You are here

Are Victorian governments trying to get rid of Victorian wildlife on purpose?

Video inside. This article is about the effects of 390,000 ha of native vegetation targeted to be burned every year in Victoria, Australia's most cleared state. The video inside this article documents how vast numbers of Australian wildlife are burned alive in scientifically dubious prescribed burns, mandated by the Victorian Government. It asks whether the cruel and avoidable fate of many wildlife in prescribed burns is really protecting human lives and assets or merely a way of meeting an arbitrary target. Others would be much harsher and say that this may be a calculated strategy to rid the state of wildlife in addition to an apparently deliberate failure to cooperate with wildlife activists in making easily protected wildlife corridors to connect viable habitat.[1]

The Labor Government in Victoria created these machinally destructive laws after the 2009 bushfires, but the Liberal Government has not questioned them. Those currently heading the Victorian animal holocaust are Dennis Napthine, Premier of Victoria (denis.napthine [ AT ] parliament.vic.gov.au),
Ryan Smith, Environment Victoria Minister (ryan.smith [ AT ] parliament.vic.gov.au) and
Peter Walsh Minister for Agriculture (peter.walsh [ AT ] parliament.vic.gov.au).

Government burning off decisions arising from the bushfire commission seem mostly based on spin. They do not acknowledge in their methods to avert bushfires the predominant role of humans in starting them. Nature accounts for only about 6% of fires, mostly in the form of lightening. Ninety point nine per cent (90.9%) of vegetation fires are caused by humans through arson (35.2), through 'accidents' (36.2%), by 'incendiary' (? explosions etc) (13.3%), and through prescribed burns reigniting (5.4%). (3.9% are described as 'other'.)

"Bushfire, arson, what do we know now?" (the source of the above graph and figures) is a Productivity Commission report on the role of arson in creating fires. As we might expect of the economic technocracy, one of their recommendations is prescribed burn-offs to limit the arsonist's bang for his/her buck! In other words, do the job for them? Absolutely no regard or even a thought for the living creatures that suffer. The authors note that it is hard to stop arson in large vegetated areas. We note, however, that there has been a huge reduction in parks and forest staff on the ground, like rangers, since the Kennett government 1992-1999, with Labor governments continuing this folly.

Shooters encouraged in parks, but not wildlife carers

Whilst governments are gung-ho to allow shooters into national parks to 'control pests', what about compensating wildlife activists and carers who are willing to roster themselves in forests during the fire-season and to monitor animal welfare and visitor activity, day and night if necessary? People who care for injured wildlife and love the bush are very unlikely to set fire to habitat.

Faulty bushfire management compounds faulty climate change management

The values of the Liberal Government avoid the issue of climate change. Their population growth and development policies (like the Labor government's before them, despite the rhetoric) actively increase high carbon-emission producing activities and drying and warming of land. Much of Australia's carbon emissions come from land-clearing, but in Victoria (and Australia) the government is encouraging more new development, and consequently more land-clearing. As well, intensification of development means that people are confined to small airless and eaveless appartments which can only be cooled by air-conditioners, which put heat into the air outside and demand more coal-fired electricity to run. Victoria's grotesque 'planning policies' increase local heat island effect and the overall risk of the climate heating and drying. We note that Victoria is soon to subject VCAT to committee regulation that will see even less control over the 'planning' that is overrunning our democracy and heating our environment.[3]

The mass media and government have avoided acknowledging the demonstrable fact that old growth forests burn much less than new or 'managed' forests. New forests and plantations dry through thinning or through repeated burnoffs which then favour combustible vegetation that survives fires, thus creating a man-made fire-vulnerable landscape and reduction to inland rainfall. The prescribed annual burn-off target greatly increases the drying of vegetated land and vegetation kinds. Trees not only create local 'heat islands' but vast old-growth forests cool vast portions of the environment as well as efficiently regulating below-ground and above ground hydration through transpiration.

For those who were in Victoria during the 2009 fires, and remember the heat leading up to the fires, the active promotion through legislation of these drying factors (although in guise of fire-precautions) is insane. At best it appears like gross incoordination of knowledge and policy; at worst it seems quasi-homicidal.

