Author Credits: [show_post_categories parent="no" parentcategory="writers" show = "category" hyperlink="yes"]
Your Say (Archive 3)
By
Posted on
editor
March 11, 2005 at 10:06
500 years on, guess which princes from the Italian Renaissance have made it into the history books?
Was it the one who, on being told by his ragioniere that the Major Paintings budget was 67 ducats short, ordered Signor Michelangelo or Leonardo or Raffaello to cut out all those murals and ceiling jobs and stick to family portraits?
No, I didn’t think so either.
Senator Kemp, if you want some very temporary notoriety – like the sort that “our” Princess Mary kept you off the front page of today’s Mercury [Lovers of TSO blast axe bid, Fri 11 Mar 05] – go ahead with the idiot report from that Qantas has-been.
But wouldn’t it be better to have an on-going 15 minutes of fame as an admittedly minor Medici ?
Leonard Colquhoun
7248
editor
March 12, 2005 at 10:21
Public meeting – one year anniversary
March 17, 2004 at the Lauderdale Hall…
More than 500 peninsula residents rejected the Walker plan for Ralphs Bay.
One year later, and the project is still on the table.
To mark this unfortunate ‘anniversary’ in the fight to save Ralphs Bay, and
to update the community on the review of the State Coastal Policy, Save
Ralphs Bay Inc will host another public meeting at the Lauderdale Hall
On March 17, 2005 @ 7.30pm.
Speakers include: Cassy O’Connor (SRB Inc.), Dr Peter Hay (UTAS), Will
Hodgman (Franklin, Lib MHA) and Nick McKim (Franklin, Green MHA) and a
representative from the DPIWE Coastal Policy Unit.
We have also invited our elected Franklin Labor representatives, Lara
Giddings MHA and Premier Paul Lennon.
Please join us and help reinforce the strength of the message first
delivered to the Tasmanian Government one year ago.
You can find more info at http://www.saveralphsbay.org
You can contact us at: [email protected]
Please tell all who might be interested!
Thank you,
Save Ralphs Bay Inc.
phill Parsons
March 13, 2005 at 03:03
The range of giant freshwater crayfish [Astacopsis gouldii] overlaps the intensively used farm and forestry land of nrthern Tasmania.
It is listed as a Threatened Species.
For 8 years the usual obfustication in the interests of the lords of the forest has delayed the finalization of a Recovery Plan.
The actions by those responsible are negligent, although one doubts that the courts will be used. A precedent for negligence by government would not be wanted at any level of same.
Natural systems under pressure from industrial use within their catchments will have less resilience as the presssures of the climate changing become critical. Air temperatures will rapidly leave the range of some species, rainfall patterns will change and in the case of the crayfish that clean cool flowing water from mountain areas running through forests may desert them.
Some write that the lack of action on the environment is because government knows that a climatic disaster is coming and are destroying nature because it will be destroyed anyway.
I am of the view that they have ignored it to date hoping that a simple solution will be found or that the science was wrong.
Lately, the Tasmanian Government through Environment Minister Jackson announced the drafting of a plan of action to address climate change. We are to be surprised by its wide ranging scope.
As I have written before many simple actions could have been taken without economic cost. Now, actions will have to be greater and for effect some economic cost has to be entailed.
Herein lies their conundrum. The community is already screaming over the cuts to government services, the costs of ventures to grow the economy and the impact on their environment and lifestyles.
How does government act swiftly and decisively on this matter, introduce a comprehensive and wide ranging plan of action, after one assumes some community consultation, and then find the wherewithal to fund the changes.
If the vested interests of the lords of the forest can obfusticate the Recovery Plan for a species recognized by the Commonwealth as threatened for eight years how will government address the many interests in the community.
Are we to see it recognize the dangers of a world where new diseases will arise and old ones spread as temperature increases.
How will Tasmania address changes in rainfall patterns. With the current cool conditions in the southern ocean an artifact of ice melt in Antarctica we may see the maritime climate remain moist;it is a strong pattern, the rainforest of the west attesting to that. However, the north east of the state has been much drier in ages past.
And so back around to the subject.
The Commonwealth has allowed many things associated with forestry in Tasmania to drift. This is not aimless as Howard’s performance in Launceston, October last, demonstrated.
We are now 3 months and 13 days beyond the deadline for a forestry agreement. No more forest than would have been destroyed anyway has been destroyed because the shortsightedness of both governments will see little if any threatened forest saved.
And so, under these regimes, it will be for the giant freshwater crayfish, pushed to the edge before action and then as little as possible, turning the blind eye to enforcement of any rules until an election looms.
Who says you can’t trust a politician, certainly not their mates.
