres south of Tasmania’s north coast all the way to its south-western extremity.
If this were to happen, it would, in my opinion, be among the top half-dozen natural areas remaining in the world. And properly managed, it would bring wealth to Tasmanians into the foreseeable future.’
.
~ Tim Flannery, contribution in ‘The Tarkine‘ (2010), edited by Ralph Ashton, and published by Allen & Unwin.
.
Tags: Australian Heritage Council, Giant freshwater lobster, National Heritage, National Park proposal, old growth forest, Savage River Open Cut Mine, save the Tarkine, scorched earthing, Tarkine National Coalition, Tarkine National Heritage, Tarkine National Park, Tarkine’s Emergency National Heritage Listing, Tasmania, Tasmanian Government, The Tarkine, Tony Burke Posted in Tasmania (AU), Threats from Deforestation, Threats from Mining, Threats from Road Making, Threats to Wild Tasmania | No Comments »
Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg
Thursday, December 1st, 2011
Corporate Tin Miner:
“We will continue to be aggressive explorers with multiple rigs focused on exploration for the foreseeable future.”
.
~ Venture Minerals (corporate tin miner from Perth), in its Mt Lindsay-Investor Presentation,
(Nov 2011), p.31
.
‘The Tarkine’ – 430,000 hectares of ancient Tasmanian forest
Tasmania’s ancient Myrtle/Sassafras forest – threatened by loggers, logger ‘adventure tourism’, roads and now bloody tin mining!
[Photo by Peter Walton, Tasmanian Expeditions – Photo Gallery on The Tarkine, ^http://www.tasmanianexpeditions.com.au/index.php?section=photo_highlights&id=285742]
.
Cradle Coast Authority (CCA), North West Tasmania’s map
as part of a tourism development strategy.
.
A bid to restore emergency National Heritage protection to the Tarkine wilderness in Tasmania’s north-west has been launched by environmentalists to head off a ”Pilbara-style” mine in the rainforest. Several conservation groups lodged the nomination with the Environment Minister, Tony Burke, hoping he will count heritage values in his impending decision on the big Venture Minerals’ Mount Lindsay open cut project.
Emergency listings of The Tarkine have been granted four times since 2004!
Moss-clad Sassafras (Atherosperma moschatum) trees in the Arthur River catchment near Waratah, Tarkine, Tasmania
(Photo © Ted Mead November 2003)
[Front Cover of the 2004 book, ‘Tarkine‘ edited by Ralph Ashton, and available from publishers Allen and Unwin,and just purchased by The Habitat Advocate.
Available at: ^http://www.allenandunwin.com/default.aspx?page=94&book=9781742372846]
.
…but that’s not how the ‘Tin Men‘ see The Tarkine…
This is how the ‘Tin Men‘ see the Tarkine… for its tin and tungsten.
(Source: Venture Minerals’ Mt Lindsay-Investor Presentation, Nov 2011)
.
…and this is how the ‘Tin Men’ see the Tarkine… for the vast mining lease area they are happy to exploit and lay to waste.
(Source: Venture Minerals’ Mt Lindsay-Investor Presentation, Nov 2011)
.
…and this is how the Tin Men see the Tarkine – for its ‘Super Mining Profits’ … 30 to 55% return!
(Source: Venture Minerals’ Mt Lindsay-Investor Presentation, Nov 2011)
.
The Mount Lindsay tin project is the largest of several mines planned around the Tarkine in an emerging new Tasmanian environmental battle. The Tarkine National Coalition said up to nine new open cut mines are in development there. Mr Burke allowed a previous emergency listing for the Tarkine to lapse a year ago when he said plans for a road through the wilderness were dropped. Environment groups objected because of what they said were increasing threats from mining.
Corporate Miner ‘Metals X’ getting well stuck into a Tarkine rainforest hillside at nearby Mount Bischoff
.
The 430,000-hectare Tarkine region is undergoing a protracted assessment for future listing by the Australian Heritage Council. But because the wilderness now lacks any listing, Mr Burke is unable to consider heritage values in an approval of the Mount Lindsay mine under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. Instead, his decision is likely to focus on protection of endangered species such as the Tasmanian Devil. The Tarkine is the wildest remaining stronghold for healthy devils, stricken across the rest of the island by a deadly facial cancer.
