Sarah Wotherspoon
Herald Sun April 07, 2008
Some of Victoria's most endangered species may be beyond salvation - and the State Government has suggested it may not continue to try to protect them.
About 1000 of the state's plant and animal species are at risk of extinction as key habitat areas continue to decline.
A damning report released yesterday reveals some endangered animals will be wiped out unless the Government invests more money and resources in saving them.
But the same report says: "Fundamental decisions need to be made about the level of resources that can be invested in this area and whether we want to continue to aim to protect all species."
More than half of Victoria's native vegetation has been cleared since European settlement, while 80 per cent of private land has been cleared.
Remaining habitats are fragmented and only isolated patches of vital and once vast ecosystems remain intact.
The report, entitled Land and Biodiversity at a Time of Climate Change, recommends pursuing private investment to restore crucial habitats.
Environment Minister Gavin Jennings denied the threatened species would not be protected, saying that assessment processes needed to be reviewed.
"The green paper explores potential opportunities for landholders to access new markets in carbon and biodiversity," Mr Jennings said.
"A lot of corporations are seeing investment opportunities in land management.
"There will continue to be significant support from the State and I hope from the Commonwealth as well."
The green paper will form part of the Government's climate change white paper to be released next year.
Other actions considered in the paper include:
USING public-private partnerships to manage public land.
IDENTIFYING and protecting priority habitats in the marine environment.
ENCOURAGING plantings in key areas for both biodiversity improvements and carbon sequestration.
CREATING north-south and east-west habitat corridors connecting national parks.
Environment groups welcomed the report as a major step in protecting Victoria's environment but said it needed to be followed up with major funding.
Victoria Naturally alliance project leader Carrie Deutsch said the Government needed to set clear targets backed with resources.
"We would like to see at least a tenfold boost in funding and that's specific funding to protect and restore habitat for our threatened species.
"The science is telling us that Victoria is the most damaged state in Australia and according to the CSIRO about one third of native plants and close to half our native animals are threatened with extinction.
"We need to reconnect our core national parks and reconnect large scale networks of habitat corridors across the state in order to give species room to move as the climate changes."
Article source
07 April, 2008
26 March, 2008
MEDIA RELEASE: Treetop Conservationists Remain
Twenty conservationists remain in two old growth logging coupes this morning south of Bendoc on the Errinundra Plateau.
Two 30 metre high tree platforms remain in place and are preventing logging from commencing.
The logging coupes are in the headwaters of the Bonang River and one of them borders the Errinundra National Park.
Both of the coupes are in a controversial area of iconic old growth forest, that has been the subject of protest actions for many years. Both include habitat for the endangered Spot Tailed Quoll and Long Footed Potoroo.
Conservationists on an ecology camp over the weekend surveyed one of the logging coupes and believe to have found rainforest, which is to be checked later this week by government scientists.
Media Comments:
Emily Black or Lauren Caulfield
Trunk Phone (in the logging coupe) 03 9416 2129, wait for tone then dial 8384620
or 03 51540174
Two 30 metre high tree platforms remain in place and are preventing logging from commencing.
The logging coupes are in the headwaters of the Bonang River and one of them borders the Errinundra National Park.
Both of the coupes are in a controversial area of iconic old growth forest, that has been the subject of protest actions for many years. Both include habitat for the endangered Spot Tailed Quoll and Long Footed Potoroo.
Conservationists on an ecology camp over the weekend surveyed one of the logging coupes and believe to have found rainforest, which is to be checked later this week by government scientists.
Media Comments:
Emily Black or Lauren Caulfield
Trunk Phone (in the logging coupe) 03 9416 2129, wait for tone then dial 8384620
or 03 51540174
07 March, 2008
THE AGE: Deal struck with PNG on carbon trading
Chris Hammer, Port Moresby
The Age, March 7, 2008
Australia and Papua New Guinea have laid the groundwork for carbon trading between the two neighbours, even before either country has developed a domestic emissions trading scheme.
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd signed the Papua New Guinea-Australia Forest Carbon Partnership with his counterpart Sir Michael Somare in Port Moresby yesterday.
The partnership aims to help save PNG rainforests by enabling the sale of carbon credits through future national, regional and global emissions trading schemes.
After signing the partnership, Mr Rudd said it would encourage PNG to "do its bit for the world" by avoiding deforestation.
"It's far better we start heading in that direction together rather than heading in different directions," he said.
The two countries will consult each other on greenhouse strategies and Australia will help PNG measure and monitor the carbon locked away in its forests. They will also help each other enter international trading schemes.
Australia will provide its neighbour with technical assistance such as satellite monitoring. The deal holds out the possibility that other countries will join the partnership.
"I think Australia, ourselves and Indonesia are like a triangle on this particular issue of carbon emissions and in relation to forests," Sir Michael said.
Australia's principal adviser on greenhouse emissions, Ross Garnaut, has called for Australia to enter a regional carbon trading agreement with its two northern neighbours. Professor Garnaut has suggested Australia could make radical but relatively painless cuts to its emissions by giving domestic polluters such as electricity generators the ability to buy off-setting carbon credits from forestry projects in neighbouring countries.
This would work in much the same way that stopping domestic land clearing has helped Australia stay on track to meet its Kyoto targets.
It would have the advantage of giving PNG land holders an alternative source of income to logging.
PNG has one of the world's four great rainforests, covering an estimated 29 million hectares.
Mr Rudd also unveiled a blueprint for relations between Australia and Pacific Island countries. The Port Moresby Declaration promising increased aid and practical co-operation from Australia.
While largely lacking in concrete measures, the declaration was warmly welcomed by Sir Michael, who had a sometimes strained relationship with the Howard government. "The relationship was more or less deteriorated for a while," Sir Michael told journalists. "That's all water under the bridge. We are talking of a new beginning."
Article source
The Age, March 7, 2008
Australia and Papua New Guinea have laid the groundwork for carbon trading between the two neighbours, even before either country has developed a domestic emissions trading scheme.
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd signed the Papua New Guinea-Australia Forest Carbon Partnership with his counterpart Sir Michael Somare in Port Moresby yesterday.
The partnership aims to help save PNG rainforests by enabling the sale of carbon credits through future national, regional and global emissions trading schemes.
After signing the partnership, Mr Rudd said it would encourage PNG to "do its bit for the world" by avoiding deforestation.
"It's far better we start heading in that direction together rather than heading in different directions," he said.
The two countries will consult each other on greenhouse strategies and Australia will help PNG measure and monitor the carbon locked away in its forests. They will also help each other enter international trading schemes.
Australia will provide its neighbour with technical assistance such as satellite monitoring. The deal holds out the possibility that other countries will join the partnership.
"I think Australia, ourselves and Indonesia are like a triangle on this particular issue of carbon emissions and in relation to forests," Sir Michael said.
Australia's principal adviser on greenhouse emissions, Ross Garnaut, has called for Australia to enter a regional carbon trading agreement with its two northern neighbours. Professor Garnaut has suggested Australia could make radical but relatively painless cuts to its emissions by giving domestic polluters such as electricity generators the ability to buy off-setting carbon credits from forestry projects in neighbouring countries.
This would work in much the same way that stopping domestic land clearing has helped Australia stay on track to meet its Kyoto targets.
It would have the advantage of giving PNG land holders an alternative source of income to logging.
PNG has one of the world's four great rainforests, covering an estimated 29 million hectares.
Mr Rudd also unveiled a blueprint for relations between Australia and Pacific Island countries. The Port Moresby Declaration promising increased aid and practical co-operation from Australia.
While largely lacking in concrete measures, the declaration was warmly welcomed by Sir Michael, who had a sometimes strained relationship with the Howard government. "The relationship was more or less deteriorated for a while," Sir Michael told journalists. "That's all water under the bridge. We are talking of a new beginning."
Article source
02 March, 2008
ARTICLE: Forest Service chief faces jail over fire retardant study
Matthew Daly, Associated Press Writer
North Lake Tahoe Bonanza, March 2, 2008
Makes no apologies for timber policies.
WASHINGTON (AP) - He overhauled federal forest policy to cut more trees - and became a lightning rod for environmentalists who say he is intent on logging every tree in his reach.
After nearly seven years in office, Agriculture Undersecretary Mark Rey still has a long to-do list. Near the top: Persuade a federal judge to keep him out of jail.
Rey, a former timber industry lobbyist who has directed U.S. forest policy since 2001, also wants to set up state rules making it easier to build roads in remote national forests and to restore overgrown, unhealthy forests by clearing them of small trees and debris that can stoke wildfires. And he wants to streamline cumbersome regulations that can paralyze actions on public lands.
But a Montana judge, accusing Rey of deliberately skirting the law so the Forest Service can keep fighting wildfires with a flame retardant that kills fish, has threatened to put him behind bars.
Judge Donald Molloy says the Forest Service violated federal law when it failed to go through a public process to analyze the potential harm from using ammonium phosphate, a fertilizer that kills fish, as the primary ingredient for retardant dropped on wildfires.
For Rey, who faces a court date today, the prospect of jail time is daunting.
"It is something we take seriously," he said. "We are doing everything we can to comply with the judge's order."
But it's just one more obstacle as he attempts to rid federal policies of pesky paperwork and endless litigation that slows forest managers from cutting down trees.
Rey's signature accomplishment - passage of the 2003 Healthy Forests Restoration Act - quickened approval of projects to thin overgrown forests so they can be completed within months rather than years.
The law, the first major change in forest management in a quarter-century, has helped restore healthy forests after decades of neglect and mismanagement, supporters say.
"We are now treating four times as many acres as we did when this administration came into office," Rey said in an interview, "and those treatments are showing the desired effect."
Devastating wildfires in California last fall on about 800 square miles killed 10 people and burned about 2,200 homes - half the number of homes destroyed in similar fires in 2003, Rey said.
Rey's critics say talk of "treatment" and "thinning" is code for Rey's real goal: cutting more trees in service of his former timber industry cronies.
Article source
North Lake Tahoe Bonanza, March 2, 2008
Makes no apologies for timber policies.
WASHINGTON (AP) - He overhauled federal forest policy to cut more trees - and became a lightning rod for environmentalists who say he is intent on logging every tree in his reach.
After nearly seven years in office, Agriculture Undersecretary Mark Rey still has a long to-do list. Near the top: Persuade a federal judge to keep him out of jail.
Rey, a former timber industry lobbyist who has directed U.S. forest policy since 2001, also wants to set up state rules making it easier to build roads in remote national forests and to restore overgrown, unhealthy forests by clearing them of small trees and debris that can stoke wildfires. And he wants to streamline cumbersome regulations that can paralyze actions on public lands.
But a Montana judge, accusing Rey of deliberately skirting the law so the Forest Service can keep fighting wildfires with a flame retardant that kills fish, has threatened to put him behind bars.
Judge Donald Molloy says the Forest Service violated federal law when it failed to go through a public process to analyze the potential harm from using ammonium phosphate, a fertilizer that kills fish, as the primary ingredient for retardant dropped on wildfires.
For Rey, who faces a court date today, the prospect of jail time is daunting.
"It is something we take seriously," he said. "We are doing everything we can to comply with the judge's order."
But it's just one more obstacle as he attempts to rid federal policies of pesky paperwork and endless litigation that slows forest managers from cutting down trees.
Rey's signature accomplishment - passage of the 2003 Healthy Forests Restoration Act - quickened approval of projects to thin overgrown forests so they can be completed within months rather than years.
The law, the first major change in forest management in a quarter-century, has helped restore healthy forests after decades of neglect and mismanagement, supporters say.
"We are now treating four times as many acres as we did when this administration came into office," Rey said in an interview, "and those treatments are showing the desired effect."
Devastating wildfires in California last fall on about 800 square miles killed 10 people and burned about 2,200 homes - half the number of homes destroyed in similar fires in 2003, Rey said.
Rey's critics say talk of "treatment" and "thinning" is code for Rey's real goal: cutting more trees in service of his former timber industry cronies.
Article source
26 February, 2008
LETTER: More for Garnaut
Liam Furlong, Carlton
Letter, The Age, 26/2/2008
A 50-50 CHANCE of exceeding two degrees and triggering catastrophic and irreversible global warming is completely unacceptable.
Letter, The Age, 26/2/2008
A 50-50 CHANCE of exceeding two degrees and triggering catastrophic and irreversible global warming is completely unacceptable.
We do not have time for partial solutions; we must get it right first time. We need an immediate end to "business as usual".
The desalination plant, the east-west freeway link, the pulp mill and the destruction of native forests should be referred back to Garnaut for urgent review.
20 February, 2008
MEDIA RELEASE: Latest Victorian forest and water catchment updates
Gavan McFadzean, The Wilderness Society
Created: 26 Oct 2006 | Last updated: 20 Feb 2008
Latest campaign successes:
While this is a great result, there is much work to be done to ensure the Brumby government sticks to their promises. Furthermore, large areas of Victoria’s old growth forests and all of our water catchments available for logging were not protected, and it is here that the campaign now turns.
The State Government has committed to undertake further research into the impact that logging has on water supply, given that five of Melbourne’s catchments, supplying over half of our water, are remarkably still available for logging. With a decade of research already done, clearly showing that logging reduces water supplies by up to 50 per cent, we believe the case is irrefutable. Nevertheless we will undertake a campaign around this process to pressure government to end logging in our catchments.
The overwhelming environmental challenge facing us is climate change, and forest protection is a critical part of any climate change action plan. Globally, about 25 per cent of dangerous carbon emissions are caused by land clearing and logging, and last year’s logging in Victoria’s native forests released as much carbon into the atmosphere as a staggering 2.3 million cars for a year. Protecting forests buffers us from dangerous climate change and linking protected forest areas builds resilience into our ecosystems and helps avoid an extinction crisis for our native animals.
For more information, please contact:
Gavan McFadzean
Victorian Campaign Coordinator
Email: gavan.mcfadzean@wilderness.org.au
Mobile: 0414 754 023
Article source
Created: 26 Oct 2006 | Last updated: 20 Feb 2008
Latest campaign successes:
- The promise of protection of world class stands of old growth forests including Goolengook, and key rainforest and threatened wildlife habitat to existing National Parks in East Gippsland. In total this will add almost 36,000 hectares of forest to the reserve system to be protected under the National Parks Act
- The creation of a Great Victorian Alpine National Park by adding 5,000 hectares to the Errinundra National Park, thus linking the Errinundra, Snowy and Alpine National Parks
- The creation of a Cobboboonee National Park, with 27,000 ha under the National Parks Act, near Portland in the state’s far west, to protect the habitat of the Spotted-tailed Quoll, Southern Brown Bandicoot, Long Nosed Potoroo and Powerful Owl
- A commitment to create new Redgum National Parks if recommended by the Victorian Environment Assessment Council. This should realise the protection of approximately 60,000 hectares of Redgum forests along the Murray and its tributaries
While this is a great result, there is much work to be done to ensure the Brumby government sticks to their promises. Furthermore, large areas of Victoria’s old growth forests and all of our water catchments available for logging were not protected, and it is here that the campaign now turns.
The State Government has committed to undertake further research into the impact that logging has on water supply, given that five of Melbourne’s catchments, supplying over half of our water, are remarkably still available for logging. With a decade of research already done, clearly showing that logging reduces water supplies by up to 50 per cent, we believe the case is irrefutable. Nevertheless we will undertake a campaign around this process to pressure government to end logging in our catchments.
The overwhelming environmental challenge facing us is climate change, and forest protection is a critical part of any climate change action plan. Globally, about 25 per cent of dangerous carbon emissions are caused by land clearing and logging, and last year’s logging in Victoria’s native forests released as much carbon into the atmosphere as a staggering 2.3 million cars for a year. Protecting forests buffers us from dangerous climate change and linking protected forest areas builds resilience into our ecosystems and helps avoid an extinction crisis for our native animals.
For more information, please contact:
Gavan McFadzean
Victorian Campaign Coordinator
Email: gavan.mcfadzean@wilderness.org.au
Mobile: 0414 754 023
Article source
19 February, 2008
MERCURY: Old-growth forest chaos predicted
Sue Neales, Chief reporter
The Mercury, February 19, 2008
IT IS time to stop logging Tasmania's old forests, an international forest management convention in Hobart was told yesterday.
And the convention was warned that global pressure could force an end to logging in old-growth and regrowth forest as the world comes to grip with global warming and carbon trading.
Australian National University resources and environment professor David Lindenmayer said commercial harvest of old-growth forests could no longer be justified.
Prof Lindenmayer wanted industry compensation.