Arthropods, having been with us for hundreds of millions of years may pass through this perturbation of the stupid monkeys making, perhaps a little poorer for species.
The stupid monkey has less paleological evidence for its survival and plenty of historical for its failure.
editor
March 14, 2005 at 03:05
In case you don’t know about the TSO petition – please follow up on this.
It is outrageous even to suggest such a cutback!
http://www.premier.tas.gov.au/update/tso.html
Sheelagh
Barry Brannan
March 15, 2005 at 04:36
The following entry in David Bartlett’s online diary is certainly important in improving our understanding of politicians and improving participation in democracy:
Haircut
What: Appointment
When: 17-03-2005 from 13:00 to 14:00
Where: Hobart
lhayward
March 16, 2005 at 03:11
Paul Lennon would have one compelling reason for not selling the Spirit III that he hasn’t mentioned.
A sale would put to the test the still unexamined assertion of a London ship broker, that the purchase price for the three ferries negotiated by Mr Lennon was $100 million too much.
Anyone who read Richard Guilliatt’s “Rough Red” portrait of our Premier in full primeval undress in the Age goodweekend mag of 12/3 will probably conclude that this is not the sort of man to be troubled by spending yet another $100 million of our money in parking this one on the back burner for another three years.
That yet another nine-digit Tasmanian boondoggle can be given the tick, again against Treasury advice and without anything like a professional cost/benefit analysis, suggests that Adele Sainte-Marie’s peceptions of runaway corruption down here are right on the disappearing money.
John Hayward
Weegena 7304
editor
March 16, 2005 at 04:17
Retired footballer in pub in London:
http://www.zippedurl.com/6j5h9h
cheers,
Scott Plimpton
London
Editor
March 17, 2005 at 03:18
Don’t miss the SLAPPS forum,
21 March, 7pm, Stanley Burbury Theatre, UTAS
with,
Sharon Beder, Brian Walters, Bob Brown, Simon Cocker, Pete Hay.
Cheers,
Prue Cameron
Shelley Smith
March 18, 2005 at 09:05
The Weld Valley is recognised by the State Government’s own Regional Forest Agreement as high conservation area. Despite this, Forestry Tasmania plans to extend a road along the northern side of the Weld river, to open it up to clearfell and cable logging.
A group of concerned community members have established a community picket at the beginning of the proposed road. The proposed road begins at the end of a clearfell that was logged late last year. On Thursday, 17th March 2005 workers for Forestry Tasmania informed people at the picket that Forestry Tasmania was planning to burn the coup, known as BB22c on 19th March 2005, weather permitting.
There is ample evidence to show that the process of clearfell burning is destructive and unreliable. Tens of thousands of hectares of Tasmanian land has been destroyed over the last twenty years through escaped regeneration burns and escaped hazard reduction burns. One example is the Styx in March 1998, where 1500 hectares of forest was burned when a regeneration fire escaped control.
In recent studies the high intensity burns that are used by Forestry Tasmania as a way of reducing waste wood have been shown to be detrimental to the biodiversity of an area, which makes the term “regeneration burn” inaccurate. In his paper, “How fire affects biodiversity” Dr. A. Malcolm Gill says high intensity fires may kill all below ground tissue, including buried buds and seeds, confining sources of regeneration to unburned areas. The threat of local extinctions is magnified when there are inter relationships between species and just one of those species is fire sensitive.
Local residents are calling for the government and other governmental bodies to employ other methods to reduce waste wood volumes.
The wood that is burned during a waste reduction fire could be used by artisans, craft people, and the other forest and timber users. The lack of community involvement and consultation in these processes means that our resources are used only by the preferred few.
“If they are going to waste all that wood , perhaps Forestry Tasmania could have an open day for the community and we could all go in there and stock up on our fire wood for the winter, that would be a better use for our public forests.” Said Shelley Smith, a Glen Huon resident.
Mark
March 20, 2005 at 17:30
It’s time to dust off the old crytal ball. Peering into its smokey haze (it’s always smokey at this time of year) I see a face. It is a man’s face, quite weather worn and aged, but not yet aged enough. It is the face of Ken Bacon.
I see his retirement. It is not immediate but seems to be triggered by a future event. The event is an anniversary, an anniversary of something important. It could be a birthday or his election to parliament. I am uncertain of the event because I cannot quite read the print on his parliamentary superannuation policy beneath the words “Defined Benefits Fund”.
I see taxpayer funded financial benefits for Ken if he reaches this anniversary and he will retire as a Minister! This should be worth a few extra bob! Oh,oh, another face! It’s Terry Martin. I didn’t realise he was in the crystal ball because he was being so quiet. Both Terry and Ken wear the same size shoe so Terry should be able to step into Ken’s without any fuss.
