Tasmanian Times

The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. No price is too high for the privilege of owning yourself. ~ Friedrich Nietzsche

The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. No price is too high for the privilege of owning yourself. ~ Friedrich Nietzsche

Economy

Tarkine – A Sumac National Park here we come!

The serene karst sinkhole of Lake Chisholm – The jewel of the Sumac Region

image
The giant eucalypt forest in Keppel Creek is a magnificent ancient ecosystem.

image
The grand Arthur River from the Sumac lookout bounds the northern extent.

image
The Sumac is a stronghold habitat for the giant freshwater crayfish – Astacopsis gouldi, including the purple-coloured form found within the Frankland River.

image
The remote Horton River bounds the southern extent of the Sumac region.

image

First published August 23

The Sumac is in the northern extent of the Tarkine.

The title Tarkine was derived from the name of the traditional custodians, the Tarkiners. The region is also identified as ‘Takayna’ by Tasmania’s Aboriginal people.

The Tarkine is a vast stretch of predominantly wild country, which is drawing people from around the nation and across the globe, and now the associated Tasmanian municipal councils are beginning to recognise that the region is a potentially high tourist drawcard, and one that will help stimulate a depressed economic region.

Most tourists are drawn to notable areas, and that is why it is imperative for the Tarkine to have recognition with a National Park status. The accessible Sumac region, which is rich in natural features and biodiversity, is the most logical and least contentious area to establish such a reserve.

The 1998 Regional Forest Agreement grew out of the 1992 National Forest Policy Statement, and as a result the Sumac forest was dedicated as a formal reserve for its representation of primitive cool-temperate rainforest.

Prior to the RFA, the Tasmanian Forestry Commission had advocated the Sumac’s preservation. In other words it was considered to have little commercial value for resource extraction.

The proposed 15,000+ ha Sumac National Park is an expansion of the present reserve that will contribute a diversity of other outstanding natural, biological and historical features such as –

– The karst landscape features between the Sumac road and the Arthur River, which includes the Lake Chisholm sinkhole and the dolomite river features of the
Julius River.

– The magnificent old-growth eucalypt forests south of the Arthur River including the
Sumac Lookout, and the Keppel Creek/Stephans rivulet area.

– An enclave stronghold habitat for the world’s largest freshwater crayfish.
¬¬
– The nature trail recreation area of the Julius River Forest Reserve.

– The remaining undisturbed extent of the southern Frankland Forests bounded by the wild Frankland and Horton rivers.

– Sections of the old Balfour pioneer track.

The proposed Sumac National Park boundary has included minimal forestry plantations (restoration areas) as to provide a contiguous manageable boundary.

The Sumac area is considered to be low mineral prospective, and non-contentious in that regard.

The declaration of the Sumac region as National Park is a positive way forward both for conservation and the economic prosperity of Tasmania’s northwest region.

The opportunity awaits, it just momentum behind the vision that is required!

*Ted Mead began campaigning towards the protection of the Tarkine’s rainforest region 30 years ago. In the meantime, other conservation goals such as the expansion of Western Tasmania’s WHA area has consumed much of his and other conservationist’s energy. Ted is confident that progress towards the dedication of a grand Tarkine reserve is on its way, though he is realistic there is still some distance to go.

Author Credits: [show_post_categories parent="no" parentcategory="writers" show = "category" hyperlink="yes"]
40 Comments

40 Comments

  1. William Boeder

    August 29, 2017 at 10:30 pm

    How is it with this State government and the aged remnant fossils of the now defunct GBE Forestry Tasmania prefer to adopt the official line consisting of “issued out falsity and guile” by this State government rather than truth, which will not allow fact and reality to transcend above the official line of State government narrative?
    To lean on a simpler means of asking this same question, why is the bull-scat of contrived government spieled nonsense allowed to take precedent above the facts and truths already known to us all.
    Sustainable Timbers Tasmania claims the need to enter even more reserves based on the natural regrowth rate of its existence in our Crown Land forests, however regrowth cannot and will never keep pace with relentless desire to trash our more volume of forests to feed both the Ta Ann poaching carpetbaggers and the State’s beguiling Wood-chippers.

    There is no ‘proven sustainability’ evident to support such delusion.
    So transparent is truth of it all that Blind Freddy could establish this same opinion?
    The link below is typical of logging palaver.

    http://www.parliament.tas.gov.au/CTEE/Council/Submissions/Sub 118 – FIAT.pdf

    This same link is how the chief of Tasmania’s Forest Practices Authority goes about his wizardry of deception and delusion.