Government by the ethically bereft in Victoria and Australia

It is as if we are governed by a self-appointed moneyed caste which has lost all respect for nature, other species and the citizens of Victoria themselves. The environmental laws are flouted [2]and then, when attention is drawn to this, our corrupt parliaments simply change the laws.

For those of us who grew up in a social environment that enjoyed the outdoors and strongly valued passive interaction with native wildlife, with a culture of wildlife protection and respect, this is shocking. We realise that we are ruled by a planning technocracy that has no higher human values, makes empty promises, speaks in cliches, and makes laws to advantage its members.

It has taken many of us decades to accept that this is really what is happening. At best we are witnesses to great callousness, at worst we are witness to the construction by elites of a kind of civilisation that is only concerned with enriching a small elite at the expense of their fellows and the total destruction of the natural world.

The people responsible are obviously not able to work out the ultimate consequences of their policies, which will see a so-degraded Austrlaia that survival for most, if not all, will become doubtful. They are also not scientists, except in the technologies that further their immediate wealth. They have no humane philosophies. If they are religious, it is with dogmas that blind them to consequences and help them to further their own immediate interests. They are like Steven King's Tommyknockers, whom education has equipped with "a limited form of genius which makes them very inventive, but does not provide any philosophical or ethical insight. Instead, it provokes psychotic violence."[4]

This class is also ruling all states of Australia.

Inquiry into 2009 bushfires

The article below is a report on the inquiry into the 2009 Victorian bushfires, which were among the most frightening ever, occurring in deadly temperatures in the mid-forties. It shows the typical approach of the mainstream media, which always backs the status quo and attributes science and foresight to the establishment in its conditioning comments about how 'scientific evaluations have always been part of intelligent fuel reduction strategy' and its illogical conclusion that 'an effective wildfire control strategy must attempt to control fires throughout the forests. The paragraphs quoted below, however, also contain telling comments from environmentalists, but these paragraphs were right at the end of the full article, where most people never read. To consign these important observations to the end of the article, naturally diminishes their value in the readers' eyes. Also, note the use of 'experts' in the Royal Commission. Experts are usually part of the establishment. If you are not part of the establishment or disagree with it, then newspapers are unlikely to call you an 'expert'.

"Environmentalists, who for years have opposed fuel-reduction burns on the grounds that they damage the environment, have taken a new tack. The Greens, for example, now claim that they never opposed prescribed burning, but wanted a scientific evaluation of each burn conducted before it was approved, to ensure the survival of fauna and flora.

While this sounds reasonable, the fact is that these considerations have always been part of an intelligent fuel-reduction strategy, which must recognise that fires have been a natural feature of the bush, and it can be assumed that fauna and flora are adapted to survive low-to-moderate intensity fires.

[Candobetter comment: The huge arbitrary annual target promotes a regularity of holocaust that was never present in the environment where Australian animals evolved. Furthermore, this pyromaniacal target occurs in the most cleared state and where wildlife are threatened by many other intensifying and expanding processes. To cite evolutionary theory under these conditions is inappropriate and has grave consequences, as we see in the film above.]

Another line of attack, put forward by some environmental groups in central Victoria, is that the DSE should be setting fire to grass and weeds in close proximity to housing, rather than burning forests.

A spokesman for the groups said, "We cannot understand why DES fuel-reduction teams keep burning public forest blocks, when the dangerous areas closer to settlements are neglected." (Bendigo Advertiser, March 24, 2010).

Another member claimed that the DSE had produced no research analysing the effect of fuel-reduction burns on central Victoria's box-ironbark forests. The groups had adopted the motto, "Hazards not Hectares", to emphasise the need for burns in high-risk areas, rather than large areas of bush.

