Pulp mill facts

Vica Bayley

Gunns responded to The Wilderness Society’s open invitation info day by arguing that had we contacted them, Gunns’ would have issued us with an invitation. However that totally misses to point. It is not only The Wilderness Society who has been seeking the opportunity to pose questions to Gunns. The public at large have endless questions and have had very limited opportunity to have them answered, in an interactive forum with the talking heads from Gunns themselves.

The requests we have made to Gunns for meetings and participation in a public symposium have either been flatly refused, or accepted on the condition they do not involve a group of more than five people. Not exactly open or interactive.

In contrast to Gunns’ closed door, invite only pulpmill event that occurred on Thurs 27th , The Wilderness Society hosted a Pulpmill Information Day, where all members of the public were welcome to attend. The day was a huge success with people attending throughout the day, in response to an ad placed in The Examiner, and flyers handed out in the city.

The information day gave the community the opportunity to hear an alternative view to the pro-mill public relations campaign that has been rolled out over the last week by Gunns and associated pro-mill groups. Via information stalls, documentaries, presentations and personal contact with campaigners, the public had the opportunity to learn more about pulpmills worldwide, Gunns proposed pulpmill and the recently released IIS document.

The IIS confirms community concerns about this pulpmill, in particular, the fact that it will drive ongoing forest destruction in Tasmania. The section on pulpwood supply reveals that it would contribute to the destruction of hundreds of thousands of hectares of native forests, an outcome that will place endangered species at an increased risk of extinction and continue the degradation of domestic and agricultural water catchments.

Flatly refused

Emerging concerns, many highlighted yesterday, are not limited to forest destruction. Marine pollution, plantation establishment, water consumption, poor economics, public subsidy, government process and local social impacts are confirmed as issues that need further explanation. These are the issues Joe Public wants to put to Gunns Ltd.

Gunns responded to The Wilderness Society’s open invitation info day by arguing that had we contacted them, Gunns’ would have issued us with an invitation. However that totally misses to point. It is not only The Wilderness Society who has been seeking the opportunity to pose questions to Gunns. The public at large have endless questions and have had very limited opportunity to have them answered, in an interactive forum with the talking heads from Gunns themselves.

The requests we have made to Gunns for meetings and participation in a public symposium have either been flatly refused, or accepted on the condition they do not involve a group of more than five people. Not exactly open or interactive.

With the release of the IIS document, more questions are being raised than answered. It is becoming increasingly clear that this pulpmill is a poor investment in Tasmania’s future. When alternatives are available, it is obvious that Tasmania can do better than a chlorine-based, polluting pulpmill, so heavily reliant on native forests.

Vica Bayley
The Wilderness Society