    Surely one can question the contrived synthetic claims of both the State’s government and the improperly badged STT.

    To not employ the truth is a crime in itself, also in so much as to have the people of Tasmania branded culpable to the contra legal claims “not true” issued out from the Zombie smiler and the State’s official line of nonsense, simply by the people’s awareness of these manifest untruths.

    The incessant criminal abuse of the truth must be identified for what it is, thereby should be exported to responsible media portals to enable persons external to this State to be given access to the truth.

  2. spikey 'no clothes' riddoch

    August 28, 2017 at 10:25 pm

    fitch, you wanna keep quoting your ‘list’, really?

    ‘snoops, whistleblowers, tree huggers, mischievious photographers’

    heaven forbid such people should have access to the peoples forests

    sounds more like a bunch of sausages want to lock it up and knock it down

  3. Russell

    August 28, 2017 at 8:32 pm

    Re #37
    If the shoe fits, fitch.

    The forests are owned by the Australian public, not your bunch of freeloading loser misfits.

    LMAO, the trees on Armitstead were all dead, only good for firewood.

    On the west coast the log trucks are full of matchsticks, another lie fitch.

    You are correct in one statement about nitens weeds though, “certainly not worth the effort of producing it.”

    Can you come up with just one verifiable fact that your industry isn’t a loser, bludging off the public purse?

  4. MjF

    August 28, 2017 at 4:08 pm

    Langfield

    Not the old three fingers back routine again? Can you try something fresh please.

    I can only report the news that you requested.

    I say again if you’re put out by locked gates then presumably you fit into one of the categories so described in my post 29.

    Re armistead, certainly a poor example from Gunns although I did see some being commercially harvested off that property recently, did you not observe that ?

    Many magnificent ha’s being clearfelled along the NW coast and replanted. Trees reaching into the clouds almost. Wound bring a tear to a treegrowers eye. There are buggy tracks west of Railton, get the trap out one day and try them out. Certainly not all failures as you perhaps twistedly like to think.

    I wouldn’t be wasting my time burning nitens, gone in a blink and certainly not worth the effort of producing it. I hope it suits you though. Get on board by all means. Get some of your miserable tax dollars back if you ever paid any that is.

    I am a little curious though. You’re a trifle early coming out of hibernation aren’t you ? Wet the spud bag bunk ?

  5. Russell

    August 28, 2017 at 12:06 pm

    Re #29
    You just described the forest industry in your first sentence! Takes one to know one I suppose. Remember fitch, for every finger you point, there’s three pointing straight back at you.

    Couldn’t tell you how many trailer loads of nitens I see coming out of the plantations though, mostly by pissed-off forestry and ex-forestry workers who know where it all is, but there’s a real thriving industry there. Some even have truckloads of the stuff delivered to their homes. Probably making more money than FT ever did, LMAO!

  6. Russell

    August 28, 2017 at 11:54 am

    Re #27
    Get your facts right fitch. The facilities were in perfect nic near Meander Falls and the public used them for picnics, but now forestry is logging there. The public facilities were going to be in the way of future forestry operations. It’s their old spiteful war cry – “if we can’t have it, then no-one can”.

    ‘Multiple Use Forests’ is nothing but a sign to places the public wasn’t allowed to go, then they were renamed ‘Working Forests’ – more bullshit. Lipstick on a pig, but a pig just the same.

    Only Forestry put gates up fitch, not the public, and it’s to keep the forests for the freeloading dickheads not to make a profit. Fact.

    Anyway, the failure plantations are coming down everywhere at the hands of the public sick of being ripped off. I have to laugh when I see Gunns’ former Armitstead leafless plantations (on prime agricultural land) bulldozed so many years early of harvest.

    Re #30
    As usual fitch your proof is nothing but lies. Did you think no-one would go to your ‘profit’ link? The article is all about FT being caught out fudging the books to pretend they made a profit. And their “rubbery figures” still didn’t take out subsidies and handouts. Nice try though fitch…not.

    Re #31
    The facts are that most of the machinery damage was done by forestry operation against forestry operation in the dog-eat-dog scramble to get petty contracts.

  7. MJF

    August 28, 2017 at 11:50 am

    #32
    Yep, throw away line.
    A fake phone call to an unknown DF,
    another fake conversation somewhere else, another random discussion somewhere else with some other invented person,
    photo captions which are either blatant lies or make no sense….. bit of a pattern in all your stories tedd.