However, an effective wildfire control strategy must attempt to control fires throughout the forests, without neglecting high-risk areas close to human habitation. " (Source: "BUSHFIRES: Victoria changes tack on fuel-reduction burns," by Peter Westmore, News Weekly, April 17, 2010

NOTES


[1] Such as those of Maryland Wilson, Malcolm Legg and Hans Brunner http://candobetter.net/?q=node/1012 and http://candobetter.net/?q=taxonomy/term/73over years on the Mornington Peninsula, attempting to link Greensbush National Park with Devilbend Reservoir, sundry then extant green paces and Frankston Reservoir. All eroded by development and then all prospects of a corridor completely destroyed - some would say gratuitously - by Peninsula Link - which could have provided many underpasses and overpasses but only provided one, in the Pines Flora and Fauna reserve, where the local Frankston Council then failed to use money allocated by government to install a predator proof fence to protect the local bandicoot population, which then became extinct. Now our only hope is a southern brown bandicoot program in the Werribee Zoo. Imagine! Needing a zoo to preserve this once common animal. Everything, from kangaroos to platypuses is now stuck in the remaining isolated and dwindling patches of habitat on Mornington Peninsula, which has been targeted for growth since Jeff Kennet made it part of Greater Melbourne. Instead of a green peninsula biosphere once touted, the Victorian government intends to build new roads and railway down to Hastings Port, of which 400 ha it then means for intensive industrial development.

[2]Victorian Fauna and Flora Guarantee Act
Auditor General's reports

[3] "GENERAL BUSINESS
7 JULY 2014

10. CHANGES TO THE VICTORIAN AND CIVIL ADMINISTRATIVE (VCAT) ACT
Planning Appeals Coordinator: Gareth Gale
General Manager Planning & Development: Stuart Draffin

PURPOSE
The purpose of this report is to brief Councillors on changes made by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) Amendment Bill 2014.

BACKGROUND
On 1 April 2014, the VCAT Amendment Bill 2014 received Royal Assent, and became effective on 2 June 2014. No community consultation occurred as part of this Amendment.

DISCUSSION
The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Amendment Bill 2014 contains substantial reforms relevant to the planning jurisdiction.

Most significantly, the reforms would enable the Tribunal to:
1. Invite a responsible authority to reconsider its decision at any time in a review proceeding
2. Make an order in relation to fees (including application and hearing fees), separate from its power to award costs
3. More actively manage the use and giving of expert evidence in proceedings
4. Make an order removing a person as a party to a proceeding if it considers that:
•??the person's interests are not affected by the proceeding; or
•??the person is not a proper or necessary party to the proceeding
5. Delegate certain functions of the Tribunal (such as making procedural orders or consent orders) to its registrars.

It is the first two reforms that are likely to be of most significance to Council. Below is a summary of those two proposed reforms.

New section 51A - Tribunal May Invite Decision-Maker to Reconsider Decision

In the context of the planning jurisdiction, this new provision would enable the Tribunal to invite a responsible authority (usually Council) to reconsider its decision at any time in the proceeding. The new section provides that on receiving the invitation to reconsider, the responsible authority may:
•??Affirm the decision
•??Vary the decision
•??Set aside the decision and substitute a new decision for it.

The new provision requires the Tribunal to ensure that, as far as possible, a proceeding's priority is not affected by inviting the responsible authority to reconsider its decision (unless the parties consent). As a consequence, the Tribunal may specify a timeframe within which a responsible authority may reconsider its decision.

One possible opportunity for Council to reconsider its decision might be following mediation and/or the amendment of plans. However, this process only seems warranted in order to avoid a hearing extending across multiple days – cases which are generally contained within the Major Cases List. Given there is clear intent in the new provisions to ensure a proceeding is not delayed further, coupled with the fact that all Major Cases List applications have hearings listed only six weeks after any mediation, it is difficult to contemplate under what circumstance this process will be useful.

It is further noted that Council already has the opportunity to reconsider its position during a VCAT process. As such, this change to the VCAT Act might not offer any new real change other than introducing a more formal mechanism to do so. This new process raises a number of procedural questions which are yet to be understood.

New Section 115 – New Power to Make Orders in Relation to Fees

This section provides that the Tribunal may, at any time, make an order that a party to
the proceeding:
•??Reimburse another party the whole or any part of any fee paid by that other party in the proceeding;
•??Pay, on behalf of another party, the whole or any part of any fee that may be required to be paid in the future by that other party in the proceeding;
•??Reimburse another party the whole or any part of any fee that may be paid in the future by that other party in the proceeding; and
•??Require a party to pay the whole or any part of a fee in future in the proceeding.

