wildlife corridors

Randy possums? breeding like rabbits? $160,000 of rate payers money for intrusive experimental possum birth control?" Maryland Wilson of the Australian Wildlife Protection Council also praises the Yarra City Council for enlightened aspects of its wildlife and possum program, but she suggest that their imaginative program could be order of magnitude more imaginative and lead a scaling up to connect with other councils. The Australian Wildlife Protection Council is the oldest organisation that specifically protects Australian wildlife and promotes wildlife corridors at local, state and national level. Maryland Wilson is a physically diminutive woman who punches far above her weight for wildlife. She works seven days a week entirely voluntarily, and has campaigns on behalf of Australian wildlife that reach to the United States and the European Union. Part of her great strength is the support she gives to wildlife carers round Australia. She never loses sight of the animals or the activists.

Yarra Council's Urban Wildlife Management is good but could be even better...

Maryland Wilson, President of The Australian Wildlife Protection Council acknowledges that Yarra City Council has a great Wildlife Policy entitled “The Yarra Urban Wildlife Management Plan 2009." She says, "We thank you, but ..."

1. Yarra Council needs to introduce Australia’s fodder trees-

These trees provide good possum food:

Among the Eucalyptus-

Peppermint gums
River Red Gums
Spotted Gums
Manna Gums
Stringybark
Forest Red Gums
Mountain Ash
Lemon-scented Gums
Red Flowering Gums-

These are all suitable hardy and good for possums with tannin/oil in their leaves

Amongst the Melaleucas-

Swamp Paper Bark
Willow Myrtle
Lilypilli
Gravillea

Amongst the Acacias

Silver Wattle
Black Wattle
Blackwood Wattle
Flinders Range Wattle
These trees provide not only leaves, but flowers for diverse insects, seeds for birds and are good for possums

The above provide such a diversity of native trees that are attractive and provide native fauna with food, shelter and they also provide shade for Visitors to the Park.

It would be ideal to introduce these as semi-mature trees rather than seedlings

2. Continuous Urban Canopies-

What is more important, is to generate interconnecting canopies that link up to Nature Strips beyond Curtin Square (the Park) providing moisture at ground level that keep grass green-

All we are saying is give possums a chance

This would give possums a chance to move outside the Park to link up to Nature Strips- allowing them to move out and create far less dense populations within Curtain Square-

Trees can create canopies and wildlife corridors, giving possum’s safe exit from the Park.

3. Interpretive Signs need to be Introduced

Interpretive signs need to be erected in Curtain Square which encourages the public to value native wildlife- Signs need to educate that:
• Possums are Protected Wildlife
• Teach children to value them and engage with them
• In Council’s interests, will change attitudes and reduce complaints

Council should stop, halt, and cease exaggerated claims that possums are killing the trees.
Possums have lived with the trees for almost a Century – it is nonsense to scapegoat them

AWPC will disagree absolutely with culling and fertility control of native species as both are inhumane intrusions and doomed to fail. Any diminished populations will be overtaken by fertile territorial possums from surrounding areas.

Fertility Control is an experimental trial whose long term health effects on possums is unknown.

Thank you for this opportunity to help find humane and exciting ways to protect the possums, all our native birds and insects and all of Nature those remains-

Please keep in mind that Australia has the highest rate of extinctions in the world.

This plan to plant native trees will help reduce Pollution and Climate Change, provide food and shelter for our native birds and animals, and create peace in Curtain Square.

Notes

[1] This article is based on suggestions by Maryland Wilson, President of the Australian Wildlife Protection Council, addressed to Councillor Sam Gaylard of Yarra City Council on September 5, 2011.

The Honourable Ryan Smith MP, Minister for the Environment, has confirmed that he will upgrade the status of the Frankston Reservoir to a Nature Conservation Reserve. A delegation, including the Member for Frankston Geoff Shaw MP, met with the Minister in March to discuss the many issues surrounding the future of this significant bushland. The extraordinary quality of this remnant wilderness comes from the fact that there has been no public access for 90 years. Full protection of this reserve will protect the fauna and flora, and guard the “sanctuary” and “solitude” experience of this unique natural heritage for Frankston residents and all Victorians.

Designation as a Nature Conservation Reserve ensures that the protection and enhancement of the flora and fauna of Frankston Reservoir is the primary focus for the future management of this area. The change in classification to Nature Conservation Reserve will require an act of parliament to amend the Crown Land Reserves Act and it is anticipated that this will take place later this year.

The upgrade in the designation seizes this unique opportunity to fully protect the very last area of highly significant bayside vegetation and fauna that lies between Portsea and the city of Melbourne. Moreover, for a society increasingly beset by the nature deficit syndrome, it also offers an exceptional opportunity for people to connect directly with the landscape and fauna that is as the first settlers saw it.

The Frankston Reservoir site supports nationally, state and regionally significant flora and fauna species, plant communities and fauna habitats, including 6 ecological vegetation classes (EVC’s) of State significance. The most extensive of these EVC’s is the endangered Grassy Woodland, which is one of the most species rich ecosystems in the temperate world and is particularly rich in native grasses, orchids and lilies. 215 indigenous flora species are recorded at the 90 hectare site and over 100 fauna species including the nationally threatened Growling Grass Frog and state significant Musk Duck. Koalas, sugar gliders and echidnas also continue to enjoy the habitat of the Frankston Reservoir.

The extraordinary high quality of this remnant wilderness can be attributed to the fact that there has been no public access for 90 years while it was under the control of the water authorities. The full protection of this reserve will not only protect the fauna and flora, but it will also guard the “sanctuary” and “solitude” experience that this unique piece of our natural heritage can offer, not just Frankston residents, but all Victorians.

Delightful koala pictures in this film which talks about why we need to speak up for koalas at the upcoming Federal Inquiry into the status, health and sustainability of Australia's koala population.

Federal Inquiry

Federal Inquiry into the status, health and sustainability of Australia's koala population
On 17 November 2010 the Senate referred the following matter to the Environment and Communications References Committee for inquiry and report by 1 June 2011, with effect from the first day of sitting of 2011.
See Submissions here: http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/committee/ec_ctte/koalas/submissions.htm.

Some of the reasons to be worried for koalas

click image to see film.

Koalas also get trampled by cows, which are aggressive towards them, so expecting the koalas to travel on foot across paddocks isn't a solution. Everyone needs more trees in Australia but koalas need them most of all.

PLEASE make a brief Submission urgently. Under the heading of Competition and Efficiency, economists easily dispense with democratic objections and humane values. Only the strictly illegal is out, and authorities are always willing to change the law if money is involved. The campaign to slaughter kangaroos for their meat in Victoria has been building over the years, despite its unsustainability and the distress it produces in kangaroos and the many people who love this species. The Department of Sustainability has shown itself to utterly lack science or responsibility in monitoring and protecting our native wildlife. More often than not it awards permits to kill kangaroos without checking their justifications. The Auditor General's report in 2009 showed that the Victorian government did not know what it was doing with regard to wildlife. It would therefore be a serious error to change laws to reward kangaroo killing and to make it easier.

Submissions on VCEC draft report and lifting the processing ban on commercially utilising kangaroos

. The Victorian Competition and Efficiency Commission (VCEC) has released a new draft report calling for lifting the processing ban on commercially utilising kangaroos in Vic, and for a more simplified ATCW permit system, which at its best is already simple and badly under resourced. (A pdf of the Report may be accessed here.)

· Kangaroos are not commercially harvested in Victoria, Northern Territory or the ACT. According to Autsralian government data kangaroo numbers have dramatically declined by 55% since 2001 in commercial shooting zones across Australia, the recent floods have added another heavy toll on kangaroos in those areas.

· There is no data or figures of kangaroo populations in Victoria, the DSE state in their fact sheet that a commercial industry is not viable as set up costs would outweigh profit, public opposition, and low kangaroo numbers.

· Currently a landowner does not have to pay any fee for an ATCW permit to be issued to them; the VCEC report states that it costs approximately $480 per permit application.

· Under the current system it costs Victorian tax payers for landowners to kill protected kangaroos without their say or consent, why then is this cost not passed onto the landowner if they are supposedly benefitting from it?

· This is particularly pertinent to wildlife carers who along with their animals already suffer from ATCW permits given to adjoining landowners placing at risk the very kangaroos they have a license to hand rear.

· The real waste is that kangaroos are killed in the first place, not that they are left to rot.
Please help oppose the commercial processing of kangaroos in Victoria by emailing a submission/letter to the VCEC

Call to lift kangaroo processing ban

Regarding the VCEC draft report in relation to lifting the processing ban on commercially utilising kangaroos in Vic, those seeking more information should read from the Introduction p.57 (1). The section on Authorities to Control Wildlife (ATCWs) is on p.104 (48) but it has been pasted at the end of this article for easy reference.

Wildlife carers are already disadvantaged from ATCW permits given to adjoining landowners placing at risk the very kangaroos they have a license to hand rear.

Currently a landowner does not have to pay a fee for an ATCW permit to be issued to them, the report states that it costs approximately $480 per permit application, along with this it’s argued that the system should be simplified!! As we all well know it already is pretty 'simple'. (funny - it costs to get an FOI (Freedom of Information)!

Your taxes

Under the current system it costs Victorian tax payers for landowners to kill protected kangaroos without their say or consent, why then is this cost not passed onto the landowner if they are supposedly benefiting from it?

If those who seek permits to kill kangaroos had to pay for a permit they might think before applying for one and properties would be inspected to ensure valid reasons are given for issuing them.

Most perpetrators of abuse using ATCW permits are hobby farmers. It would be more appropriate for ATCW to be issued only to landowners whose sole income is from the land/farming.

There is a huge need to educate and to create awareness of how essential it is to protect biodiversity. Make ATCW permits harder to get with tough requirements.

Email your submissions to
[email protected]
Cc [email protected]

Extract from Draft Report: Part 2 – Priorities for Regulatory Reform

An Inquiry into Victoria’s regulatory framework

A draft report for further consultation and input

March 2011

3.2.5 Authority to Control Wildlife

In Victoria, control of wildlife is regulated under the Wildlife Act 1975 (Vic). In particular, lethal control measures are heavily restricted, requiring approval from DSE through an Authority to Control Wildlife (ATCW). DSE states that an ATCW for lethal control measures is issued only as a last resort where other non-lethal options are impractical (DSE 2008b, p. 1).

The Victorian Farmers Federation (VFF) (sub. 17, p. 5) identifies ATCWs as a source of excess burden for its members. The submission points to several issues, including:

prohibition on commercial use of kangaroo carcasses

the cost and complexity of obtaining permits.

The VFF also identifies health and safety issues arising from an alleged restriction on removing a culled kangaroo carcass from the point at which the animal dies. The Commission understands that DSE’s guidance materials do, in fact, indicate that the carcasses of animals destroyed under an ATCW can be removed (DSE 2008b, p. 1).

Complexity and delays in the permit application process

Obtaining an ATCW requires the applicant to go through a relatively in-depth approvals process and submit an application form detailing the proposed controlmeasures, and details of other non-lethal control measures already attempted. In many cases a site visit from DSE field officers is a prerequisite to approval.

The rationale for extensive assessment of applications is to ensure that pest kangaroos are only destroyed as a last resort. In 2008, 1592 ATCWs were issued for three species of kangaroo. If wallabies are included, the total increases by 1798. Long term data suggest around 30 000 kangaroos are destroyed under ATCWs each year in Victoria (DSE 2010a).

No data are publicly available on the average cost of individual permits. However, information available to the Commission suggests an industry cost of just under $1 million.1

In its submission, the VFF recommends that kangaroos be ‘declared unprotected’ on private land (sub. 17, p. 5). The Commission does not believe that this would be possible without jeopardising policy outcomes. However, it should be possible to reduce the costs to landholders of obtaining ATCWs without compromising protection of wildlife. In particular, DSE could consider simplifying the application process, as there may be room to:

simplify the application form, consolidating the application and landholder self-assessment to eliminate duplicate requests for information

reduce the need for on-site assessments by field staff.

Prohibition on commercial use of culled kangaroos

The Victorian Government, while allowing lethal control measures for kangaroos and other wildlife (in limited circumstances, as noted above), prohibits commercial use of culled kangaroos (DSE 2010a). ‘Commercial use’ would primarily entail sale of the carcass for processing to meat and leather products (Environment and Natural Resources Committee 2000, p. 93).

This ban is linked to the Government’s overall opposition to establishing a kangaroo meat industry in Victoria, based on a stated low kangaroo population density, and community opposition to commercial kangaroo hunting (Environment and Natural Resources Committee 2000, p. 378). The underlying concern is that introducing additional incentives to destroy ‘pest’ kangaroos could lead to de facto commercial exploitation of the wild population.

The tight controls on ATCWs and the high level of monitoring by DSE suggest that the Government should be able to detect and prevent culls proposed

1 Taking into account the need for a site visit and the rigour of the permit system, a reasonable starting point would be one day per permit. Using default wage, overhead and on-cost assumptions from the Department of Treasury and Finance’s guidance on estimating administrative burdens, this yields an administrative cost associated with each application of approximately $480, or $863 000 across industry. There may be further costs from ongoing damage from pest animals where control action is delayed by administrative processes primarily for the commercial value of kangaroos. Assuming no change in the rate at which ATCWs are granted, permitting the sale of carcasses would pose no further threat to the population, with those animals culled under permit, by definition, being within sustainable limits.

While — as noted by the VFF — it is not clear whether the numbers of kangaroos culled in Victoria would make a kangaroo products industry economic (sub. 17, p. 5), a ban appears unnecessarily burdensome and redundant in light of other measures to protect biodiversity and animal welfare. The Government should consider lifting this ban. If this option is taken, impacts should be monitored closely and, in no later than 3 years, the operation of the scheme should be reviewed to assess whether removal of the ban has harmed welfare or biodiversity outcomes. Draft recommendation 3.5

That the Government change aspects of the control of pest wildlife under Authorities to Control Wildlife (ATCW) to:

simplify the process for obtaining an ATCW

allow commercial use of kangaroos and wallabiesdestroyed under an ATCW, where such use does not compromise other policy objectives.

Approval to rezone the rural land opposite Serendip Sanctuary, Lara, near Geelong, sets a dangerous precedent for open slather development that places the wildlife protected there at risk and flies in the face of democracy. The Sanctuary is internationally recognised for successfully breeding captive species such as Brolga, Musk and Freckled Duck and now the Eastern Barred Bandicoot, which is on the brink of extinction. Serendip forms an important wildlife corridor between the You Yangs Regional Park and Brisbane National Park through agricultural land and the sprawl of Greater Melbourne as it spreads to meet the regional city of Geelong.

Why do Victorians and other Australians have to keep fighting over and over again to protect their rights from the very people who are supposed to be looking after their rights?

The new Liberal Government in Victoria needs to abandon Amendment C73 which was approved by City of Greater Geelong Councillors on 12 April 2011. Approval of C73 will allow rezoning of rural residential land to Residential 1. This retrograde step will literally pave the way for 380+ high density houses.

Residents have been opposing this application for 8 years!

What more do they need to do in a democracy?

Serendip Sanctuary under threat

Approval to rezone the rural land opposite Serendip Sanctuary crosses a line which should not be crossed and which the electorate does not want. To satisfy narrow ambitions to profit from unwanted development, wildlife at risk of extinction will be placed at greater risk.

Serendip Sanctuary is internationally recognised for successfully breeding captive species such as Brolga, Musk and Freckled Duck and now the Eastern Barred Bandicoot which is on the brink of Extinction. The 225 hectares that make it up were purchased and put aside by the Victoria State Government in 1959 for the purposes of wildlife research and the captive management and breeding of species threatened in Victoria. The sanctuary contains many different types of wetland and is home to many plant species as well, such as River Red Gums, tall spikerush, and tussock grass.

How can a supposedly expert and independent panel ignore the regional and international importance of this reserve?

Koalas, kangaroos, wallabies, brolgas, rare native geese...

Numerous nomadic wildlife, including Cape Barren geese, Magpie Geese and Eastern Grey kangaroos breed there and spill over on to the rural land surrounding the Sanctuary, which is only 2 km from You Yangs Regional Park. Serendip Sanctuary thus represents a very important wildlife corridor in an agricultural and small township area, which greater Melbourne is approaching in a pincer movement as it threatens to connect with the regional city of Geelong. The Serendip corridor ultimately leads, via the You Yangs Regional Park to the Brisbane Ranges National Park, which is a haven for koalas, which are daily losing their habitat to the unprecedented amount of development in Victoria and other states.

Serendip Sanctuary is just 45 minutes to the west of Melbourne but visitors will find that they are immediately amongst wild kangaroos and native birds, such as the animated honeyeaters and screeching cockatoos. The lake is the home of crowds of waterbirds. These waterbirds include the magnificent brolgas, celebrated in Aboriginal dance, now rarely seen by Australians.

These precious areas of nature on which our wildlife depend and which Australians and international tourists love will be inexcusably stressed if high density housing goes ahead opposite the Sanctuary, with the intensification of human activity and increase presence of cats, dogs and foxes which accompanies urbanization.