    William seems to be a fan though.

  8. William Boeder

    August 28, 2017 at 12:55 am

    #29 &30;. MJF.

    https://www.farmlandgrab.org/post/view/27352-chinese-billionaire-tried-to-sell-van-diemen-s-land-company-before-buying-it

    Still on the hunt for hidden or camouflaged references.
    Current sales income not yet presenting as high as 2014 sales figures had presented.

    In due time owner Mr Li is going to be in more financial scat than Speed Gordon.
    The entire purchase was by of (a 100% extension of debt) upon Mr Lu’s current not necessarily tangible assets.

    So at this point in time it carries no asset value for Mr Lu.

    Mr Shwe is by photo image appears as a female rather than a male.

    An opportune Ms Jan Cameron may still be in the running if she cares to profit by engaging in the pursuit offering a “moderate” rescue package in X amount of unencumbered $$ unto the eyes of Mr Lu.
    I wonder if any ex-real-estate rat was up for a spotters fee or sellers commission.
    Wealthy svelte and smiling elites are quite capable of committing the same crimes as do the poverty riddled unfortunates.

  9. Ted Mead

    August 28, 2017 at 12:12 am

    #27 – You need to take a good look of aerial maps across the Dempster Plains area – Numerous coupes dotted across the landscape, predominantly kilometres apart.

    Extensive roading and more than likely cost negative forestry activity!

    Throw a way line hey – but Fact as usual!!!!!

    You see, even those who work within the fallible industry don’t even know – or want to know what’s happened or is happening out there!

  10. Ted Mead

    August 27, 2017 at 7:58 pm

    #27 & 28 Locked gates are only a deterrent.

    This is public land and so accessing it with two wheels is easy and legal.

    I would probably support the concept of gates as to protect machinery from vandalism, but history shows that didn’t wor in rare occasions there was vandalistic events.

    And the word is – that those events came from within the industry, not through the Wilderness society as Paul Lennon claimed in parliament under his privileged protection.

  11. MJF

    August 27, 2017 at 6:32 pm

    #23
    Previously forgot the last time profitable query, but according to the ABC, it was 2014/15

    Then they got a whack from Transend in July 1, 2015 for the new FY.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-27/forestry-tasmania-turns-around-finances-and-posts-profit/6888454

  12. MjF

    August 27, 2017 at 6:16 pm

    #28

    KO, I’ll try again – dickheads, thieves, vandals, snoops, whistleblowers, tree huggers, mischievious photographers, troublemakers, lowlifes, woodhookers, the night shift and lost tourists.

    Does that about capture most of your demographics ?

    How does T Mead get about so much with all these gates in place ?

    Keys are always available to genuine types with legitimate reasons for entry (for a small deposit which is returned when the key is).

    If you’re genuine you’ll get entry. Not necessarily my policy but I’m not in a position to decide so there you have it, until it’s changed.

    What have you unearthed at VDL william ?

  13. William Boeder

    August 27, 2017 at 5:44 pm

    #27. MJF, Steady as you go cried the captain, this matter of gates is not quite the way you have so imprecisely stated, as locked gates are also a ruse to allow for private sinister purpose as well as to lock out public surveillance also kept that way to prevent public access, fact.
    Locked gates are to prevent whistle-blower observation and photo opportunities.
    Locked gates are also a ruse to hide sinister incursions by former Forestry Tasmania, how else can one slip in and conduct a raid followed by a cover-up mono-species plantation set to growing inside the boundaries of HVC and Heritage listed forest.

    The secrets rest with the holder of the keys, hark back to the days of the Gunns Ltd era with the abject support of the dastard Lennon (Llewellyn and giggler Green ululating in the background) locked gates served many a different purpose.
    Having in times past proceeded on foot beyond locked gates, the unfolding secrecy is there to be seen in the rawness of its despoil.

  14. MjF

    August 27, 2017 at 4:13 pm

    #21
    Gilmour,
    Interesting take on the situation. So FT had to repair/replace a culvert twice in a road they had already built into a coupe (which would have already been in their harvest schedule via their 3 year plan if access was constructed)?

    Now all of a sudden and as a result of additional spending, the clearfell is now your fault ??

    It seems to me the clearfell was always going to happen.

    …..and by your own admission – “Even though they had ear marked the area for logging prior to”

    So you clearly weren’t responsible for the clearfell. They were maybe a bit pissed it took a local to highlight their shabby culvert work, but not much else in it.