The key area that this could be useful for Council is in Enforcement Order Applications (EAO’s). Given EAO’s are generally only made in the situation where Council is forced to do so, the Tribunal could award the reimbursement of the $802 fee to Council.

SUMMARY
The new changes to the VCAT have been introduced with little forewarning or consultation.

The implications of the changes, and particularly those at the new section 51A, are unclear amongst those working within the planning profession. At this stage, there appears little opportunity to enact this new provision, particularly given there is clear intent in the new provisions to ensure a proceeding is not delayed further.

The new changes will be monitored to better inform our understanding of how they will affect Council and other stakeholders.

HUMAN RIGHTS CONSIDERATION
The recommendation complies with the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and
Responsibilities Act 2006.

RECOMMENDATION
That Council note this report."

[4] Quote from Wikipedia summary of the plot of Steven King's The Tommyknockers, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tommyknockers

Comments

Australia is one of the few mega-diverse nations in the world, teaming with endemic wildlife. This gives us a rich diversity, the result of long periods of evolution. The arid interior occupies approximately 70 per cent of the continent, with tropical monsoon areas to the north and a Mediterranean and temperate climate to the south. It's been more than 20 million years following the break-up of the ancient Gondwanan landmass, a period that saw extensive evolutionary divergence of its plants, animals and microorganisms.

Australian species are adapted to poor soils, are tolerant of extreme conditions and can be easily propagated and regenerated which makes them highly valued worldwide. It is estimated that 40 per cent of tropical plantations in the world are of Australian species.

Clearing the land of vegetation and wildlife, through prescribed, or deliberate burning, will create a landscape ripe for farmers, for short term profits, and more opportunities for housing and industries. There will be no more accountability for the environment, such as the Environmental Impact assessments, the EBPC Act, Ramsar or any other hindrances to "progress". It's the natural conclusion to a free market economy, where businesses determine political policies, and they're allowed a free rein to dismantle our country as a generic and barren landscape suitable only for industries, grazing, mining, logging, hunting and other destructive economic activities. There will be no accountability to wildlife, or any other hindrances.

Australia First Party

NATIONAL WATTLE DAY

1st September

1st September, was the date chosen by our earlier generations to be an occasion "primarily to inspire and stimulate an Australian national sentiment". It was felt this could be accomplished by embracing such sentiment in a native flower, and uniting as a people on the day to do it honour.

The Wattle had been selected as the most suitable of our native flora because of its accessibility, and occurring throughout the length and breadth of our continent.

In addition, it was desired that the Wattle Blossom, as the Australian National Flower, should be worn, and its cultivation and display encouraged.

The call was made to "all citizens to foster, protect and cherish the Wattle; for a sacred charge to every Australian to plant it in all parks, reserves, and pleasure grounds and also private gardens, that it might become a source of pilgrimage in blossom time. Also to rouse the young people's sense of chivalry, and make the Wattle synonymous with Australia's honour."

Wattle Day was first celebrated in Adelaide, Melbourne and Sydney in 1910, promoted by the citizens who had formed the Wattle Day League.

The Sydney Morning Herald editorial about the Day stated "To the Native Australian the wattle stands for home, country, kindred, sunshine and love - every instinct that the heart deeply enshrines".

The Wattle Day League was truly a patriotic society, in the vein of the Australian Natives Association, and promoted "Australia First" not only in our national values, but in a sense directly linked to the preservation and appreciation of the uniqueness of the flora of our land.

This attitude for patriotic sentiment included an "Order of the Wattle Blossom" award for contribution to our Australian society, and for the day to give recognition to Australian manufacturers and Australian productions.

The theme suggested from the Golden Wattle was a representation:- "the golden fleece - the wool; the golden green - the wheat; the golden sunshine - the golden hearts of the Australian people".

In addition, there was a call for the three cheers of hip hip hooray, of Danish/Polish origin, to be replaced by an Australian cry of three COO-EE'S, our then well known bush call.