Now the question, “Who is to replace Ken from his electorate?” Oh no, that damn smoke haze is getting thicker! It must be getting closer to Easter.
editor
March 21, 2005 at 04:30
Editor
The Examiner
Paterson St
Launceston
12/3/2005
Tasmanian Treasures Trashed
Dear Sir,
The Pulp Wood Industry is making a moth eaten blanket of Tasmania and a mockery of Tasmanians.
While the ratio of chip company profits to wages paid to Tasmanians runs at approx 6:1, here is the sustainable work that the chip industry promises;
• Trashing our native forests and streams to silt and match sticks.
• Incendiary burning every last moss and fern and lizard standing
• Planting homogeneous acres of non local eucalypts.
• Soaking our land in pesticides and herbicides.
• Shooting and poisoning the animals that reappear on these killing fields.
• Overseeing the automated Longreach chip mill.
This is the juggernaut of the Woodchipping Industry, backed by our State Government, promising untold jobs and wealth.
Sure there will be jobs in Centre Link for supporting the farmers left without adequate ground water and the small tourist operators with nowhere to go, and for the doctors at the asthma clinics, the clean water tank suppliers and the lawyers in suing the Tasmanians who dare to protest.
Your sincerely,
Helen Tait
John Samuels
March 21, 2005 at 05:48
The Mercury tells us that Paul Lennon has had a tough year … poor Paul.
What about the people in pain on our public dental waiting lists?
What about the people dying and in agonies on our public hospital waiting lists?
What about our disabled who are getting no services?
What about people being sent to the mainland for important operations?
Poor Paul?
Dave Groves
March 21, 2005 at 12:24
TRAC slams bill as Government folly
The Tamar Residents Action Committee has slammed the government’s move to fast track the State Policies and Projects Amendment Bill 2005 as pure folly.
The Bill that passed the Lower House will mean planning processes for the proposed pulp mill at Longreach will be included under the umbrella of Projects of State Significance, along with approvals for a dam to be built across the Pipers River.
The coordinator of TRAC Mr Les Rochester said the essence of the amendments will mean that the responsibility for proving the pulp mill project will transfer from the proponent to the project itself.
“What concerns us is under the amendment the state government opens itself to incurring further massive costs associated with the project, costs that will be borne by the Tasmanian taxpayer.”
“But the most insidious parts of this innocuous amendment will mean that the proponent will also be able to change in composition for example through merger or entering into partnership, or be substituted for another proponent, without the project failing,” Mr Rochester said.
“This opens a pandora’s box of concerns, for example, will it allow the proponent to pass the project off before it’s even started to a Japanese pulp and paper company?”
“How will this affect the ‘referral’ process that the proponent entered into with the Federal Department of Environment and Heritage?” Mr Rochester asked.
TRAC has sought advice on this matter from the Federal Minister for the Environment and Heritage Senator Ian Campbell, on how his approval will be affected by the State Policies and Projects Amendment Bill 2005.
“How we interpret the amendment is that it will also take the responsibility from DPIWE and place it with the RPDC (Resources Planning and Development Commission) to decide on any application for a dam across Pipers River.”
“As a group representing more than 1,000 concerned residents in the Tamar Valley, we’re calling on all members of the Upper House to vote against the Bill, because of its significant ramifications for all Tasmanians,” Mr Rochester said.
The normal process for dam applications and setting management plans for rivers in Tasmania normally takes 12 months.
“We’re concerned that this part of the project is being put under the RPDC’s umbrella so it can be fast-tracked and so stifle the normal appeals process.”
“It’s especially worrying when the chief executive of Gunns Ltd, Mr John Gay, is on record that he’ll have the Integrated Impact Statement completed and in the hands of the RPDC by July, that’s four months away.” Mr Rochester concluded.
Dave Groves
Paul de Burgh-Day
March 22, 2005 at 14:34
I have on several occassions in the past written about the importance of Homeopathic levels of toxins in our water supplies. These views of mine were derived from considerable research – needless to say, they have predictably been dismissed as ‘junk science’.
Fact is that if my claims are correct, then it raises serious questions about the validity of any test results that fail to take this into account.
It appears that the most sensitive tests can measure down to 0.1ppb (which is far lower than the most sensitive possible results in Tasmania).
Today I received the 22 March edition of New Scientist. This contains an article which includes the following report on Homeopathic (super-low, untraceable levels) doses. In this case it deals with Homeopathic remedies. The consequences are equally applicable to toxins.
The effects may still be impossible to explain, but they are undeniable. It is fallacious for anyone to claim because something cannot be quantified, it does not exist.
Belfast homeopathy results