"In the context of Australia, there is not a need for old-growth forest logging any more," he said. "But there needs to be structural adjustment for industry and no perverse outcomes, as has happened in Tasmania before."
The four-day conference, attended by more than 250 delegates from 20 countries, was warned climate change and carbon trading could bring massive pressure on logging.
University of Tasmania forestry professor David Bowman predicted carbon trading would throw accepted forest management and harvesting systems into chaos.
Prof Bowman cautioned governments entering long-term timber contracts at fixed prices, such as the 30-year deal signed between Forestry Tasmania and Gunns Ltd for the Tamar Valley pulp mill.
"We're in a strange twilight zone where we don't know the rules. It's going to be a really difficult time for Tasmania," Prof Bowman said. "Many people are going to feel disempowered because decisions are going to be taken out of the hands of the people and the politicians and made by the market."
The Federal Government is set to introduce a national carbon-trading system that will put an economic value on carbon production, emission, use and storage.
Trees are the biggest users of carbon, potentially mitigating against climate change.
But debate is raging about how the industry will be affected by a carbon-trading system that values growing trees for the carbon stored, but penalises it when the trees are cut down and when waste is burned.
Professor Bowman feared Tasmania was not prepared for global pressure to end logging in Tasmanian forests, including managed regrowth areas.
"Regrowth forests are an important means of reducing atmospheric carbon. There is a distinct possibility that the logging of regrowth forests will lose its current social licence," Prof Bowman said.
"We are facing a change of unfathomable proportions. Climate change and the carbon economy is going to affect every action we take."
Prof Bowman predicted radical forest management solutions would be needed to cope with adverse impacts of climate change on plantations and standing forests, especially if logging is reduced."
Article source
The Mercury, February 19, 2008
IT IS time to stop logging Tasmania's old forests, an international forest management convention in Hobart was told yesterday.
And the convention was warned that global pressure could force an end to logging in old-growth and regrowth forest as the world comes to grip with global warming and carbon trading.
Australian National University resources and environment professor David Lindenmayer said commercial harvest of old-growth forests could no longer be justified.
Prof Lindenmayer wanted industry compensation.
"In the context of Australia, there is not a need for old-growth forest logging any more," he said. "But there needs to be structural adjustment for industry and no perverse outcomes, as has happened in Tasmania before."
The four-day conference, attended by more than 250 delegates from 20 countries, was warned climate change and carbon trading could bring massive pressure on logging.
University of Tasmania forestry professor David Bowman predicted carbon trading would throw accepted forest management and harvesting systems into chaos.
Prof Bowman cautioned governments entering long-term timber contracts at fixed prices, such as the 30-year deal signed between Forestry Tasmania and Gunns Ltd for the Tamar Valley pulp mill.
"We're in a strange twilight zone where we don't know the rules. It's going to be a really difficult time for Tasmania," Prof Bowman said. "Many people are going to feel disempowered because decisions are going to be taken out of the hands of the people and the politicians and made by the market."
The Federal Government is set to introduce a national carbon-trading system that will put an economic value on carbon production, emission, use and storage.
Trees are the biggest users of carbon, potentially mitigating against climate change.
But debate is raging about how the industry will be affected by a carbon-trading system that values growing trees for the carbon stored, but penalises it when the trees are cut down and when waste is burned.
Professor Bowman feared Tasmania was not prepared for global pressure to end logging in Tasmanian forests, including managed regrowth areas.
"Regrowth forests are an important means of reducing atmospheric carbon. There is a distinct possibility that the logging of regrowth forests will lose its current social licence," Prof Bowman said.
"We are facing a change of unfathomable proportions. Climate change and the carbon economy is going to affect every action we take."
Prof Bowman predicted radical forest management solutions would be needed to cope with adverse impacts of climate change on plantations and standing forests, especially if logging is reduced."
Article source
STAR NEWS: MP chain gang
Kath Gannaway
Star News Group, 19th February 2008
Police were forced to intervene on Tuesday last week as timber industry supporters clashed with MP Tammy Lobato at Yarra Junction.
And the Gembrook MP said the incident has left her questioning whether it is safe for her to continue her mobile offices.
Sixteen women led by Timber Communities Australia National coordinator Kirsten Gentle confronted Ms Lobato as she arrived at the Upper Yarra Community House for a scheduled meeting with constituents.
As Ms Lobato attempted to leave to go to Warburton, the women barred her way, holding a chain around her car and refusing her demand that Ms Gentle move away from the driver’s door.
As Ms Gentle spoke on her mobile to the Premier’s Department, Ms Lobato called for police assistance.
Two Yarra Junction police officers escorted the MP to her car.
Ms Gentle later told the Mail she had made a statement to police after Ms Lobato grabbed her arm in an attempt to move her away from the car.
The protestors, representing timber families and communities accused Ms Lobato of reneging on her pledge of support of the timber industry.
The protest was sparked by the MP’s recent call on her government to stop logging in Melbourne’s water catchments until a report currently underway into the practice was completed.
“It’s hard to believe that an ALP member can come out against their own party’s policy and against an industry she has claimed to support since gaining power in 2002,” Ms Gentle said.
Ms Gentle accused Ms Lobato of lying to timber workers about her support and said she was ignoring both the science of logging in the catchments and timber workers’ legal right to carry out logging there.
“The women today wanted to ensure Ms Lobato understood she had lost their confidence and trust in her as a local member and for her to experience first hand the frustration of not being able to work due to protesters locking on to personal equipment,” Ms Gentle said.
Ms Lobato, however, said she had made it very clear that her concerns relate to the logging within the Armstrong Creek catchment and not about the logging industry in general.
“The protestors know that for the past five years I have always been available and keen to support them,” she said. “I have tried to explain my position to the protestors but they won’t listen,” Ms Lobato said.
She said timber workers had refused to meet with her when an invitation was extended last week, and again on Tuesday.
Ms Gentle, however, said the time suggested by Ms Lobato for the first meeting was not suitable for the protestors and said no meeting had been offered on the Tuesday.
Ms Lobato said the protest could cause her to reconsider how she meets with residents in the future.
“When my constituents who want to meet with me in their own townships are subjected to verbal abuse, I obviously need to consider whether my commitment to being accessible by conducting mobile offices is posing unacceptable risks,” she said.
She said she had met with around 20 people and groups on the day and was sad that opportunity may not continue. “For protestors to chain my car was unfair to those residents in Warburton who had taken the time to make an appointment to see me,” she said.
“I do not like to let people down.”
Many of the placards questioned Ms Lobato’s allegiance to the Labor Party and her willingness to represent her logging industry constituents.
“Instead of coming out and condemning illegal forest protestors Ms Lobato decided to attack our family and our industry instead adding fuel to the fire for radical zealots who think they are representing the community when they illegally stop our business from working,” said protestor Nicki Green who claimed her family had been victimised by anti-logging protestors. In the face of slogans such as “Wanted, New ALP Candidate for Gembrook Pre-Selection” and “Tammy Lobato betraying her party and betraying the workers”, Ms Lobato defended her choice to speak out.
“My job as an MP is not to be a mere mouthpiece for party policy but to be an effective representative and stand up for what I believe in,” she said.
“That is what I am doing in this policy area and I have been inundated with messages of support.”
Police said no charges would be laid.
Article source
Star News Group, 19th February 2008
Police were forced to intervene on Tuesday last week as timber industry supporters clashed with MP Tammy Lobato at Yarra Junction.
And the Gembrook MP said the incident has left her questioning whether it is safe for her to continue her mobile offices.
Sixteen women led by Timber Communities Australia National coordinator Kirsten Gentle confronted Ms Lobato as she arrived at the Upper Yarra Community House for a scheduled meeting with constituents.
As Ms Lobato attempted to leave to go to Warburton, the women barred her way, holding a chain around her car and refusing her demand that Ms Gentle move away from the driver’s door.
As Ms Gentle spoke on her mobile to the Premier’s Department, Ms Lobato called for police assistance.
Two Yarra Junction police officers escorted the MP to her car.
Ms Gentle later told the Mail she had made a statement to police after Ms Lobato grabbed her arm in an attempt to move her away from the car.
The protestors, representing timber families and communities accused Ms Lobato of reneging on her pledge of support of the timber industry.
The protest was sparked by the MP’s recent call on her government to stop logging in Melbourne’s water catchments until a report currently underway into the practice was completed.
“It’s hard to believe that an ALP member can come out against their own party’s policy and against an industry she has claimed to support since gaining power in 2002,” Ms Gentle said.
Ms Gentle accused Ms Lobato of lying to timber workers about her support and said she was ignoring both the science of logging in the catchments and timber workers’ legal right to carry out logging there.
“The women today wanted to ensure Ms Lobato understood she had lost their confidence and trust in her as a local member and for her to experience first hand the frustration of not being able to work due to protesters locking on to personal equipment,” Ms Gentle said.
Ms Lobato, however, said she had made it very clear that her concerns relate to the logging within the Armstrong Creek catchment and not about the logging industry in general.
“The protestors know that for the past five years I have always been available and keen to support them,” she said. “I have tried to explain my position to the protestors but they won’t listen,” Ms Lobato said.
She said timber workers had refused to meet with her when an invitation was extended last week, and again on Tuesday.
Ms Gentle, however, said the time suggested by Ms Lobato for the first meeting was not suitable for the protestors and said no meeting had been offered on the Tuesday.
Ms Lobato said the protest could cause her to reconsider how she meets with residents in the future.
“When my constituents who want to meet with me in their own townships are subjected to verbal abuse, I obviously need to consider whether my commitment to being accessible by conducting mobile offices is posing unacceptable risks,” she said.
She said she had met with around 20 people and groups on the day and was sad that opportunity may not continue. “For protestors to chain my car was unfair to those residents in Warburton who had taken the time to make an appointment to see me,” she said.
“I do not like to let people down.”
Many of the placards questioned Ms Lobato’s allegiance to the Labor Party and her willingness to represent her logging industry constituents.
“Instead of coming out and condemning illegal forest protestors Ms Lobato decided to attack our family and our industry instead adding fuel to the fire for radical zealots who think they are representing the community when they illegally stop our business from working,” said protestor Nicki Green who claimed her family had been victimised by anti-logging protestors. In the face of slogans such as “Wanted, New ALP Candidate for Gembrook Pre-Selection” and “Tammy Lobato betraying her party and betraying the workers”, Ms Lobato defended her choice to speak out.
“My job as an MP is not to be a mere mouthpiece for party policy but to be an effective representative and stand up for what I believe in,” she said.
“That is what I am doing in this policy area and I have been inundated with messages of support.”
Police said no charges would be laid.
Article source
15 February, 2008
AUSTRALIAN: 'Efficiency and forestry' key to cuts
Matthew Warren, Environment writer
The Australian, February 15, 2008
Forestry and more efficient use of energy, rather than gas or renewables, can spearhead deep cuts in Australia's greenhouse emissions by 2020, according to research by heavyweight business consultants McKinseys.
The report, to be released today by the global A-list consultants, backs environmentalists' claims that Australia can afford to cut its greenhouse emissions by nearly 40 per cent over the next 12 years.
Major energy users dismissed the claim as "literally fantastic".
The report claims deep emission cuts of 30 per cent by 2020 based on 1990 levels could be achieved at a cost of about $3billion a year, or up to $65 per tonne of greenhouse emissions. Australia is currently 9 per cent above its 1990 emissions.
The report claims the first quarter of the 40 per cent emissions cuts could come by improving the efficiency of energy use in factories, offices and households through insulation and retrofitting of electric motors and airconditioning systems, which would deliver huge savings in power bills.
A further 31 per cent would come from avoiding further land-clearing and deforestation, coupled with rapid, widespread tree-planting programs to provide one of the cheapest ways for Australia to offset its greenhouse emissions.
The McKinsey modelling predicts there will be some new geothermal and wind energy generation by 2020, but by comparison very little switching from coal to gas-generated electricity.
Opposition environment spokesman Greg Hunt yesterday predicted the Rudd Government would abandon its mandatory renewable energy target to include all low-emission options by the 2009 budget.
The self-commissioned report, An Australian cost curve for greenhouse gas reduction, follows similar McKinsey analyses in the US, Britain and Germany.
The report's author, Stephan Gorner, said that compared with most other developed economies, Australia was in a unique position to develop large-scale forest sinks as a relatively cheap way to quickly deliver large cuts in net emissions.
He said that without forestry and the big gains available byreplacing coal with zero-emissions energy, Australia would find it much more difficult to achieve the deep targets proposed. "We are not daydreaming and thinking about breakthrough technologies," Mr Gorner said. "Everything here is live and operating."
Climate Institute policy director Erwin Jackson said energy efficiency was still the bridesmaid of greenhouse policy and that the McKinsey research highlighted the need for urgent government action to drive savings across theeconomy.
Australian Industry Greenhouse Network chief Michael Hitchens doubted such cuts were possible and warned that the report dangerously omitted many of the broader costs arising from this scale of emissions cut.
"If we need an emissions price of $60 a tonne, as they suggest, then that will cost far more than $290 per household," Mr Hitchens said. "This means something like 16c (more for) each litre of petrol, a 30 per cent increase in household power bills and maybe the doubling of gas prices."
Original article
The Australian, February 15, 2008
Forestry and more efficient use of energy, rather than gas or renewables, can spearhead deep cuts in Australia's greenhouse emissions by 2020, according to research by heavyweight business consultants McKinseys.
The report, to be released today by the global A-list consultants, backs environmentalists' claims that Australia can afford to cut its greenhouse emissions by nearly 40 per cent over the next 12 years.
Major energy users dismissed the claim as "literally fantastic".
The report claims deep emission cuts of 30 per cent by 2020 based on 1990 levels could be achieved at a cost of about $3billion a year, or up to $65 per tonne of greenhouse emissions. Australia is currently 9 per cent above its 1990 emissions.
The report claims the first quarter of the 40 per cent emissions cuts could come by improving the efficiency of energy use in factories, offices and households through insulation and retrofitting of electric motors and airconditioning systems, which would deliver huge savings in power bills.
A further 31 per cent would come from avoiding further land-clearing and deforestation, coupled with rapid, widespread tree-planting programs to provide one of the cheapest ways for Australia to offset its greenhouse emissions.
The McKinsey modelling predicts there will be some new geothermal and wind energy generation by 2020, but by comparison very little switching from coal to gas-generated electricity.
Opposition environment spokesman Greg Hunt yesterday predicted the Rudd Government would abandon its mandatory renewable energy target to include all low-emission options by the 2009 budget.
The self-commissioned report, An Australian cost curve for greenhouse gas reduction, follows similar McKinsey analyses in the US, Britain and Germany.
The report's author, Stephan Gorner, said that compared with most other developed economies, Australia was in a unique position to develop large-scale forest sinks as a relatively cheap way to quickly deliver large cuts in net emissions.
He said that without forestry and the big gains available byreplacing coal with zero-emissions energy, Australia would find it much more difficult to achieve the deep targets proposed. "We are not daydreaming and thinking about breakthrough technologies," Mr Gorner said. "Everything here is live and operating."
Climate Institute policy director Erwin Jackson said energy efficiency was still the bridesmaid of greenhouse policy and that the McKinsey research highlighted the need for urgent government action to drive savings across theeconomy.
Australian Industry Greenhouse Network chief Michael Hitchens doubted such cuts were possible and warned that the report dangerously omitted many of the broader costs arising from this scale of emissions cut.
"If we need an emissions price of $60 a tonne, as they suggest, then that will cost far more than $290 per household," Mr Hitchens said. "This means something like 16c (more for) each litre of petrol, a 30 per cent increase in household power bills and maybe the doubling of gas prices."
Original article
11 February, 2008
ARTICLE: Of his own tree will, one man grows back to the future
Steve Waldon
February 11, 2008, The Age
He is a quiet one, is Richard Appleton, but you would not want to mistake that for an absence of passion.
In the diabolical tumult that is the climate change debate, he has a clarity of vision and calm resolve that could be a model for those of us who want to help the environment but don't know how.
Mr Appleton is a steward of the earth. We all are, he says, just temporary caretakers of the planet. He reckons that what we do now and tomorrow will determine our legacy.
In this philosophical stance he is far from alone, but Mr Appleton long ago decided to act on his beliefs.
And so we come to a good news story about what can happen when people set an example, form sympathetic alliances, dirty their hands and substitute altruism for ego.
Mr Appleton has a little remnant cool-temperate rainforest on his property at Balook, in that misty part of the Strzelecki Ranges where even in summer a persistent drizzle can feel like a sponge bath.