    Any chance you can repost your letter from FT, I can’t help but think you’ve misconstrued the content.

    An interesting anecdote but irrelevant to anything I’ve previously stated re the whole economics of tonnes recovered vs cost of roading

    As I was saying and just to refresh your memory,

    “Mead, you have not the slightest idea whether the costs of building logging roads through sumac, Dempster, holder, Balfour, Gould Country,
    Catarmaran or anywhere else were recouped by the wood volumes moved”

    #23

    Awesome ted – here’s my proof ?

    Another throw away line is what I see.

    Like “the discussion you had the with FC economist many years ago”, or the “largest area of devastation I’ve ever seen” etc etc and so forth.

    Do you seriously think 4 kilometres of road built into an isolated and very small coupe would not be accessing additional wood along the way ?

    All 4 km built across buttongrass plain was it ?

    You’re right on one account teddy – more BS made up.

    #23
    Same old, same old Langfield
    Gated roads do not lead you to multiple use forests.

    Gated roads lead to active harvest areas for obvious reasons of OH&S.

    Multiple use forests do not have gates in front of them.

    I don’t know the deal behind Meander Falls situation but if facilities have been removed then they probably couldn’t afford to maintain them. If logging is going on then there’s another clue for a perceptive person.

    Sadly the only reason gates are installed is to keep dickheads out. If you’ve had a problem with gated access, then the policy seems to be working.

    $24 WB
    Good of you to acknowledge my comment references are largely correct. But not fully correct ?

  15. William Boeder

    August 26, 2017 at 3:51 pm

    Hello Russell, I seem to recall that on the discovery of the devil facial tumour disease there was nil next to nothing aid response initiated by the State government of the day.
    I mention this given the rapidly diminishing habitat of the Astacopsis Gouldi and a recent State government blurb of doing something or other like the halt to USTT muddying up the shallow creaks and streams in ongoing clear-fell log harvested areas.
    Now that you appear to be back in Tasmania do you recall that the Devil facial tumour disease (immune-suppressant) actually had originated from an area in Tasmania that had suffered intense chemical saturation?
    Also that there were consistent relativities that the cause for the rapid onset of that Devil disease also had its specificities to the logging operations that occurred quite randomly in that same area all that long time ago.
    Now have you thought about the new termed or re-badged logging entity euphemism of STT, would it not be far more accurate if these initials incorporated the letter U at the front end of this STT, then reading as USTT, would be far more representational considering that no new forests have appeared out of the ground or could possibly do so before the expiration of 90 years.

    I now refer to the 90 year duration figure as was claimed to be essential to regenerate a clear-felled area that was earlier determined by the Former Scientific Geronimo’s of Forestry Tasmania had then allocated for full regeneration, though this seems never allowed its fruition (based on the Ta Ann/Forestry Tasmania formulae) as they had earlier claimed, with Forestry Tasmania being well able to cope with logs harvested from the current forest timber production harvest zone allocated areas,rather than in any soon foregoing time, or even in half of the allotted period of 90 years.

    Given that TA Ann claims its logs are definitely not from HCV or Ancient Rain Forest realm areas of that which is delivered to their receiving depot, (while at some recent prior time Ta Ann was purchasing its preferred log-size volumes that were being derived from prohibited natural regenerating native forest specified zones to inevitably fulfil their original gifted annual log supply.) which had been so haphazardly gifted back in 2005-6.
    I find that the opening of vast new realm of forest reserves to continue the so called “sustainable” gifted annual log supply to Ta Ann, now by the now STT hatted harvesting contractors.

    Better to be added the extra letter of ‘U’ to the front end of STT (to then read USTT) would be far more honestly applicable given the opening up of new forest reserves now going to become an antithesis of STT.

    So based on the necessity of immediate access to new impounded forest reserves by the sheer necessity to access even more forested area for clear-fell harvest of logs for the nil provision of profitable income from Ta Ann, though I believe is required to zip the remainder of the non so discerningly graded logs el-rapido to the wood-chippers, (over and above the need for a 4% quota of perfect A grade sawlogs) how does this confounder of STT fit under the same sized hat of the re-badged forestry Tasmania that suddenly becomes viewed as “yep we are still really truly fully sustainable.”
    Hmm, another questionable utterance exiting through the Zombie smile of a forests minister, who I will leave to be an person anonymous for now.
    I believe the USTT referencing Initials would be far more an accurate and applicable set of badge letters than to warrant the bogus fiasco of STT.
    (My pardon on the trespass of the ‘forum attendee’ known as bogus fiasco.)
    2 last questions Russell, from your residential dwelling height above the surrounding regions, have you noticed any new old growth regenerated forest coupes springing out of former clear-felled areas over this past say 15 years?