The Tarkine is a refuge for healthy Tasmanian Devils to avoid the genocidal tumour disease
..but what could heartless commercial ‘Tin Men’ care?
Think of the ‘Super Mining Profits’ … 30 to 55% return!
.
The Tarkine National Coalition spokesman Scott Jordan said yesterday:
”Companies, including Venture, are using the removal of the heritage protections to ramp up exploration activities including roading and drilling that are having a significant effect on the values of the area.”
.
The coalition was joined by the World Wildlife Fund, the Australian Conservation Foundation and The Wilderness Society in seeking the listing. An Australian National University environmental law specialist, Andrew Macintosh, said emergency listings had been granted four times since 2004, but Mr Burke was not compelled to respond to the request. In a statement, Mr Burke did not respond directly to the emergency listing request, but said he would continue meeting with different groups on issues surrounding the heritage listing of the Tarkine. [Editor’s note: in fact there has been one emergency National Heritage listing (Dec 2009 – Dec 2010), one National Heritage nomination (2004), three emergency National Heritage nominations (Nov 2009, Mar 2011 and Nov 2011), and two AHC recommendations (2003 and Sep 2010)… so what’s it bloody take to get the message through?]
.
[Source: ‘ Call for heritage listing of the Tarkine to head off tin mine‘, Sydney Morning Herald, 20111119, ^ http://www.smh.com.au/national/call-for-heritage-listing-of-the-tarkine-to-
head-off-tin-mine-20111118-1nndq.html]
.
.
‘Jobs, jobs, jobs’ justification – but all for mainlanders, foreigners and short-termers
.
Typically, this miner (Venture Minerals) relies on the standard jobs justification to exploit, dig up, pollute and destroy the Tarkine Wilderness for tin. Venture Mineral is promising 700 jobs! But of those , 500 jobs involve construction – so short term fly ins from the mainland and overseas only during construction phase. The remaining 200 jobs are promised for the mine’s operations. But miners don’t train locals. This is not about Tasmanian jobs. These 200 jobs will be sourced from similar mines on the mainland and indeed from overseas all on on Federal Labor’s 457 Visa (Australian worker displacement) Scheme. Just look at OZ Minerals at Rosebery.
457 Visas: ‘..for employers who would like to employ overseas workers to fill nominated skilled positions in Australia, to employ overseas workers for a period of between one day and four years.’
[Source: ^http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/skilled-workers/sbs/]
.
Venture Minerals is Perth-based at 181 Roberts Road Subiaco, another West Australian corporate miner exploiting Tasmania and taking the profits offshore. Venture Minerals forecasts $1 billion in revenue but it won’t go to Tasmanians. It will go back to West Australia and to its rich mine shareholders. Typically mining is eco-rape, pillage and plunder – wam, bam, thank you mam, then pissing off back to where one came, leaving another tin moonscape like Mount Bischoff.
Look at the mining legacies across Tasmania left as moonscapes:
Nearby Mount Bischoff Tin Mine – wam, bam, thank you mam!
.
- Kara Mine in Hampshire
- Mount Lyle’s sulphuric moonscape
- Henty Mine
- Briseis Mine at Derby
- Pioneer Mine on Bradshaws Creek
- Anchor Mine on Blue Tier
- Gladstone Mine
- Coles Bay Mine
- Ben Lomond Mine
- St Paul’s River Mine
- Flinders Island Mines
- Mount Heemskirk
- Mount Balfour
- Renison Bell
- Stanley River
- Mount Cleveland
- Cox Bight
- Melaleuca
- etc

And of course the Tasmanian Minerals Council backs mining in The Tarkine. And of course it opposes national heritage listing of the Tarkine. The Tasmanian Minerals Council is only about the financial bottom line, exploitation of ore and perpetuating its own existence.
The Tasmanian Minerals Council claims that there are “already enough layers of protection across the Tarkine region, where about 80% of the land has been put in multiple use reserves that allow mining“.
What ‘layers of protection’? If 80% of the Tarkine is reserved form mining, how can that be for protection? – for protection of mining profits and royalties perhaps.
So Tony Burke, if you’re not to pre-occupied with resolving the future of the Murray-Darling, what time are you allocating for Tasmania’s ancient Myrtle forests?