The rainforest has nowhere to run, he says. This is its final refuge. But the fact that it has survived at all is reason for hope. It could have disappeared during the wholesale (and many now say mad) clearing of Gippsland's Great Forest, which began in the 1870s, when settlers decided ancient stands of glorious mountain ash should make way for crops and cattle.
Richard Appleton's parents bought the 40-hectare Balook property in 1953. They cleared a few patches to grow potatoes and ride horses.
But when the Forests Commission came knocking, Mr Appleton's mother refused to sell. The area was beginning to recover from the 1944 bushfires. When Mr Appleton acquired the property in 1997, he sat down to plan not just its preservation, but a replanting scheme. He wanted to recreate the biodiversity that would have existed 200 years ago, when the tree canopy protected a dense understorey, and animals and birds had a symbiotic relationship that contributed to their survival. An environment, that is, that did not need human tampering.
Today, Mr Appleton's property is a little native oasis flanked by the Tarra Bulga National Park and the Merrimans Creek headwaters.
The leeches cling like limpet mines as you gingerly pick your way through gullies where Mr Appleton has loosened the formidable grip of blackberry infestation, allowing native shrubs and ferns to reclaim their rightful place.
He is putting in sassafras, beech and, of course, eucalypts — but it's a hell of a task. He turned to Trust For Nature for help. Like many Victorian landowners developing an eco-consciousness, Mr Appleton signed a covenant, protecting the land from opportunistic development.
Since 1972, the trust, a not-for-profit organisation, has been in the vanguard of innovative moves to protect Victoria's native habitat through covenants, land purchases and management programs.
In 2006, the trust put Mr Appleton in touch with Brendan Condon, of Australian Ecosystems. He is director of an offshoot organisation, Climate Positive, which is dealing with historical carbon debt.
It is not enough to be carbon neutral, Mr Condon says — we can suck it out of the atmosphere and lock it down.
Science is making inroads, all we need is the will to act positively. He dubs it "carbon catching".
On Friday, we went with Mr Condon and Trust For Nature's executive director, Mike Gooey, on a visit to Balook.
Also on board was the trust's West Gippsland conservation officer, John Hick.
Our little expedition was joined at Mr Appleton's home by GippsLandcare representative Gaby Mitchell, then we walked.
Mr Hick described one magnificent specimen of mountain ash as stately, exactly the word you had to settle on.
Mr Appleton took us to the paddocks where, with help from Climate Positive volunteers, thousands of eucalypts, wattles and acacias have been planted. There will be another planting in July.
Richard Appleton has a vision. He knows he won't be around to see the mature results.
Nor will any of us who don't know what to do except use energy-efficient light globes and ride a bike to the supermarket. But it is a vision that incorporates hope for a future with oxygen, and last Friday's expeditioners agreed that hope is as good a place as any to start.
Original article
February 11, 2008, The Age
He is a quiet one, is Richard Appleton, but you would not want to mistake that for an absence of passion.
In the diabolical tumult that is the climate change debate, he has a clarity of vision and calm resolve that could be a model for those of us who want to help the environment but don't know how.
Mr Appleton is a steward of the earth. We all are, he says, just temporary caretakers of the planet. He reckons that what we do now and tomorrow will determine our legacy.
In this philosophical stance he is far from alone, but Mr Appleton long ago decided to act on his beliefs.
And so we come to a good news story about what can happen when people set an example, form sympathetic alliances, dirty their hands and substitute altruism for ego.
Mr Appleton has a little remnant cool-temperate rainforest on his property at Balook, in that misty part of the Strzelecki Ranges where even in summer a persistent drizzle can feel like a sponge bath.
The rainforest has nowhere to run, he says. This is its final refuge. But the fact that it has survived at all is reason for hope. It could have disappeared during the wholesale (and many now say mad) clearing of Gippsland's Great Forest, which began in the 1870s, when settlers decided ancient stands of glorious mountain ash should make way for crops and cattle.
Richard Appleton's parents bought the 40-hectare Balook property in 1953. They cleared a few patches to grow potatoes and ride horses.
But when the Forests Commission came knocking, Mr Appleton's mother refused to sell. The area was beginning to recover from the 1944 bushfires. When Mr Appleton acquired the property in 1997, he sat down to plan not just its preservation, but a replanting scheme. He wanted to recreate the biodiversity that would have existed 200 years ago, when the tree canopy protected a dense understorey, and animals and birds had a symbiotic relationship that contributed to their survival. An environment, that is, that did not need human tampering.
Today, Mr Appleton's property is a little native oasis flanked by the Tarra Bulga National Park and the Merrimans Creek headwaters.
The leeches cling like limpet mines as you gingerly pick your way through gullies where Mr Appleton has loosened the formidable grip of blackberry infestation, allowing native shrubs and ferns to reclaim their rightful place.
He is putting in sassafras, beech and, of course, eucalypts — but it's a hell of a task. He turned to Trust For Nature for help. Like many Victorian landowners developing an eco-consciousness, Mr Appleton signed a covenant, protecting the land from opportunistic development.
Since 1972, the trust, a not-for-profit organisation, has been in the vanguard of innovative moves to protect Victoria's native habitat through covenants, land purchases and management programs.
In 2006, the trust put Mr Appleton in touch with Brendan Condon, of Australian Ecosystems. He is director of an offshoot organisation, Climate Positive, which is dealing with historical carbon debt.
It is not enough to be carbon neutral, Mr Condon says — we can suck it out of the atmosphere and lock it down.
Science is making inroads, all we need is the will to act positively. He dubs it "carbon catching".
On Friday, we went with Mr Condon and Trust For Nature's executive director, Mike Gooey, on a visit to Balook.
Also on board was the trust's West Gippsland conservation officer, John Hick.
Our little expedition was joined at Mr Appleton's home by GippsLandcare representative Gaby Mitchell, then we walked.
Mr Hick described one magnificent specimen of mountain ash as stately, exactly the word you had to settle on.
Mr Appleton took us to the paddocks where, with help from Climate Positive volunteers, thousands of eucalypts, wattles and acacias have been planted. There will be another planting in July.
Richard Appleton has a vision. He knows he won't be around to see the mature results.
Nor will any of us who don't know what to do except use energy-efficient light globes and ride a bike to the supermarket. But it is a vision that incorporates hope for a future with oxygen, and last Friday's expeditioners agreed that hope is as good a place as any to start.
Original article
09 February, 2008
HERALDSUN: Women take front seat in politics and industry
Olga Galacho
Herald Sun. February 09, 2008
Never before have so many women wielded as much clout over big-ticket government and business policies as they will this year.
Curiously, many of those seeking to influence the policymakers began their careers in the forestry industry.
Others have been handpicked for their telegenic qualities and their ability to project a certain image in front of the television cameras.
Federal Parliament's resumption this week will focus attention on how business and politics intertwine - and on the pivotal role some women will play in a number of important debates this year.
Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard is expected to introduce her long-awaited workplace relations legislation while, across from her, deputy Opposition leader Julie Bishop will argue the Coalition's position.
Ms Bishop like her counterpart has responsibility for workplace relations.
In revising the WorkChoices laws, Ms Gillard would have consulted the most senior leaders vouching for workers, employers and all that lies in between.
The most powerful of them are women, too: note Barbara Bennett, director of the Workplace Authority, plus Australian Council of Trade Unions president Sharan Burrow and her opposites Heather Ridout, the chief executive of the Australian Industry Group (Ai Group), and Katie Lahey, her counterpart at the Business Council of Australia.
The other major employer lobby group, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI), has an interim head, Peter Anderson, following Peter Hendy's recent recruitment by Opposition leader Brendan Nelson.
When BusinessDaily spoke to Mr Anderson, he said he had not made up his mind about whether to apply for the permanent position.
Asked if he believed ACCI might end up with a woman at the helm he answered: "I would be very pleased if there were a lot of women applying for the job."
He noted the increasing number of female politicians could encourage even more women to lead industry groups.
"There is no doubt that a conversation between a woman MP and a business woman would be different to a conversation between two men. Some women have a different manner . . . they bring a different language, a different tone."
THIS observation was played out on Wednesday when the Climate Change and Water Minister, Senator Penny Wong, delivered her first public speech since returning from the Bali talks to an Ai Group audience.
The irony of Senator Wong opting to make this debut with ACCI's rival could not have been lost on the chamber.
Its former chief, Mr Hendy, had often boasted about his role in scripting the Howard Government's WorkChoices laws.
The senator was not subtle on Wednesday: "It is not a coincidence that this first address is with the Ai Group . . . Heather has been an outstanding advocate for industry."
An effusive Ms Ridout had introduced her guest speaker with an equal emphasis on the good relations they had enjoyed in the past.
Relationships and consensus appear to be central to the way female figureheads of male-dominated organisations project themselves.
Yet many of them have connections or experience in an industry that traditionally oozed with conflict - forestry.
A raft of former pro-logging lobbyists have emerged to represent transport, cement, mining and energy groups - and it is no accident that they are all carbon intensive industries.
Mr Anderson agreed: "There do seem to be many women leading peak energy bodies and if there is any area where negotiating skills require an ability to compromise, it would be energy . . . otherwise, in the climate change debate there is going to be no agreement."
Hatched from the forestry incubator are three former Timber Communities Australia executives - Jill Lewis, who last month was headhunted by the NSW Trucking Association; Robyn Bain, now chief of the Cement Industry Federation and Dominique La Fontaine, who heads the Clean Energy Council, which includes gas, electricity and wind companies on its board.
A fourth ex-forestry industry lobbyist, Belinda Robinson, who used to lead plantation products council A3P, is chief executive of the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association.
Gas industry promoter Cheryl Cartwright, chief of the Australian Pipeline Industry Association, was a former adviser to one-time Forestry Minister Warren Truss, who now leads the federal National Party.
In fact, most of these women have worked within the National Party at some stage and all of them have also rubbed elbows with Forestry Union strongman Michael O'Connor.
Ironically, the two most powerful women in the Rudd cabinet also have links to Mr O'Connor.
Ms Gillard was once his girlfriend, still cites him as a trusted adviser and has subsequently spoken against former Labor leader Mark Latham's restrictive logging policy.
Working closely with Ms Gillard as Employment Participation Minister is Mr O'Connor's brother, Brendan.
Also part of their team is Senator Wong, who will represent their portfolios in the Upper House.
Once a prominent member of Mr O'Connor's timber workers division of the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU), Senator Wong went on to advise the former Carr Government of NSW on logging issues.
Mr O'Connor conceded to BusinessDaily that he had had working relationships with all of these women to varying degrees.
However, he declined to be quoted on whether the anti-conservation position the former timber lobbyists had taken in the past would help to shape the carbon emission policies of the future.
Forestry expert and Australian National University academic Judith Ajani believes the parallels between the timber and energy resources sectors are many and explains why lobbyists can move comfortably between the two.
"Logging native forests for woodchips is a mining industry," says the author of The Forest Wars.
"These are both commodity industries, characterised by cost competitiveness and highly conflictual because they both involve the environment.
"If you've worked in forestry, you understand what makes other resource industries tick," she said.
Dr Ajani believes the high proportion of women representing the interests of resource companies is a strategy to keep the public's mind open.
"These are highly public industries, with high public concern and the women advocates are the frontline defence in the battle to justify a licence to operate."
Former forester turned cement promoter Ms Bain argues that it "makes sense that women have become the face of industry" as global warming moved on to the corporate agenda.
"The environment debate brought women to the fore when it was more of a social and emotional issue," said Ms Bain.
"When the environment became part of an economic debate, we moved with it and got ahead of the guys.
"We had a natural advantage . . . and we are not afraid of an emotional argument. Forestry certainly teaches you the art of negotiating."
She adds that if an advocate can survive forestry, they can survive anything.
"Cement is a walk in the park, it's easy compared to forestry's blockades."
The peak body for timber companies, the National Association of Forest Industries, continues to have a woman at the helm in Catherine Murphy, a former adviser to Opposition leader Brendan Nelson.
One time Queensland forestry lobbyist Dr Guy Pearse said it was no coincidence that pro-logging groups had women chief executives.
After decades of conflict over felling in the Tasmanian old growth forests to create woodchip exports, the timber industry wanted to distance itself from the aggressive tactics of forestry workers frustrated by blockading environmentalists, Dr Pearse said.
"They wanted to reinvent their image and make their leadership look as different to the flannel-shirted loggers as they could in the public's eye. It's called a telegenic appointment," said the author of High and Dry.
Trish Caswell, who has lobbied on both sides of the timber industry fence, firstly as the head of the Australian Conservation Foundation and later at the Victorian Association of Forest Industries, said other industry groups went on to borrow the ploy of appointing female figureheads.
"There was a conscious effort to get women into those leading roles at the beginning of the decade," she said.
Organisations traditionally seen as dirty, tough and male-dominated in particular wanted to soften their image in the media, she said.
They have included the NSW Minerals Council, which recruited Dr Nikki Williams, and the Plastics and Chemicals Industries Association, with Margaret Donnan at the helm.
Even renewable energy groups not tarnished with a polluting reputation have chosen to go with the "telegenic" option when appointing chief executives.
The Australian Geothermal Energy Association, for example, is headed by Susan Jeanes, and Environment Business Australia's chief is Fiona Wain.
But Ms Caswell is under no illusion that being the boss of a peak body is a sign that women are successfully taking their place in big business.
"While the role of an association has become more important, being the chief executive of one is not a mainstream power position in itself. You are not in the seat of power."
Business academic Vivek Chaudhri believes appointing leaders by virtue of their gender is counterproductive.
"There is a perception in some sections of the business community and in academia that in some circumstances, this swing has damaged opportunities for competent women," said the Monash University associate professor.
"If a woman higher up was not the best candidate for the position and she is looked at in not the best light, the consequences can be more damaging than just the wounded male response.
Original article link
Herald Sun. February 09, 2008
Never before have so many women wielded as much clout over big-ticket government and business policies as they will this year.
Curiously, many of those seeking to influence the policymakers began their careers in the forestry industry.
Others have been handpicked for their telegenic qualities and their ability to project a certain image in front of the television cameras.
Federal Parliament's resumption this week will focus attention on how business and politics intertwine - and on the pivotal role some women will play in a number of important debates this year.
Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard is expected to introduce her long-awaited workplace relations legislation while, across from her, deputy Opposition leader Julie Bishop will argue the Coalition's position.
Ms Bishop like her counterpart has responsibility for workplace relations.
In revising the WorkChoices laws, Ms Gillard would have consulted the most senior leaders vouching for workers, employers and all that lies in between.
The most powerful of them are women, too: note Barbara Bennett, director of the Workplace Authority, plus Australian Council of Trade Unions president Sharan Burrow and her opposites Heather Ridout, the chief executive of the Australian Industry Group (Ai Group), and Katie Lahey, her counterpart at the Business Council of Australia.
The other major employer lobby group, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI), has an interim head, Peter Anderson, following Peter Hendy's recent recruitment by Opposition leader Brendan Nelson.
When BusinessDaily spoke to Mr Anderson, he said he had not made up his mind about whether to apply for the permanent position.
Asked if he believed ACCI might end up with a woman at the helm he answered: "I would be very pleased if there were a lot of women applying for the job."
He noted the increasing number of female politicians could encourage even more women to lead industry groups.
"There is no doubt that a conversation between a woman MP and a business woman would be different to a conversation between two men. Some women have a different manner . . . they bring a different language, a different tone."
THIS observation was played out on Wednesday when the Climate Change and Water Minister, Senator Penny Wong, delivered her first public speech since returning from the Bali talks to an Ai Group audience.
The irony of Senator Wong opting to make this debut with ACCI's rival could not have been lost on the chamber.
Its former chief, Mr Hendy, had often boasted about his role in scripting the Howard Government's WorkChoices laws.
The senator was not subtle on Wednesday: "It is not a coincidence that this first address is with the Ai Group . . . Heather has been an outstanding advocate for industry."
An effusive Ms Ridout had introduced her guest speaker with an equal emphasis on the good relations they had enjoyed in the past.
Relationships and consensus appear to be central to the way female figureheads of male-dominated organisations project themselves.
Yet many of them have connections or experience in an industry that traditionally oozed with conflict - forestry.
A raft of former pro-logging lobbyists have emerged to represent transport, cement, mining and energy groups - and it is no accident that they are all carbon intensive industries.
Mr Anderson agreed: "There do seem to be many women leading peak energy bodies and if there is any area where negotiating skills require an ability to compromise, it would be energy . . . otherwise, in the climate change debate there is going to be no agreement."