    A non-sceptical person would automatically accept each of the myths of information published in cock-eyed State government media released propaganda statements, so may I ask if you yourself are on side with myself as a sceptic? (Realist.)

  16. Russell

    August 26, 2017 at 11:44 am

    Re #24
    Co-incidental how the Devil Facial Tumour Disease only occurs where forestry and their poisons have been.

    Also, this year the Leatherwood honey manufucturers (who also produce more sustainable money and jobs for Tasmania, with no forest destruction) had to helicopter their hives into the forests because the bridges and roads weren’t repaired after the floods. I’m sure they will be once FT needs to get in there to continue their rape.

  17. William Boeder

    August 25, 2017 at 8:49 pm

    20. Fitch, thank you for your advice, though not the attitude held by you as a person bereft of entitlement to scathingly respond to attendees (in myview) to this forum that you have lately adopted.
    In response to your advice this link information held within happens to qualify your forestry and logging componentry held within otherwise scathing response to my comments and their assertions.
    Yet it is with much trepidation held by me to any announcement that issues from this State’s powerbroker Miles Hampton in his utilizing the names of others to express the purposes he intends.
    http://www.vdlfarms.com.au/assets/files/VDL Press Releases/Media Release VDL – EBPC lodgment Feb 2014 (final).docx.pdf

    (it is proposed to construct a devil proof fence with the cooperation of VDL, DPIPWE and Devil Island Projects Inc.
    • The fence will protect the Woolnorth population from the disease.)

    I acknowledge your comment references were largely correct, I now propose to spend some spare time reading up on the report of the Chief Forest Authority commencing from page 11.

    This excerpt from the link content itself has a rather disputable inconsistency held within its pages, that the true purpose of this special design of fence was deviously presented a Tasmanian Devil isolating fence seems rather gratuitous, when I learnt from an insider that this particular fence was deemed essential to halt the trespass of the grazing incursions by the native marsupials dwelling within their natural habitat zones.
    The dread being that the regions marsupials will devour pasture intended for the increased dairy herd consumption.
    I acknowledge your comment references were largely correct, I now propose to spend some time reading up on the report of the Chief Forest Authority Graeme Wilkinson, commencing from page 11.
    Thank you.

  18. Russell

    August 25, 2017 at 7:25 pm

    Re #19
    Well you should because ALL the money, every cent, came from the public purse, therefore the public paid for it. Tell us where you think it came from?

    Multiple use forests, my arse! Who else other than Forestry used them? They were gated and locked by Forestry.

    Even recently, so-called publicly shared facilities at Meander Falls have been removed by Forestry, and before you lie, they were NOT anywhere near any flood damage.

    So, why were they removed? Is it co-incidental that that area is now being logged?

    Wake up, fitch.

    Regarding making profits, fitch, provide us with the last time FT made one (without subsidies or any other handouts) so that you can’t be seen as the “total bullshitter who makes statements up with no backing or evidence to support your lunacy”.

    It would be so much more cost effective for FT to be wound up and all put on the dole to find a real job than to pay the elite welfare payments they currently thrive on.

    It’s a backward loser industry, spreading weeds throughout the country and destroying the environment which thousands of people come to see with absolutely no intention of making a profit.

    Tourism brings much more money and jobs into the state than your destructive little clan of resource parasites.

  19. Ted Mead

    August 25, 2017 at 7:09 pm

    #19 – Here’s your proof – though I know you will say it’s B.S again, but that’s your problem as I’m sure most readers here will not doubt it.

    Actually i had a phone conversation many years ago with a senior district forester. I was making enquiries about the logging of a magnificent E.brookeriana area.

    The district forester stated to me that he had an obligation to fulfil a pulpwood contract so he wasn’t interested in what was the significant of the forest was, and simply claimed there are representations of this forest everywhere along the west coast.

    However he did admit to me that the 4 kilometre road to an isolated and very small coupe would cost more than what the resource of the coupe would provide.

    He was just doing what he is told as always – just like all the other sheep that crawl and bleat in their insular lives whilst grovelling along the the Forestry gravy train!

    Maybe it was you who I spoke to?