87% of Lara residents oppose this rural to urban rezoning.

Over 3000 residents or 87% of Lara’s enrolled voters have gone on record with submissions or petition signatures which were presented to the Legislative Assembly in November 2009 opposing the C73 Caddys Road Amendment. This level of public opposition is unprecedented in City of Greater Geelong Council history. The voice of the people was ignored by the Brumby Government.

"Independent Panel" unable to recognise importance of Serendip Sanctuary

Serendip Sanctuary and its environmental significance to Geelong and Victoria has been overlooked.

An Independent Panel undervalued the vast majority of serious environmental, safety and community issues that will result from C73 being approved.

As well as the blight on the environment that more development will cause, Lara also lacks infrastructure for additional population. Its schools are already overcrowded and there is a well documented history of fire and flood risk.

Much more careful planning with an emphasis on pulling back, less (development) is more, and quality living over quantity, is required for us all by Local and State Government. To the west of Lara there is already a huge area zoned for future development in Lara. There is thus no reasonable excuse to allow this new development to go ahead opposite the sanctuary.

Australians have a right to demand protection for their natural assets and to ensure peaceful co-existence with our wildlife.

Please help to protect Serendip Sanctuary and to protect Lara from inappropriate development by writing to the new Minister for Planning, Mathew Guy, and asking him to abandon the C37 Amendment which is the administrative culprit in the approaching man-made disaster.

Matthew Guy
Minister for Planning
State Parliament of Victoria
Level 7
1 Spring Street
MELBOURNE.V.3000

Email: matthew.guy[at]parliament.vic.gov.au

Freeway proponents' argument for clearing push prior to provision of net gain offsets:
"Their main argument was that granting this injunction would cost them millions of dollars. They did not challenge that the Incorporated Document said the offsets should be in place prior to construction. They did not produce a list of offsets that are being considered." (Gillian Collins)

Ed. The below was written by Gillian Collins. The only editorial changes are the use of subtitles and emphasis by formatting changes. Note that VCAT stands for Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal - an institution where Victorian laws are meant to be administered in a relatively low key and inexpensive way by 'members' who are usually not professionally legally trained.

"At the VCAT Directions hearing yesterday, the Frankston North Community Group, Inc., Pines Protectors, was represented by Felicity Millner of the Environment Defenders Office, and Barristers Julie Davis and Stephen Grant. Julie Davis presented the argument. And I was there.

The LMA, Southern Way, and AbiGroup had a total of 19 lawyers, solicitors, and helpers, including one Queens Council for LMA. Frankston City Council and Mornington Council each had one lawyer there. Neither supported our application, which was very disappointing.

Four against 19 - David and Goliath indeed.

At the hearing in the Administrative Division, Planning and Environment section, we asked for an Interim injunction to prevent AbiGroup from clearing the two remaining sections of the Peninsula Link right-of-way that still contain rare and endangered plant communities - the Pines Flora and Fauna Reserve and the Eastlink interchange Herb rich Grassy Wetlands - until the entire application could be heard. That may take up to six months.

Conservationists' Argument

"Our argument was fairly simple - the Incorporated Document in the Frankston and Mornington Planning Schemes that give permission for the project state that net gain offsets will be provided prior to the beginning of construction and works."

Ms Davis presented the evidence based on the documents and Ms Millner and Mr. Grant supported her with additional points. It took about an hour and 15 minutes.

The rest of the 4 hour hearing was taken up with the QC and other lawyers presenting the defence, plus a 10 minute break. Their affidavit from Geoff Rayner of LMA was only presented shortly before the hearing, and it was huge, so neither the Judge nor our representatives had had time to read it.

"During their testimony, they actually presented a new version of the Environment Management Plan. Quite extraordinary."

Freeway proponents' argument

"Their main argument was that granting this injunction would cost them millions of dollars. They did not challenge that the Incorporated Document said the offsets should be in place prior to construction. They did not produce a list of offsets that are being considered. They did produce a letter from Mark Winfield from DSE dated after the Incorporated Document saying they had one year to produce them. They created lots of date discussion that seemed without any relevance to the application."

We finished about 7:00pm with the Judge saying that she will have her decision on the interim injunction by close of day on Monday. The date for the regular appeal about the offsets will probably be set then."

Source:
Gillian Collins
Pines Protectors
0414 309 960

This is the sequel to our important, long-running article,"SEITA Bulldozers imminent on Westerfield Bushland Sth Frankston - Picket-line plans up to Victorian Elections" (was "SEITA Bulldozers threaten...". Update, Monday 27 September 2010: VCAT Appeal and Be ready on site for action Tuesday 28 Sep
On 21 September 2010, Gillian Collins, who has led the defense of the Pines Bushland and wildlife corridors, against the Frankston Freeway for years now, may have taken her final physical stand on this on the battlefield at Westerfield, where she has been manning a picket-line since Monday 5 July 2010. I doubt, however, that we have heard Gillian's last word on this matter, because as she went down, she was brandishing papers and talking barristers.


[Clarification: Linking Melbourne Authority is the new organisation or name which has replaced SEITA in this section of the Freeway. It's hard to keep up with these name changes.]

Update, Monday 27 September 2010: VCAT Appeal and Be ready on site for action Tuesday 28 Sep

Here is news from the front concerning the threatened destruction of historic Westerfield with construction of Peninsula Link (Frankston Bypass). As reported earlier. on Thursday 23 September 2010 Roads Minister Tim Pallas gave an undertaking that work would be suspended until after a VCAT appeal had been heard.

The AbiGroup and its sub-contractors are apparently not working on the property today, Monday, because they have an agreement with CFMEU to honor their "lock down" week-end.

Gillian Collins says that if the AbiGroup and Linking Melbourne authority do not comply with Minister Pallas' decision to suspend the work until the VCAT appeal has been heard, then we will need to show up in force at Westerfield on Tuesday - tomorrow - to continue to make our case.

So the message is - prepare to come to Westerfield tomorrow early if possible. Check later today on www.savethepines.net. This will have current information. Gillian suggests that if there is to be a picket tomorrow coming to the Westerfield house parking lot and then walking down to the picket line. Hundreds of people have visited the picket over the past months. The community support is very much appreciated.

Contact: Gillian Collins, Pines Protectors Phone: 03-9782-5116 Mobile: 0414 309 960
Source: Julianne Bell, Protectors of Public Land

From Gillian: Update#1, 0815hrs, 23-9-2010

Police informed Gillian and site manager confirmed that no trees will be cut down today. Site fences will be built.

From Gillian: Update #2, 22-9-2010

It was a long day today - but what a day! About 60 protestors came to our community picket today and stopped the bulldozers. We owe you such a great debt of gratitude. As Shakespeare's Richard V said in a very loose modern translation - you should have been there!

I am in awe of the courage shown by our faithful band, and by the exceptional work and support shown by the two CFMEU organisers who came to help. Thanks to them and some great mediation by the Frankston Police, we have a short reprieve until 7:00am Thursday morning. Between now and then the Pines Protectors under the auspices of the Frankston North Community Group, Inc. will be filing a case with VCAT to stop the contractor until offsets required by the Native Vegetation Framework are secured. We will also continue to work with the CFMEU and the contractor to get more time.

If we can't stop the contractor from continuing, the bush will be destroyed on Thursday. We saw enough raw power in their three PC300 excavators and a bulldozer today to destroy Westerfield's in a day - a terrifying thought. Some of us will still be there trying to stop them on Thursday. We would welcome your companionship and participation as we face this real life terror.

Gillian Collins
Pines Protectors
0414 309 960

Update 22-9-2010

"Protest co-ordinator Gillian Collins said the group would go to the planning tribunal today to see if there were legal avenues to stop demolition. If the group is successful, the case could become the first test of state legislation put in place last year to stop last-minute legal objections delaying big transport projects. Ms Collins said police had informed the protesters they would be arrested on Thursday morning if they remained. Abigroup spokeswoman Carol Bartley said yesterday work had been put on hold until Thursday morning."
Source: Clay Lucas, "Protesters fight to delay Frankston Bypass work," The Age, September 22, 2010.

The Front Line

Gillian Collins, who has led the defense of the Pines Bushland and wildlife corridors, against the Frankston Freeway for years now, may have taken her final physical stand on this today, September 21, 2010, at Westerfield, where she has been manning a picket-line since Monday 5 July 2010F. The freeway is the work of SEITA and the Victorian Government, and this encounter was with Abbey Road Construction. I doubt, however, that we have heard Gillian's last word on this matter, because as she went down, she was brandishing papers and talking barristers.

Negotiations

Good for her!

She continued to negotiate firmly right to the end with an Abbey Road Construction team, on behalf of the picketers, and all remained on site, to block the passage of the bulldozers in order to defend the wildlife and the trees.

As the picketers stood their ground against several bulldozers, whilst awaiting the arrival of the police, other construction workers began to chainsaw trees at the other end of the property, where the picket-line had its marquee.

Ceci Cairns painting one final beautiful record of tragically destroyed beauty

(My apologies at not getting a picture of the painting which could be reproduced on its own. It is a lovely painting and should become valuable as a unique aesthetic record as well.)

An artist working there, Ceci Cairnes, who had been painting the trees and the tent, was alarmed to see the chainsaws arrive. "No-one even spoke to me. Not even to tell me to be careful. They just began sawing down trees."

When I left only a few trees had been sawed down, here and there, as though the moonscapers didn't want their work to look too obvious right away. Perhaps they intended to finish it at night. A woman carrying one small animal cage - the kind you take a cat to the vet in, followed behind a small group of construction workers, which proceeded towards a large, beautiful dam, surrounded by luxuriant vegetation. As they disappeared among the foliage, I heard their chainsaws start up.

War-zone

My dog had been waiting for me in the car for a couple of hours, so I was anxious to take him walking. I consoled myself with the idea that there were still some areas between here and the Pines Reserve where we could walk off-leash for a kilometer or two without putting wildlife in danger. Heading for the area between Skye Road and the Pines, that runs parallel with McClelland Drive, I passed scenes of complete devastation. Next door to and opposite Peninsular Private Hospital, on the corner of McClelland and Cranbourne Road were moonscaped, with not a tree standing, but mounds of massacred vegetation with broken trunks and branches poking out, and hills of bare, drying earth. You could almost hear the silent screams - or perhaps they were my own - as the earth and the creatures in it died and released the carbon they had stored in their living bodies.

There was industrial mowing along McClelland Drive. Bulldozer-like machines with long metal arms with lawnmowers on the end mowed the roadside vegetation on the left as they drove down the road. This was the first time I had seen such machines. I marvelled at their number, at the embodied energy in these monsters, and at the trouble engineers take to remove every last scrap of life from their projects.

No-where to walk left

When I got to Skye Road, I reeled in horror, because the bushland on both sides was also now reduced to mute and damaged carcasses, bulldozed up to form a dark wall on the horizon. I saw that the actual tree-lined-track beside walled new suburbs that I usually took from Skye Road to the Pines had been spared, although everything between it and McClelland Drive had been blasted. Determined to console myself with this last remaining bit of green, I drove the car up to it and parked. My dog got out of the car eagerly, looking forward to running finally.

All part of "the plan"?

Alas, our way was barred. A grotesquely cheery blue sign announced on behalf of the Victorian Government that this was "all part of the plan!" Maybe body-snatchers have invaded our leaders in Victoria. That would explain their alien plans for the rest of us.

Infuriated, I drove on to a road that leads to the golf course on McClelland Drive. Word was that they had done a deal with SEITA to have their course saved when parts of the adjacent Pines Wildlife reserve had been sacrificed. I thought that I should be able to get into the reserve with my dog, via the golf-course. I realised I would have to keep my dog on a leash, but it would be better than nothing.

Locust-like swathe cuts Pines Reserve

The entrance gates to the Pines Reserve adjacent to the golf course were covered in signs telling the public to keep out, but the gates were wide open, and Nubi and I had had enough. We walked through the gates, heading for the sand-hills in the distance. Alas, to the left and to the right were more scenes of devastation. The bulldozers had already been through here too, leaving only a few self-important little men in florescent parkas walking about with mobile phones a few hundred meters away.

Log-truck load in Frankston Pines

My gaze was arrested by a truck bed stacked with enormous logs. I had not thought that there were such large trees left in this area. For a moment I thought this must be part of an exhibit I had seen in the outdoor exhibition at the McClelland Gallery, but these logs were much larger. I wondered what would happen to them.

At last I realised the extent of the Frankston Freeway: it was going to trash most of the bushland I had come to love in the 20 years since I moved into an old house here - no, not some new development. Below is my google-earth grab of what it looks like to me.

The Victorian Government is at War with Nature

The Victorian Government is at war with nature and the people who defend nature. It has been shown to flout its own laws on fauna protection. It presses the interest of property developers and passes laws to promote property development in the name of economic growth which it prioritises over all other things. It forces population growth on the people of Victoria and thus creates new pressures daily for our natural environment. We are not able to affect our government democratically on these issues because the opposition holds similar values to the government. The Victorian Greens won't criticise population growth or property development as priorities, only trying to minimise a harm which must eventually overwhelm all attempts to compensate for it or otherwise attenuate the damages it causes to our natural surroundings and the fauna which depend on them.

The Victorian government licenses agents, such as Abbey Road Constructions, to carry out its will and expects the police to back up such corporate activities in the field. It thereby forcibly exerts its will against democratic objection.

How should Citizens react to forcibly carried out undemocratic actions which they hate?

Most of us cannot afford to access the formal legal system and there are few laws to defend the environment and fauna and flora which the public can actually make a complaint under. Usually those laws require another party - often a State Government agent or an NGO in receipt of government funding - to act on behalf of the public and bring a complaint, and this so rarely happens.

In the absence of legal resources, for whatever reason - either by lack of money or lack of good laws, how should citizens react to force? They cannot afford to initiate force because the state holds the power and the means of savage repression. Citizens do, however, have the moral right to resist the state or its agents and contractors where they forcibly act against democratic objection and the spirit of laws to defend environmental and ecological values, for all kinds of reasons.

The importance of picket lines

The use of picket-lines represents a reasonable and defensible response where citizens use their bodies to resist the impacts of unreasonable government policies, whether carried out by a contractor or directly by government employees, in the opinion of this author.

Gillian Collins and others on the Westerfield Picket line took a courageous and necessary step in the battle of Victorians to defend their right to protect and conserve their natural surroundings and the right of indigenous fauna to live in peace. They have not won this battle, but the war is still on and there must be more battles.

UPDATE September 21, 2010: Millionaire bequest due in 12 months - but money urgently needed now.


On 7 August 2009 I wrote an article about the Wombat Awareness Organisation, which also referred to some interesting 19th century attitudes to wombats in Britain. On September 21 we learned that, although Brigitte Stevens still needs funding urgentlyfor another 12 months or so, after that the organisation expects the release of the first million dollar installment of an $8m bequest from a US horse-racing millionaire! So rarely do wildlife carers get the recognition they deserve for giving recognition and rights back to our fellow creatures. How wonderful to know that there are some rich people in the world who are not, apparently, entirely given over to land speculation and undermining democracy.

To see the whole article:

For the whole article, with the update at the end, see, "Hairy-nosed wombat, South Australia - rescue effort well worth supporting"

Click to go to New article 1 October 2010.
Photos by Jill Quirk added on 21 July. Latest Update 20 July: More Picket News! This will make you angry. In the first project to come under the notorious "Major Transport Facilitation Act," bulldozers move in to nationally significant heritage Westerfield before the Heritage Council Decision comes out. Picket line ongoing, since 5 July. Contacts for the picket site: S Walsh Mobile: 0405 380 312 Also Gillian Collins Pines Protectors 0414 309 960 and Jim Kerin Defenders of the South East Green Wedge Mobile 0409 501 764. Original notice was from Julianne Bell, Secretary, Protectors of Public Lands Victoria Inc.
PO Box 197, Parkville 3052, Mobile: 0408022408

Update 16 September 2010: Urgent - Reinforcements required now!

THE SITUATION AT WESTERFIELD HAS BECOME DESPERATE. After the picket line holding them at bay all winter, the Heritage Exective Director has signed off the plan for destruction. So this Heritage property will be destroyed when they could take the road another route. Help now needed - an hour or two, to front up to the bulldozers which could arrive at any time.

"After the terrible meeting yesterday, LMA asked for another with the Welsh's today and broke the news that the Heritage Executive Director has signed off on the revised plan leaving a little more of the dam.

The plan they discussed was : 1) the dam would begin to be lowered so the aquatic animals can be rescued, then it would be drained completley.; 2) at the same time, the fence alignment will be cleared; 3) the construction fence constructed in its new location, and 4) the fauna sweep conducted. Carol Bartley of Southern Way said the nesting boxes will be set up 24 hours ahead of the tree removal so the animals can escape - we were speechless.

We believe LMA and Southern Way are in violation of their Incorporation Document, since they are not minimising the damage to Westerfield's. If the Heritage Appeal had not gone through, they would have made no changes at all - they are determined to destroy this magnificent piece of grassy woodland for the sake of the road. We are about to take an action against them.