Hatched from the forestry incubator are three former Timber Communities Australia executives - Jill Lewis, who last month was headhunted by the NSW Trucking Association; Robyn Bain, now chief of the Cement Industry Federation and Dominique La Fontaine, who heads the Clean Energy Council, which includes gas, electricity and wind companies on its board.
A fourth ex-forestry industry lobbyist, Belinda Robinson, who used to lead plantation products council A3P, is chief executive of the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association.
Gas industry promoter Cheryl Cartwright, chief of the Australian Pipeline Industry Association, was a former adviser to one-time Forestry Minister Warren Truss, who now leads the federal National Party.
In fact, most of these women have worked within the National Party at some stage and all of them have also rubbed elbows with Forestry Union strongman Michael O'Connor.
Ironically, the two most powerful women in the Rudd cabinet also have links to Mr O'Connor.
Ms Gillard was once his girlfriend, still cites him as a trusted adviser and has subsequently spoken against former Labor leader Mark Latham's restrictive logging policy.
Working closely with Ms Gillard as Employment Participation Minister is Mr O'Connor's brother, Brendan.
Also part of their team is Senator Wong, who will represent their portfolios in the Upper House.
Once a prominent member of Mr O'Connor's timber workers division of the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU), Senator Wong went on to advise the former Carr Government of NSW on logging issues.
Mr O'Connor conceded to BusinessDaily that he had had working relationships with all of these women to varying degrees.
However, he declined to be quoted on whether the anti-conservation position the former timber lobbyists had taken in the past would help to shape the carbon emission policies of the future.
Forestry expert and Australian National University academic Judith Ajani believes the parallels between the timber and energy resources sectors are many and explains why lobbyists can move comfortably between the two.
"Logging native forests for woodchips is a mining industry," says the author of The Forest Wars.
"These are both commodity industries, characterised by cost competitiveness and highly conflictual because they both involve the environment.
"If you've worked in forestry, you understand what makes other resource industries tick," she said.
Dr Ajani believes the high proportion of women representing the interests of resource companies is a strategy to keep the public's mind open.
"These are highly public industries, with high public concern and the women advocates are the frontline defence in the battle to justify a licence to operate."
Former forester turned cement promoter Ms Bain argues that it "makes sense that women have become the face of industry" as global warming moved on to the corporate agenda.
"The environment debate brought women to the fore when it was more of a social and emotional issue," said Ms Bain.
"When the environment became part of an economic debate, we moved with it and got ahead of the guys.
"We had a natural advantage . . . and we are not afraid of an emotional argument. Forestry certainly teaches you the art of negotiating."
She adds that if an advocate can survive forestry, they can survive anything.
"Cement is a walk in the park, it's easy compared to forestry's blockades."
The peak body for timber companies, the National Association of Forest Industries, continues to have a woman at the helm in Catherine Murphy, a former adviser to Opposition leader Brendan Nelson.
One time Queensland forestry lobbyist Dr Guy Pearse said it was no coincidence that pro-logging groups had women chief executives.
After decades of conflict over felling in the Tasmanian old growth forests to create woodchip exports, the timber industry wanted to distance itself from the aggressive tactics of forestry workers frustrated by blockading environmentalists, Dr Pearse said.
"They wanted to reinvent their image and make their leadership look as different to the flannel-shirted loggers as they could in the public's eye. It's called a telegenic appointment," said the author of High and Dry.
Trish Caswell, who has lobbied on both sides of the timber industry fence, firstly as the head of the Australian Conservation Foundation and later at the Victorian Association of Forest Industries, said other industry groups went on to borrow the ploy of appointing female figureheads.
"There was a conscious effort to get women into those leading roles at the beginning of the decade," she said.
Organisations traditionally seen as dirty, tough and male-dominated in particular wanted to soften their image in the media, she said.
They have included the NSW Minerals Council, which recruited Dr Nikki Williams, and the Plastics and Chemicals Industries Association, with Margaret Donnan at the helm.
Even renewable energy groups not tarnished with a polluting reputation have chosen to go with the "telegenic" option when appointing chief executives.
The Australian Geothermal Energy Association, for example, is headed by Susan Jeanes, and Environment Business Australia's chief is Fiona Wain.
But Ms Caswell is under no illusion that being the boss of a peak body is a sign that women are successfully taking their place in big business.
"While the role of an association has become more important, being the chief executive of one is not a mainstream power position in itself. You are not in the seat of power."
Business academic Vivek Chaudhri believes appointing leaders by virtue of their gender is counterproductive.
"There is a perception in some sections of the business community and in academia that in some circumstances, this swing has damaged opportunities for competent women," said the Monash University associate professor.
"If a woman higher up was not the best candidate for the position and she is looked at in not the best light, the consequences can be more damaging than just the wounded male response.
Original article link
02 February, 2008
HERALDSUN: Water wars over logging
Peter Flaherty
Heraldsun (article), February 02, 2008
More than 20 billion litres of water is being lost in Melbourne's catchments every year because of logging.
Angry residents who want logging in a catchment near Healesville stopped have made the claim, which has been backed by a senior CSIRO scientist.
The Sustainability and Environment Department's decision to allow logging in the Armstrong Creek catchment has outraged locals and the Yarra Ranges Shire Council.
Logging began before Christmas and is expected to be completed by April.
Healesville businesswoman Sarah Rees said loggers wanted prized mountain ash.
"Mountain ash are among the largest trees in the world and they need the most water to grow," she said. "As they grow, they can suck up to 50 per cent of any runoff."
Research estimated logging slashed flows to the Thomson Dam by almost 20 billion litres a year, she said.
"That's almost the capacity of the Maroondah Reservoir. If logging continues across the catchments,
60 billion litres will be lost annually from Melbourne's water supply by 2050."
CSIRO senior scientist Richard Benyon said logging would reduce flows into Melbourne's catchments.
A loss of 20 billion litres a year was "not an unrealistic figure", he said.
"While it's only a small percentage of the amount of water Melbourne uses each year, all water is precious in a time of drought," he said.
Dr Benyon, who has completed a study into how bushfires affect water flows, said bushfires and logging had the same impact on runoff.
"After bushfires or logging, new growth sucks up water for several decades as it grows," he said.
DSE director of public land policy Nina Cullen said claims that 20 billion litres a year was being lost because of logging were wrong.
"Stream flows from the forested catchments are actually increasing, regardless of timber harvesting, because the vast majority of forests in the catchments are naturally ageing following the 1939 bushfires," she said.
Melbourne had 157,00ha of catchments and no more than 340ha was logged in any one year, she said.
Timber Communities Australia spokesman Scott Gentle said the amount logged each year was a fraction of the total catchment.
"Logging creates jobs and is a sustainable industry," he said. "There's real balance in what we do."
Yarra Ranges Shire councillor Samantha Dunn said the council opposed logging in catchment areas and had "overwhelming support" from residents.
The case that only a small part of catchments was logged was "ridiculous", she said.
". . . the phrase, 'it's only a little bit' adds up when it's repeated all the time."
Article source
Heraldsun (article), February 02, 2008
More than 20 billion litres of water is being lost in Melbourne's catchments every year because of logging.
Angry residents who want logging in a catchment near Healesville stopped have made the claim, which has been backed by a senior CSIRO scientist.
The Sustainability and Environment Department's decision to allow logging in the Armstrong Creek catchment has outraged locals and the Yarra Ranges Shire Council.
Logging began before Christmas and is expected to be completed by April.
Healesville businesswoman Sarah Rees said loggers wanted prized mountain ash.
"Mountain ash are among the largest trees in the world and they need the most water to grow," she said. "As they grow, they can suck up to 50 per cent of any runoff."
Research estimated logging slashed flows to the Thomson Dam by almost 20 billion litres a year, she said.
"That's almost the capacity of the Maroondah Reservoir. If logging continues across the catchments,
60 billion litres will be lost annually from Melbourne's water supply by 2050."
CSIRO senior scientist Richard Benyon said logging would reduce flows into Melbourne's catchments.
A loss of 20 billion litres a year was "not an unrealistic figure", he said.
"While it's only a small percentage of the amount of water Melbourne uses each year, all water is precious in a time of drought," he said.
Dr Benyon, who has completed a study into how bushfires affect water flows, said bushfires and logging had the same impact on runoff.
"After bushfires or logging, new growth sucks up water for several decades as it grows," he said.
DSE director of public land policy Nina Cullen said claims that 20 billion litres a year was being lost because of logging were wrong.
"Stream flows from the forested catchments are actually increasing, regardless of timber harvesting, because the vast majority of forests in the catchments are naturally ageing following the 1939 bushfires," she said.
Melbourne had 157,00ha of catchments and no more than 340ha was logged in any one year, she said.
Timber Communities Australia spokesman Scott Gentle said the amount logged each year was a fraction of the total catchment.
"Logging creates jobs and is a sustainable industry," he said. "There's real balance in what we do."
Yarra Ranges Shire councillor Samantha Dunn said the council opposed logging in catchment areas and had "overwhelming support" from residents.
The case that only a small part of catchments was logged was "ridiculous", she said.
". . . the phrase, 'it's only a little bit' adds up when it's repeated all the time."
Article source
30 January, 2008
ARTICLE: Flannery's plan: buy forests to help environment
Katharine Murphy, Canberra
January 30, 2008, The Age
Australians could buy a stake in the protection of endangered tropical forests under a groundbreaking scheme being devised by former Australian of the Year Tim Flannery.
Professor Flannery outlined his proposal yesterday in a private meeting with Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's hand-picked climate change adviser, Professor Ross Garnaut.
Professor Flannery — Australia's most prominent environmental campaigner — wants to set up an internet-based carbon market with a pilot scheme to be run in Papua New Guinea.
In a paper prepared for Professor Garnaut, Professor Flannery says 20% of global carbon emissions come from the wholesale destruction of tropical forests, so preservation must be part of any effective response to climate change.
His scheme envisages that households and businesses would be able to secure the protection of forests and the replanting of trees through an auction scheme.
Buyers would identify vulnerable forest lands online, using internet technology like Google Earth, and then make bids to secure its protection through a site like e-Bay.
If the bid is accepted by the village, the funds would be held in trust by a non-government organisation until the agreed protection of biodiversity or carbon sequestration has been delivered.
"The purpose of this paper is to outline a practical way to establish a pilot scheme in PNG, which has the potential to guide the development of a tropical forest carbon market worldwide," Professor Flannery says in his paper to the Garnaut Climate Change Review.
Industry and environmentalists are now jockeying in an effort to influence the outcome of Professor Garnaut's review, which will deliver its interim report in June. The review is examining the impact of climate change on the Australian economy and will recommend policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Before yesterday's meeting with Professor Garnaut, Professor Flannery had outlined his forests proposal to federal Environment Minister Peter Garrett and PNG Prime Minister Sir Michael Somare during a meeting late last year.
He told The Age yesterday that he believed his proposal could help deal with some of the problems associated with reforestation schemes in the developing world because it recognised that villagers, not governments, were owners of the forest land.
The scheme would recognise "Mabo-like" principles of land ownership, he said. Sir Michael had expressed interest in PNG, which has clan-based land tenure, being the location for a pilot scheme. "The key thing is you have to buy from the owner," Professor Flannery said.
Households and businesses would buy biodiversity protection in the first instance, followed by carbon sequestration.
Heavy polluters are already seeking access to schemes to help offset their carbon dioxide emissions. Forests are natural carbon dioxide "sinks", which can be used to offset greenhouse emissions.
"My view is you would buy that right for one year," he said. Regular re-auctioning would be an important means of safeguarding progress and keeping villages accountable under the scheme.
Professor Flannery says the scheme would require participation by at least 50 villages. Governments would need to put appropriate regulations in place.
Significant funding would also be required for technology upgrades for remote villages. In a document prepared for Professor Garnaut, Professor Flannery identifies the previous government's $200 million global forests initiative as a source of support.
Article source
January 30, 2008, The Age
Australians could buy a stake in the protection of endangered tropical forests under a groundbreaking scheme being devised by former Australian of the Year Tim Flannery.
Professor Flannery outlined his proposal yesterday in a private meeting with Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's hand-picked climate change adviser, Professor Ross Garnaut.
Professor Flannery — Australia's most prominent environmental campaigner — wants to set up an internet-based carbon market with a pilot scheme to be run in Papua New Guinea.
In a paper prepared for Professor Garnaut, Professor Flannery says 20% of global carbon emissions come from the wholesale destruction of tropical forests, so preservation must be part of any effective response to climate change.
His scheme envisages that households and businesses would be able to secure the protection of forests and the replanting of trees through an auction scheme.
Buyers would identify vulnerable forest lands online, using internet technology like Google Earth, and then make bids to secure its protection through a site like e-Bay.
If the bid is accepted by the village, the funds would be held in trust by a non-government organisation until the agreed protection of biodiversity or carbon sequestration has been delivered.
"The purpose of this paper is to outline a practical way to establish a pilot scheme in PNG, which has the potential to guide the development of a tropical forest carbon market worldwide," Professor Flannery says in his paper to the Garnaut Climate Change Review.
Industry and environmentalists are now jockeying in an effort to influence the outcome of Professor Garnaut's review, which will deliver its interim report in June. The review is examining the impact of climate change on the Australian economy and will recommend policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Before yesterday's meeting with Professor Garnaut, Professor Flannery had outlined his forests proposal to federal Environment Minister Peter Garrett and PNG Prime Minister Sir Michael Somare during a meeting late last year.
He told The Age yesterday that he believed his proposal could help deal with some of the problems associated with reforestation schemes in the developing world because it recognised that villagers, not governments, were owners of the forest land.
The scheme would recognise "Mabo-like" principles of land ownership, he said. Sir Michael had expressed interest in PNG, which has clan-based land tenure, being the location for a pilot scheme. "The key thing is you have to buy from the owner," Professor Flannery said.
Households and businesses would buy biodiversity protection in the first instance, followed by carbon sequestration.
Heavy polluters are already seeking access to schemes to help offset their carbon dioxide emissions. Forests are natural carbon dioxide "sinks", which can be used to offset greenhouse emissions.
"My view is you would buy that right for one year," he said. Regular re-auctioning would be an important means of safeguarding progress and keeping villages accountable under the scheme.
Professor Flannery says the scheme would require participation by at least 50 villages. Governments would need to put appropriate regulations in place.
Significant funding would also be required for technology upgrades for remote villages. In a document prepared for Professor Garnaut, Professor Flannery identifies the previous government's $200 million global forests initiative as a source of support.
Article source
29 January, 2008
Families stage logging protest
ABC Gippsland, January 29, 2008
Families from the town in Goongerah in East Gippsland marched into an old-growth logging area this morning.
Eighteen people, including children from the remote south-east Victorian community, are protesting about clear-fell logging in the catchment of the Yalmi River.
Goongerah resident Jarrod Ruch says the logging will reduce the quality and quantity of the town's only water supply.
He says the logging is in an area earmarked for protection at the last state election.
"It's just the every day mums and dads and kids that are up here, there's nothing confrontational happening here today, it's just purely them wanting to make the point that this is important to us as a community to protect our old-growth forest and our water catchment in times of climate change which we're heading into," he said.
Article source
Families from the town in Goongerah in East Gippsland marched into an old-growth logging area this morning.
Eighteen people, including children from the remote south-east Victorian community, are protesting about clear-fell logging in the catchment of the Yalmi River.
Goongerah resident Jarrod Ruch says the logging will reduce the quality and quantity of the town's only water supply.
He says the logging is in an area earmarked for protection at the last state election.
"It's just the every day mums and dads and kids that are up here, there's nothing confrontational happening here today, it's just purely them wanting to make the point that this is important to us as a community to protect our old-growth forest and our water catchment in times of climate change which we're heading into," he said.
Article source
27 January, 2008
LETTER: Just ask us
Lloyd Davies, Mannerim
Letter to the editor, The Age, 27 January 2007
The State Government manages the state forests on my behalf as a Victorian. I do not recall ever giving them the go-ahead to destroy my forests and turn them into paper at a net loss (20/1).
Surely, if we live in a democracy, more than 50% of people would have to want our forests logged before Brumby gave the go-ahead. Why does he not ask us what we want done with our forests?
Source: Letters - theage.com.au
Letter to the editor, The Age, 27 January 2007
The State Government manages the state forests on my behalf as a Victorian. I do not recall ever giving them the go-ahead to destroy my forests and turn them into paper at a net loss (20/1).
Surely, if we live in a democracy, more than 50% of people would have to want our forests logged before Brumby gave the go-ahead. Why does he not ask us what we want done with our forests?