    Sounds like your language and unprincipled ethics!

  20. Claire Gilmour

    August 25, 2017 at 6:59 pm

    #19 MjF, I have a letter from Forestry Tasmania, albeit some years ago and posted on TT

    which states Forestry Tasmania only logged a coupe next to me because they wanted to re-coupe money because a culvert/bridge/road area they put in washed out – twice, which I personally warned/told them about.

    The first time half the road disappeared over the culvert/bridge, the second time it was undercut.

    This area was the turn-around point for their logging trucks.

    Someone could have died traversing that culvert/bridge/road if I had not been vigilant – FT certainly weren’t.

    SO they had to repair road and blamed me, in writing, for the coupe clearfell –

    Even though they had ear marked the area for logging prior to!

    SO you were saying MjF …!?!

    I think it goes something like this …

    MjF should apologise to Ted Mead ……

  21. MjF

    August 25, 2017 at 5:55 pm

    #18
    Boeder
    Refer to the recent mead story on “STT economics”.

    The one headed up by the blackened coupe photo and captioned by one of teds better lies referring to it as a view of 400 ha of devastation. VDL Comments are on the end of that string If memory serves.

    To save you another simple search, the headlines are 1800 ha approved, not 7000 and none of it done yet.

    Regards and good afternoon.

  22. MjF

    August 25, 2017 at 5:43 pm

    #16
    No I do not. The taxpayer didn’t pay for these facilities but they were established for (presumably) everyone’s pleasure.

    There used to a concept called Multiple Use Forests – You may have heard of that.

    Back to sleep langfield.

    #17
    Mead, you have not the slightest idea whether the costs of building logging roads through sumac, Dempster, holder, Balfour, Gould Country, Catarmaran or anywhere else were recouped by the wood volumes moved.

    You a total bullshitter who makes statements up with no backing or evidence to support your lunacy.

    If you see a reserve or two as simply tokenistic, good for you.
    A few of your fellow old lag hardliners would view things similarly I’m sure.

    Mr Middleton was suitably impressed though, perhaps you should get in his ear and explain the finer points of the world according to you.

    I anticipate the millions of handout money is being spent on wages, the rent, servicing loans, maintaining fire equipment, road building into wood and anything else which will keep them immediately afloat. Not surprising that maintenance has fallen by the wayside. The situation must be dire.

    Visual management – yes, questionable but very subjective. If a retained screen or buffer blows over, no point leaving the mess.

  23. William Boeder

    August 25, 2017 at 5:05 pm

    Now, Mr Mjf I have since double-checked the history of your comments that are retained in the MJF pages of contributed comments printed on Tasmanian Times, nary a mention on a VDL subject matter could I find.
    I had typed in your known 3 letter non de plume of MJF up did spring a recorded of comments published back to 2012.
    When one considers the recent sale of the VDL Land Company, I then sourced the internet, then as article appeared that was published in the Australian Financial Review that caught my eye.

    I leave you a link below to access that article about VDL sale, in my view this giant property sales would certainly have had the tentacles of Miles Hampton keeping a strangle-hold of a great deal of the Tasmanian government funding that had been sniped upon by this Tasmanian director riven all through it, this report still leaves a number of questions yet to be responded to, while glossing over certain in-house dealings of the VDL of its recent times.
    https://www.farmlandgrab.org/post/view/27352-chinese-billionaire-tried-to-sell-van-diemen-s-land-company-before-buying-it

  24. Ted Mead

    August 25, 2017 at 4:14 pm

    This whole thing about FT being the saviour for providing public access is absolute B.S

    Many of the roads put through the Sumac, Dempster, Balfour logging operations cost more to construct that the resources extracted.

    These forest reserves such as Julius River and Milkshake Hills were most likely part of the Forest industry PR program. The reserves themselves are small tokenistic representations of the once magnificent pre-logged region.

    Back in the mid to late 1980’s FC were spending over $4 million some years on their propaganda PR campaign. Visitor services and the maintenance of such may have not even been inclusive of that?

    What’s happened hey? – who is managing these reserves now? – STT are relinquishing anything that may relate to maintenance works and/or costs.

    STT has been recently granted $millions to maintain roads (on the premise of access for tourism, so it was stated) so where is this money being spent? Certainly not on the Tarkine Tourist Drive!

    As from earlier this month I noticed the sealed Tarkine Tourist road has not had any of the tree windfalls removed across the road since last autumn. This has been exacerbated from the recent and blatant clearfell operations, which was conducted right up to the edge of the sealed road.