The good news is that the Trades Hall Council and the CFMEU are supporting us, and they believe with us that no work should proceed until such time as all legal avenues have been exhausted.

To that end, we need every available supporter to join us on the picket starting tomorrow morning. If you were ever going to help us out - now is the time to do it. Give us an hour or give us a day - we do not know what day they are starting, but we have been notified, and "soon" is any moment from now on. Please distribute this call to action to all your networks.

Gillian Collins
Pines Protectors

0414 309 960"

Update 15 September 2010: Organising the picket up to Victorian Election time

Gillian Collins has led a picket on Westerfield for the last 10 weeks. This has been a deliberate and sustained effort to achieve a better outcome from the Government’s merciless push for Peninsula Link. Peninsula and Western Port need a vastly better, sustainable and greener future than the Brumby government plans for them. Many people have made enormous efforts put their considerable resources into different aspects of the same issue, and the efforts to draw the line at Westerfield are among the most remarkable and admirable.

Gillian, the Welsh family, and a couragous and reliable group have picketed seven days a week from early morning until the end of the work day. They have been visited by over 300 individuals and supported by nearly 30 environmental groups across the Peninsula and across Melbourne.

Their efforts have not been in vain: It looks like the road easement across Westerfield is still being negotiated, as there has been no clearing of Westerfield. Minister Pallas may be listening.

The amazing picketers are giving their utmost, but as in any concerted and long-term action in the face of vested interests in government and corporate enterprise, their numbers need constant supplement. The picket line needs a continuing supply of regular, reliable, individuals. They need tangible support and encouragement - both bodies and funding.

The Pines Protectors, a sub-committee of the Frankston North Community Group, Inc., and which Gillian chairs, have organised CMFEU support for the picket and have received help from The Greens Party. Supporters of the picket have established that the Abigroup construction was started before the legalities were complete and that the Native Vegetation Framework offsets are required before works start (despite information by government). DSE, LMA, LGA Councils and DEWHA must implement the full requirements our environmental laws. Gillian has made a major contribution to the community consultation process supporting the significant efforts of the Frankston community and the two local councils.

At a strategy meeting on Friday, the meeting recognised that a picket up to the elections is required. But that needs on-ground support.

Conservationists the Peninsula recognise that the 40 year-plan to industrialise greater Melbourne and Western Port poses serious threats, through incremental losses - large and small - on our remaining natural environment.

This infrastructure growth is deceptively portrayed by the media and government as a "part of our community’s vision." There needs to be a bolder plan for an environmental and sustainable future.

Tangible support to the picket could help this.

Help is needed to man the Westerfield Picket with more than 60 person days from now till Election day. Offers of help can be made to Gillian Collins and donations up to $1000 to The Pines Protectors are being sought to support further action on their behalf. (Contact Gillian or Pines Protectors)

More Picket News 20 July 2010

"A really cold start to the day was warmed by the presence of four beautiful children brought by David W. and Ted H. With Kate's lovely hairy Dachshunds, they brightened up the day no end. Then the team from the Friends of the Pines Flora and Fauna Reserve came and did some weed pulling at Westerfields and joined us for lunch on the picket line. What a great
group they are!

In case you missed it, Bill Russell from the Centre for Urban Studies recommended on ABCs Stateline on Friday that:

"...we will probably see the metro rail tunnel funded in the next two or three rounds of federal funding. But as I say, the trucks action plan is quite small; it's only $380 million and the state could fund that from its own resources, really. And then, I think that both the WestLink and the Peninsula Link really ought to be postponed five or10 years into the future."

It is still on the web if you want to see it - Google "Stateline" and then click on Friday's program.

With a State and Federal election looming, we remain hopeful that this project will be stopped, the land repaired, and more public transport and an upgrade to Moorooduc Highway will be considered. It's not too late.

We're looking at a week of cold and cloudy weather - the Melbourne winters I remember from my youth - but we will still be on the picket line. Please come and give us what time you can."

Signed: Gillian Collins

UPDATE 16 JULY: PICKET-LINE ONGOING!

"Our picket day started with Michelle C. delivering the attached brochure to the Bayside Christian School. Michelle did a brilliant job of capturing the essential environmental values that, we assume, the school teaches. The school had a working bee today, and she delivered the brochure to parents, the Principal, and the "Light FM" radio station that was broadcasting from the school.

Later in the day, we had 4 visits from Grade 10 students asking about our picket. This evening I find that David M. from WPPC has sent an e-mail to the school asking that students be allowed to join us - an unplanned but great coincidence.

Greg Hunt, our Federal Shadow Environment Minister, paid a visit, and we are hoping for his support for an immediate halt to the destruction and a better solution for all of us, including the school.

Peter K. showed us the photo of the skink that he carried home unknowingly yesterday in his tea cup in his backpack. He only found it when he went to clean the cup last night. He called Mel, who told him how to keep the skink comfortable overnight, and he returned it, unharmed, this morning.

Such tender care in the face of such a brutal future for this tiny member of our ecosystem.

E.O. Wilson, famous ant biologist and author, wrote a book called "Consilience," in which he predicts that there will come a time soon when our individual scientific fields of knowledge will consiliate (jump together) and we will understand the nature of the universe. It feels as though we have a consilience of effort at the picket site, and that we are beginning to really have an effect.

We will continue. Hope to see you there some time this week-end."

Signed Gillian Collins

BACKGROUND AND EARLIER REPORTS

In the first project to come under the notorious "Major Transport Facilitation Act," bulldozers move in to nationally significant heritage Westerfield before the Heritage Council Decision comes out. Picket line ongoing, with effect. Work will probably start tomorrow (6 July) or Wednesday (7 July).

UPDATE: REPORT ON TODAY'S ACTION RESULTS BELOW. Contacts for the picket site: S Walsh Mobile: 0405 380 312 Also Gillian Collins Pines Protectors 0414 309 960 and Jim Kerin Defenders of the South East Green Wedge Mobile 0409 501 764. Original notice was from Julianne Bell, Secretary, Protectors of Public Lands Victoria Inc.

(See contact information at end of article.)

Why is this picket-line so important?

Expression of public protest on this destructive and undemocratic process is of great importance because this project is the first to come under the "Major Transport Facilitation Act." For this reason it will attract a lot of interest.

UPDATE 3: REPORT FOR 7 JULY

Another amazing day today, and still no bulldozers. It would seem that Abigroup is now held up until a satisfactory resolution can be found to the outstanding issues about Westerfields. We feel strongly, however. that the picket should be maintained until that happens.

An exciting innovation will occur, we hope, tomorrow, when we go live with a computer camera from the Robinson's Road side. Craig Allen will be streaming the resulting images from our web site, www.savethepines.net

We had more [mainstream] media interest today, and some of the picketers stopped by to help because they drove by and saw our signs. Melanie Attard has done a brilliant job of making them, and the coverage in The Independent , we
think, caused lots of folk to hoot and wave encouragement all day long.

Julianne Bell of Protectors of Public Lands drove from the City on Sunday to bring her "Community Picket" sign for us to use, and her brilliant strategic abilities have inspired a lot of what we are doing so successfully now.

Please join us whenever you can. We will be there every day until we get a more positive outcome than is now planned. There are so many interesting people stopping by, that we promise you won't be bored! And there will be
more singing tomorrow.

Gillian Collins, Pines Protectors

UPDATE 2: REPORT FOR 6 JULY

Another amazing day today. The situation is still incredibly fluid, and picketers hear that tomorrow (7 July) may be the day they try to bring the bulldozers in.

A "Community Picket" has been established on both sides of the site, and drivers of the equipment have been asked not cross the line until the unresolved issues with Heritage Victoria and wildlife rescue are resolved.

Today representatives from the CFMEU were on the site, thanks to Colin Long, Greens Candidate for South Eastern Metropolitan area. These union reps have been very encouraging about supporting the picket.

As many people as possible are needed to man the picket.

The picket is situated at Robinsons Road (MEL 103 C11) from 7:00am. Easy parking is at Bayside Christian College, just before the traffic signals that are closing one lane of Robinsons Road for gas line relocation. Walk on up to where the picket is and you will be assisted to get to the rear picket.

Today there were twice as many people as yesterday, and more tomorrow would be good. Some groups that have been
represented are:

Frankston City Council, Mornington Council, Protectors of Public Lands, The Greens, Green Wedges Coalition, Animalia Wildlife Shelter, Environment Victoria,The Connies, Western Port Protection Council, Friends of the Pines Flora and Fauna Reserve, Pines Protectors group of the Frankston North Community Group, Inc., Australian Wildlife Protection Council, Inc., Blue Wedges, Friends of Banyule, and the Public Transport Users Group.

Mainstream media who have been present or are following are: Channel 7, 9, 10, ABC, The Independent and The Age.

Thanks to Peter for the chips, Ronnie for the coffee, Jenny for the tea and home made biscuits, and Joyce and Simon for the egg and bacon sandwiches and afternoon tea!

Source [edited]: Gillian Collins
Pines Protectors, 03-9782-5116, 0414 309 960

UPDATE 1: REPORT ON FIRST ACTIONS: Monday 5 July 18:24 p.m.

Gillian Collins of Pines Protectors reports that the community picket line was successful, and the bulldozers did not come on the site. They were parked across the street all day, and a lot of their folk stood around idle.

Volunteers showed up, brought signs and soup and chips, and generally kept the protestors feeling really positive all day.

Gillian writes that great thanks are due to the Mayor, Christine Richards, who stayed all morning and gave lots of interviews to the press. Similarly, she writes that thanks are also due to Neale Burgess, Member of Parliament for Hastings, David Morris, Member for Mornington, and Geoff Shaw, candidate for the seat of Frankston, who all stayed a long time and gave the picketers their support.

She adds that the picket starts again tomorrow starting at 7:00am sharp. There will be two locations, the one on Robinsons Road and on the west side of the property, where the bulldozers are now parked. (MEL 103 C11) If you can come, please come to the Robinson's road site and we'll send half of you to the other side. Bring a torch is you're really early, because it was very dark without street lights. Dress warmly, too!

There was strong mainstream media interest - Channel 7, 9, 10, and ABC were there, plus a reporter from the Independent.

Because this project is the first to come under the "Major Transport Facilitation Act" it is getting a lot of interest and is also very important. More people to support the picket line will be very welcome.

Source [edited]: Gillian Collins
Pines Protectors, 03-9782-5116, 0414 309 960

Background and earlier reporting

Today: 7 am Monday 5 July 2010 construction will start on the Westerfield bushland heritage property. It is being bulldozed for the peninsula Link freeway route. Local groups will be picketing the site.

Work is to start despite the fact that :

* The Westerfield appeal was heard in the Heritage Council on 25 June 2010 and no cldecision has been made. The Heritage Council was reported to have said that the members would not be hurried into making a decision.

* There still appears to be a dispute over the question of whether vegetation offsets has been finalised.

On Monday 28 2010 June a resolution was put to Frankston Council and carried unanimously that "That Council seeks the assurance of the Linking Melbourne Authority and the Department of Environment and Sustainability that Vegetation Offsets required of the Peninsula Link project and the location and detail of such offsets will be determined prior to further clearing occurring. That such offsets for Frankston native vegetation will be taken up within the municipality in consultation with Council to ensure that there will be a net gain of native vegetation within the municipality."

The Frankston Council is again considering the matter at a Council meeting tomorrow night.

* The owners were given less than 24 hours notice of the start of land clearing/construction and have not been given a time table for works .

If anyone in the area can help attend the picket the details are:

Time: 7 am start but it may well continue during the morning.

Date: Monday 5 July 2010

Place: Robinson's Road, Frankston South. See Melways Map Page 103 C 11. The site of the picket is next to Bayside Christian College and near the intersection of Mc Clelland Drive and Robinson's Road. As the road might be
blocked it is suggested that you approach via Robinsons Road and drive into the Westerfield property to park.

The driveway is opposite Robinsons Park and is just past a white water tower. It will be signposted. Then you will have to walk down to the end of the road. Note that the proposed route of the freeway is marked on the Melways map.

From the Victorian Heritage Database

Westerfield
Location

86 - 96 Robinson's Road,FRANKSTON, Frankston City
For further details, contact the local council or go to Planning Schemes Online.

Level of Significance: National

Statement of Significance

Designed in 1924 for Russell and Mabel Grimwade by Harold Desbrowe Annear, Westerfield is the most intact example of the series of houses Annear remodelled, or designed on the Mornington Peninsula in the 1920s which demonstrate the vitality of early twentieth century eclecticism. Moving away from the more formal urban Georgian style, Annear responds to the "playground" ambience of the peninsula with a range of formal attitudes. Westerfield itself is a Y plan half timbered house built on a granite base somewhat reminiscent of French country architecture.

However, the significance of Westerfield lies not only with its architecture but also its owners and its place in a particular Melbourne culture of the 20th century.

Conceived as a working farm as well as a retreat, Westerfield's grounds are planted with the euclypt species Grimwade cultivated and recorded in a photographic study. With his friend Charles Lane-Poole, first Principal of the School of Forestry at Canberra, Grimwade was ahead of his time in matters of conservation and land use, seeking a workable alliance with industry. During the war, the property was given over to growing crops for medicinal drugs; poppies, lavender, foxglove and belladonna. The house, garden and grounds are included in the classification of Westerfield which is considered to be of national significance.

First Classified 12/12/90
Revised: Classified National 3/8/98

CONTACT DETAILS

Contacts for the picket site: S Walsh Mobile: 0405 380 312 Also Gillian
Collins Pines Protectors 0414 309 960 and Jim Kerin Defenders of the South
East Green Wedge Mobile 0409 501 764

The above article was based on a notice from Julianne Bell, Secretary, Protectors of Public Lands Victoria Inc.
PO Box 197, Parkville 3052, Mobile: 0408022408

Tasmanian wildlife are in a terrible situation and there is a great need for better laws to look after their welfare and habitat. Candobetter did articles on this problem Tasmania, West Australia, Victoria - our wildlife are ignored by government, and fortunately the recent Auditor General Special Report No. 78, Management of threatened species (Tasmania) will hopefully provide a good basis for your submissions. Please send your submissions to us and we will publish them.

The closing date for submissions is Friday 13 August 2010.

Tasmania: Native Plants & Animals, Changes to laws

Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment, Native Plants & Animals, Wildlife Regulations Review

Wildlife Regulations Review

Public submissions invited by 13 August 2010.

The following extracts are taken from the Government site at http://www.dpiw.tas.gov.au/inter.nsf/WebPages/LBUN-87L4Q9?open

Please refer there for files and applications>

The Tasmania Government is reviewing the Wildlife Regulations to provide a regulatory framework that ensures the best possible outcomes for the natural environment and the Tasmanian community.

The Wildlife Regulations 1999 govern the protection, control and management of our native fauna. They regulate a wide range of activities that have potential impacts on Tasmania’s wildlife, including:

* The recreational and commercial use of wildlife in Tasmania (including hunting)
* Wildlife exhibitions and displays
* Deer farming
* Wildlife licences, permits and record keeping requirements.

It is proposed that the new Regulations will be replaced as set out below.

The Wildlife (General) Regulations 2010
These Regulations will govern the recreational and commercial activities concerning wildlife including:

* Wildlife licences and permits (conditions, issue, renewal, cancellation and appeal processes)
* Tagging, marking and record keeping requirements
* The taking and trading in wildlife and wildlife products, including requirements for importing and exporting wildlife
* Hunting
* Taxidermy
* Offences.

Download Draft Wildlife (General) Regulations 2010 as a PDF Draft Wildlife (General) Regulations 2010
(PDF: 853 KB / 114 pages) View PDF as HTML

This is a Portable Document Format (PDF) file and requires the use of Adobe Acrobat Reader. The Reader is easy to download and is free of charge.

Download Review of Wildlife Regulations 2010 - Guide to Proposed Changes as a PDF Review of Wildlife Regulations 2010 - Guide to Proposed Changes
(PDF: 374 KB / 2 pages) View PDF as HTML

This is a Portable Document Format (PDF) file and requires the use of Adobe Acrobat Reader. The Reader is easy to download and is free of charge.

Download Review of Wildlife (General) Regulations 2010
Guide to Part 4 - Taxidermy as a PDF Review of Wildlife (General) Regulations 2010
Guide to Part 4 - Taxidermy
(PDF: 344 KB / 2 pages) View PDF as HTML

This is a Portable Document Format (PDF) file and requires the use of Adobe Acrobat Reader. The Reader is easy to download and is free of charge.

Wildlife (Exhibited Animals) Regulations 2010
These Regulations will govern the exhibition of wildlife, including wildlife parks and travelling wildlife displays, including:

* Wildlife exhibition licences and display permits (conditions, issue, renewal, cancellation and appeal processes)
* Record keeping requirements
* Disposal of wildlife
* Release or escape of wildlife
* Offences
* Travelling wildlife exhibition permits.

Download Draft Wildlife (Exhibited Animals) Regulations 2010 as a PDF Draft Wildlife (Exhibited Animals) Regulations 2010
(PDF: 618 KB / 49 pages) View PDF as HTML

This is a Portable Document Format (PDF) file and requires the use of Adobe Acrobat Reader. The Reader is easy to download and is free of charge.