Source: Letters - theage.com.au
LETTER: Wood for the trees
Bianca Faye, North Fitzroy
Letter to the Editor, The Age, 27 January 2007
Thanks to Peter Weekes, it appears that the real story of the tragic and pointless destruction of Victoria's native forests is finally becoming exposed.
On the back of the embarrassing revelation that the Victorian Government actually makes a loss woodchipping forests that are worth far more as carbon sinks and water catchments, is the latest contribution — that 85% of our logged native forest ends up as woodchips, and a paltry 5% as appearance timber.
While the Brumby Government subsidises the accumulation of shameless profits for woodchip companies, the same forests are about to become more valuable on the global carbon trading market if they are left standing.
Labor governments in NSW, WA and Queensland all grew a brain years ago and have set their logging industries on a path to dependence on plantations. Meanwhile Victoria, with Australia's largest plantations resource, is set to become like Tasmania, where the forest conflict now poisons the social fabric of the island state.
Source: Letters - theage.com.au
Letter to the Editor, The Age, 27 January 2007
Thanks to Peter Weekes, it appears that the real story of the tragic and pointless destruction of Victoria's native forests is finally becoming exposed.
On the back of the embarrassing revelation that the Victorian Government actually makes a loss woodchipping forests that are worth far more as carbon sinks and water catchments, is the latest contribution — that 85% of our logged native forest ends up as woodchips, and a paltry 5% as appearance timber.
While the Brumby Government subsidises the accumulation of shameless profits for woodchip companies, the same forests are about to become more valuable on the global carbon trading market if they are left standing.
Labor governments in NSW, WA and Queensland all grew a brain years ago and have set their logging industries on a path to dependence on plantations. Meanwhile Victoria, with Australia's largest plantations resource, is set to become like Tasmania, where the forest conflict now poisons the social fabric of the island state.
Source: Letters - theage.com.au
22 January, 2008
ARTICLE: Flying clouds the real climate culprit
Martin Wright, BBC NEWS
Tuesday, 22 January 2008
The aviation industry has become public enemy number one for environmental groups, says Martin Wright. But, he argues in this week's Green Room, they should focus their efforts on "the real elephant in the room" - forest destruction.
Ask some vaguely green people what's the single biggest thing they can do to tackle climate change, and most will respond with a guilty smile: "yes, I know, I should stop flying."
A few brave, selfless souls do just that. But the rest of us are far too used to cheap, quick getaways to kick the habit completely.
There's nothing like a few months of unremitting English mizzle to soften the resolve of the most committed "no flyers".
Environmentalists will always struggle to persuade people to eschew pleasure in favour of the planet. After all, no-one likes being told off for having a good time. Any argument that says, in effect: "save the planet - stay at home in the wet" is hardly going to win hearts and minds.
Sure, there's always the slow train to Provence. But like so much of the Slow Movement (food; travel; life, even), it still reeks of privilege. It's more expensive, it takes (and lasts) longer.
There could be all kinds of ways - from subsidies to sabbaticals - of making it more accessible for those whose only hope of a great escape is an Easyjet south. But for the moment, life in the slow lane is still a velvety green luxury for the favoured few.
So until such time as fuel prices go through the roof, or draconian caps on carbon stifle the market, air travel will remain a seductive option for all but the deepest of greens.
Real carbon culprit
But while we're agonising over our aircraft addiction, we're missing the real "elephant in the living room" of climate change: forest destruction.
It is already the largest single source of carbon emissions after energy, contributing up to 10 times as much as aviation.
The Stern Report, no less, warned that rainforest destruction alone would, in the next four years, release more carbon into the atmosphere than every flight from the dawn of aviation until 2025.
Burning forests produces a particularly nasty double whammy of warming. As they burn, they send vast swathes of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. And once they're gone, they can't soak up the carbon from industry, cars and power plants.
But despite all this, people get far more exercised over the evils of aviation than they ever do over forest loss.
This is partly because aviation looms large on those instant "carbon calculators", designed to give a rough-and-ready guide to an individual's impact.
Deforestation, for the most part, doesn't, as it's virtually impossible to quantify individual responsibility for forest loss - unless you happen to be a timber trader or a palm oil planter.
But it's also because the forests are disappearing in "faraway countries": the chainsaws and fires aren't exactly on our doorstep, so it's easy to believe it's nothing to do with us - and there's nothing we can do about it, either.
This is bitterly ironic, because politically and economically it would be much easier to make massive reductions in deforestation than to achieve similar cuts in air travel. And in terms of curbing climate change, that would be massively more effective, too.
Tree hugging
So if we could just persuade people to be as excited about saving forests as they feel guilty about flying, then maybe we'd achieve something.
That means making forest conservation everyone's business - literally. And one of the best ways of doing so is to make the future of forests worth investing in - not just for the planet, but for your own pocket, too.
After all, you don't need complex technical fixes to stop forest destruction. You just have to make trees worth more standing than felled. And with the fate of civilisation cradled in their canopy, they should carry quite a price tag.
On paper, it's a no brainer. By any rational calculation, forests can yield better returns when kept intact than when cleared.
Take their role in protecting watersheds, for example, or their value as a source of fruit, nuts, shade-grown coffee, game and medicinal herbs - even, in some cases, a genuinely sustainable source of high-quality timber.
That's been the basis for a range of initiatives known as "payments for ecological services".
In essence, these are deals between forest communities and "buyers", who benefit from the forest remaining in place - such as towns and cities downstream, or the owners of mines or hydro plants, all of whom depend on the water supply that the forest ensures.
Cool Earth, a charity set up by businessman Johan Eliasch, allows individuals to buy parcels of rainforest - not for their own profit, but to hold them in trust on behalf of local communities, so taking them out of the clutches of the loggers.
It's an intriguing scheme, but it's still driven by charity, not business.
Sound investment
But once you introduce forests' ability to store carbon into the equation, then the balance sheet really starts to shift in their favour.
According to one recent study, most ventures which drive forest destruction - whether logging or for agriculture - generate around $5 (£2.50) for every tonne of carbon released as a result of the forest loss.
Europeans are typically paying up to seven times that amount to offset the same amount of carbon.
And as emissions trading takes off, so the carbon price will rise. One estimate puts the value of greenhouse gas storage in some forests at a healthy $2,200 (£1,100) per hectare.
And it's that which is pricking the interest of the financial markets. Invest in a forest now, and you can expect its value to appreciate substantially over the years - especially since, after the recent UN climate conference in Bali, forest owners can expect to "sell" their benefits on the emerging global carbon markets.
All of a sudden, it opens up the prospect of massive investments from pension funds, drawn to the long-term security which standing forests can provide.
Halving forest destruction by 2030, says the Stern Report, would cost around £10-£15 billion a year - that's roughly the same as we spend on alcohol in Britain alone. It is, in other words, a sum which should be readily available - as long as there's the prospect of a decent return.
The Global Canopy Programme - an alliance of forest scientists - is urging the adoption of a global market in forest carbon credits to help unleash a tide of investment.
Forum for the Future and others are working on schemes for forest-backed bonds; some are predicting the launch of Forest PEPs. Such is the potential value in keeping forests intact that even those masters of the dark arts of finance, the hedge funds, are starting to sniff around.
There are all manner of pitfalls, of course. For some, it smacks of "carbon colonialism".
Others warn that such schemes will inevitably favour wealthy landowners, who can cope with all the complex legal processes involved, rather than forest peoples themselves.
Then there's the question of proving that a particular stretch of forest, which may lie in a remote, hard-to-monitor area, really has survived intact.
But these are not insuperable obstacles. Investors don't have to buy up forests to make a return on them; they merely have to ensure they share in the proceeds of their conservation over times.
So they can for example rent, or lease, an interest in the forests from local communities, who are in any case best placed to safeguard the assets - and so can reasonably expect to share in the profits, too.
On the monitoring side, satellite mapping is now sophisticated enough to zero in to the scale of individual trees, providing pinpoint, 24-hour surveillance. Microchips inserted in selected trunks can report instantly if they're felled - and then track the timber, electronically fingering everyone involved.
So in a few years' time, you could sit at home on the sofa, and, via your laptop, check up on the health of "your" patch of forest, in real time.
Result? The world will have a million or more eagle-eyed forest monitors, casting a protective eye over the green canopy of their investments. (And only occasionally, you'd hope, needing to utter the anguished cry: "Oi! That's my pension plan going up in smoke!")
The logic is simple; the implementation will be anything but. But if we wait till we've a perfect system, we'll be wasting precious time; time in which thousands of square miles of forest will be irrevocably lost.
Martin Wright is editor (at large) of Green Futures Magazine
Article source: Flying clouds the real climate culprit, BBC NEWS
Tuesday, 22 January 2008
The aviation industry has become public enemy number one for environmental groups, says Martin Wright. But, he argues in this week's Green Room, they should focus their efforts on "the real elephant in the room" - forest destruction.
Ask some vaguely green people what's the single biggest thing they can do to tackle climate change, and most will respond with a guilty smile: "yes, I know, I should stop flying."
A few brave, selfless souls do just that. But the rest of us are far too used to cheap, quick getaways to kick the habit completely.
There's nothing like a few months of unremitting English mizzle to soften the resolve of the most committed "no flyers".
Environmentalists will always struggle to persuade people to eschew pleasure in favour of the planet. After all, no-one likes being told off for having a good time. Any argument that says, in effect: "save the planet - stay at home in the wet" is hardly going to win hearts and minds.
Sure, there's always the slow train to Provence. But like so much of the Slow Movement (food; travel; life, even), it still reeks of privilege. It's more expensive, it takes (and lasts) longer.
There could be all kinds of ways - from subsidies to sabbaticals - of making it more accessible for those whose only hope of a great escape is an Easyjet south. But for the moment, life in the slow lane is still a velvety green luxury for the favoured few.
So until such time as fuel prices go through the roof, or draconian caps on carbon stifle the market, air travel will remain a seductive option for all but the deepest of greens.
Real carbon culprit
But while we're agonising over our aircraft addiction, we're missing the real "elephant in the living room" of climate change: forest destruction.
It is already the largest single source of carbon emissions after energy, contributing up to 10 times as much as aviation.
The Stern Report, no less, warned that rainforest destruction alone would, in the next four years, release more carbon into the atmosphere than every flight from the dawn of aviation until 2025.
Burning forests produces a particularly nasty double whammy of warming. As they burn, they send vast swathes of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. And once they're gone, they can't soak up the carbon from industry, cars and power plants.
But despite all this, people get far more exercised over the evils of aviation than they ever do over forest loss.
This is partly because aviation looms large on those instant "carbon calculators", designed to give a rough-and-ready guide to an individual's impact.
Deforestation, for the most part, doesn't, as it's virtually impossible to quantify individual responsibility for forest loss - unless you happen to be a timber trader or a palm oil planter.
But it's also because the forests are disappearing in "faraway countries": the chainsaws and fires aren't exactly on our doorstep, so it's easy to believe it's nothing to do with us - and there's nothing we can do about it, either.
This is bitterly ironic, because politically and economically it would be much easier to make massive reductions in deforestation than to achieve similar cuts in air travel. And in terms of curbing climate change, that would be massively more effective, too.
Tree hugging
So if we could just persuade people to be as excited about saving forests as they feel guilty about flying, then maybe we'd achieve something.
That means making forest conservation everyone's business - literally. And one of the best ways of doing so is to make the future of forests worth investing in - not just for the planet, but for your own pocket, too.
After all, you don't need complex technical fixes to stop forest destruction. You just have to make trees worth more standing than felled. And with the fate of civilisation cradled in their canopy, they should carry quite a price tag.
On paper, it's a no brainer. By any rational calculation, forests can yield better returns when kept intact than when cleared.
Take their role in protecting watersheds, for example, or their value as a source of fruit, nuts, shade-grown coffee, game and medicinal herbs - even, in some cases, a genuinely sustainable source of high-quality timber.
That's been the basis for a range of initiatives known as "payments for ecological services".
In essence, these are deals between forest communities and "buyers", who benefit from the forest remaining in place - such as towns and cities downstream, or the owners of mines or hydro plants, all of whom depend on the water supply that the forest ensures.
Cool Earth, a charity set up by businessman Johan Eliasch, allows individuals to buy parcels of rainforest - not for their own profit, but to hold them in trust on behalf of local communities, so taking them out of the clutches of the loggers.
It's an intriguing scheme, but it's still driven by charity, not business.
Sound investment
But once you introduce forests' ability to store carbon into the equation, then the balance sheet really starts to shift in their favour.
According to one recent study, most ventures which drive forest destruction - whether logging or for agriculture - generate around $5 (£2.50) for every tonne of carbon released as a result of the forest loss.
Europeans are typically paying up to seven times that amount to offset the same amount of carbon.
And as emissions trading takes off, so the carbon price will rise. One estimate puts the value of greenhouse gas storage in some forests at a healthy $2,200 (£1,100) per hectare.
And it's that which is pricking the interest of the financial markets. Invest in a forest now, and you can expect its value to appreciate substantially over the years - especially since, after the recent UN climate conference in Bali, forest owners can expect to "sell" their benefits on the emerging global carbon markets.
All of a sudden, it opens up the prospect of massive investments from pension funds, drawn to the long-term security which standing forests can provide.
Halving forest destruction by 2030, says the Stern Report, would cost around £10-£15 billion a year - that's roughly the same as we spend on alcohol in Britain alone. It is, in other words, a sum which should be readily available - as long as there's the prospect of a decent return.
The Global Canopy Programme - an alliance of forest scientists - is urging the adoption of a global market in forest carbon credits to help unleash a tide of investment.
Forum for the Future and others are working on schemes for forest-backed bonds; some are predicting the launch of Forest PEPs. Such is the potential value in keeping forests intact that even those masters of the dark arts of finance, the hedge funds, are starting to sniff around.
There are all manner of pitfalls, of course. For some, it smacks of "carbon colonialism".
Others warn that such schemes will inevitably favour wealthy landowners, who can cope with all the complex legal processes involved, rather than forest peoples themselves.
Then there's the question of proving that a particular stretch of forest, which may lie in a remote, hard-to-monitor area, really has survived intact.
But these are not insuperable obstacles. Investors don't have to buy up forests to make a return on them; they merely have to ensure they share in the proceeds of their conservation over times.
So they can for example rent, or lease, an interest in the forests from local communities, who are in any case best placed to safeguard the assets - and so can reasonably expect to share in the profits, too.
On the monitoring side, satellite mapping is now sophisticated enough to zero in to the scale of individual trees, providing pinpoint, 24-hour surveillance. Microchips inserted in selected trunks can report instantly if they're felled - and then track the timber, electronically fingering everyone involved.
So in a few years' time, you could sit at home on the sofa, and, via your laptop, check up on the health of "your" patch of forest, in real time.
Result? The world will have a million or more eagle-eyed forest monitors, casting a protective eye over the green canopy of their investments. (And only occasionally, you'd hope, needing to utter the anguished cry: "Oi! That's my pension plan going up in smoke!")
The logic is simple; the implementation will be anything but. But if we wait till we've a perfect system, we'll be wasting precious time; time in which thousands of square miles of forest will be irrevocably lost.
Martin Wright is editor (at large) of Green Futures Magazine
Article source: Flying clouds the real climate culprit, BBC NEWS
20 January, 2008
ARTICLE: Pulped — Vic forests end up as copy paper
Peter Weekes, The Age
January 20, 2008
Most of the trees logged in Victoria's native forests last year ended up as pulp, much of it exported to Japan to become photocopying paper. More than 85% of the 1.59 million cubic metres of the state's native forest logged last financial year — the equivalent of 4745 MCGs — was turned into woodchips, sawdust and waste.
The figures were released after a freedom-of-information request. They show that despite claims the industry is based on providing sawlogs for the state's building needs, this type of wood accounted for only 11.9% of the amount logged, with the remaining 2.8% turned into shipping pallets.
VicForests, the quasi-government agency charged with commercialising the state's forests, said the figures were only indicative as it does not keep records on how the wood is used, but are based on "our industry knowledge".
Luke Chamberlain, of the Wilderness Society, said poor industry practice meant vast areas of forest were being logged for a small amount of sawlog.
He said plantation wood could supply most of the state's needs, other than the highest-quality sawlogs, which he argues should be logged selectively rather than the current practice of clear-felling large coupes of native forest.
"These figures prove that logging of our native forest is not driven by the need for sawlogs, but for woodchips," he said.
"Under the national competition policy and the rules under which VicForests was established, it must be commercially viable and obviously it isn't."