    So much for visual management – STT have become a embarrassment to any form of logging practices standards.

    Stand by for some more visual exposure on this!!!

  25. Russell

    August 25, 2017 at 2:36 pm

    Re #2
    You mean the tax payer paid for the roads, built the bridges, the culverts, the walking tracks and established these reserves for EVERYONE to access and enjoy so much, don’t you Martin?

    Forestry has paid for NOTHING.

  26. philll Parsons

    August 24, 2017 at 4:32 pm

    #7 It’s not a reason not to create a National
    Park.

  27. Mjf

    August 24, 2017 at 3:12 am

    #13
    Absolutely no problem with night time loading and cartage provided contractors develop a suitable safe work method statement to address and manage issues such as adequate lighting, where people will be located and how they are to communicate, PPE to be worn for night work etc.

    No special approvals of permits required. Just switch the lights on.

    A mechanical harvesting operation i.e. plantation based, can operate around the clock perfectly safely if required to do so.

    I have commented (twice) re the VDL clearing situation on another string as previously indicated to you.

  28. William Boeder

    August 23, 2017 at 11:08 pm

    Mjf, when you claim that the Forestry Commission developed these reserves, lookouts and associated picnic spots I can accept that statement.
    Today’s article by Ted Mead is not critical of the Forestry Commission in that aspect of visitor friendly places.
    However the introduction of F/T STT into the subject matter is where the fluted music comes to an abrupt halt, as that was the time when the rot began to set in.
    Forestry Tasmania called themselves a Forestry management entity (what a load of bullshit) as this was the mob that sacrificed an enormous amount of native old growth forested realm to the plunders of J Gay R Gray and other plunderlust persons.

    I wonder what may be the cause or reason for late-night log loaded trucks to be scarpering along the Murchison Highway at whatever time of dark, as I often wonder why the night time transportation has necessitated or found the need for this late night early morning transport of logs?
    Would these dark of night transports of logs be ordained or approved of by the new (non-sustainable) STT blundering Barnett system?
    I say this with regard to safe worker safety and safe work practices, as darkness would hinder the loading of these late night loads.
    By the way have you hunted down the FPA authority planning and approval documents for that area of 7000 hectares up Woolnorth way?
    I am yet to discover who Mr Miles Hampton had approved to be the buyers of this gigantor volume of logs, perhaps you might like to comment on this log disposal matter.

  29. Mjf

    August 23, 2017 at 6:06 pm

    Further to my #11, I was referring to the Kunnunah Bridge as the “Arthur River bridge”.
    FC also built the original Tayatea Bridge which was washed away after many years servicing log trucks, they also developed all the forest reserves, lookouts and associated picnic spots in the general area now promoted as key spots on the Tarkine Drive. Nothing new about these.

    I worked for FC at Smithton in the early 1980’s and they all existed then thanks to the Forestry Commission and some foresight.

    #9 Respectfully Peter I’m not about to dump forestry companies into the court of public opinion who haven’t been and don’t derserve to be here, just to be ridiculed.

  30. MJF

    August 23, 2017 at 5:02 pm

    #10
    Take note, poster #1 visited lake chisholm “almost 20 years ago”

    This a long time before anyone dreamt up the concept of the Tarkine Explorer or indeed budgeted for it, officially opened in 2015.

    Whilst this road includes new construction it also included substantial upgrading of existing logging roads. Logging roads Middleton had the choice to use .

    There was no sealed road nearly 20 years ago when #1 first visited the lake. He was even warned by his car hirer not to go on these roads as they were gravel only. Not quite the Tarkine Explorer as you enjoy it now.

    He got there using forestry roads from the Arthur River bridge , pure and simple.

    The Arthur River bridge, integral to your Tourist Drive, was also built by the then Forestry Commission for log cartage.

    Not quite as you thought.

  31. Carol Rea

    August 23, 2017 at 4:09 pm

    The Tarkine Drive was opened with much fanfare by the Premier in 2015 at a cost of $23 million and designated a tourist road accessible to tourists with hire cars now that it was sealed.
    Definitely not an FT/STT project.
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-24/new-road-opens-tarkine-region-up-to-more-tourist-traffic/6569884
    Stanley Visitor Centre has a lovely brochure as well http://www.stanley.com.au/stanleyedge/wp-content/uploads/Tarkine-Drive-Guide-2.pdf

  32. Peter Godfrey

    August 23, 2017 at 3:34 pm

    #8 MJF just wondering which industry companies you are referring to when you say.
    “You should also recognise there are probably another 6 or 7 industry companies operating here that have never received anything in the way of handouts that I’m aware of. They continue to sink or swim on their own merits but with the rare ability to self manage.”

