Tony Saddington
I have seen first hand environmental terrorism, forest vandalism fuelled by greed and with the compliance of the state government headed by David Llewellyn, Minister for the Forests.
Up behind me is the Mt. Dismal range. Despite its name, the area had a natural rugged beauty. Tree ferns were plentiful, with many more than 3 metres high. Threatened species inhabit the region, such as Devils, Spotted tail Quoll and Wedge Tailed Eagle.
It was also home to specialty timbers, which will never return.
All gone, victims of an operation that has left mounds of refuse to be burnt in Autumn preceding a plantation.
In May 2008, we received a letter from a company in Spreyton. The letter advised that a 250 ha logging coupe would be established in Mt Dismal and would largely, be selectively logged.
I wrote to Launceston Council requesting if there was a forest practice plan in place.
Launceston council wrote to the company, but received no reply.
In November 2008, work commenced. In just over a week, the treeline along the top of the mountain was removed. This has exposed the four houses below to the potential of landslip and runoff pollution to the private dams below in which we all depend.
It can be seen clearly from the East Tamar Hwy, the ‘Wine tourist route’ and was, I believed, a breach of the ‘Forest Practices code’ (2000), as outlined in Section D 4.
I was also of the opinion that as of 2007, native forest was to be regenerated, rather than replaced by plantation.
This is not happening.
A letter from LCC general manager, Frank Dixon, advised that council could not intervene.
Scenic protection does not apply in the rural zone; forest practices are exempt and self regulatory.
Council plays no inspectoral role.
It is astounding; that all councils do not have control over forestry related industries that affect its ratepayers and that the actions of forest harvesting are paramount and free from prosecution, let alone scrutiny.
Instead of an independent regulatory body, policing forestry code, operators police themselves. It is self regulatory. Like the surgeons of old, mistakes are buried without fanfare.
Forestry and government bodies do not, (or do not want to), know about infringements.
It is up to the individual to complain, to protest, and to argue for what is ours.
Alderman Jeremy Ball, in response to complaints from local residents, moved a motion in Council that all future forest practice plans must be made available, on request, to the Launceston City Council for public scrutiny. Council is still restricted but can act if harvesting is likely to impact on the public and violate municipal codes.
The motion was carried, 10 votes to 2.
Those against were Ivan Dean and Annette Waddle. Ivan has previously stated that council should not be involved in forestry matters.
Ivan’s position on this was predictable, as the ‘champion’ for Forestry in the Launceston Council and in the Legislative Council. Annette I cannot presume to understand.
Commonsense, except for two aldermen, prevailed.
On Monday, 5th January, I received a call from the Forest Practices Authority. Michael Schofield, who assured me that they were looking into it. I was told that they were taking the complaint seriously.
He did stress that the FPA does not have the power to shut down a coupe.
I was told that they had my photos and he was very apologetic.
I recently received a letter from the FPA. There is a proper plan in place as a private timber reserve and it is expected that the operations will continue along with the subsequent plantation as per the ‘Forest Practices Code’.
The letter ends with a request that I contact the FPA if I should have any concerns.
So I have had the run around. Following the Launceston Council, I wrote to David Bartlett. This was referred to David Llewellen, who in turn passed the ball to the FPA
The FPA writes to me telling me to get in touch if I have any concerns.
I can’t help but feel a sense of surrealism here. The ‘Yes Minister’, Sir Humphrey Appleby approach. ‘The Hollowman’ design to deter interest, confuse and wear one down.
So if terrorism can be determined as something that is potentially dangerous by a perceived threat or action, and if that action can possibly lead to injury or fear, then I believe that the ‘eco terrorist’ exists and is operating in the Dismal ranges and many other coupes across Tasmania.
The worker there may not see himself as such, but believes that what he does is right.
Current forestry practices fit this description, riding roughshod over individual’s rights of health, safety and inheritance in order to obtain financial gain for a company entity.
Through no fault of ourselves or our neighbours, we now have a constant reminder in the ‘scalping’ of Mt Dismal and the subsequent fire and smoke that is to come.
The threat of water poisoning and that of landslip looms above us.
It is a fear. Perhaps it is not a real fear. A landslip may not occur with the winter rains, our water may not be poisoned.
But it could and it might.
It has occurred elsewhere in the state.
Our mountain has been raped with the blind consent of our government and its lackeys.
Tony Saddington
Dilston. 7252.