Download Review of Wildlife Exhibition Regulations 2010 - Guide to Proposed Changes as a PDF Review of Wildlife Exhibition Regulations 2010 - Guide to Proposed Changes
(PDF: 499 KB / 3 pages) View PDF as HTML

This is a Portable Document Format (PDF) file and requires the use of Adobe Acrobat Reader. The Reader is easy to download and is free of charge.

The Wildlife (Deer Farming) Regulations 2010
These Regulations will govern European fallow deer farming in Tasmania as, for the purposes of the Regulations, European fallow deer are considered wildlife. The provision of Regulations to distinguish between farm deer and wild deer remove the need for farmers to obtain permits to buy, sell, possess or kill farm deer. These Regulations will govern European fallow deer farming including:

* Notification obligations for prospective deer farmers
* Deer farm approvals and inspections
* Record keeping and marking of animals
* Actions necessary to prevent or address deer escape, including notification, recovery, destruction and forfeiture.

Download Draft Widlife (Deer Farming) Regulations 2010 as a PDF Draft Widlife (Deer Farming) Regulations 2010
(PDF: 286 KB / 14 pages) View PDF as HTML

This is a Portable Document Format (PDF) file and requires the use of Adobe Acrobat Reader. The Reader is easy to download and is free of charge.

Download Review of Fallow Deer Farming Regulations 2010 - Guide to Proposed Changes as a PDF Review of Fallow Deer Farming Regulations 2010 - Guide to Proposed Changes
(PDF: 407 KB / 2 pages) View PDF as HTML

This is a Portable Document Format (PDF) file and requires the use of Adobe Acrobat Reader. The Reader is easy to download and is free of charge.

Submissions
Submissions are invited from members of the public to provide comment in relation to any and all of these proposed Regulations. There is no set form for making a submission. They may be in the form of a letter, a substantial paper or a short document. Appendices and other supporting documents may be included.

Submissions should be sent to:

Post: Wildlife Regulations Review
Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment
P.O. Box 44
Hobart 7001
Fax: (03) 6223 8603
Email: [email protected]
Hand delivery: Wildlife Regulations Review
Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment
Resource Management and Conservation Division
134 Macquarie Street
Hobart
Further information
Hard copies of the proposed Regulations and other explanatory material may also be obtained from Service Tasmania outletsYou are now leaving our site. DPIPWE is not responsible for the content of the web site to which you are going. The link does not constitute any form of endorsement.

The closing date for submissions is Friday 13 August 2010.

www.animaljusticeparty.org

The Animal Justice Party (AJP) is close to the target number of members to be able to register with the Australian Electoral Commission. This is an indication of the importance the community gives to animal welfare. The party is now calling for more members so that it can begin to make an impact. By the way, isn't that a beautiful logo!

Dear Animal Supporter

Much of the cruelty inflicted on animals in this country results from government policy decisions, ignorance, and inertia. The interests of animals have not been represented in the Australian electoral system and as a result governments have not given due regard to their plight.

Over recent months, a small but widely representative group of compassionate animal advocates has been working to establish a political party to represent the interests of animals in the Australian Parliamentary system. During this time, a Charter, Constitution and Party logo have been established and a wide range of policy papers is currently being prepared, covering such areas as: vivisection, intensive farming, live animal exports, animals used for sport and entertainment, wildlife, kangaroos, domestic animals, animals and the law, marine animals, population and settlement, and others.

These policy papers will be on the Animal Justice Party web site in a few weeks from now.

To be registered as a political party with the Australian Electoral Commission the AJP will need 500 members. Simply through word of mouth and our website we have almost reached this target, but we will need many more members if we are to be the significant force that all animals need.

We therefore invite you to visit the infant (but soon to be upgraded) AJP website www.animaljusticeparty.org, read the key documents and download and complete a Party membership form.

Yours faithfully Animal Justice Party Steering Committee

20 April 2010

Photo by Brett Clifton of a new wild male kangaroo come to the neighborhood

Late 2008 a school teacher helped worried children in Epping write to the Minister for the Environment, Mr Jennings, asking him to help kangaroos marooned by development and battered by traffic. Why did DSE allow Wildlife Victoria to spend time and money on a plan to relocate the 21 remaining kangaroos to safe territory, but then secretly kill the kangaroos in a unilateral decision in January this year? Why did DSE, which is also responsible for planning, allow development to trap the kangaroos? A memorial protest will be held for these kangaroos on Sunday 28 March at 2pm at Oleander Drive off McDonalds Rd in South Morang.We the People can do more about this - see inside! See also "Children in Epping tread where politicians fear to go" and "Our State government appears to be on a campaign to eradicate native wildlife from Victoria, especially kangaroos"

Mill Park/South Morang kangaroos

In late 2008 a school teacher helped worried children in Epping write to the Minister for the Environment, Mr Jennings, pleading for his department to look after kangaroos in the area,[1] which were landlocked by Government policy to artificially stimulate human population growth and the associated commercial and housing development.[2]

The children were especially distressed by the frequent sight of injured kangaroos on roads which they tried to cross in efforts to find food and water.

To our knowledge, the Minister never answered the children's emails, but the schoolteacher and children were silenced. Obviously one would write more about this except that it would not be in the interests of the children and their teacher. Why this should be so in Victoria in 2010, I leave to the reader's imagination.

Wildlife Victoria searched for kangaroos which DSE has shot without telling them

McDonalds Rd., South Morang and Bunnings, Mill Park, Feb 13, 2006 (Google Earth) with Inset of local kangaroos caught in further commercial development (Photo Fiona Corke).

Note that this area has changed enormously since the latest google-view of Feb 13 2006, such is the forced pace of change in Australian cities. South of McDonalds Road is where the mob was, and that is now quite heavily built on, with commercial development, including Bunnings. North of McDonalds Rd is largely overtaken by residential development, but there are also kangaroos over there, particularly near the two water tanks that can be seen on the top right hand edge of the area. There are not as many as there used to be. Wildlife rescuers are trying to ascertain with regular monitoring how many may have disappeared from there as well, and if any of these may have been killed. The kangaroos can get some passage through up into the northern area and beyond. Alas that takes them into farming areas where they are likely to also be shot with permits issued by the DSE to farmers.

The Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) dissolved the South Morang Kangaroo Working Group Committee last year, but DSE told Wildlife Victoria that they could submit a relocation plan, although it clearly stated that the plan would have to meet all recommendations. So far these recommendations have all been met and the plan is currently under review with an Ethics Committee that is chaired by a DSE employee.

On Friday 19th March 2010, however, after being questioned by Wildlife Victoria about the disappearance of kangaroos under focus, the Department put out a media release, stating that the kangaroos had been shot in January. The DSE employee who was left continuing to chair the ethics committee had not been informed either.

The grounds given for killing the kangaroos were that development was reducing them to starvation, but Wildlife Victoria says that recipient sites were available for them. Yes, there is land available, because of the depletion of populations due to last year's bushfires in other areas. This relocation option was to be presented before the ethics committee for approval next week.

Why did DSE, which is also responsible for planning, allow the situation which preceded this final tragedy to arise in the first place? Why did they also allow Wildlife Victoria to spend considerable time and money on a plan to relocate these animals to safe territory, then secretly kill the kangaroos in a unilateral decision?

Substantial Wildlife Corridors are still possible and must be created

It would still be possible to create corridors to safeguard Victoria's kangaroo population if it were not for the attitude of the commercially obsessed and development-mad Victorian Government, which seems to intend to get rid of every kangaroo in the State without letting anyone know what it is doing. Since similar attitudes prevail in other States, it seems possible that Australian governments could have plans which will make the kangaroo extinct, for all the public knows.
See also "Children in Epping tread where politicians fear to go" and "Our State government appears to be on a campaign to eradicate native wildlife from Victoria, especially kangaroos"

Secretive elimination of wild kangaroos in South Morang and Mill Park

The Sth Morang kangaroos that people have fought so long to save have been secretly killed by commercial shooters contracted by the Department of Sustainability and Environment.

The kill happened in January, although their relocation was and theoretically still is under review by an Ethics Committee. The chair of that Ethics Committee is a Senior DSE Wildlife employee who was not informed that the kangaroos had been killed.

21 remaining members of the original mob of 30 (depleted by road accidents), which rescuers had been focusing on, had been missing for weeks. Wildlife Victoria Members, Fiona Rowley, Narelle Smith and their northern network, Wildlife Rescuers, had been searching the area. All the while they suspected that the kangaroos had secretly been killed.

After Freedom of Information (FOI) notification and recent questions from Wildlife Victoria, the DSE issued a media release dated 19 March 2010.

The DSE media release [cited below] uses the fact that property development in the area was eliminating these animals' habitat and that they would starve to death to excuse the unilateral kill and implies that relocation was too unsure and costly an option to consider.

Kangaroo defenders say, however, that Wildlife Victoria’s submission to relocate the kangaroos was panning out well. Fiona Rowley had been an effective advocate for a rescue plan and both she and Narelle Smith had been involved in key aspects of the relocation plan and submission, and were keeping up monitoring of the area. The City of Whittlesea and Westfield Shopping Centre were prepared to cover the costs of the relocation, according to Fiona Rowley.

DSE "Out of touch" on wildlife issues

In response to the DSE press release, a distressed Fiona Rowley said:

“No proper study of the effects of relocating kangaroos has ever been undertaken, so how do they know it’s not possible. We were prepared to undertake one and the relocation project was pending approval via an expert panel.

"Money has been spent on statistical consultants, having site assessments done on recipient sites and it was determined by these consultants that the sites were suitable and could accommodate this mob of kangaroos with little to no environmental impact.

"Furthermore the City of Whittlesea and Westfield Shopping Centre were also supportive in relocating the kangaroos and were prepared to cover the costs of this project. The DSE are out of touch with wildlife issues and don’t consider what the community wants or expects in these situations.”

Ms Rowley added:

"In the South Morang Kangaroo Working Group Committee that many of us were involved in over the past few years the DSE admitted to being afraid of public backlash and noted the media attention when hundreds of kangaroos were killed at the Belconnen Naval Transmission site in Canberra 2 years ago. They also admitted on a number of occasions during the working group meetings that they were opposed to relocating these kangaroos as they did not want to set a precedent of relocating kangaroos in Victoria. DSE finally agreed that a relocation plan could be submitted and that it would have to go through an animal ethics committee for approval.

Why is the Department of Sustainability and Environment so cruel, callous, devious and incompetent?

The Department of Sustainability and Environment may have perceived an interest in defeating Wildlife Victoria's attempt to relocate kangaroos because, had this attempt succeeded, it could have been the first of many. The Department would then have been forced to admit that their duty of care towards these indigenous animals involves finding them alternative habitat or ceasing to grant new building permits in affected areas.

There are many groups of kangaroos in similar man-made predicaments - more every day. Kangaroos are high visibility animals (unlike some solitary, smaller creatures which often die unnoticed). Relocating kangaroos requires very noticeable efforts and organisation, drawing even more attention to their plight and government responsibility, cruelty, and over-release of building permits.

The public get very upset when they are confronted with the merciless impact of population growth and development on wildlife and the last thing that DSE wants the public to realise is the extent of the suffering of kangaroos and other wildlife through its already unpopular and unnecessary population growth and development objectives. The public really need to know about this, however.

DSE Victoria is already in trouble for failing to collect and maintain competent wildlife statistics, which means that it has failed to identify threatened and endangered species, let alone fulfill its international obligations to draw up plans. A recent auditor general's report on the matter estimated that it would take the Department nearly 30 years to catch up with its obligations if it continued to allocate so few resources to the task.

The Department of Sustainability and Environment is in charge of all the planning in Victoria and responsible for releasing too many building permits and inviting too many people to come and live in Victoria. To allow the DSE to be responsible for the welfare of kangaroos is like putting the fox in charge of the welfare of hens, a maniac in charge of a child, or a drunk in charge of a bar.

DSE should reimburse Wildlife Victoria and Volunteers involved in relocation efforts for their time

Is DSE going to reimburse the many weeks and months which volunteers have spent doing the department's work for them in researching relocation options and plans? In my view, the volunteers deserve the same hourly compensation as DSE managers would expect for undertaking similar responsibilities. If DSE is prepared to pay shooters rates to kill the kangaroos, it can pay volunteers for their time that it has wasted.

Reimburse Stress and suffering for Wildlife volunteers as well

Some also speak of compensation for pain and suffering - the awful stress of putting yourself out - literally for years - to find a solution for wildlife to a problem caused by incompetent planning - only to be assaulted with the information that the department was apparently not even attending to your input. Those months and years of forgone income, time with children, time maintaining home and fitness, in order to put in time for kangaroos with the Department of Sustainability deserve full compensation, including holidays and penalty rates and medical expenses for stress.

There is a lot we can do about all these wrongs!

Complain

Write a supportive comment under this article.

Email Ron.Waters[AT]dse.vic.gov.au to voice your protest
Email Gavin Jennings, the Minister for the Environment gavin.jennings[AT]parliament.vic.gov.au to let him know how disgusted you are. His phone number is (03) 9888 1910.

Send us copies of emails you send to politicians.

Change your vote!

Join the Animal Justice Party, which is a new political party in Australia that is seeking members in order to become an effective voice for all creatures great and small in every state of Australia.

Alternatively, join one and or vote for both (using preferences) of the two parties which intend to reverse government policy for rapid population growth in Australia. After all, population growth and development are the greatest cause of suffering for our native fauna. The parties are The Stable Population Party of Australia and the New Australia Party. Support Federal ALP member, Kelvin Thomson's population reform plan and vote for him if you are in Thomson's Federal electorate (Wills), which borders on the areas discussed here. You can contact him at (03) 9350 5777 or email him at Kelvin.Thomson.MP[AT]aph.gov.au Tell other MPs that they should get behind Kelvin's plan.

Get the relevant State and Federal Members of Parliament to put pressure on the relevant ministers

The area in question falls under two different State electorates - Yan Yean (administered by Danielle Green MP - danielle.green[AT]parliament.vic.gov.au Phone: (03) 9432 9782) and Mill Park (administered by Lily d'Ambrosio MP - lily.d'ambrosio[AT]parliament.vic.gov.au Phone: (03) 9465 9033 . These members need to tell the Minister for Planning to refuse any new building or clearing permits for the area and to provide safe crossings for animals in extant roads and to stop inviting immigrants to Victoria because there is no room.

The Federal member responsible for this particular area - Scullin electorate - is ALP member, Harry Jenkins: Harry.Jenkins.MP[AT]aph.gov.au Phone: (03) 94678055. He needs to tell the Prime Minister to cut down Australia's immigration because it is causing kangaroos to suffer by driving housing and infrastructure development on indigenous habitat.

Memorial Protest for these victims of DSE and Victoria's overdevelopment and lack of fauna management

A memorial protest will be held in honour of these kangaroos, who became the innocent victims of development and lack of native fauna management by the government department responsible for their wellbeing. It will be held next Sunday 28 March at 2pm at Oleander Drive off McDonalds Rd in South Morang.

Please – tell everyone you can, it’s really important that as many people attend as possible.

Enough is enough; this war against our wildlife has got to stop!

Kangaroo and Wildlife activists and carers hope to see many Victorians there from city and country areas.

The Department's media release in March about the shootings in January

The Department of Sustainability and Environment Media Release re the
"South Morang Kangaroosof 19 March 2010, [3] (reproduced in the "Notes" section of this article), was two months after the event.

It said that DSE had

'humanely put down a group of kangaroos that had been isolated on land at South Morang.' It said that "The welfare and safety issues associated with the capture and relocation of kangaroos were significant” and that “Finding suitable habitat to relocate kangaroos to is also a challenge.”

The choice of the words 'significant' and 'challenge' is interesting. 'Significant' is a useful term for avoiding quantification, comparison or documentation. Why wasn't the decision on the kangaroos scientifically and ethically informed by the relocation study concurrently being carried out? 'Challenge' is a political word that covers a multitude of omissions, including the fact that there was a choice. DSE chose to kill the kangaroos. It chose to deprive them of life and people working on this problem of the opportunity to attempt to save their lives. Victorian observers could be forgiven for seeing this as expedient or cowardly or callous.

One long-time wildlife campaigner wrote:

"I may be wrong/out of line but as I've said before, probably the only way to save some kangaroos is to dart and move them illegally, at night. Government departments that are supposed to protect wildlife almost never help when we ask them to protect animals and seem to take every opportunity to kill them. I cannot help but wonder if there is a criminally corrupt aspect. Someone's brother may be a 'roo shooter. Wildlife carers get nothing for the work they do, but shooters get paid. What is the going price for shooting 20 kangaroos, I wonder, after you split it with someone in a department meant to help the roos?

Of course there must be people in departments that are supposed to protect wildlife who actually do care about animals, but they have to follow orders and the directions from the top seem to be universally callous."