  33. MJF

    August 23, 2017 at 2:51 pm

    # 6
    An almost fair question Mr Halfpenny for once, instead of your usual blend of satirical and esoteric nonsense.

    I don’t know why that is but certainly some players have had the ear of benefactor governments for a long period of time. And no doubt been very well represented by the influential “industry” interest groups that abound or at least once did has helped.

    Having the status of a GBE (as one recipient entity does) structurally would also make it difficult to sever the umbilical by the parent.

    How I wish I’d been on the receiving end of some of the gifting.

    Note I say some players as distinct from the industry as a whole which doesn’t/hasn’t received benefits across the board per se.

    Obviously the biggest culprit had been FT/STT in recent years, followed by (but not in any order) Ta Ann, Gunns and individual sawmillers, showered with federal monies for retooling, R&D etc etc. to ready themselves for the arrival of the almost mystical plantation grown sawlogs

    You should also recognise there are probably another 6 or 7 industry companies operating here that have never received anything in the way of handouts that I’m aware of. They continue to sink or swim on their own merits but with the rare ability to self manage.

    So it’s quite incorrect to accuse the ‘industry’ of receiving wholesale handouts as that is not the case.

  34. TGC

    August 23, 2017 at 12:46 pm

    #1 “…I can attest to its appeal as a tourist destination…”
    Now that’s fine if, say, now and again a ‘tourist’ wanders trough the area- foot or car- or bike.
    But what if many hundreds arrive over increasingly shorter periods – suddenly the road/track maintenace factor- let alone the ‘threats’ they may pose to the environment – become issues that could well negate any backpacker tourist benefits.
    As always with ‘wilderness tourism’ it’s a finely balanced ‘industry’ but pressured to keep performing by those who have invested in it- big or niche investors.

  35. john hayward

    August 22, 2017 at 9:01 pm

    #2, MjF. While you’re on the subject, why has forestry attracted massive subsidies and support, when it has largely been a destructive drain on the state’s economy?

    Is it due to Govt’s famous buddy system with entities sharing similar scruples?

    John Hayward

  36. MJF

    August 22, 2017 at 4:19 pm

    #3
    Stranger still, I think you’ll find these reserves and associated infrastructure were established, to be enjoyed by tourists, a long time before any subsides were kicked in.

    I suggest ongoing maintenance costs of non core facilities like these which return nothing fiscally to STT, are part of the current problem.

  37. John Wade

    August 22, 2017 at 4:08 pm

    “Lucky for you Mr Middleton the forest industry constructed the roads, built the bridges, the culverts, the walking tracks and established these reserves for you to access and enjoy so much …..and for free.”

    – we are exceedingly grateful and hope that they continue to do the same, after all, we are paying them to do so.

  38. Helen

    August 22, 2017 at 4:04 pm

    #2 Strange. I was under the impression that our taxes funded Forestry Tasmania.

  39. MJF

    August 22, 2017 at 3:59 pm

    #1
    Lucky for you Mr Middleton the forest industry constructed the roads, built the bridges, the culverts, the walking tracks and established these reserves for you to access and enjoy so much …..and for free.

    That would be the the same tree murdering mob who shouldn’t be allowed near children. I’m surprised you even partook of these delights on principle.

  40. Robert Middleton

    August 22, 2017 at 3:26 pm

    What a great idea, Ted! It all makes perfect sense.

    I went to Lake Chisholm almost 20 years ago. I remember it vividly as a magical place unquestionably worthy of preservation and I can attest to its appeal as a tourist destination when coupled with visits to tall trees and other forest attractions in that area.

    As for the Julius River Forest Reserve, it’s a quiet, hidden gem of a place. The first time I went there some years ago I was warned by the nearly hysterical car hire agent in Launceston “You can’t go there! That road is banned for hired cars. You cannot drive our car on that road.” I decided to risk it and went anyway, hoping I wouldn’t get pulverized by a logging truck. Fortunately, that didn’t happen and I’m glad I took the risk. I made return visits in subsequent years and I know that many visitors would love that relatively short, easy trail through the forest and down along the river. I hope such an opportunity will be available for many generations to come.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

To Top