The Sunday Age reported in December that VicForests sold last year's harvest for $99 million but reported a $17,000 loss. Last year, pulp fetched about $10 a metric tonne, while high-quality sawlogs fetched more than $70.
Two of the three big mills that bought the timber — Australian Paper, a subsidiary of PaperlinX and Japanese-owned South East Fibre Exports — posted a combined profit of $87 million last financial year, the Australian Securities Exchange and Australian Securities and Investments Commission filings show.
The privately held Midway did not release its profit.
David Pollard, chief executive of VicForests, said the "proportional and total sawlog level was lower than previous years because of bushfires and subsequent low sawlog-producing fire-salvage operation".
"The amount of pulp log produced in any year is about twice the amount of sawlogs."
Mr Chamberlain said this could not be independently verified as the volume of differing types of wood is not provided in VicForests' annual report or on its website.
Mr Pollard said paper manufacture from pulp was "one of the highest value-adding industries in Australia" and that the pulp industry helps to keep the price of sawlog timber lower.
Source
January 20, 2008
Most of the trees logged in Victoria's native forests last year ended up as pulp, much of it exported to Japan to become photocopying paper. More than 85% of the 1.59 million cubic metres of the state's native forest logged last financial year — the equivalent of 4745 MCGs — was turned into woodchips, sawdust and waste.
The figures were released after a freedom-of-information request. They show that despite claims the industry is based on providing sawlogs for the state's building needs, this type of wood accounted for only 11.9% of the amount logged, with the remaining 2.8% turned into shipping pallets.
VicForests, the quasi-government agency charged with commercialising the state's forests, said the figures were only indicative as it does not keep records on how the wood is used, but are based on "our industry knowledge".
Luke Chamberlain, of the Wilderness Society, said poor industry practice meant vast areas of forest were being logged for a small amount of sawlog.
He said plantation wood could supply most of the state's needs, other than the highest-quality sawlogs, which he argues should be logged selectively rather than the current practice of clear-felling large coupes of native forest.
"These figures prove that logging of our native forest is not driven by the need for sawlogs, but for woodchips," he said.
"Under the national competition policy and the rules under which VicForests was established, it must be commercially viable and obviously it isn't."
The Sunday Age reported in December that VicForests sold last year's harvest for $99 million but reported a $17,000 loss. Last year, pulp fetched about $10 a metric tonne, while high-quality sawlogs fetched more than $70.
Two of the three big mills that bought the timber — Australian Paper, a subsidiary of PaperlinX and Japanese-owned South East Fibre Exports — posted a combined profit of $87 million last financial year, the Australian Securities Exchange and Australian Securities and Investments Commission filings show.
The privately held Midway did not release its profit.
David Pollard, chief executive of VicForests, said the "proportional and total sawlog level was lower than previous years because of bushfires and subsequent low sawlog-producing fire-salvage operation".
"The amount of pulp log produced in any year is about twice the amount of sawlogs."
Mr Chamberlain said this could not be independently verified as the volume of differing types of wood is not provided in VicForests' annual report or on its website.
Mr Pollard said paper manufacture from pulp was "one of the highest value-adding industries in Australia" and that the pulp industry helps to keep the price of sawlog timber lower.
Source
08 January, 2008
LETTER: The big picture
Vivienne Ortega, Heidelberg Heights
Letter to the editor, The Age, 8/1/08
The Victorian Government focuses on details such as limiting water for household gardens but misses the big picture. We are having one of the greatest droughts on record, with record high temperatures. With Melbourne's water supplies at an all-time low, the catchment areas of the Thomson and Armstrong need to be permanently protected from logging. Thirsty young saplings, the regrowth, need more water than old forests.
Instead of an expensive and unpopular desalination plant, we should be protecting our existing catchment areas, supporting their efficiency and encouraging further water recycling.
Letter to the editor, The Age, 8/1/08
The Victorian Government focuses on details such as limiting water for household gardens but misses the big picture. We are having one of the greatest droughts on record, with record high temperatures. With Melbourne's water supplies at an all-time low, the catchment areas of the Thomson and Armstrong need to be permanently protected from logging. Thirsty young saplings, the regrowth, need more water than old forests.
Instead of an expensive and unpopular desalination plant, we should be protecting our existing catchment areas, supporting their efficiency and encouraging further water recycling.
26 December, 2007
LETTER: Only a small area is logged
Mark Poynter, The Institute of Foresters of Australia, Doncaster East
Letter to the editor, The Weekly Times, 26 December 2007
While it is impossible to respond to all of Lorraine Leach’s (WE December 19) half-truths in the limited space available, it is important to contradict several of her untruths about Victoria’s forests.
First, Victoria is not alone in harvesting some of its native forests. Tasmania, NSW and Western Australia all have ongoing sustainable native hardwood timber industries.
Queensland is phasing out its public native forests over a 25-year period, in favour of eucalypt plantations that are being established at great taxpayer expense.
Secondly, contrary to her claim that a third of Melbourne’s catchments have been logged over the past 30 years, sustainable timber production is, in fact, permitted within just a net 13 per cent portion.
If Ms Leach really believes there is an unabated rush to exploit the last of Victoria’s forests, she urgently needs to take a drive to acquaint herself with the 91 per cent of our forests that are in national parks and reserves, or are just unsuitable for timber production.
Letter to the editor, The Weekly Times, 26 December 2007
While it is impossible to respond to all of Lorraine Leach’s (WE December 19) half-truths in the limited space available, it is important to contradict several of her untruths about Victoria’s forests.
First, Victoria is not alone in harvesting some of its native forests. Tasmania, NSW and Western Australia all have ongoing sustainable native hardwood timber industries.
Queensland is phasing out its public native forests over a 25-year period, in favour of eucalypt plantations that are being established at great taxpayer expense.
Secondly, contrary to her claim that a third of Melbourne’s catchments have been logged over the past 30 years, sustainable timber production is, in fact, permitted within just a net 13 per cent portion.
If Ms Leach really believes there is an unabated rush to exploit the last of Victoria’s forests, she urgently needs to take a drive to acquaint herself with the 91 per cent of our forests that are in national parks and reserves, or are just unsuitable for timber production.
LETTER: Pouring cold water on privatisation
Jean Menere, Albury, NSW
26 December 2007, The Age
Older garden-lovers strain to lift buckets of grey water; pensioners scrimp to buy water tanks. The water companies sell the water saved for sportsgrounds; sell our aquifers; plan to build desalination plants on beautiful areas of coastline.
Greed leads to trees being cut down in water catchment areas; megalitres of water allocated to service pulp mills and coal-fired power stations. Pensioners become crippled, gardens die; shareholders grow fat. Isn't privatisation wonderful?
26 December 2007, The Age
Older garden-lovers strain to lift buckets of grey water; pensioners scrimp to buy water tanks. The water companies sell the water saved for sportsgrounds; sell our aquifers; plan to build desalination plants on beautiful areas of coastline.
Greed leads to trees being cut down in water catchment areas; megalitres of water allocated to service pulp mills and coal-fired power stations. Pensioners become crippled, gardens die; shareholders grow fat. Isn't privatisation wonderful?
24 December, 2007
LETTERS: Creators of a corporate beast
Larry Tofler, Tea Gardens
Letter to the editor, Sydney Morning Herald, 24 December 2007
A young girl is arrested, charged, fined and forced to pay compensation after attempting to save a forest from logging ("Tree-sitting activist wins high praise from judge", December 22). Even her judge can't help but offer praise for her efforts.
Her opponent was not even a person, just a legal entity, a corporation - little more than a piece of paper. And we created it. We gave it the same legal rights as a person, and worse, we obliged it by law to put the profits of its shareholders over all other concerns - be they social, environmental or otherwise.
We created monsters that have become our own worst enemy and nothing is being done about that because corporations wouldn't like that.
Matt Caine, Tamarama
Holly Creenaune proves once and for all that nice gels do climb trees. More power to you, Holly.
Letter to the editor, Sydney Morning Herald, 24 December 2007
A young girl is arrested, charged, fined and forced to pay compensation after attempting to save a forest from logging ("Tree-sitting activist wins high praise from judge", December 22). Even her judge can't help but offer praise for her efforts.
Her opponent was not even a person, just a legal entity, a corporation - little more than a piece of paper. And we created it. We gave it the same legal rights as a person, and worse, we obliged it by law to put the profits of its shareholders over all other concerns - be they social, environmental or otherwise.
We created monsters that have become our own worst enemy and nothing is being done about that because corporations wouldn't like that.
Matt Caine, Tamarama
Holly Creenaune proves once and for all that nice gels do climb trees. More power to you, Holly.
LETTER: Praise and applause
Dan Musil, Gisborne
Letter to the editor, The Age, 24/12/07
IT'S heartening to hear that the incredible work and worth of activists is beginning to be recognised ("Magistrate so impressed by woman in the tree that Holly gets off lightly", The Age, 22/12). Holly Creenaune is an amazing young individual who has devoted much of her life to making our world a better place, and her anti-logging activism charges were rightly dismissed by magistrate Jelena Popovic.
I applaud this decision, and the invaluable work that environmental and social justice activists carry out in Australia. Let's hope that those standing up for a better world begin to have their efforts praised and respected too, instead of disrupted, dismissed and persecuted.
It is an outrage that the State Government is still logging the breathtaking forests in East Gippsland that Holly and so many others are still fighting to protect — the struggle to save our planet continues.
Letter to the editor, The Age, 24/12/07
IT'S heartening to hear that the incredible work and worth of activists is beginning to be recognised ("Magistrate so impressed by woman in the tree that Holly gets off lightly", The Age, 22/12). Holly Creenaune is an amazing young individual who has devoted much of her life to making our world a better place, and her anti-logging activism charges were rightly dismissed by magistrate Jelena Popovic.
I applaud this decision, and the invaluable work that environmental and social justice activists carry out in Australia. Let's hope that those standing up for a better world begin to have their efforts praised and respected too, instead of disrupted, dismissed and persecuted.
It is an outrage that the State Government is still logging the breathtaking forests in East Gippsland that Holly and so many others are still fighting to protect — the struggle to save our planet continues.
22 December, 2007
THE AGE: Magistrate so impressed by woman in the tree that Holly gets off lightly
Steve Butcher, The Age
December 22, 2007 [http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/magistrate-so-impressed-by-woman-in-the-tree-that-holly-gets-offlightly/2007/12/21/1198175340714.html?page=fullpage Source]
To some, the young woman atop the tree-sit tripod in the Victorian old-growth forest was just another unemployed feral greenie disrupting legitimate workers.
However, Holly Creenaune's appearance last week in a Melbourne court, after her arrest on January 17 last year in the Goongerah Forest logging coupe in East Gippsland, moved one of Victoria's most senior magistrates to exercise a rarely used discretionary power.
Deputy Chief Magistrate Jelena Popovic dismissed charges of obstructing a road and obstructing an officer (Creenaune having pleaded guilty), rejected an application for Creenaune to pay $1900 compensation, and described her as a "remarkable young woman".
"I have to say I've never had the opportunity to meet somebody like Miss Creenaune, who has worked consistently and effectively in relation to improving our environment and maintaining the environment," Ms Popovic said.
"I don't know that I'll ever meet anyone again with the same passion, drive and ability, and I suspect that it won't be the last time I hear the name," she said.
"Next time I'll know how to pronounce it." A CV tendered by Creenaune's lawyer, Vanessa Bleyer, alerted Ms Popovic to the fact that she had a unique offender before her.
It was a CV that might motivate some, or put others to shame.
Creenaune, 23, Victorian-born but now living in Sydney, started a school conservation club when she was 12. As a teenager she worked for Rotary in a Brazil orphanage, and later she co-ordinated 2000 young people for Australia's largest environmental sustainability conference.
She was the recipient this year of the University of Technology Sydney human rights award, presented by Justice Michael Kirby of the High Court.
It denoted Creenaune's commitment to a range of social justice and human rights organisations and activities, including indigenous rights, climate change and environmental justice.
Now in her final year of a law and journalism degree, Creenaune said that her parents, both teachers, were not "greenies or lefties" or even activists.
"What they fostered in me as teachers was to use critical thinking skills, to read a newspaper and look beyond and take a critical eye to issues," she said.
When ordered from the tree-sit, Creenaune refused unless VicForest, the Government's commercial forestry arm, stopped logging.
Her parents, shocked when the prosecution summons lobbed, followed the progress of the charges and "reminded me every now and then to avoid a (criminal) record at all costs", Creenaune said.
Politics does not excite her — "my feet are firmly planted in organising" — but the Rudd Government now offered "wriggle room" for a stronger voice for communities, unions and environmental lobbyists.
"I am looking towards the new area of climate law," she said.
Ms Popovic ruled Creenaune's "exemplary" character as a significant factor in her dismissing the charges against her, but warned that she might not adopt the same line of reasoning if Creenaune reoffended.
Such forest activities were best left to the past, Ms Popovic advised Creenaune.
December 22, 2007 [http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/magistrate-so-impressed-by-woman-in-the-tree-that-holly-gets-offlightly/2007/12/21/1198175340714.html?page=fullpage Source]
To some, the young woman atop the tree-sit tripod in the Victorian old-growth forest was just another unemployed feral greenie disrupting legitimate workers.
However, Holly Creenaune's appearance last week in a Melbourne court, after her arrest on January 17 last year in the Goongerah Forest logging coupe in East Gippsland, moved one of Victoria's most senior magistrates to exercise a rarely used discretionary power.
Deputy Chief Magistrate Jelena Popovic dismissed charges of obstructing a road and obstructing an officer (Creenaune having pleaded guilty), rejected an application for Creenaune to pay $1900 compensation, and described her as a "remarkable young woman".
"I have to say I've never had the opportunity to meet somebody like Miss Creenaune, who has worked consistently and effectively in relation to improving our environment and maintaining the environment," Ms Popovic said.
"I don't know that I'll ever meet anyone again with the same passion, drive and ability, and I suspect that it won't be the last time I hear the name," she said.
"Next time I'll know how to pronounce it." A CV tendered by Creenaune's lawyer, Vanessa Bleyer, alerted Ms Popovic to the fact that she had a unique offender before her.
It was a CV that might motivate some, or put others to shame.
Creenaune, 23, Victorian-born but now living in Sydney, started a school conservation club when she was 12. As a teenager she worked for Rotary in a Brazil orphanage, and later she co-ordinated 2000 young people for Australia's largest environmental sustainability conference.
She was the recipient this year of the University of Technology Sydney human rights award, presented by Justice Michael Kirby of the High Court.
It denoted Creenaune's commitment to a range of social justice and human rights organisations and activities, including indigenous rights, climate change and environmental justice.
Now in her final year of a law and journalism degree, Creenaune said that her parents, both teachers, were not "greenies or lefties" or even activists.
"What they fostered in me as teachers was to use critical thinking skills, to read a newspaper and look beyond and take a critical eye to issues," she said.
When ordered from the tree-sit, Creenaune refused unless VicForest, the Government's commercial forestry arm, stopped logging.
Her parents, shocked when the prosecution summons lobbed, followed the progress of the charges and "reminded me every now and then to avoid a (criminal) record at all costs", Creenaune said.
Politics does not excite her — "my feet are firmly planted in organising" — but the Rudd Government now offered "wriggle room" for a stronger voice for communities, unions and environmental lobbyists.
"I am looking towards the new area of climate law," she said.
Ms Popovic ruled Creenaune's "exemplary" character as a significant factor in her dismissing the charges against her, but warned that she might not adopt the same line of reasoning if Creenaune reoffended.
Such forest activities were best left to the past, Ms Popovic advised Creenaune.
19 December, 2007
LETTER: Tap into alternatives
Peter Campbell
Letter to the editor, The Age, Wed 19 December 2007
Cross posted on Peter Campbell's state of the planet
Letter to the editor, The Age, Wed 19 December 2007
Cross posted on Peter Campbell's state of the planet
Water Minister Tim Holding's assertion (Letters, 17/12) that the Government's water plan is cost effective and sustainable is questionable. The proposed desalination plant will consume most of Victoria's available renewable energy, which will lend impetus to the Government's ill-advised plan to build yet another brown coal-fired power station.
Incredibly, the Government is still allowing logging in the Thomson catchment, decreasing the quality and quantity of our water. Last week, logging started in the Armstrong catchment, closer to Melbourne. Stopping this logging would be much cheaper than producing desalinated water.
In 2002 extensive public consultation led to a move to develop plans to stop logging our catchments. Five years later it is still business as usual.
Our Melbourne house has been almost self-sufficient for water for more than five years, with 23,000 litres of tank storage.