Notes

[1] "in the area": This particular tragedy came to the attention of the public through a mob of about 30 kangaroos which became trapped behind Bunnings/Westfield in Mill Park. This mob was split as the roads became busier with increasing development and population growth. As the other side of McDonalds road is South Morang, they are known as the Sth Morang kangaroos as they were once the same mob. The mob over on the other side has farmland on the other side of the large residential development, but many have become increasingly locked in there as well under a transmission station and Melb Water land.

There are also other isolated and landlocked mobs in Somerton Rd, known as the Somerton mob, (see video) also pockets in Lalor and Bundoora, which are all in trouble.

[2] Most citizens are not aware of the Victorian government policy to invite immigrants from other states and from overseas to live in Victoria - hence the population growth, which drives undemocratic development throughout Victoria.

[3]

Department of Sustainability and Environment Media Release re the
"South Morang Kangaroos

19 March 2010

The Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) has humanely put down a group of kangaroos that had been isolated on land at South Morang.

DSE Wildlife manager Ron Waters said this was a difficult decision for everyone involved but the welfare of the kangaroos had to come first.

“The health and safety of these kangaroos was at risk. They were facing dehydration and starvation because of the progressive loss of habitat at the site,” Mr Waters said.

“The site is largely private land and there’s no long term future for kangaroos on this site that has effectively become enclosed by roads and commercial development.”

“DSE had been monitoring the group of about 30 kangaroos closely for a number of years and had hoped that they might naturally disperse from the area as development proceeded.”

“It became clear that despite significant and increasing disturbance at the site, animals were reluctant to disperse naturally and DSE took the tough decision to use professional shooters to humanely destroy them before they starved or were pushed onto adjoining roads.

“The welfare and safety issues associated with the capture and relocation of kangaroos were significant.”

“Finding suitable habitat to relocate kangaroos to is also a challenge.”

Google aerial photo of ADI Site giving an idea of size. Obviously it is surrounded by suburbs. Humans have not been denied species representation here, but, if this site is taken away, they will be denied their natural right to access natural ammenity and wild environment, which we should all be able to do, without compromising it. (Ed.)

Geoff Brown
President
Western Sydney Conservation Alliance Inc
PO Box 4134
WERRINGTON NSW 2747
Thursday, 4 March 2010
The Hon Peter Garrett
Minister for Environment, Heritage and the Arts
cc David Bradbury Member for Lindsay

RE: Urgent Ministerial intervention required to halt the clearing of Cumberland Plain Woodland at the former ADI Site – Penrith Local Government Area

Dear Minister,

We have been reliably informed that Delfin Lend Lease is about to commence
clearing Critically Endangered Cumberland Plain Woodland (CPW) within the Western Precinct of the former Commonwealth owned ADI Site. This first 6 hectare subdivision will be one of many out of the total 230 hectares within the Western Precinct. The Central Precinct, some 130 hectares is proposed to be developed in some 5 years time. This combined area of 360 hectares is predominately CPW
Aerial detail of water body at part of the site.
Your DEWHA recently listed CPW and Shale Gravel Transition Forest as Critically Endangered Ecological Communities. It is believed that the basis for the Critically Endangered Listing was that CPW had been reduced in area by some 400 hectares.
Minister here at ADI a developer is allowed to clear nearly the same amount of CPW that justified elevating CPW from Endangered to Critically Endangered and they don’t even have to refer their development applications to your DEWHA to have those assessed against the EPBC Act.

This is [...]

criminal and

morally bankrupt and your DEWHA and the local member for Lindsay know that what Delfin Lend Lease is proposing is clearly a breach of the EPBC Act.

The justification for that statement is that DEWHA in 2008 received a delegation from Delfin, Penrith Council and David Bradbury to negotiate changing the National Estate boundaries of the ADI Regional Park. DEWHA told the delegation, and this
was paraphrased by your Adviser Peter Wright when we met him last month, that such an amendment would require Lend Leases 10 year old approval Certification – a dubious certification and assessment issued under the Howard Government – to be reassessed under the EPBC Act. Essentially DEWHA told the delegation that Delfin would not like the outcome of such assessment as it would result in the protection of CPW within proposed development areas and therefore a reduced housing lot yield and lower profits for the developer.

We know that Delfin Lend Lease has some shonky certification from the Howard Govt (see below)

Assessment and approval under Commonwealth environmental law was granted to the entire St Marys development under the former Environment Protection (Impact of Proposals) Act 1974 (EPIP Act) prior to the gazettal of the EPBC Act. Correspondence from the former Environment Australia (now DEWHA) was provided to the applicant in July 2002 advising
that despite the repeal of the EPIP Act and gazettal of the EPBC Act, no further Commonwealth approval would be required for the St Marys property. This certification was provided under the Environmental Reform (Consequential Provisions) Act 1999.

But for your DEWHA and the local ALP Member to hide behind this dubious certification and turn a blind eye to the bulldozing of Critically Endangered CPW is immoral and in reality, when assessed against the EPBC Act, as it should be, ILLEGAL.

Minister we now call on you to urgently intervene and to call in the ADI Site development proposal by Delfin Lend Lease so that Critically Endangered CPW is properly assessed under the EPBC Act. It is clear the current assessment Delfin Lend
Lease has - that gives them immunity from the EPBC Act - is scientifically flawed. The entire ADI Site assessment process under the Howard Govt was dubious and now as the bulldozers are about to roll those wrongs need to be corrected .

I recently emailed and phoned David Blumenthal – with no response - calling for him to act on this issue; we also said the same to Peter Wright last month in Sydney. A failure to protect these last great remnants of CPW at the ADI Site under the guise that legally we have no come back on the developer will not be accepted and viewed dimly by large numbers of voters in Western Sydney concerned with the protection of our Natural Heritage.

Yours truly,
Geoff Brown

DEVELOPER RULES – URGENT!

WHAT THE ELLS GOING ON?

One rulebook for developer Bob Ells, of King’s Forest/Cobaki Lakes, and one rulebook for everyone else.

Is this right? Are we going to stand for it? What do you think?

4500 lots each Kings Forest and Cobaki Lakes (9000 total) What about the infrastructure, water etc. for such huge developments?

Block sizes from 120m (Normal minimum 450m)

Developer creates own rules for house types, roads, sewerage, etc.

THIS IS OUR LAST CHANCE TO OBJECT

Send submission to:

Dept of Planning, PO Box 39 , Sydney 2001

Fax: 02 9228 6540

Email: [email protected]

IF YOU LOVE KOALAS , PLEASE HELP!

Dear Dept Planning

I strongly object to Leda Development being able to create their own rules for house types, roads, sewage etc. What on earth is going on here? Who is governing this country, developers or politicians? Who is this government serving, the people or the developers?

Why is Leda trying to minimise block sizes from 450m minimum to 120m? This is absurd not only for the environment but also the people who will be crammed together like sardines, 4500 lots with a minimum of 9000 people. Surely this will create a lot of crime in the area?

Leda will not be paying for infrastructure, water, rubbish removal, Tweed Shire council and local ratepayers will and we don't even want another 10,000 people here! We can hardly cope with the traffic and water demands we have now.

What I am most concerned about however, is the wildlife. Round Mountain was the #1 koala colony in Tweed shire and tragically it was totally burned out in a major bushfire a month or so ago. That leaves Kings Forest as the new #1 koala colony and you are allowing a major housing development on it?

What hope do the koalas have? Koalas stop breeding when stressed and many things cause stress - even simple things like having their favourite tree chopped down, or the loss of family members to say nothing of dogs (which will be permitted at Kings Forest), 6 lane freeways (with no overpasses, underpasses or exclusion fences), invasion of habitat. Their main habitat will become the new golf course which of course will be regularly sprayed with neurotoxic organophosphates which also will cause cancer and reproductive problems.

In addition to the threat to diminishing numbers of koalas, there a total of 450 species of native animals on Kings Forest , 33 of which are endangered. Why isn't the government doing something proactive to protect our wildlife? Are you not aware of the fact that Australia has the highest rate of species extinctions on the planet? Wildlife is under the radar of any government department and I would like to know WHY.

By the time people wake up to the horrific loss of biodiversity it will be too late. Humans cannot survive without biodiversity. The best protection is for the government to reclaim land like Kings Forest and leave it for the native animals. Why does money win out every time? What about your children's future? Are you even thinking of what a diminished future they will have with no koalas in Tweed ?

Tweed is home to more biodiversity than even Kakadu yet 2/3rds of these species are at risk of extinction.

Please do something NOW! Stop Kings Forest from going ahead with this madness. Bob Ell is acting like a Frankenstein monster with dollar signs popping out of his eyes and hell bent on destroying our wildlife.

[...]

Sincerely,
Menkit Prince
Uki NSW

"How thick can a political skin get?" writes Victorian wildlife ecologist, Hans Brunner.

Mr. Brumby's minister for the Environment, Gavin Jennings, turns a damning report by the Auditor-General on endangered species into receiving a “pat on the back”.

In a media report he welcomes the Auditor-General’s report and stating, “ The findings are a “pat on the back” as well as a remainder that we must continue working to protect Victoria’s unique plants and animals”, hence, nothing will change.

He has received this report with a poker face grin and treated it like water of a duck.

Here are some of the Auditor-General’s remarks:

• “ At the current rate of progress, with existing resources, it will take a further 22 years for the department to complete action statements for the 653 items currently listed threatened.”
• “ Of those threatened species listed as threatened, less than half had an action statement prepared”.
• “ The gap between listed items and items with action statements continue to widen.”
• “On the advisory list are 2249 species of flora and vertebrate fauna.”
• “ Listing decisions are compromised by a lack of reliable, up to date, scientific data and limited stakeholder participation.”
• “ The Act enables the department secretary to prepare formal plans to guide the management of threatened flora, or potentially threatening processes – NO MANAGEMENT PLAN HAS BEEN PREPARED TO DATE.”
• “ This review concluded that the existing regulatory policy framework for the protection of threatened species is in need for a major overhaul.”
• “ There is no legal power to compel department or other agencies to complete the directions within action statements. Departmental staff who prepare and monitor action statements relay on GOOD WILL of other departmental and agency staff to undertake tasks in the action statements.”
• “ The full range of management processes and consideration and control measures available in the act has NOT BEEN USED.”
• “ The greatest human threat to other species is habitat loss. Accordingly, tools to protect ecologically significant areas of habitat are essential.’

The report also pointed out on numerous occasions on inefficiencies, duplications and limits of resources. What it missed to clearly highlight is that huge amount of time and money is spent on listing endangered species and the production of management plans but no further action is taken or enforced to properly rectify the problems.

A typical example is the under resourced and incompetent handling of the nationally endangered Eastern Barred- and Southern Brown Bandicoot. Further more, habitat loss is still continuing unchecked with no realistic offsets possible.

If this deserves “a pat on the back” for Mr. Brumby, ordinary, daily work would have to make him immortal.

Hans Brunner
Wildlife Ecologist, Victoria
(shown left pointing out bandicoot activity in the Frankston area, Victoria)

Photo by Brett CliftonText added by Sheila Newman

In a press release on
April Fools Day 2009,
Victoria's Minister for the Environment,
Gavin Jennings
interpreted as a 'pat on the back' a condemnatory report by the Auditor General on the Victorian Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988.[1] Jennings' response seems like a crude damage-control exercise. The report said "the government's lack of baseline data or output performance measures means that it is not possible to conclude whether or not the Act has achieved its primary objectives. The available data, which is patchy, indicates that it has not," and notes failure to use the conservation and control measures in the Act, inadequate listing of threatened species, failure to develop action statements, to monitor implementation of these, or to assess their effectiveness, and that penalties for offences under the Act have not been reviewed or updated and therefore are not an effective deterrent." The Minister and the Government should resign; they are a sad joke.

[1]The media release cited was from the Minister for Environment and Climate Change, Gavin Jennings, was dated Wednesday, 1 April, 2009, entitled, "Government welcomes auditor-general report".

The Australian Wildlife Protection Council has long said that Victoria lacks any framework within which our fauna are managed and has noted that there has never been a prosecution under the Victorian Fauna and Flora Act since it was created in 1988. Victorians who have looked and listened carefully have noted the silence in many forests once alive with song and movement, the deserted grasslands, and the corpses of kangaroos, koalas, wombats on our roads. Those of us who have tried to tackle the situation with Department of Sustainability Victoria (DSE) have also observed the avoidant, unassertive, endangered staff and ever-diminishing habitat of the biodiversity section of DSE and its encroachment by primary industries, find this comes as no surprise.

But will the backbenchers of the Bracks/Brumby government's aspirational classes come to their senses and stop chorusing on cue that Victoria is the "best place to live work and raise a family". Instead, will they stand up for their constituents on nature, justice and democracy and refuse to kowtow to hollow leaders more interested in commercially trading property and finance than good government?

Below is the summary of The Victorian Auditor General's report on the Administration of the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988

1. Audit summary

1.1 Introduction

Conserving biodiversity is core to responsible environment and natural resource management and is fundamental to maintaining both quality of life and economic well-being, both now and in the future.

The Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 (the Act) is the primary Victorian legislation providing for conservation of threatened species and ecological communities, and the management of processes that threaten the sustainability Victoria's native flora and fauna. The Act establishes a listing process. Once an item is listed the Act sets out a range of management processes and conservation tools that can be implemented to protect and conserve species.

Since the Act was passed in 1988, 653 plant and animal species, communities and threatening processes have been listed.
The objective of the audit was to review the Department of Sustainability and Environment’s (the department) administration of the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 and to assess how effective the processes and actions developed under the Act have been in preserving Victoria’s native flora and fauna.

1.2 Conclusions

The full range of ‘management processes’ and ‘conservation and control measures’ available in the Act has not been used.
Action statements are the primary tools in the Act being used to protect and conserve threatened flora and fauna. However, the effort directed to listing threatened species and processes has not been matched by effort to develop action statements, to monitor the implementation of actions, or assess their effectiveness. The gap between listed items and items with action statements continues to widen.

The lack of baseline data and outcome or output performance measures means it is not possible to conclude whether the Act has achieved its primary objectives. The available data, which is patchy, indicates that it has not.

2 Administration of the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988

1.3 Findings

1.3.1 The listing process

The department has invested most effort in listing threatened species. However, there is duplication of processes within the department and with the Commonwealth Government’s listing process. The time taken to list an item, while within the three year (156 weeks) timeframe specified under the Act, continues to exceed the department’s internal benchmark of 31 weeks. The internal benchmark is an optimum period that requires each stage to be completed as quickly and reasonably as possible. This benchmark could not always be met in part due to factors beyond the department’s control, such as the Scientific Advisory Committee requiring multiple meetings to consider a nomination.

Over 800 items have been nominated for listing and 653 have been listed under the Act. However the department’s ‘advisory’ list (a separate list not subject to the listing process), contains over 2 200 species of flora and vertebrate fauna. Many of the species on the advisory list are likely to satisfy the criteria for the ‘threatened’ list maintained under the Act.

The listing process while conforming with the Act is compromised by a lack of up-to-date scientific data and by limited stakeholder participation. The department’s information systems relating to conservation and biodiversity are incomplete and disjointed. Major system development and integration projects are underway to address current shortcomings.

1.3.2 Conservation tools

The various management processes, conservation and control measures available under the Act to conserve and protect flora and fauna are not being used, largely because of their perceived complexity and difficulty of administering these provisions.

The department has relied on provisions in other environmental legislation, strategies, policies and plans in preference to those available under the Act to conserve and protect flora and fauna.

While ‘action statements’ are mandatory, their development and finalisation has been protracted. There is no time limit in the Act for these tools to be finalised—‘as soon as possible’ is the time standard set. At the current rate of progress, with existing resources, it will take a further 22 years for the department to complete action statements for the 653 items currently listed as threatened.

1.3.3

The Act The Act was reviewed by the department in 2002. This review concluded that ‘the existing regulatory and policy framework for the protection of threatened species in Victoria is in need of a major overhaul.’ A number of recommendations to improve the Act resulted from this review, but no amendments to the Act have been made.

Audit summary Administration of the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 3 The state government’s April 2008 green paper, Land and Biodiversity at a Time of Climate Change, acknowledges the need for legislative reform (State and Federal) and the proposed white paper will identify the extent to which legislative change is required.

1.4 Recommendations The department should:

• review the internal timeframes it sets for listing, against the resources it applies and the processes it adopts, to confirm they are realistic

• continue to build its knowledge-base on threatened species, causes of their decline and how best to mitigate threats to them; and expedite the transfer of information held on manual files to the ABC system

• formalise its collaboration on conservation activity with the Federal Government and seek a joint agreement to eliminate duplication in the listing process (Recommendation 4.1).

The department should:

• assess the resources it applies to developing, monitoring and reviewing action statements and establish a prioritised action plan to address the backlog of listed items with no action statements
• include in new and revised action statements the processes by which it will monitor progress and evaluate the effectiveness of each initiative within the action statement • review the efficacy of conservation and protection tools available under the Act
• assess whether the listing process is the most effective and efficient means of protecting species and communities
• develop a suite of output efficiency and outcome effectiveness measures to monitor and assess its conservation efforts (Recommendation 5.1)."