Sadly, this developing folkloric celebration was later submerged by "Imperial and Empire" type politicians, who lacked interest in Australian sentiment in practical terms, and the day has largely passed into memory.

Australia since WWII has seen further decline of our Aussie cultural values due to “Americana” and crass consumerism influences accompanying the extensive buy out of our natural and productive wealth by American/multinational corporations monopolising for their Globalist market.

In this present era, Australia hating multiculturalists’ programmes, designed to inflict a culturally deficient, low grade multiracial society, of no common heritage or real values, are being used to assail our Aussie culture and to break down the community bond that makes an Australian - that being European derived and of our Native Soil. The Asian Graveyard Century is their goal!

History shows that no nation can endure the destruction of its identity and culture, as is occurring via the plagues of Third World peoples and cultures now being dumped into Australia by Globalisers, and their paid politicians.

Regime change is now necessary for our Australia to survive!

In Wattle Day, Aussies have the great legacy of an inheritance which is uniquely Australian. It flies in the face of multicultists and must be reclaimed as an essence of our Australian culture.

Australia First Party calls on all fairdinkum Australians to join with our Australian Peoples Movement in ensuring a High Culture for our people, and where the spirit of Wattle Day is enshrined.

Celebrate National Wattle Day as an expression of our Aussie heritage; of environmental awareness/ecological sustainability; genuine patriotism and sentiment in support of a modern independent nation, with its own strategic and self-sufficient industry base where wealth is created, owned and shared by Australians.

TO PARTICIPATE:- Wear a sprig of Wattle; plant a Wattle shrub in your garden; rub hands on the bark of a Wattle tree, and reflect on the unique eco-diversity of our Southern Land; read some verse of The Banjo or Henry Lawson; play a few Larrikins songs; dwell on our cultural heritage with thanks to our earlier generations. And support our Australian Peoples Movement.

The Australia First Party is committed to the advancement of Australia's traditional culture and identity, founded on economic, political and cultural independence. If you don’t fight - you lose!
But now that we have made the land And we must sing a rebel song
A garden full of promise, And join in rebel chorus.
Old Greed must crook 'is dirty hand We'll make the tyrants feel the sting
And come to take it from us. O' those that they would throttle;
So we must fly a rebel flag, They needn't say the fault is ours,
As others did before us If blood should stain the wattle!
Henry Lawson

Australia First Party
www.australiafirstparty.net. email: ausfirst [ AT ] hotmail.com
National Contact Line 02 85870014

AUSTRALIA FIRST PARTY - RECLAIMING AUSTRALIA FOR AUSTRALIANS

Flitting, darting,
flashing blue green tail
Brushing, hopping , stares with beady eye
Bright eye like pin head sees me stopped on asphalt path
Bird on little patch of bush is on display

She makes the best of this mean reserve,
Surrounded by the constant roar
of, eager homeward bound traffic
Little wren, it could be worse,
At least this meagre noisy space
is officially
yours

Subject was: "The link to Minister Ryan Smith will not click."

I am in the process of writing my own e-mail and it is taking longer than expected because I always get "bogged" in something that I notice along the way. I notice that the link to Minister Ryan Smith will not click; I searched his name using Google and found his e-mail. I did not "sign" the petition because the address format is for residents of Australia and I live in Croatia and would rather send an e-mail where I can use my correct details. I am not sure if there is time to send a paper letter. (I was not sure whether to write this in a comment or send a message; but when I click "contact" it refers to James).

Dear Sime,

Our apologies for the incorrectly typed mail links. That's been fixed now. I have also included the e-mail addresses in the page so that they can now be copied and pasted, as well as clicked on. (I prefer the former method.) Thank you for your post and for your concern about animal rights in Australia. Sadly, they are no not going well right now, but we are confident we can change that (although, possibly not before a few more endangered mammals become extinct).