The $3 billion to be spent on the desalination plant could equip about 600,000 households with tank systems that could provide more water than the plant's estimated production. Combined with recycling sewerage water and protecting our catchments, we may not even need desalination.
We also need improved consultation about options for Victoria's water, rather than unilateral decisions made in Spring Street following deliberations behind closed doors.
18 December, 2007
THE AGE: Sustainable logging doesn't add to global warming
Mark Poynter, Victorian media spokesperson for the Institute of Foresters of Australia.
December 18, 2007, The Age
Many people can't see the wood for the trees in the greenhouse debate.
An uparalleled dermination to conserve tropical rainforests has been a welcome development from the UN climate change summit in Bali. But the recent call by Greens senator Christine Milne for Australia to "tackle our forestry emissions by stopping logging in Tasmania and Victoria" highlights the need to clearly differentiate between the damaging climate change implications of tropical deforestation and the benefits of sustainable Australian native forest wood production.
Deforestation in developing countries involves permanently removing forest cover in favour of some other agricultural land use. While it can produce wood, it is mostly conducted illegally and so represents an unregulated and unsustainable supply. The release of carbon from clearing and subsequent burning of vegetation, coupled with the loss of future carbon sequestration, led the 2006 Stern review to conclude that tropical deforestation is responsible for 18% of the world's carbon dioxide emissions.
Conversely, Australian wood production is best described as managed harvesting and regeneration, with the aim of maintaining native forest cover and wood supply in perpetuity. It is a legal, highly regulated and sustainable arm of forest management or forestry. Sustainable wood production makes a positive contribution to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by transferring carbon from forests into storage in the community in an array of wood products while creating space in the forest for replacement trees to sequester more carbon.
It also reduces demand for rainforest timber imports that contribute to tropical deforestation.
Milne is certainly not the first to try to equate concerns about tropical deforestation and climate change with Australian wood production. Indeed, the mainstream environmental movement's fixation on closing Australia's native hardwood industry causes it to routinely misrepresent our wood production as a significant contributor to global warming. Just one example is the Wilderness Society's oft-repeated assertion that native forest timber harvesting in Victoria annually releases as much carbon as 2.4 million cars — an unsubstantiated claim that seemingly regards carbon removal in wood products as an emission and ignores the reality that logged areas are regenerated.
The environmental movement's promoted alternative is to "preserve" all forests in parks and reserves that will store carbon forever. But this is flawed by the reality that Australian forests rely on disturbance for their long-term renewal and so will always wax and wane as carbon stores subject to the influence of severe fire.
The striking contradiction of Australian anti-logging campaigns is that if ultimately successful, they would significantly diminish our capability to combat climate change.
Wood is the world's only naturally renewable building material. The carbon emissions associated with its production are hundreds of times less than alternatives such as steel and aluminium, and six to eight times less than concrete. Sustainably producing wood to displace the use of these alternatives is one of the best means of reducing net carbon emissions.
Timber harvesting transfers carbon from the forest into storage in the community in a range of products. Where harvesting is conducted within designated wood production forests at sustainable rates, there should be no net loss of carbon from the system due to simultaneous sequestration by regrowth from past logging and in yet-to-be harvested sections.
Consequently, sustainable wood production adds to net carbon stores and helps counter the build-up of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
And using part of our forests for wood production maintains them at a younger average age. The trees grow more vigorously, with enhanced rates of carbon sequestration compared with older forests.
The popularly promoted view that "old growth" forests must be preserved because of their carbon storage capability is somewhat compromised given that ageing trees are no longer growing and eventually become net carbon emitters as they decay and slowly die. In any case, they will inevitably be burnt and so will release much of their stored carbon.
Mark Poynter is the Victorian media spokesperson for the Institute of Foresters of Australia.
December 18, 2007, The Age
Many people can't see the wood for the trees in the greenhouse debate.
An uparalleled dermination to conserve tropical rainforests has been a welcome development from the UN climate change summit in Bali. But the recent call by Greens senator Christine Milne for Australia to "tackle our forestry emissions by stopping logging in Tasmania and Victoria" highlights the need to clearly differentiate between the damaging climate change implications of tropical deforestation and the benefits of sustainable Australian native forest wood production.
Deforestation in developing countries involves permanently removing forest cover in favour of some other agricultural land use. While it can produce wood, it is mostly conducted illegally and so represents an unregulated and unsustainable supply. The release of carbon from clearing and subsequent burning of vegetation, coupled with the loss of future carbon sequestration, led the 2006 Stern review to conclude that tropical deforestation is responsible for 18% of the world's carbon dioxide emissions.
Conversely, Australian wood production is best described as managed harvesting and regeneration, with the aim of maintaining native forest cover and wood supply in perpetuity. It is a legal, highly regulated and sustainable arm of forest management or forestry. Sustainable wood production makes a positive contribution to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by transferring carbon from forests into storage in the community in an array of wood products while creating space in the forest for replacement trees to sequester more carbon.
It also reduces demand for rainforest timber imports that contribute to tropical deforestation.
Milne is certainly not the first to try to equate concerns about tropical deforestation and climate change with Australian wood production. Indeed, the mainstream environmental movement's fixation on closing Australia's native hardwood industry causes it to routinely misrepresent our wood production as a significant contributor to global warming. Just one example is the Wilderness Society's oft-repeated assertion that native forest timber harvesting in Victoria annually releases as much carbon as 2.4 million cars — an unsubstantiated claim that seemingly regards carbon removal in wood products as an emission and ignores the reality that logged areas are regenerated.
The environmental movement's promoted alternative is to "preserve" all forests in parks and reserves that will store carbon forever. But this is flawed by the reality that Australian forests rely on disturbance for their long-term renewal and so will always wax and wane as carbon stores subject to the influence of severe fire.
The striking contradiction of Australian anti-logging campaigns is that if ultimately successful, they would significantly diminish our capability to combat climate change.
Wood is the world's only naturally renewable building material. The carbon emissions associated with its production are hundreds of times less than alternatives such as steel and aluminium, and six to eight times less than concrete. Sustainably producing wood to displace the use of these alternatives is one of the best means of reducing net carbon emissions.
Timber harvesting transfers carbon from the forest into storage in the community in a range of products. Where harvesting is conducted within designated wood production forests at sustainable rates, there should be no net loss of carbon from the system due to simultaneous sequestration by regrowth from past logging and in yet-to-be harvested sections.
Consequently, sustainable wood production adds to net carbon stores and helps counter the build-up of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
And using part of our forests for wood production maintains them at a younger average age. The trees grow more vigorously, with enhanced rates of carbon sequestration compared with older forests.
The popularly promoted view that "old growth" forests must be preserved because of their carbon storage capability is somewhat compromised given that ageing trees are no longer growing and eventually become net carbon emitters as they decay and slowly die. In any case, they will inevitably be burnt and so will release much of their stored carbon.
Mark Poynter is the Victorian media spokesperson for the Institute of Foresters of Australia.
15 December, 2007
THE AGE: Nations to be paid to stave off logging
Mark Forbes, Nusa Dua, Bali
December 15, 2007 [Article source]
Countries will be paid to protect forests from logging, with the Bali conference adopting a proposal for the successor to the Kyoto Protocol to embrace deforestation.
The deal was proclaimed as beginning a new era in conservation, envisaging a multibillion-dollar forest carbon protection fund to reward developing nations for reducing logging.
The head of the Global Canopy Program, Andrew Mitchell, said Bali had become "the forest conference".
Money will immediately flow through to pilot forest protection projects.
The breakthrough heralded a new international approach to the environment, according to the chief negotiator for developing nations, Kevin Conrad. "I believe it's a first step to what we in society have to do in the future, which is create markets that value our environment."
Trading the carbon saved from reducing logging would create a new carbon credit market, Mr Conrad said. The move would require deeper emissions cuts from developed nations to help fund the trade.
"It's the first time we've really had an ecosystem service that's globally traded, that starts to deal with standing forests," Mr Conrad said.
"The industrialised world wants our wood, wants our cocoa, wants our coffee, and for us that means we've got to cut down forests."
Bali delegates endorsed a declaration stating the post-Kyoto deal should include "issues relating to reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation" in developing countries.
The move offers a lifeline to the world's tropical forests, which are threatened by rampant logging.
The Kyoto Protocol did not extend to logging, and the decision was seen as a breakthrough for developing nations.
December 15, 2007 [Article source]
Countries will be paid to protect forests from logging, with the Bali conference adopting a proposal for the successor to the Kyoto Protocol to embrace deforestation.
The deal was proclaimed as beginning a new era in conservation, envisaging a multibillion-dollar forest carbon protection fund to reward developing nations for reducing logging.
The head of the Global Canopy Program, Andrew Mitchell, said Bali had become "the forest conference".
Money will immediately flow through to pilot forest protection projects.
The breakthrough heralded a new international approach to the environment, according to the chief negotiator for developing nations, Kevin Conrad. "I believe it's a first step to what we in society have to do in the future, which is create markets that value our environment."
Trading the carbon saved from reducing logging would create a new carbon credit market, Mr Conrad said. The move would require deeper emissions cuts from developed nations to help fund the trade.
"It's the first time we've really had an ecosystem service that's globally traded, that starts to deal with standing forests," Mr Conrad said.
"The industrialised world wants our wood, wants our cocoa, wants our coffee, and for us that means we've got to cut down forests."
Bali delegates endorsed a declaration stating the post-Kyoto deal should include "issues relating to reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation" in developing countries.
The move offers a lifeline to the world's tropical forests, which are threatened by rampant logging.
The Kyoto Protocol did not extend to logging, and the decision was seen as a breakthrough for developing nations.
14 December, 2007
MEDIA RELEASE: Water catchment logging shock
Luke Chamberlian, The Wilderness Society
14 December 2007
While Brumby talks tough on climate change at Bali, Melbourne’s carbon stores and catchments are woodchipped
The Wilderness Society responded with shock today to news that the Brumby government has ignored pleas from environment groups and started logging in one of Melbourne’s water catchments.
“We are calling on the Premier to intervene immediately to stop the logging,” said Victorian Forest Campaigner Luke Chamberlain.
“Catchment logging will result in the loss of millions of litres of water and the release of thousands of tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. We are stunned that the Brumby government would log old growth forest in Melbourne’s water catchments during our worst ever drought and with the looming threat of climate change.”
“While Brumby talks tough on climate change at Bali, Australia’s biggest carbon stores are being destroyed for woodchips.”
“These trees safely store as much carbon as any on earth, and the logging, burning and soil disturbance releases vast amounts of global warming carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.”
“Logging reduces water supplies into dams by up to 50% and it takes the forests up to 150 years to release as much water again.”
“98% of these trees which supply water and store carbon will now end up as woodchips, palettes and posts, all products which should instead come from Victoria’s massive plantation estate.”
Nestled between the Yarra Ranges National Park and the protected Upper Yarra catchment less than two hours drive east of Melbourne, the Armstrong catchment contains some of the most spectacular stands of unprotected old growth forest in Victoria and is one of Melbourne’s water catchments.
Further comment contact: Luke Chamberlain 0424 098 729
14 December 2007
While Brumby talks tough on climate change at Bali, Melbourne’s carbon stores and catchments are woodchipped
The Wilderness Society responded with shock today to news that the Brumby government has ignored pleas from environment groups and started logging in one of Melbourne’s water catchments.
“We are calling on the Premier to intervene immediately to stop the logging,” said Victorian Forest Campaigner Luke Chamberlain.
“Catchment logging will result in the loss of millions of litres of water and the release of thousands of tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. We are stunned that the Brumby government would log old growth forest in Melbourne’s water catchments during our worst ever drought and with the looming threat of climate change.”
“While Brumby talks tough on climate change at Bali, Australia’s biggest carbon stores are being destroyed for woodchips.”
“These trees safely store as much carbon as any on earth, and the logging, burning and soil disturbance releases vast amounts of global warming carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.”
“Logging reduces water supplies into dams by up to 50% and it takes the forests up to 150 years to release as much water again.”
“98% of these trees which supply water and store carbon will now end up as woodchips, palettes and posts, all products which should instead come from Victoria’s massive plantation estate.”
Nestled between the Yarra Ranges National Park and the protected Upper Yarra catchment less than two hours drive east of Melbourne, the Armstrong catchment contains some of the most spectacular stands of unprotected old growth forest in Victoria and is one of Melbourne’s water catchments.
Further comment contact: Luke Chamberlain 0424 098 729
13 December, 2007
ACTION: Armstrong Catchment Letter writing kit
Take a few minutes to write an email to people who can stop this catchment from being logged. Use these points as a guide but make your letter personal.
You can also send the same email to the various people who make the decisions. You could also phone them to express your concerns.
Overview
MINISTERS (Labor)
Victorian Minister for Environment
Hon. Gavin Jennings
Email – gavin.jennings@parliament.vic.gov.au
Phone - 9096 8830
Victorian Minister for Water
Tim Holding
Email - timothy.holding@parliament.vic.gov.au
Phone - 8684 8000
BUSINESS:
Paperlinx
Tom Park, Managing Director and CEO
Email - tom.park@paperlinx.com.au
Phone - 8540 2333
Australian Paper
Jim Henneberry, Executive General Manager
Email – jim.henneberry@australianpaper.com.au
SHADOW MINISTERS (Liberal)
Shadow Minister for Environment
Andrea Coote MLC
Email - andrea.coote@parliament.vic.gov.au
Phone - 9681 9555
Shadow Minister for Water
Hon. Louise Asher
Email - louise.asher@parliament.vic.gov.au
Phone - 9592 9799
DEPARTMENTS:
Melbourne Water
Chairman
Cheryl Batagol
Email (personal assistant) – anne.jackson@melbournewater.com.au
Phone - 9235 7100
Department of Sustainaility and Environment (DSE)
Secretary
Peter Harris
Email - peter.harris@dse.vic.gov.au
Phone - 9637 8765
Links
You can also send the same email to the various people who make the decisions. You could also phone them to express your concerns.
Overview
- This is a pristine unspoiled water catchment providing Melbourne with the purest drinking water - 2 billion litres per year, or 815 Olympic swimming pools.
- Forest within the Armstrong is scheduled for logging from Saturday 1 December 2007.
- A number of Melbourne’s water catchments were protected in the 19th and 20th Centuries, including the Maroondah and O’Shaughnessy.
- These areas were protected to the point where public access is prohibited. Fines up to $2,000 are enforced.
- The Armstrong catchment has the same aspects as protected catchments. However, it will be logged.
- Clearfell logging involves the broad scale clearing of forest areas and has a dramatic impact on the landscape.
- Clearfell logging is followed by a high-intensity burn, up to 1,000 degrees.
- It has been shown that clearfell reduces water flows by 50%. Also, it takes up to 250 years for the area to recover. This was shown by the Maroondah Experiment (Melbourne Water).
- When logging begins in the Armstrong, this catchment will be shut off from Melbourne’s water supply. This is so that logging can take place. This is to prevent pollution from the industrial scale of logging operation (soil sedimentation, erosion and fuel spills)
- It is a south-facing catchment and recieves a lot less heat from sun. It therefore contains a lot more moisture than other forest types.
- Water is 5 times more valuable in economic terms than woodchips used for paper.
- VicForests, the government agency responsible for sale of wood including from this area, made a net loss last year of $17,000. It is being propped up by taxpayer dollars.
- The government has made a significant net loss.
- The State government refuses to end the logging of Melbourne’s water catchments.
- The Shire of Yarra Ranges have unanimously passed motion in objection to the State government for the continued logging of water catchments.
- In this period of record-breaking drought, with Melbourne’s reservoirs at 40% it is ludicrous to be wasting water on this scale.
- This is publicly owned forest which should be protected to ensure Melbourne’s water security.