The Report can be downloaded here

Photos of Tasmanian Devils are from this wonderful you-tube movie by Chris Coupland of a devil in the snow at Cradle Mountain. (The music may not be to everyone's taste but it suits the devil's walk.) Note that Tasmania's devils are so inbred due to isolation that somewhere round half now suffer from a fatal mouth cancer. For this reason vigilance must be of highest order.

Fauna protection in every state is a disaster!

Victoria isn't the only state that has received terrible criticism of their administering of fauna protection laws.
You only have to google for Auditor Generals' reports on fauna to come up with them for most or all states in Australia. Here are some examples:

Tasmanian Government

Threatened Species Report, Auditor-General of Australia, March 2009
http://www.audit.tas.gov.au/publications/reports/specialreport/pdfs/specialreport78.pdf

A damning report on the state of Tasmania's rare and endangered species by Australia's Auditor-General, was released in March, 2009 and among may issues notes how only 2 of Tasmania's threatened species have full recovery plans in place.

Tasmania's Southern Forests are habitat-in-crisis for many of these species.

“It was pleasing to find evidence that private forest covenants had been numericallyeffective but that only two public authority management agreements, which provide an effective mechanism to allow public sector entities to commit to arrangements for management of species and habitats, had been made.

Another concern was that the existing organisational structure did not encourage a strategic approach to conservation of threatened species, their habitats and the threatsconfronting them. However, a divisional plan with clearly defined objectives exists and performance against the plan was regularly monitored and results published.
The Report includes 19 recommendations primarily aimed at introducing a structuredand prioritised approach to managing Tasmania’s threatened species with a focus on assessing implementation plans and monitoring progress.”

West Australian Government

West Australia:
10 June 2009
Auditor General finds number of threatened species increasing and few are improving (West Australia)

With WA’s list of threatened species now over 600 and rising, Auditor General Colin Murphy has found that recovery action is not happening for most, and few are improving.

In his report tabled in Parliament today titled, Rich and Rare: Conservation of Threatened Species, Mr Murphy found that, in many areas, the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) is not providing effective protection and recovery to WA’s threatened flora and fauna.

“Only a handful of threatened species are actually recovering, while the number of species on the list continues to grow,” Mr Murphy said.

“My office has found that only one in five threatened fauna, and fewer than half of threatened flora species have recovery plans, and those plans that are in place are often not fully implemented.”

The report also found that DEC’s $8.2 million threatened species program prioritises recovery plans and actions towards critically endangered species, leaving vulnerable and endangered species at increased risk of decline.

A major obstacle to DEC’s performance is the long delay in drafting a Biodiversity Conservation Act, to replace the existing Wildlife Conservation Act 1950. DEC has pursued updated legislation for over 20 years.

The current legislation restricts DEC’s ability to effectively conserve threatened species; existing protection measures are largely inadequate, and DEC does not have the power to access threatened species on private property to implement much-needed conservation action.

The report found that multi-species approaches to conservation can be effective in dealing with the growing number of threatened species.

“DEC is undertaking a number of multi-species approaches. For example, the Western Shield program has improved the status of several native mammals,” Mr Murphy said.

“DEC is also acquiring land to secure species habitat, but less than half the nationally agreed target has been reserved in WA.”

The Auditor General’s report found a number of other areas for improvement, particularly:

* DEC cannot demonstrate that all of its threatened species conservation activities are effective.
* DEC has not identified habitat critical to the survival of all threatened species.
* State and Commonwealth threatened species lists are not aligned and 190 WA species do not receive protection from the Commonwealth Government.

“Increasing numbers of threatened species and the size of WA present a significant challenge for DEC,” Mr Murphy said.

“Achieving the right balance between programs which benefit large numbers of species at once, with those targeted at individual species’ needs, will be critical.”

Where did the photograph come from and was this really a bridge built for animals? Update inside. Original teaser: Majestic picture inside. They had to build the animals their own crossing (especially the elk) because that was where the natural crossing was and after the highway was built there were far too many accidents. Pity Australia's developers and road makers seem to be too mean to do this kind of work for animals, although there are a few, small exceptions. Let's hope that Australia will follow this example. Unfortunately, on population policy, Canada is nearly as bad as Australia.

Elk used railway bridge.

Not a scam, but a reasonable mistake.

Futher update, from the wife of the photographer, Bob Peters.

On May 5, 2011, Mrs Peters wrote (see comment below article) that the photograph of the elks was first published on Picassa in 2006. "We did a little research of our own yesterday and we discovered that the bridge the elk were using is, indeed, a railway overpass. From the lower roadway, we couldn't tell that it isn't one of the animal overpasses Parks Canada has been building."

Scam?

The article was described as a scam by www.snopes.com, but it turns out that it was a simple mistake which illustrates, nonetheless, the principle that animals will use wildlife passes or whatever comes to hand, paw, hoof.
www.snopes.com has a page giving the background, which links to a much more interesting site with photographs of lots of different wildlife passes - here.

Below is an article where the true role of the bridge as a wildlife crossing was mistaken. We have republished the wonderful photo with the name of the photographer, Bob Peters. We are glad to be have the full story and to give due credit to Mr Peters. (Maybe he will send us some more wildlife photos one day!)

The bridge. Nice work, Canada !!

WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT?
If You Build It, THEY Will Come...

This is the actual turn-off From Banff, Alberta, Canada to the #1 highway to Calgary .

Great picture isn't it? They had to build the animals their own crossing (especially the elk) because that was where the natural crossing was and after the highway was built there were far too many accidents.

It didn't take the animals long to learn that this was their very own bridge!
And then you have some people saying 'Animals are stupid.'
Really....?

Candobetter Editor: This came to candobetter by email, but without the original author and photographer's name.
If you know them, please let us know and we will attribute the article and photos.

Photo by Jill Quirk

The material below comes from the preface of a new report, prepared by Dane Wood on behalf of the Canberra Environment and Sustainability Resource Centre for the ACT Office of the Commissioner for Sustainability and the Environment. Available from: Canberra Environment and Sustainability Resource Centre, GPO Box 1875, Canberra 2601.

Risks associated with eradicating native plant and animal life

"This report collates recent existing data on the Australian Capital Territory’s biodiversity in order to analyse and scope the capacity of biodiversity in adapting to climate change and global warming. It intends to provide a report that will ultimately assist research and preparation for the ACT State of the Environment Report with the purpose of educating the Canberra and wider ACT communities on the value of biodiversity for the ‘bush capital’ and warning of the risks associated with eradicating native plant and animal life and the consequences related to this."

The data used for this study was drawn from a wide range of sources to ensure the topic was scoped sufficiently to provide accurate results regarding the Territory’s biodiversity and how successfully it has adapted to the changing climate. Statistics regarding flora, fauna, general biodiversity data and bushfire regeneration figures were drawn from the Centre for Plant Biodiversity Research (Australian National Botanic Gardens), the bushfire regeneration monitoring on Farrer Ridge report, the Australian Government Bureau of Rural Sciences, Molonglo Catchment Group, Ginninderra Catchment Group, Southern ACT Catchment Group, Countdown 2010 - Local and Regional Authorities and the Canberra Ornithological Group.

Collectively the information we have collected has provided us with sufficient data to produce a report that will inform the Office of the Commissioner of the scope, range and value of the region’s biodiversity within the overall context of climate change adaptation.

We found that in response to bushfires and controlled burning throughout the Australian Capital Territory, the area’s flora was quick to re-establish itself and was closely followed by the return of fauna. This is a positive sign in how the Territory’s biodiversity has adapted over the years to regenerate quickly and has tailored itself to not only suit the changing climate but slow the process of global warming through quick restoration of carbon sequestering flora. Also noticed was the positive impact on the environment by particular native species that have had the opportunity to adapt over millions of years when compared to the less suited domestic species such as cattle and sheep. Kangaroos in particular have proven to be the ideal species to help the natural environment revive and also assist in minimising the hazards which can lead to bushfires. There was sufficient additional literature to support the finding that biodiversity-rich environments not only regenerate faster, but can also play a part in preventing the spread of fire and control fires as a total system.

While the ACT is rich in biodiversity across the scope of flora and fauna, there is cause for concern from the long term perspective of preparation for climate change:

-- Of the 47 species of mammals found in the ACT, less than half are commonly found, with 57.45% of the total declared as uncommon, scarce, insufficiently known or endangered.

-- The reptile population returns similar statistics, with 59.32% of total species declared uncommon, scarce, rare or endangered.

-- Of the amphibians population, 58.82% are uncommon, scarce or endangered, and a further 2 species of amphibians have been declared extinct.

The effects of climate change on the region are expected to include:

-- higher temperatures
-- increased winds in summers months
-- drier average seasonal conditions
-- increased frequency of extreme weather events including storms
-- increased risk of bushfire

Given this, it is particularly relevant to examine the role of biodiversity in adapting to these conditions over time. After the 2003 bushfires the Farrer Ridge Landcare group undertook a study on the restoration of the landscape and found that native flora species recovered quickly. In response to this, there is a need for community education in the role of native species in gardens as a means of maintaining native habitat as the landscape undergoes the changes that will accompany the expected changes in climate.

Bushfire remains a crucial risk in the region. We found that an ecosystem containing a rich biodiversity recovered more quickly and provided greater ecosystem stability during the restoration period than an ecosystem which featured monoculture (such as the pine forests) or where biodiversity was lacking.

This report has concluded that as climate change progresses further, communities within the Australian Capital Territory will notice dramatic changes to the local climate. In order to address this, three key issues regarding the biodiversity of the ACT must be addressed. These are:

-- protecting and nurturing the diverse ecosystems around the ACT
-- better integration of the natural and human environments
-- closely following the 18 year plan set out in the ACT Climate Change Strategy 2007 – 2025.

These points if addressed properly will have a beneficial effect on the local ecosystems and biodiversity and will increase the capacity of our landscapes to adapt to the process of climate change over a period of years."

This is a report well worth reading: short, clear and showing a responsible, knowledgeable and positive regard for our indigenous animals.

Thargomindah's “Invasion” of kangaroos and emus

According to a new report a “plague” of kangaroos has descended on the outback Queensland town of Thargomindah in search of food and water due to the drought. Residents of the small town in Queensland have been subject to a “biblical invasion” of kangaroos and emus over the past few days and it’s causing quite a stir in this small outback community.

Map of Thargomindah

Bulloo Mayor John Ferguson says the shire has been struggling with drought since 2001 and conditions are probably the worst they have been in more than 40 years. Councillor Ferguson says most graziers have destocked their properties because there is no feed left, even for kangaroos or emus.

The Burke and Wills 'Dig Tree', 300 km west, tells a story of explorer misfortune, bad luck and bad timing. It was under the shade of this Coolabah tree on the Banks of Cooper Creek that the explorers established their Base Camp in November of 1860. This town was the first in Australia and the third in the world to have street lighting generated by hydro power back in 1893.

“Swarm” proportions

According to a local farmer, “they’re swarm proportions, you have no idea, it gives you a creepy feeling when you see them that thick”. He also says that despite good rain to the east, none fell west of Thargomindah and Eromanga. The “plague” or “curse” is not the kangaroos!

The “exploding kangaroo population” in Thargomindah Queensland, apparently, is because Russia has banned the sale of roo meat.  It sounds like the kangaroo industry pushing their own agenda! The media has reported stupid things like a a woman who was too scared to hang her washing out because of the kangaroo coming close to the town, implying very strongly that they are creating a safety problem as well!

Apart from the emotive and derogatory wording, the situation is indicative of the condition of Australia. Apparently Tharomindah's population of 250 are so “run over” that there are five roos for every person! The local sergeant claimed it was not the first time they had been “ender siege” from the kangaroos!

Clearly, they see their national symbols as the threat, and they on alert for a war against these generally gentle animals.

Theromindah's worst drought in 50 years has hardened hearts against their indigenous inhabitants

Tharomindah is having the worst drought in 50 years and it has left the region desolate.
The temperature reached 41 degrees Celsius recently and Bulloo Mayor John Ferguson says the onset of hot conditions is a huge worry for landholders.

When farmers remove stock from their paddocks because of lack of feed, many of them add urea to the water troughs to kill any kangaroos that come to drink.

If our wildlife are the canaries in the mine, then surely this is a very dire situation and indicative of the terrible toll under which our environment, due to drought and climate change, are under. The industry propaganda states that currently kangaroos are starving to death, and it's kinder to shoot them.

Climate change is exacerbating existing threats

Climate change may happen too quickly for some species to adapt and may exacerbate existing threats such as land clearance, farming and pollution. Australian species with biological traits that make them susceptible to change, or with restricted habitats, are particularly vulnerable to extinction.

Australia already has the worst rate of mammal extinction in the world. Almost 40 per cent of mammal extinctions globally in the last 200 years have occurred in Australia. This incredible continent is losing species at an unprecedented rate and, as most species found here aren’t found anywhere else, the loss of Australian species is a loss for the whole world.

Two of the four species that are extinct on the mainland survive today on a few offshore islands. This trend of extinction and isolation may continue as a result of climate change.

At the time of European settlement the Bridled Nail-Tail Wallaby was a common species.  It now survives in only five percent of the area it once inhabited. They are the only species of rock-wallaby in Victoria, and were once found in large numbers in rocky areas prior to European settlement.

There were once 10,000,000 Mala Hare Wallabies right across Australia in arid and semi-arid areas. The species is now considered to be extinct in the wild.

The list of extinctions of once “common” species is a deadly roll call. Yet, people still don't understand or have compassion for today's common species.

Six macropod species are extinct, 7 are endangered

Out of our 49 macropod species, 6 have become extinct, 7 are endangered and 10 classed as vulnerable due to their small population in restricted areas, and numbers of the remaining species are killed annually.

Incessant and unsustainable commercial shooting has decimated kangaroo populations throughout rural Australia.

A new study published in the December issue of the University of Chicago’s Physiological and Biochemical Zoology found that an increase in average temperature of only two degrees Celsius could have a devastating effect on populations of Australia’s iconic kangaroos.

Authors Euan G. Ritchie and Elizabeth E. Bolitho of James Cook University in Australia say that generally accepted climate models predict temperatures in northern Australia to be between 0.4 and two degrees warmer by 2030, and between two and six degrees warmer by 2070.  Ritchie and Bolitho found that a two-degree temperature increase may shrink its range by 89 percent.
They found that a temperature increase as small as a half-degree Celsius may shrink kangaroos’ geographic ranges.  Pasture and water holes drying up  "may result in starvation and failed reproduction … or possible death due to dehydration for those species that are less mobile.”

We have the highest number of livestock per head in the world! Kangaroos are scapegoats and being vilified for livestock damage and the lack of willingness of landholders to tolerate any animals other than livestock on their land.

Language of hate and fear

The description of kangaroos as a “plague” and a threat is disgraceful and disrespectful of our national icons. People think that kangaroos are indestructible, but climate change and the drought are obviously taking its toll on our wildlife.

The lack of compassion and fear is really astounding! Livestock eat much more than kangaroos, and are clearing our land of trees and native pasture. If they are desperate for food and water, they are indicative of what is to become of Australia - a sterile, hot and dry lifeless desert!

They don't deserve to be begrudged some food.

Bridled Nail Tail Wallaby was a common species.

The following article is based on a submission to George Seitz, Committee Chair of the Outer Suburban/Interface Services and Development Committee, Victoria, and was submitted on 19th October by Protectors of Public Lands. Headings inserted by Candobetter editor are preceded with “(Ed.)” Illustrations are from candobetter.org . The rest of the article, unless otherwise marked, is the original text.

Submission to Parliamentary Outer Suburban Interface/Services and Development Committee Inquiring into the Impact of State Government Decision to Change the Urban Growth Boundary

...

Introduction:

I am making a submission on behalf of Protectors of Public Lands Victoria Inc. (PPL VIC.) I should by way of introduction mention that our organisation, established in 2004, is a State wide coalition of over 80 environment, heritage, resident and parks groups across Victoria. We are dedicated to keeping public lands in public hands and to protecting and conserving iconic heritage places and environmental sites of significance.

Summary of Grounds of Opposition: In addressing the terms of reference we are considering “The impact of the State Government’s decision to change the urban growth boundary on landholders and the environment…” PPL VIC draws the Committee’s attention to the failure of the State Government in strategic urban planning over the last 10 years and in encouraging uncontrolled entry of settlers to Victoria without examining sustainable population levels. We object to creation of growth areas outside the existing boundaries as extending and creating urban sprawl; alienation of established Green Wedges; destruction of the environment and wildlife; loss of biodiversity; creation of “dormitory” settlements without infrastructure and services; likely social alienation of youth; loss of arable land for food production; increasing car dependency; worsening Victoria’s greenhouse gas emissions and contributing to climate change with land clearance, unsustainable housing and reliance on road transport; plus knowingly approving the building of new settlements in fire-prone areas. Additionally we deplore the imposition of a vendor tax on landowners in order to fund the infrastructure of the new settlements and the impetus given to land speculation and “land banking.” PPL VIC supports the submissions made by our colleagues from the “Green Wedges Coalition” and “Taxed Out”.