.
.
.
‘Tasmania’s Tarkine wilderness is one of the world’s largest temperate rainforests.
This vast expanse is a wilderness wonderland of wild rivers, dramatic coastal heathlands, button grass plains, bare mountains, ancient Huon pines, giant eucalypts and myrtles and extraordinary horizontal scrub.
It is home to rare and endangered birds – like the Orange-bellied parrot and the White goshawk – and countless animals such as the Eastern pygmy possum. This superbly illustrated book captures the beauty of this unique wilderness.’
.
[Source: ^http://www.andrewisles.com/all-stock/publication/tarkine]
.
Orange-bellied Parrot
‘Here at Melaleuca, six days’ walk from the nearest road,
such moments of peace are typically broken by bird calls,
including the distinct buzzing of the orange-bellied parrot’.
.
[Source: ‘Scientists Race To Rebuild Parrot Population’, by Peter Ker, Sydney Morning Herald, 20110207, ^http://www.globalanimal.org/2011/02/07/scientists-race-to-rebuild-parrot-population/29032/]
.
Current status:
‘The Orange-bellied parrot (Neophema chrysogaster) is one of 18 birds listed as endangered under the Tasmanian Threatened Species Protection Act 1995. It is also listed as endangered under the Federal Act and has the dubious honour of being one of the most endangered birds Australia wide.
Why is it endangered? The Orange-bellied parrot is endangered because it is so rare (only 200 birds left) and its habitat is quickly disappearing.
.
There are only about 50 breeding pairs of this bird left!
..but what could heartless commercial ‘Tin Men’ care?
Think of the ‘Super Mining Profits’ … 30 to 55% return!
.
‘…It is a breeding endemic of Tasmania, which means that it only breeds in Tasmania. In fact it only breeds in one place in Tasmania and that is in our Southwest National Park. It arrives here in summer, nesting in eucalypt tree hollows adjacent to the parrot’s feeding grounds of extensive coastal buttongrass plains.’
.
[Source: http://www.dpiw.tas.gov.au/inter.nsf/webpages/bhan-54g3c5?open]
.
Tags: 457 visas, Cradle Coast Authority, Environment Minister, high priority drill targets, Melaleuca, Metals X, Mount Lindsay, Orange-bellied Parrot, Pieman River, super mining profits, Tarkine Tourism Development Strategy, Tarkine Trails, Tarkine wilderness, Tasmania, Tasmanian Devil, Tasmanian Minerals Council, The Tarkine, tin man, tin men, tin mine, Tony Burke, tungsten mine, Venture Minerals, wam bam thank you mam Posted in Birds (Australian), Tasmania (AU), Tasmanian Devils, Threats from Mining, Threats to Wild Tasmania | 8 Comments »
Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg
Thursday, October 13th, 2011
If you go down into the woods today you’re sure in for a big surprise…but in Tasmania’s South-West it ain’t no teddy bear’s picnic.
One has to first get past the many infamous locked gates. Forestry Tasmania (aka the State-sanctioned corporate logger) is sure to have locked its steel gates for very good reason – Forestry Tasmania doesn’t want the public to know the truth about what it is doing to Tasmania’s remaining wild forests.
Forestry Tasmania’s locked gate on the public road to the top of Mount Tim Shea
(Suspiciously this public access road was deemed unfit for public travel coincidentally around the same time as Forestry Tasmania opened its ‘Adventure Hub’ in Maydena,
and equally coincidentally one of the hills they charge people for a ride to the top from reads ‘Adventure Hub’).
(Photo by Alan Lesheim)
.
Rugged Mount Tim Shea, South-West Tasmania
Photo by Forestry Tasmania
^http://www.forestrytas.com.au/topics/2008/06/maydena-adventure-hub-opportunities
.
Locked Gate on Five Road in the Upper Florentine
(connects to Cook’s Track which enters the Gordon River Road short of Camp Flozza)
(Photo by Alan Lesheim)
.
Forestry Tasmania has hundreds of these padlocked gates throughout Tasmania’s wild forests.
The Wilderness Society’s spokesperson Amanda Sully said “Forestry Tasmania have a locked boom gate over the Huon Valley Wilderness and are refusing entry. This is just one of hundreds of gates on forestry roads in Tasmania.