MINISTERS (Labor)
Victorian Minister for Environment
Hon. Gavin Jennings
Email – gavin.jennings@parliament.vic.gov.au
Phone - 9096 8830
Victorian Minister for Water
Tim Holding
Email - timothy.holding@parliament.vic.gov.au
Phone - 8684 8000
BUSINESS:
Paperlinx
Tom Park, Managing Director and CEO
Email - tom.park@paperlinx.com.au
Phone - 8540 2333
Australian Paper
Jim Henneberry, Executive General Manager
Email – jim.henneberry@australianpaper.com.au
SHADOW MINISTERS (Liberal)
Shadow Minister for Environment
Andrea Coote MLC
Email - andrea.coote@parliament.vic.gov.au
Phone - 9681 9555
Shadow Minister for Water
Hon. Louise Asher
Email - louise.asher@parliament.vic.gov.au
Phone - 9592 9799
DEPARTMENTS:
Melbourne Water
Chairman
Cheryl Batagol
Email (personal assistant) – anne.jackson@melbournewater.com.au
Phone - 9235 7100
Department of Sustainaility and Environment (DSE)
Secretary
Peter Harris
Email - peter.harris@dse.vic.gov.au
Phone - 9637 8765
Links
- Logging rainforest within the Melbourne's domestic water supply catchments. Victorian Rainforest Networks, good maps and photos
11 December, 2007
LETTER: Lunacy of logging catchments continues
Peter Campbell
Letter to Editor (not published)
We have a total of 22,500 litres of storage for rainwater collected from our house roof in Melbourne. We use the tank water for showers, the dishwasher, the laundry, the hot water system and garden watering.
We filled the rainwater tanks in late 2001 when we moved in after a house renovation. We have only added more Melbourne water a couple of times during severe drought periods. This means we have been basically self sufficient for water for around 5 years.
The $3 billion allocated by the Victorian Government for the Wonthaggi desalination plant could equip around 600,000 households with domestic rainwater tank systems that could provide up to 160 gigalitres of water per year that would otherwise be lost as storm water.
This equates to 165 days of Melbourne’s total water consumption based on the current daily usage, and it exceeds the estimated yearly production of 150gl from the proposed desalination plant.
We may not even need the desalination plant if:
- More rainwater tanks were in use
- The sewerage water currently flushed out from ocean outfalls was recycled.
- Logging in Melbourne’s water catchments ceased, which would yield another 30gl of water per year.
At the very least, we need radically improved public consultation about options for Melbourne’s and Victoria’s water strategy rather than unilateral decisions made in Spring Street following secret deliberations.
HERALDSUN: Yarra Ranges Shire Council to fight logging plans
December 11, 2007, Herald Sun, [article source]
Yarra Ranges Shire Council will fight state government plans for two logging coupes in a key Melbourne water catchment area.
The council last month voted unanimously to oppose logging earmarked for the Armstrong and Cement Creek catchments and has vowed to take the fight to the Premier and Environment and Water ministers.
The catchments flow into the Upper Yarra Dam, Melbourne's third biggest.
The council says logging has a detrimental effect on water yield because regrowth trees need more water and affect water quality.
Cr Samantha Dunn said it was poor policy to log water catchments, particularly in a time of record low inflows.
The State Government's commercial forestry arm, VicForests, has planned seven coupes in Armstrong Creek over the next two summers, another four in Cement Creek next summer and eight in the Thomson catchment this summer.
Yarra Ranges Shire Council will fight state government plans for two logging coupes in a key Melbourne water catchment area.
The council last month voted unanimously to oppose logging earmarked for the Armstrong and Cement Creek catchments and has vowed to take the fight to the Premier and Environment and Water ministers.
The catchments flow into the Upper Yarra Dam, Melbourne's third biggest.
The council says logging has a detrimental effect on water yield because regrowth trees need more water and affect water quality.
Cr Samantha Dunn said it was poor policy to log water catchments, particularly in a time of record low inflows.
The State Government's commercial forestry arm, VicForests, has planned seven coupes in Armstrong Creek over the next two summers, another four in Cement Creek next summer and eight in the Thomson catchment this summer.
10 December, 2007
MEDIA RELEASE: Logging halted for Climate Change
10 December 2007
Thirty five people have today stopped logging in an area of old growth forest north of Cann River, near the Errinundra National Park, in the Cobon forest block. The protest co-incides with climate talks in Bali, where the Australian government is being urged to agree to deep cuts in emissions.
“Twenty percent of global greenhouse emissions are caused by forest clearing, yet in Australia, old growth logging is being sanctioned by both state and federal governments,” said spokesperson for the protesters Mark Tylor.
“We have a new Federal government who won an election on the climate change issue, yet old growth forest is still being destroyed. Most school children are able to tell you about the importance of old growth forests as carbon sinks, yet this basic lesson is apparently beyond our politicians who still are allowing this destruction to happen,” he continued.
The area contains old growth forest and is habitat for the endangered Sooty Owl. Environmentalists, who have been camping in the forest coupe all weekend, have heard the extremely rare owl at night. Today, two people have chained themselves to logging machinery, while another sits on top of a tripod erected over a logging bulldozer. A 30 metre high tree platform is attached to another machine preventing it from continuing work.
This blockade follows a number of forest blockades last week, where logging was halted in three logging coupes by protesters chaining themselves to machinery. Five people were charged on summons.
“Old growth logging is still continuing in East Gippsland despite the state government election promises to protect important areas of forest. We are one year out from the election, yet none of the places the Labor Government promised to protect have been placed in a reserve. It is about time our politicians were called into account” he concluded.
For more comment Mark Tylor (at the forest blockade) 0428 125 602
For information and updates 03 5154 0174
Thirty five people have today stopped logging in an area of old growth forest north of Cann River, near the Errinundra National Park, in the Cobon forest block. The protest co-incides with climate talks in Bali, where the Australian government is being urged to agree to deep cuts in emissions.
“Twenty percent of global greenhouse emissions are caused by forest clearing, yet in Australia, old growth logging is being sanctioned by both state and federal governments,” said spokesperson for the protesters Mark Tylor.
“We have a new Federal government who won an election on the climate change issue, yet old growth forest is still being destroyed. Most school children are able to tell you about the importance of old growth forests as carbon sinks, yet this basic lesson is apparently beyond our politicians who still are allowing this destruction to happen,” he continued.
The area contains old growth forest and is habitat for the endangered Sooty Owl. Environmentalists, who have been camping in the forest coupe all weekend, have heard the extremely rare owl at night. Today, two people have chained themselves to logging machinery, while another sits on top of a tripod erected over a logging bulldozer. A 30 metre high tree platform is attached to another machine preventing it from continuing work.
This blockade follows a number of forest blockades last week, where logging was halted in three logging coupes by protesters chaining themselves to machinery. Five people were charged on summons.
“Old growth logging is still continuing in East Gippsland despite the state government election promises to protect important areas of forest. We are one year out from the election, yet none of the places the Labor Government promised to protect have been placed in a reserve. It is about time our politicians were called into account” he concluded.
For more comment Mark Tylor (at the forest blockade) 0428 125 602
For information and updates 03 5154 0174
MEDIA RELEASE: Forest Blockade stops Old Growth Logging
10 December 2007
Thirty five people have today stopped logging in an area of old growth forest north of Cann River, near the Errinundra National Park, in the Cobon forest block. The area contains old growth forest and is habitat for the endangered Sooty Owl. Environmentalists, who have been camping in the forest coupe all weekend, have heard the extremely rare owl at night. Today, two people have chained themselves to logging machinery, while another sits on top of a tripod erected over a logging bulldozer. A 30 metre high tree platform is attached to another machine preventing it from continuing work.
This blockade follows a number of forest blockades last week, where logging was halted in three logging coupes by protesters chaining themselves to machinery. Five people were charged on summons.
“Old growth logging is still continuing in East Gippsland despite the state government election promises to protect important areas of forest. We are one year out from the election, yet none of the places the Labor Government promised to protect have been placed in a reserve. It is about time our politicians were called into account,” said spokesperson for the protesters, Mark Tylor.
“We have a new Federal government who won an election on the climate change issue, yet old growth forest is still being destroyed. Most school children are able to tell you about the importaince of old growth forests as carbon sinks, yet this basic lesson is apparently beyond our politicians who still are allowing this destruction to happen,” he continued.
“It is a sad indictment on the state of our government that it takes young people such as the ones in the forest today to physically stop this old growth forest logging by placing their bodies on the line,” he concluded.
For more comment: Mark Tylor (at the forest blockade) 0428 125 602
For information and updates: 03 5154 0174
Thirty five people have today stopped logging in an area of old growth forest north of Cann River, near the Errinundra National Park, in the Cobon forest block. The area contains old growth forest and is habitat for the endangered Sooty Owl. Environmentalists, who have been camping in the forest coupe all weekend, have heard the extremely rare owl at night. Today, two people have chained themselves to logging machinery, while another sits on top of a tripod erected over a logging bulldozer. A 30 metre high tree platform is attached to another machine preventing it from continuing work.
This blockade follows a number of forest blockades last week, where logging was halted in three logging coupes by protesters chaining themselves to machinery. Five people were charged on summons.
“Old growth logging is still continuing in East Gippsland despite the state government election promises to protect important areas of forest. We are one year out from the election, yet none of the places the Labor Government promised to protect have been placed in a reserve. It is about time our politicians were called into account,” said spokesperson for the protesters, Mark Tylor.
“We have a new Federal government who won an election on the climate change issue, yet old growth forest is still being destroyed. Most school children are able to tell you about the importaince of old growth forests as carbon sinks, yet this basic lesson is apparently beyond our politicians who still are allowing this destruction to happen,” he continued.
“It is a sad indictment on the state of our government that it takes young people such as the ones in the forest today to physically stop this old growth forest logging by placing their bodies on the line,” he concluded.
For more comment: Mark Tylor (at the forest blockade) 0428 125 602
For information and updates: 03 5154 0174
08 December, 2007
ARTICLE: The bay plan's all dollars, no sense
Tracee Hutchison
The Age, December 8, 2007
For some time in Victoria it's been considered a given that on matters environmental the Government treats its citizens as idiots.
We host the fuel-burning Grand Prix. We nurse bucket-backs every summer, hauling grey water to our gardens while logging in water catchments continues. We prefer an energy-guzzling desalination plant on a pristine Gippsland coastline to water tanks and rebated grey water systems. And gouging a whopping crevice through a marine national park is considered a tremendously inspired idea.
But this week — as opponents of the dredging of Port Phillip Bay won the right to challenge the Government's channel deepening project in the Federal Court — took the enviro-cake. Environment Minister Gavin Jennings must have thought no one was listening when he said, apparently with a straight face, at the launch of the Two Bays environmental research into the health of Port Phillip and Western Port bays that water purity in the bay was being challenged by stormwater run-off and by increased salinity as the drought lessened the flow of fresh water in the bay.
This is the same state minister who recently signed off on the $763 million plan to dredge 22.9 million cubic metres of sediment from the bay's floor, stir up toxic sludge from the Yarra mouth, create 18 hectares of rock falls at the Heads, spawn algal blooms, damage crucial seagrasses and reduce fish stocks.
Could someone whisper to Minister Jennings that a little bit of stormwater and increased salinity won't be a patch on what his Government has in store for the bay if dredging goes ahead?
It is apparent the Government and the Port of Melbourne Corporation think they are dealing with a populace suffering collective amnesia. What else could explain the poker-face commentary surrounding Justice Mark Weinberg's decision to allow the Blue Wedges Coalition to fight them in the Federal Court?
The Dredges-R-Us mob shrieked about the $430,000 weekly fine (or $1.7 million if the fleet is already mobilised), they will face if dredging doesn't start on the date they decided on before the project was approved. Yes. That's right. The corporation began spending taxpayers' money contracting its dredging fleet before the Government approved it. And the Government, presumably, did nothing.
Why on earth does the corporation think it can hold the bay to ransom because of its arrogant assumption it would get its way?
As the chairman of the panel assessing the project, Dr Allan Hawke, said during the hearing, the corporation's decision to engage tenders in the unapproved project was done at its own commercial risk.
This should ring alarm bells for federal Environment Minister Peter Garrett in whom the ultimate fate of the bay is trusted and who must front the Federal Court in January to hear the Blue Wedges Coalition argue its case.
But this week the Yesterday's Men who have not caught on that the planet is buckling under the weight of nonsensical environmental destruction in the name of progress screamed It Wasn't Fair. The Blue Wedges Coalition was called "spoilers" by a chap in the Chamber of Commerce who didn't think clearly enough about his turbid choice of words. And the great mystery as to why there is such a rush to get this project moving continued to deepen.
Why, at a time the Port of Melbourne announces record container trade numbers through the port, is the corporation trying to persuade us that the port is at risk of becoming obsolete unless the shipping channel is deepened immediately?
Why, when the port has just comfortably docked the 77,000-tonne cruise ship Sun Princess, the biggest cruise ship ever based in Australia, do the Heads needs to be blown apart and channel deepened to bring in even bigger ships?
Why do the projected economic benefits — a paltry $2 billion to the national economy over 30 years — look increasingly flimsy? And why does it all keep pointing to the building of warships at Williamstown with Chinese steel?
What will it take for responsible custodianship of the planet to prevail? Dead penguins, starved of their anchovy feed, washed up on St Kilda beach? Dead fish rotting at Williamstown? A dead bottle-nosed dolphin beached off Sorrento?
This is precisely what we are talking about if the bay dredging goes ahead, and Garrett must ask for more time to consider the environmental implications of this idiotic project. It cannot go ahead.
Tracee Hutchison is a writer and broadcaster and Mornington Peninsula resident.
The Age, December 8, 2007
For some time in Victoria it's been considered a given that on matters environmental the Government treats its citizens as idiots.
We host the fuel-burning Grand Prix. We nurse bucket-backs every summer, hauling grey water to our gardens while logging in water catchments continues. We prefer an energy-guzzling desalination plant on a pristine Gippsland coastline to water tanks and rebated grey water systems. And gouging a whopping crevice through a marine national park is considered a tremendously inspired idea.
But this week — as opponents of the dredging of Port Phillip Bay won the right to challenge the Government's channel deepening project in the Federal Court — took the enviro-cake. Environment Minister Gavin Jennings must have thought no one was listening when he said, apparently with a straight face, at the launch of the Two Bays environmental research into the health of Port Phillip and Western Port bays that water purity in the bay was being challenged by stormwater run-off and by increased salinity as the drought lessened the flow of fresh water in the bay.
This is the same state minister who recently signed off on the $763 million plan to dredge 22.9 million cubic metres of sediment from the bay's floor, stir up toxic sludge from the Yarra mouth, create 18 hectares of rock falls at the Heads, spawn algal blooms, damage crucial seagrasses and reduce fish stocks.
Could someone whisper to Minister Jennings that a little bit of stormwater and increased salinity won't be a patch on what his Government has in store for the bay if dredging goes ahead?
It is apparent the Government and the Port of Melbourne Corporation think they are dealing with a populace suffering collective amnesia. What else could explain the poker-face commentary surrounding Justice Mark Weinberg's decision to allow the Blue Wedges Coalition to fight them in the Federal Court?
The Dredges-R-Us mob shrieked about the $430,000 weekly fine (or $1.7 million if the fleet is already mobilised), they will face if dredging doesn't start on the date they decided on before the project was approved. Yes. That's right. The corporation began spending taxpayers' money contracting its dredging fleet before the Government approved it. And the Government, presumably, did nothing.
Why on earth does the corporation think it can hold the bay to ransom because of its arrogant assumption it would get its way?
As the chairman of the panel assessing the project, Dr Allan Hawke, said during the hearing, the corporation's decision to engage tenders in the unapproved project was done at its own commercial risk.
This should ring alarm bells for federal Environment Minister Peter Garrett in whom the ultimate fate of the bay is trusted and who must front the Federal Court in January to hear the Blue Wedges Coalition argue its case.
But this week the Yesterday's Men who have not caught on that the planet is buckling under the weight of nonsensical environmental destruction in the name of progress screamed It Wasn't Fair. The Blue Wedges Coalition was called "spoilers" by a chap in the Chamber of Commerce who didn't think clearly enough about his turbid choice of words. And the great mystery as to why there is such a rush to get this project moving continued to deepen.
Why, at a time the Port of Melbourne announces record container trade numbers through the port, is the corporation trying to persuade us that the port is at risk of becoming obsolete unless the shipping channel is deepened immediately?
Why, when the port has just comfortably docked the 77,000-tonne cruise ship Sun Princess, the biggest cruise ship ever based in Australia, do the Heads needs to be blown apart and channel deepened to bring in even bigger ships?
Why do the projected economic benefits — a paltry $2 billion to the national economy over 30 years — look increasingly flimsy? And why does it all keep pointing to the building of warships at Williamstown with Chinese steel?
What will it take for responsible custodianship of the planet to prevail? Dead penguins, starved of their anchovy feed, washed up on St Kilda beach? Dead fish rotting at Williamstown? A dead bottle-nosed dolphin beached off Sorrento?
This is precisely what we are talking about if the bay dredging goes ahead, and Garrett must ask for more time to consider the environmental implications of this idiotic project. It cannot go ahead.
Tracee Hutchison is a writer and broadcaster and Mornington Peninsula resident.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)