The grounds of our submission are as follows:

New Growth Areas = Future Urban Sprawl = Major Failure of Strategic Urban Planning:

The Bracks Government guaranteed in 2002 that, under a Labor Government there would be no changes or amendments to the Urban Boundary or to the Green Wedges corridors. The fact that there are now radical changes represents a serious breach of faith with the electorate by the Brumby Government. Melbourne 2030 was considered to be the blue print for future development and was expressly intended to contain future urban sprawl; to prevent urban incursions into rural land; to concentrate residential growth into areas served by high capacity public transport; and protect sensitive environmental zones around the city. Many planners have pronounced Melbourne 2030 dead in view of recent radical departures from the plan.

Before the 2002 election the State Government announced protection of Melbourne’s green wedges from subdivision and inappropriate urban uses. There was bipartisan support - the Opposition supported the green wedge protection legislation when it passed through the Legislative Assembly before the 2002 election.

(Ed.) Path to unsustainable growth paved with broken promises

The Government has additionally broken a 2005 promise when 11,500 hectares was excised from Green Wedges land that there would be no further changes until 2030. The community accepted the excision on this proviso. Apparently, the Minister for Planning gave a number of assurances right up to the announcement of the review of the Urban Growth Boundary that there would be changes to Green Wedges. .

The State Government announced its review of the Urban Growth Boundary in December 2008 when it released the Melbourne @5 million, an update to Melbourne 2030: Planning for Sustainable Development. This signalled the State Government’s plans to open up at least 23,000 hectares – including land in Green Wedges areas - for urban expansion to allow for construction of 600,000 houses with 284, 000 of these to be located in growth areas. It was only apparently belatedly realised by Government advisers and planners that Victoria needs to accommodate another 1 million people before 2025. By 2036 Melbourne is predicted to have a further 1.8 million, twice the number forecast by Melbourne 2030 planners. By anyone’s reckoning failure to predict this massive population boom is a monumental blunder in strategic planning (See also comment under population)

(Ed.) Incremental excisions of natural amenity, wildlife habitat and agricultural land

We can see no improvements under the current Delivering Melbourne’s Newest Sustainable Communities (DMNSC) report on the Urban Growth Boundary Review released in June 2009. PPL VIC was alarmed to see that according to the Green Wedges Coalition the report proposes to excise a further 41,663 hectares from Melbourne’s Green Wedges, nearly twice the area estimated to have been needed in last December’s Melbourne @ 5 Million report.
Minister Madden has added to proposals by announcing on 6 October 2009 that new “Precinct Structure Plans guidelines” were to be added, a kind of overlay for suburbs of 3,000 dwellings or more. These guidelines were drawn up to try to ensure developments avoided becoming isolated, so called “dormitory” suburbs - places where there is nothing to do but sleep. The Age article of 11 October 2009 “Sprawl of the wild” by Melissa Fyfe says “The Victorian Government has discovered sustainable communities. Pity it’s 10 years late.”

On 16 October 2009 Planning Minister Madden announced the draft legislation for Growth Areas Infrastructure Contribution Bill. We have only been given time to make comments until 2 November 2009. (It is not known if the legislation will be introduced to Parliament before this Committee has reported.) The problem is that arrangement to levy the GAIC have been changed or significantly amended. Michael Hocking of Taxed Out says on his website:

“This is taxing the landowner by stealth. The tax is still applied at a flat rate regardless of the sale price yet the land may be twenty years from development. A property owner needing to sell in the short-term will find it virtually impossible to find a purchaser who is prepared to accept a GAIC liability when he sells, meaning the only likely purchaser is a developer not interested in the value of the dwelling and not interested in paying development prices for land that won't be developed for decades.

The Growth Areas Authority assumptions relating to value uplift remain fundamentally flawed and Taxed Out Inc. intends to expose these issues at the Parliamentary Inquiry…In many respects this situation is worse than that originally proposed.”

PPL VIC deplores the fact that the State Government appears to have attempted to mislead affected landowners. We also point out that this debacle over changes to the GAIC further illustrates that our contention that this is planning on the run.

What is a Sustainable Population for Victoria?

The whole rationale for extending the Urban Growth Boundary is to accommodate the unprecedented flood of population to Victoria. It is instructional to Google the “Population Clock” of the Bureau of Statistics. This shows the resident population of Australia which increases by one person every 1 minute and 12 seconds. This projection is based on the estimated resident population at 31 March 2009 and assumes growth since then of:

• one birth every 1 minute and 44 seconds,
• one death every 3 minutes and 39 seconds,
• a net gain of one international migrant every 1 minutes and 53 seconds leading to
• an overall total population increase of one person every 1 minute and 12 seconds

(Ed.) Process of loss of Green Wedges and Agricultural land will be endless

PPL VIC considers that the extension of the Urban Growth Boundary is really the thin end of the wedge. As there are no plans to stop the present high rate of population growth (mostly from immigration) the process of loss of Green Wedges and agricultural land is endless. There will be another extension when the proposed boundaries are seen to be filling up.

The extension of the Urban Growth Boundary does not save private or public open space in the established suburbs - the rate of population growth is so high that Melbourne is getting more urban densification daily as well as urban sprawl. As we have pointed out the State Government is devoid of coherence in these planning matters and its approach to endless population growth.

PPL VIC considers it imperative that the Victorian Government hold a forum to determine the population sustainable for Victoria, especially in view of water shortages and the likelihood of future droughts. (Excuses used have been “immigration is a Federal matter” but State Premiers have influence in Canberra.) At a rally on 14 July 2009 protesting over Planning Minister Madden’s “Cash for Chat” with developers, PPLVIC and allies delivered a set of resolutions to the Minister including the need for a population forum. There were over 500 people at the Rally which indicates the strength of public feeling concerning the issues raised here.

I have a quote here from Mr Kelvin Thomson MHR, Federal Member for Wills who says that:

Everything that makes our city the great place to live, work and raise a family, is potentially under threat if population growth and urban sprawl continue at the current rate. We must implement a strategy to control population growth, urban expansion and development. Our way of life, open spaces and infrastructure cannot be sacrificed on the altar of ever expanding population. We have a responsibility to secure our city’s future by thorough, thoughtful and detailed planning. This planning should not include an expanding Melbourne waistline.” (Source: “Five Million is too many: Securing the Social and Environmental Future of Melbourne” Submission to the Urban Growth Boundary Review July 2009.

Destruction of the Environment and Green Wedges:

The Government must abandon the Green Wedge land grab as destructive of the environment, a threat to wildlife, including endangered species, and as a major contributor to Green House Gas Emissions. Around the urban fringe we have a concentration of some of the most endangered eco- systems in Australia including the Western Basalt Plains Grasslands and Grassy Woodlands in the Darebin, Jackson and Merri Creek valleys, with 400 year-old red gums, and plus loss of habitat for a range of threatened species (e.g. Southern Brown Bandicoot.) PPL VIC supports the submission of the Green Wedges Coalition as being an excellent detailed statement of the threats to significant landscapes, endangered species and wildlife plus indigenous vegetation.

The 15,000 hectares of grassland reserves to be provided over 10 years as a trade-off for grasslands is apparently of poorer quality than the kangaroo (themeda) grasslands to be destroyed

The removal of environmental protection from all areas within the Urban Growth Boundary would seem to indicate that areas such as significant parts of the Merri Creek Catchment will not be protected from environmental damage or even clearing.

Areas for development are clear felled by developers. The loss of trees and other vegetation for housing adds to global warming effect. Is there any provision for conservation?

The proposed high density, low open private space in these outer suburbs means they will be hotter - urban heat island effect - from the lack of the cooling effect of vegetation/transpiration - low ratio of vegetation to concrete and other hard surfaces.

What provision is made for public open space? There is no mention made of public open space for passive recreation as well as sports fields and recreation areas.

(Ed.) Cruel failure to create or maintain wildlife corridors spells slow death for native animals

On past performance, no allowance will be made for wildlife in outer suburban development. PPL VIC has had experience with kangaroos of Somerton and Morang where animals get trapped in developed areas and just left to get killed on roads. The outer suburban interface is considered terra nullius it seems. What of smaller animals/birds what about the grasslands and inhabitants? There appears to be no consideration given to the creation or maintenance of wildlife corridors.

(Ed.) McPhail Report – State of the Environment

The State Government appears to have taken little notice of report by the Commissioner for Environmental Sustainability, Mr Ian Mc Phail, in “The State of the Environment Victoria 2008”. In it he comments:

"Victoria's population growth, increasing affluence and the expansion of our cities and towns has contributed to unsustainable levels of resource consumption and waste production. This has direct environmental impacts through changes in land use from conservation and agriculture to cities and towns. To supply our cities and towns, we harvest water for residential and manufacturing purposes, changed river flows, discharge wastes to land and sea, remove native vegetation and send damaging gases into the atmosphere." (Refer in the report to A Culture of Consumption. Drivers of Change – Population, Change and Settlements Page 9)

The report continues:

“Continuing growth of Victoria’s population will increase demand for land, as well as housing and transport services, potentially leading to more waste and pollution. Extra demand for water is particularly pertinent given the predictive effects of climate change on already depleted water storages.” Mr Mc Phail concludes on a depressing note: "It is currently cheaper to protect the environment to than to restore it but it is even cheaper to degrade it…”

Urban Growth Areas in Fire Prone Areas:

Whether it is advisable settling thousands of people in outer suburban fire prone areas does not appear to have occurred to the Government. These are the outer suburban areas classified as "Growth Areas": Beveridge, Bulla, Devin Meadows, Cranbourne East, Clyde North, Diggers Rest, Donnybrook, Kalkalo, Melton, Mt Cottrell, Officer, Pakenham, South Morang, Sunbury, Tarneit and Truganina.

Councils opposed to the extension of the Growth Areas Boundary and the imposition of the Growth Areas Infrastructure Contribution are Melton, Casey, Cardinia and Mitchell. Wyndham refuses to comment.

It is apparent that these areas are either under resourced by fire services or not serviced at all. We assume this also goes for ambulance and police. Would the State Government be liable if fire services were not provided and a fire went through the settlement?

The Age reported on 4 July 2009 (Lessons to Learn) on the proceedings of the Bushfire Royal Commission and pointed to urban sprawl as one of the “fatal confluence of factors” that led to Black Saturday.

Cost to Victorians:

The cost of building new homes in the rural fringes of Melbourne is double that of constructing infill dwellings in the inner city. This is the hidden cost of suburban sprawl. This is an unacceptable financial burden for Victorian tax payers to shoulder. The added costs include extra infrastructure such as power, water and transport, as well as higher health costs and greenhouse gas emissions.

The report, commissioned by the State Department of Planning and released in July, cites research that found "for every 1000 dwellings, the cost for infill development (in existing suburbs) is $309 million and the cost of fringe developments is $653 million".

It has been stated by Minister Madden in Parliament (and reported in the Sunday Age 11 October that the funds to be raised by the $95,000 hectares Growth Areas Infrastructure Contribution will cover only 15 per cent of total infrastructure costs. The Minister is prepared to sacrifice Green Wedges land that makes Melbourne “livable” and to destroy the livelihoods of many small landowners and farmers for this minor financial return.

Unfair Tax on Land Vendors: The Growth Areas Infrastructure Contribution is an unfair, discriminatory tax on family farms and small landowners, even after amendment by the State Government in draft legislation. As we have consistently maintained, the tax needs to be withdrawn and any charges levied at the point of development, consistent with the approach taken in other Australian states. PPL VIC supports the campaigns of “Taxed Out” and as mentioned above held a joint rally on 14 July 2009 to protest against the Growth Areas Infrastructure Contribution.

Perpetuation of Car Dependency: The plans to construct major freeways/ring roads and the absence of plans for extensive rail networks to serve the new suburbs spells out that the population of Melbourne will remain dependent on cars despite the uncertain future of oil. We are particularly concerned over plans to build the E6 freeway through Woollert. The roadway appears redundant.

Reduction of Arable Land: Given our population crisis and likely food shortages with the drought it is unthinkable that the Government can even be contemplating turning over arable land for housing development. The loss of vegetable farms including prime market garden land in the Westernport Catchment will increase food miles for our produce.

Increase of Green House Gas Emissions: Climate change is the most important moral question of the age and must be at the forefront of our public policy. The State Government appears to have its head in the sand. Compared to other cities in the world Melbourne has one of the highest rates per capita. Our private vehicles and public transport were recently recorded to generate 11 million tonnes of carbon monoxide a year compared with 8.5 tonnes in London. The increase in urban sprawl will worsen our figure.

Accommodation of Population within Existing Urban Growth Boundaries:

No examination has been undertaken of how the increased population can be accommodated in Metropolitan Melbourne.

Suggestions have been made that an inventory should be conducted of development applications which have already been approved by Council within the Urban Growth Boundary but which have not yet been built. Utilizing existing approvals might go some way to addressing the issue.

An inventory also needs to be undertaken of brown field sites and land which could be available for residential development – former transport depots, rail sidings and Commonwealth Government sites eg the Maribyrnong Defence site.

(Ed.) Developers prefer Greenfield Sites because they are cheaper

It is most unfortunate that the practice of “land banking” by developers appears widespread throughout the city. Take for example land on the former Royal Park Psychiatric Hospital site in Parkville which was given to Australand and the Citta Property Group to build a residential development then used for 2 weeks for the 2006 Commonwealth Games Village. The original plans showed a wall of 700 units in a 9 storey block along City Link. The land is still vacant and there have been no attempts to commence building. The developers are said to be waiting until the “market is right.” The truth is that developers prefer green field sites and are unwilling to invest in developing brown field sites.

Request to Committee: PPL VIC urges the Committee to reject approval of the extension of the Urban Growth Boundary and the iniquitous Growth Areas Infrastructure Contribution and to develop recommendations for accommodating increased population within the Urban Boundary plus arriving at consensus for determining a sustainable population for Melbourne.

Submission details

This submission was addressed to:

Protectors of Public Lands Victoria Inc.

Mr George Seitz
Committee Chair
Outer Suburban/Interface Services & Development Committee
C/- Parliament House
Spring Street, Melbourne
VIC 3002

on 19 October 2009
by

Julianne Bell
Secretary
Protectors of Public Lands Victoria Inc.
PO Box 197
Parkville 3052

[email protected]

Steve Garlick, a professor in regional economics, and his wife, Rosemary, who is a general practitioner, spend a lot of their time going out to get injured Australian native animals and bring them back to their property. There they undertake comprehensive rehabilitation. They house the animals for a time and then release them.

Most of the animals - even the wombats - are pretty peaceful characters, but Denton Wombat was an exceptional character and this is a marvellous story. Don't let it prejudice you against wombats though! Read more about wombats here.

Not your typical wombat

Denton was never your typical wombat. Named because of all the dental work to fix a fractured jaw when his mother was killed by a motor vehicle, he was happiest sleeping in a red backpack. Initially this was alright but as he continued to grow this soon became impractical. ‘Attack’ was his mode of operation with anything that moved and several of us have the scars on our legs to prove it. He would get up on his hind legs and bring his teeth down into your flesh. He was impossible to outrun and he would knock our in-care kangaroo joeys over like nine pins given half a chance.

Denton takes the initiative

After being in care for 18 months and with spring in the air, Denton, now at 25kgs, had decided it was time to venture into the big bad outside world. We weren’t quite ready for this, we ordinarily release in-care orphaned wombats at around 30kgs and we had not yet found a suitable safe release area for him to go to where the conditions were right. But he was determined. Late one Saturday night he decided it was time to go. He found a weak spot in the corrugated iron wall of his enclosure, worked away at it and eventually clambered out.

Once the escape was discovered a full search was mobilised. After three days of looking there was a report of him being seen in a neighbour’s laundry. With reinforcements, sedation and a thick blanket a wrestling match ensued in the laundry with clothing being spread to the four winds. He was not a happy boy being captured and returned to his enclosure, which in the interim had been suitably reinforced with more iron, metal star pickets and huge boulders to prevent a recurrence of the escape.

Second escapade

Despite the repairs to the enclosure after a couple of days Denton escaped a second time discarding the iron, the pickets and the boulders like confetti. When a wombat makes his mind to go there is no changing it! Signs were put up "Missing Wombat (not friendly)" with the contact phone number. During the Sunday apart from searching for Denton we found several promising, hopefully unoccupied, burrows for him at his new release site. We stuffed the burrow entrances with newspaper to test whether the burrows were indeed still unoccupied after several days. Wombats can have up to six burrows spread around to use as escape hatches when needed.

Sightings of Denton

Various sightings of Denton were reported by neighbours on the Sunday but we always seemed to be 10 minutes behind him when we got there. One neighbour thought they had a burglar when all the shoes on their veranda went flying in all directions during the night. Convinced of their burglar theory they installed a closed circuit TV security system! I told them that it was highly unlikely a burglar would upset the orderly nature of their shoes and that it was more likely to be Denton. Another neighbour said he heard things being thrown around in his shed and when he went to investigate the wombat chased him around his house and then waddled down his driveway.