How are animal rights in Europe these days? I trust that animals are faring better in Croatia than they are in England where there is almost no wildlife to be found. Please stay in touch. - best regards, James (aka 'Ed')

Minister Ryan Smith can be contacted on the following page:

Ministerial Office

Street Address
Level 17, 8 Nicholson Street, Melbourne, VIC 3002

Phone
(03) 9637 8890

Fax
(03) 9637 8880

Internet

Email
ryan.smith@parliament.vic.gov.au

Thank you for taking an interest and concern for Victoria's wildlife. Free market policies and liberalism don't allow much regard for wildlife or natural environments, and we are being governed more and more by the power of corporations and the mega-wealthy. Our "environment" minister, Mr Hunt, despite his title, gives little regard for the environment and it's more about ticking the boxes for mining and logging companies. The drive to "manage" more bushfires in Victoria is about mass burnings to save money on insurance and litigation payouts - and at the same time allow for urban expansion close to forested and vegetated areas.

Dear James,

(I apologise that this is quite long and do not feel obliged to publish it. I was not sure how much detail to go into.)

I completed my e-mail and sent it to the Premier of Victoria; the Minister for environment and the Minister for Agriculture about 22 hours ago just as my night shift was about to end. I have yet to forward a copy of the e-mail to Maryland Wilson and a list of other people from Australia that I correspond with regarding Australian wildlife (to avoid making this too long and double-checking names, I am not listing them here but I can if you wish). Would you like me to send you a copy? (If I click "contact" and use the webform, the text will lose its format and I am not used to the formatting method destribed below and I do not guarantee that I will not end up doing it correctly without a lot of trial-and-error). Most of the text is simply from the petition text; some is copied from a text by Maryland Wilson - page 11, "A Voice for Wildlife, August 2014; and I have added a paragraph about Croatia in an attempt to personalize the e-mail. Of course, it is always possible to say that I could have writen a better e-mail. I have been working on the issue of Australian wildlife since 2003. (I am not sure if I should go into details because it will get too long). Unfortunately, I am not sure if I spelled some species correctly: "Mallee fowl" is often spelt "Malleefowl"; "Mallee Emu Wren" is spelt "Mallee Emu-wren" when I checked using Google. I am not sure why the capital letters even if the word is not at the start of a sentence.

Regarding animals in Croatia - it depends how one looks at it. Most people are rednecks but an animal rights organization has been active since 2001 and I was one of the first activists although I would not describe myself as being able to continuously do good work. In 2007, the keeping of dolphins and whales in captivity has been banned, as has the "use" of wild and exotic animals in circuses; primates are not "used" in experiments although they are not actually banned; even the major Croatian brands of personal hygiene and cleaning products are not tested on animals; the population of bears and wolves has trippled since 1995 - to about 1,000 bears and 200 wolves - according to daily newspapers although bear hunting is still allowed; forests cover about 45% of the land and are nature-identical in composition and not decreasing in area; GMOs are not grown in Croatia; the human population is decreasing (births - deaths) by about 10,000 people per year although emigration is still happening. (I am against people emigrating to Australia and North and South America because of the genocide of indigenous peoples).

I returned to Croatia in 1992 and am disappointed that my family and friends have not returned from Australia and that one sister has 4 children and they have married non-Croatians and will almost certainly not be returning. I have thought about returning to Africa - the original homeland of humans - to live with chimpanzees but think that that is not an idea that many people would follow. I am a member of and donate to many organizations including the Jane Goodall Institute (UK) and PETA (USA) since 1993. I recycle over 99.5% (by mass) of my waste, do not drive a car, live in high-density housing; am vegan since 1995 and since 2002 most food that I eat does not involve killing the plant, I have no children although that is partly because I have never had a girlfriend (or boyfriend!). My income is above average and I have invested in the stockmarket in the past (until my mother demanded that I buy a flat in 2003) and I am able to make donations although I am not really prepared to add new organizations to those that I already donate to. On a more negative note, I buy several daily newspapers and the light is on in every room now! Last night, I read one of the articles about arson. When I went for a walk after catching up on sleep after night shift, I noticed that somebody had set fire to 6 big paper recycling bins close to my block of flats although the fires had been put out.

Best regards,

Sime Validzic (I also spell my name "Simon Validzic and "Šime Validži?")