“It’s very clear who is locking up the forests. People are sick and tired of seeing log truck after log truck coming from the clear felling behind these padlocked gates.
These are publicly-owned forests.
Forestry Tasmania is supposed to manage them for the benefit of all Tasmanians, not just the loggers” Ms Sully concluded.
.
[Source: ‘Forestry Tasmania – Locking up our forests‘, ^http://www.wilderness.org.au/campaigns/forests/19980924_mr
.
Forestry Locked Gate on Blue Road, northern section of the Upper Florentine Valley
(Photo by Alan Lesheim)
.
.
Author Anna Krien was on a quest for the truth described in her revealing expose book of 2010 into what’s stihl happening in Tasmania’s wild forests:
~
‘Most people travelling through Tasmania will never know of the long-running hide-and-seek taking place in the labyrinth of logging roads beyond the bitumen.
Sightseers walk among 300-year-old trees, some of them 90 metres tall, in the Styx Big Tree Reserve, chainsaws can be heard in the distance.
The road into this attraction is lined with stage sets of wilderness.
At the rise of a hill, just before the nose of the car tilts downwards, passengers might glimpse a balding peak, a fleeting insight into the world behind the verge.’
~
[Source: ‘Into the Woods: The Battle for Tasmania’s Forests‘, 2010 by Anna Krien pp.25-26, published by Black Inc. ^http://www.blackincbooks.com/books/woods, includes video interviews].
.
So, this Editor, half way through the book, last month flew down to Hobart, hired a car and retraced the author’s journey into Tasmania’s South-West …
.
Driving west along the old Hydro Electrical Commission’s (HEC) Gordon River (Access) Road,
through Forestry’s logging town of ‘Westerway’
.
Noticeably, when driving out of Hobart I passed clearly wealthy residential suburbs, yet driving along the Gordon River Road these few isolated hamlets are not wealthy. Their construction mostly seems temporary like mining companies would construct while the mine delivers. The highway through the hamlets of Westerway, Fitzgerald and Maydena seems only for forest access, not for community.
I parked the car and walked through Maydena.
There is only the odd person out and about. The place seems impoverished – one small primary school, a notable lack of shops, lack of amenities, and little sign of any vibrant community.
It’s as if the profits from logging have driven right through the guts of these local villages and on to big corporations eastward.
.
Past the National Park Hotel
where Tasmania’s champion wood-chopper ‘Big Dave’ holds pride of place above the pub’s fire place.
.
Driving through Forestry’s old logging town of ‘Fitzgerald’
.
.
Driving through the old logging town of ‘Maydena’
– a closed so-called ‘Adventure Hub’ on the left, yet its diesel bowser (circled) open for Forestry Tasmania vehicles and observed in used by Editor 20110928.
.
Reminiscent of Australia’s 1850s Gold Rush, Tasmanian folk would have been lured west by Forestry to the promise of bountiful tall timber delivering reliable logging income and the promise of building personal wealth.
But along the Gordon River Road there is a stark absence of Forestry wealth. Instead it seems Forestry has abandoned these Gordon River Road communities.
What Forestry has done is to sell out Tasmania’s traditional woodcraft industry for short term profit from flogging quality Tasmanian hardwood as cheap asian woodchips, destroying Tasmania’s forests timber communities in the process. Then Gunns got greedy and Tasmania’s timber reputation has deteriorated thereafter.
Now Forestry Tasmania are clearfelling and selling out Tasmania’s rare forests to the asians direct, to the likes of Ta Ann. Forestry Tasmania is no more than a corporate pimp of Tasmanian rare forest heritage.
.
“The road into this attraction is lined with stage sets of wilderness.”
Driving further west along the HEC Gordon River Road
– bulldozed in 1964 through 64km of pristine wilderness forest by the Hydro Electric Commission, and
funded by the then Menzies federal government at a cost of £2.5 million (likely twenty times that in today’s terms – i.e. $50 million.
.
Gordon River Road – signposted logging country
.
“At the rise of a hill, just before the nose of the car tilts downwards, passengers might glimpse a balding peak”
The balding peak of Forestry Tasmania’s cable logging…’a fleeting insight into the world behind the verge’.
(Photo by editor 20110928 while on Gordon River Road heading west)
.
An entire hill of wild Tasmanian forest savagely cabled logged bare by Forestry Tasmania
Tourists can now see this from Gordon River Road.
(Photo by editor 20110928. Click photo to enlarge.)
.
Beyond the lock gates lies the ecological holocaust
(Photo by editor 20110928. Click photo to enlarge.)
.
Styx Valley Holocaust
(Photo by Rob Blakers)
.
Tasmania’ s Styx Holocaust
September 2011 (Photo by Alan Lesheim)
.
Forestry Tasmania’s Killing Fields
.
Cambodia’s Khmer Rouge Killing Fields
(Human mass murder comparable to Tasmania’s mass forest murder
– both crimes consistently against life)
.
Google Maps (September 2011) satellite view of the forest rape by Forestry Tasmania
.
.
Camp Flozza’s symbolic goddess of the ancient Florentine Forest
~ eco-raped by Forestry Tasmania in its January 2009 raid
.
And they wonder why the people protest and are prepared to be arrested?
(Photo of forest defender being arrested at Forestry Tasmania’s police raid on Camp Flozza,
Upper Florentine Valley, 13th January 2009)
.
Styx Valley Holocaust by Forestry Tasmania, September 2011
(Photo of editor 20110928. Click photo to enlarge.)
.
.
Forestry Tasmania padlocks gates 10 kilometres from clearfell around a protected Wedge-tailed Eagle nest
[Source: ‘Loggers breach eagle nest protection laws again‘, Bob Brown, 20090827, ^http://bob-brown.greensmps.org.au/category/issues/environment/forestry/wielangta]
‘In the breeding season, a clear felling operation in Tasmania’s wild Upper Huon Valley has breached guidelines by smashing down forests next to an endangered Tasmania’s Wedge-tailed eagles’ nest. The Tasmanian Wedge-tailed eagle, with wingspan up to 3 metres, are one of the Earth’s 6 largest eagle species.

“After repeated controversies about woodchip operations burning or destroying eagle nests and causing failure of nesting because of bulldozers and chainsaws operations near nests, this failure of protection in the Huon is inexcusable. It makes a mockery of logging industry propaganda,” said Australian Greens Leader Bob Brown.
“The Ministers for Forestry and Environment who are responsible for Australia’s rare and endangered species don’t know, and don’t act in any helpful way.”
“It is as if the Howard Government never left office. These ministers have washed their hands of their role in the Wedge-tailed eagles’ fate. Logging laws in Tasmania state that a minimum of 10 hectares be left around an eagle’s nest,” said Senator Brown.
Forestry Tasmania has erected locked gates 10 kilometres from the nest logging site preventing public or media inspection.’
.
Footage of the logged area and nest available here (on YouTube):

.
.
Meanwhile Forestry Tasmania on its ‘Adventure Forests‘ website promotes its ‘Top of the World Tour‘ from Maydena…

…’Go wild where eagles soar…Make the escape to the Eagle’s Eyrie on a Top of the World Tour.You’ll experience all the fun of the Railtrack Rider as you travel into the heart of the forest to explore long-abandoned bush heritage, before emerging to an alpine wonderland and an eagle’s eye view over the Tasmanian wilderness. There’s plenty of time for indulgence as well, with an individually-prepared gourmet lunchbox and fine regional wines enjoyed in the fireside comfort of the Eagles Eyrie.’
^http://adventureforests.com.au/maydena
.
.
‘The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes
but having new eyes’
~ Marcel Proust, French novelist
Tags: Anna Krien, Cable Logging, Camp Flozza, deforestation, Fitzgerald, Florentine Valley Holocaust, Forestry Holocaust, Forestry Locked Gates, Forestry Tasmania, Gordon River Road, having new eyes, Into the Woods, Maydena, Maydena Adventure Hub, Mount Tim Shea, National Park hotel, Styx Big Tree Reserve, Styx Forest, Styx Valley, Styx Valley Holocaust, Ta Ann, Tasmania, Tasmania's Ancient Forests, Tasmania's South West, Tasmania's Wild Forests, Upper Florentine Forest, Wedge-tailed Eagle, Westerway, wild forests Posted in Eagles, Tasmania (AU), Threats from Deforestation, Threats to Wild Tasmania | No Comments »
Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg
|
|