The search continued on Monday in all drain culverts and other likely wombat resting places. Per chance I thought I would look in our own drain culvert and fortunately there he was. By now it was getting dark and rain was threatening. I had a blanket in the car but no sedative. How would I get him by myself? Surprisingly he responded to my calling and he eventually emerged from the culvert. I threw the blanket over him and held him down - 25kg of writhing muscle. What to do now? With no sedation I wrapped him in the blanket and bundled him into the car and headed some distance up the hill to home. I left the car to get the sedation and because it was now quite dark left the engine running with the lights on. Not a good idea.

Denton at the wheel!

By now Denton had got himself out of the blanket and when I got back with the sedative he was pressing on the car's accelerator and the engine was revving loudly. While the gear was in neutral and the hand brake on it would have been easy for him to knock the gear shift into gear and set the car in motion. I could just imagine the car careering down the hill with Denton at the wheel! How would I explain that to the insurance people? Fortunately he didn't. Turning the engine off I didn't count on him leaning on the car horn continuously despite now being sedated. In fact he fell asleep leaning on the car horn. Fixing this up I let him sleep for a couple of hours until Rosemary arrived home to assist.

Options

Options. We could take him immediately to the release site however it was now quite late, he was too sedated, it was raining and we were still not sure the burrows we had identified were in fact unoccupied. So we decided to put him in one of our other, more secure, wombat enclosures for the night, but we would have to move the occupants (Osh and Gosh) out of their enclosure temporarily. This we did and Osh and Gosh obliged.

By this time Denton, despite being sedated, had made his way to the rear of the wagon so we took the opportunity of driving him to the now freed up more secure enclosure. Taking food into the enclosure for him, I fell into the newly dug trench for the next wombat enclosure we are building and got my foot stuck and couldn't get out. Meanwhile it was now pouring with rain and Denton was getting agitated in the car.

After some time we got Denton into the enclosure with a bag of fresh grass and got to bed ourselves at around 3.00am.

Property inspection

Next day we began plans to move Denton to the release site. When we entered his enclosure he dutifully came out, again in an angry mood (see picture at top of article). Another wrestling match ensued until we bundled him into the cage and the car for the 30 min trip to his new home. No dogs, no humans, good digging, water and other wombats. We positioned the cage near the entry to the burrow and opened the gate. We had expected Denton to just wander into the burrow and go to sleep. Not Denton. Never think you understand wombat behaviour. He went to the entrance of the burrow and came away and did this several times. He then chased Rosemary and I away and, as we watched from the safety of the car, he began to mark his territory in the usual way.

Still not convinced he would make the burrow his new home I tried to coax him into it by moving near to it. Denton thought this a great game and proceeded to chase me around and around the burrow until I was able to escape back to the safety of the car.

We will check on him over the next few days and give you some update reports and, hopefully some pictures in his new surroundings.

National Parks & Wildlife have given two licences to Bathurst Regional Council to shoot 140 kangaroos on Mnt Panorama, home of Bathurst’s car race to be held in 2 weeks.

The Western Advocate said they were advised this was for “public safety” for the race.

The NSW Wildlife Rescue and Education Service, WIRES[1] members have to continually deal with kangaroos at Mount Panorama tangled in fences, hit by cars, dispersing into suburbs etc.

These are the last of the actual town’s kangaroos – the last of thousands of generations that have been pushed into the small pocket of Mnt Panorama and managing to survive.

Out of proportion

140 roos is certainly much more than the 15% allowed in commercial killing zones, and observers who have walked the environs over many years specifically noting the kangaroos in the area, suggest this represents most of the remaining population there. NPWS reportedly refused to answer the question of what percentage it represents.

National Parks and Wildlife have also reportedly refused to answer the following questions, which should also be asked of Bathurst Council:

· How many kangaroos are actually up on the Mount and its “nature reserves” and environs?

· What consideration has been given to the wallaroos and swamp wallabies on the Mount – are they to be shot also?

· What is happening to the young at foot – who are still fed by their mothers?

· What about the young in pouch?

· What consideration is given to the big male roos, who represent the most important genetic lines for the future?

· Has any consideration been given to creating corridors to allow roos to disperse, eg at the back of the Mount?

· Where is the kangaroo management plan that has determined this is to happen after due consideration of all other ecological factors – or is this a knee jerk reaction to terrified kangaroos on the racing track at last year’s Big Race?

Do the race sponsors condone this cruelty?

Questions of the sponsors of the race – SuperCheap Auto; Lawrence & Hanson; XXXX beer; as well as the sponsors of the driving teams

· Would you be proud to publicise that 140 kangaroos were shot as part of the preparation for the Bathurst 1000 race?

Are you prepared to allow this to happen without a whimper?

WIRES spokesperson, Helen Bergen, in Bathurst, said, "Platitudes to do with 'public safety' (the big race) [and even with] with 'sustaining the kangaroo population' [!] do not provide answers to the questions above.

"Is this how we thoughtfully care for our wildlife? This is how wildlife disappears from our landscapes – and we accept it as inevitable, so make no noise as it happens."

What you can do

Bathurst NPWS, Bathurst Regional Council, the media and the race sponsors all need to realise that some people feel extremely distressed about this situation.

Motor Racing Circuit Bathurst (official Bathurst Regional Council website):-

http://www.mount-panorama.com/contact-us
PMB 17 or 158 Russell Street
Bathurst
NSW
2795

02-6333 6158
02-6331-7211

NOTES

[1] WIRES - NSW Wildlife Rescue and Education Service is the largest wildlife rescue group in the country and has branches across NSW.
The website is www.wires.org.au

Observations on how we are being backed into a corner

The propaganda against the 1/4 acre block started a few decades ago. - appearing as opinion pieces in newpapers. I believe this propaganda was aimed at very ordinary people in or suburbs with traditional blocks. It was to prepare them to relinquish their lifestyle and for their children not to expect it in the normal course of events. I don't think it was aimed at rich people as they are different - a special case. The very rich can actually do the opposite to "urban consolidation." The rich can buy the next door property in Toorak, bulldoze the house and annexe the land for their own pleasure in the form of a tennis court or swimming pool.

The propaganda seems to have been on behalf of those who wanted to effect radical change in values and rights for the sake of population growth, which for various reasons they derived benefit from - usually financial.

Why this is important

The 1/4 acre block affords some local self sufficiency to the ordinary person. 50 years ago it was quite common for people to keep chickens in the suburbs- some still do but I don't think it's as usual. There is probably an economic reason for this . Vegetable gardens were common then and they may be trying to make a return now.

Recently in Sydney I visited a cousin who has built her eco friendly dream home in the suburb of Ryde. The garden was for low rainfall, the house worked on passive temperature control and in the corner of this living arrangement was a chicken house with inhabitants. Area of block- 1/4 acre approx.

As oil depletion continues I believe self sufficiency will become more important. The more land per family we lose the less self sufficient we can be.

How dare we be talked into denying children the rights that we grew up with?

I believe the people of Melbourne are losing their land by stealth and propaganda. I also wonder how people can, on the one hand, be talked into having more children, and, on the other hand, talked into letting go of those children's rights.

In 2007 I made a submission to the Melbourne 2030 review. I made some of the points below. (Now Melbourne 2030 is out of date, of course. They are trying to bring in something even worse. )

Urban temperatures rising, trees and water disappearing

Urban temperatures are higher than those in the country, and made worse by air conditioners. I worry about the reduced ability of land to absorb water with increased concrete bitumen, housing and impermeable surfaces in general. I can see this affecting the water table and possibly having ramifications with regard to street trees and other trees and vegetation on public land. We should be preserving trees to keep the city cool and moist instead of infilling and concreting everything.

I would have thought with all the apartments and townhouses shooting up in the bastardized process known as suburban infill, that we would want to keep backyards full of trees etc. Never mind that I'll never own a $1.8M 3BR house in Hawthorn East, I'm just glad someone owns it so that there aren't twenty people in 6 townhouses there instead.

So God bless those rich people in their big houses!! (Unless of course they are developers and politicians telling the rest of us to go and live in high-rise infills.)

Even if I have hardly any garden at all, I want to protect other people's gardens. They are part of the environment and even if the garden is not mine- I benefit if I walk past or live near it. I breathe the oxygen that its greenery exudes. I am cooled by the transpiration of the leaves. Even if I live in a one bedroom apartment in the same street, I am better off if this house and garden remain than if this house in turn is bulldozed for another block of apartments. I can see what the obvious counter argument is to this - homelessness - but that problem is circular; the root cause of homelessness is rapid population growth.

Urban wildlife is yet another issue - one I feel so deeply about that I can hardly even write of it. Gardens provide some habitat for native animals, birds reptiles, and insects. The more the city is consolidated, the more predictable every space within it becomes and there will be little room for any species other than humans, dogs and cats. And, even then, the dogs must be on leads and the cats must be kept indoors. It would make more sense if we made friends with the neighbourhood possums, but the government has designated them as pests.

If we continue with population growth at 2% per annum- we stand to lose the few advantages we still have very quickly. If we have a population growth rate of 1% per annum we will still lose it but at half the speed.

I do not think that Australian politicians have a moral or any other right to do this to us.

Through incompetence and neglect 110 ha which was recently added to the Pines Flora and Fauna reserve was mismanaged by Parks Victoria and Department of Sustainability Victoria to the point where nearly all the species it contained have become extinct. Now this land is due to be separated by a huge tollway from the rest of the reserve, despite many bitter protests and submissions from residents and other concerned people, whose hearts are nearly broken. See also related articles

The death of the DARA land.

110 ha of land once belonging to the Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, known now as 'the DARA land" was recently added to the Pines Flora and Fauna reserve. Through incompetence and neglect it has been mismanaged by Parks Victoria and Department of Sustainability Victoria to the point where nearly all the species it contained have become extinct. Now, in a crowning act of environmental vandalism,[1] this land is due to be separated by a huge tollway from the rest of the reserve. This is to go ahead, despite many bitter protests and submissions from residents and other concerned people who do not want it.

Here Hans Brunner describes the process by which the species became extinct and pleads for the area to be rehabilitated. It is the least that the State government and SEITA (now renamed the Linking Melbourne Authority) can do. This time there should be transparent aims to increase the fauna species representation to its optimum and reproducible methods to test the success of the operation, so that the public may monitor the effectiveness of it.

Hans Brunner sends a plea to Department of Sustainability and Environment and to Parks Victoria to bring the Dara land back to life again. It can and must be done.

The future of the DARA land can be so much brighter than its past

The Dara land is the 110 ha that has been added to the Pines Flora and Fauna Reserve. It borders on Ballarto Rd and McClelland Drive and joins on to the golf course, North-East of the original Pines. The proposed Bypass will separate the two parcels of land.

Some twenty years ago the Dara land, then occupied by the Dept. of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, was teaming with wildlife. There were large colonies of Swamp Rats, lots of Bandicoot diggings everywhere, there were Wallabies, Ringtail- and Brush-tail Possums, Echidnas, an occasional Koala and Sugar Glider and only a very small number of Rabbits. This was the result of regular poisoning of foxes and rabbits and the total absence of dogs. Boundary fences were inspected weekly and repaired immediately.

After a large wildfire, it took about two to three years for these animals to recover to their original numbers, but they did so with the help of ongoing fox and rabbit control and the absence of dogs.

After Dept of Agriculture left, Parks Vic and DSE allowed ferals to run amuck

After the Dept, of Agriculture vacated the Dara land Parks Victoria was appointed to manage this land. Immediately fox and rabbit poisoning stopped, a number of gates were erected to allow people with their dogs to enter as well as foxes and cats. The bandicoots were the first to suffer. It took only about twelve months for them to totally disappear from the whole of the Dara land. Where there were once large colonies of Swamp Rats one could find only the mounds of soil where they used to be. Rabbit numbers increased and fox and dog foot prints became prevalent not only along the walking tracks but also throughout the bush land off the tracks.

20 yrs ago foxes' and domestic dogs' scats revealed diet of endangered fauna

During my many visits, I collected scats of foxes, cats and dogs containing hairs and identified them in order to determine the prey species.

Since we know already too well what foxes prey on I concentrated on dog scats with hairs of prey species. It is well known that some people encourage their dogs to hunt for rabbits in the Reserve and the dogs will than go for anything that moves including native animals. Bandicoots are especially vulnerable to predation as they have to dig deep holes to get to their food and then can easy be ambushed while doing so. They also have not got large ears like the rabbits have to hear predators approaching. Subsequently I established what the contents were of twenty four dog scats. Of these, 8 had Rabbit, 4 had Wallaby, 4 had Bandicoot, 3 had Brush-tail Possum, 3 had Ring-tail Possum and 2 had Swamp Rat. Fox scats had a higher proportion of Rabbits but preyed on all the other animals as well and included some Sugar Gliders and lots of lizards.

Now the same scats show diet of mostly rabbits

Fox and dog scats now contain manly rabbit and a few ring-tail possums as all the other small native animals have almost totally disappeared.

This was not helped when Parks Victoria control burnt a large area of prime bandicoot habitat and before this area could recover an adjacent area was also burnt. This resulted in the absence of all the animals that used to live there and consisted of about fifty percent of the whole Dara bush land.

Active fox dens are now distributed throughout the whole area and there is no hope for the native animals to become re-established again.

The ultimate blame lies with DSE and PV

The ultimate blame lies with DSE (Department of Sustainability and Environment)[2] and PV (Parks Victoria)[3]. They both were unwilling to protect the nationally endangered bandicoots and with it all the other native mammals, birds, lizards and frogs. How can they completely neglect and mismanage this prime habitat for not only this rare bandicoot but also for Koalas, Sugar Gliders, Swamp Rats, Echidnas, Brush- and Ring-tail Possums and all the other native wildlife! We have to urgently go back to the way the Dara land was managed by the Agriculture Dept.

In the absence of dogs, the control of foxes, cats and rabbits could than be carried out completely un-restricted and efficiently.

I plead with the DSE and PV to bring the Dara land back to life again. It can and must be done. If I had time, exactly the same story could be told about the Western half of the Pines where beside the predators and rabbits motorbike riders cause havoc to Wallabies, birds and other wildlife.

Hans Brunner

[1] Works undertaken by the Linking Melbourne Authority (once called SEITA) with the support of the Brumby government and your taxes.

[2] The Department of Sustainability and Environment has almost no staff devoted to actively protecting and sustaining healthy biodiverse fauna populations. DSE seems to be far more interested in pushing human population growth by stimulating high immigration, providing land to developers and pushing through infrastructure programs to the detriment of our indigenous fauna and the loss of green spaces. DSE is dominated by agriculturalists and property development oriented planners and technicians.

[3] Parks Victoria is a public authority (akin to a government department), funded from three major sources; payments from the State Government Budget (your taxes), an annual charge based on a property rate levied on all metropolitan properties, and user fees.
It is managed by a board with the following members:
Rob Gerrand, BA, FAMI, FAICD
Lois Appleby
Clarice Ballenden, BA (Hons) M.Ed.
Damien Bell
Rod Gowans, PSM.
Ken King, Dip. For., B.Sc (Hons)
Noel Harvey, OAM, MAICD
Jennifer Labourne, B.Bus, FCPA
Jan Mahoney BA, PhD, FAICD

What are these people doing with our money?

ABC Australian news reported that someone somehow placed rocks on the road where rally cars would pass at some time prior to the Repco Rally event. Apparently stones or rocks were also thrown. See Rally rock-throwing 'could have killed', ABC news, September 5, 2009 http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/09/05/2677430.htm

First day of the rally

The picture of the car trailing dust has been included for educational purposes because it shows how much dust is being thrown up by a rally car on the unpaved roads that pass through national parks of World Heritage significance. One can imagine the noise and the speed from the picture. Unless you like noise, speed, metal and dust, this would be a very unpleasant experience. For wildlife it could be a fatal experience. Politically it could represent a fatal breech in the wall of law that has preserved Australia’s wild spaces to date.

Would Repco race cars through a cathedral?

The idea alone of racing cars through national parks is appalling to many. With the position of National Parks in Australia it is a bit like racing cars through cathedrals in Italy or France, except that the damage it is likely to do in the long term is that much more significant.

It may not result directly in the extinction of endangered species but, whether it does or not, it is like a big breech in the wall. If government can get away with doing this to our National natural cathedrals, they may soon be running the equivalent of brothels in cathedrals there. Indeed, the same NSW government which overturned local democracy (the most immediate form of democracy) to force this race on Australians, is also apparently prepared to allow the Shooters Party to shoot indigenous animals in National Parks.

The car is not exactly an endangered species

Many of us live on highways or have to drive to work and find this difficult enough. It is amazing to think that the NSW Parliament actually legislated away 12 environmental laws in order to import such a rally to this area, which, to date, was a sanctuary for animals, trees and humans. The local inhabitants have complained of the risk to life for humans and other animals in the area.

Today we received a letter to candobetter.org claiming that “Greenies” threw rocks at the rally drivers.

“Rally Australia"

On September 5th, 2009 Jack (not verified) wrote:

"You greenies who are responsible for putting boulders on the road and throwing rocks might get charged with attempted manslaughter or murder if you are not careful. It is not a joke to do these things, one could expect it in a third world country but one would have hoped that in a so called educated society things like this would not happen. If you want to protest then do it in a more effective way than risking the life of another human being!”

The writer assumes that ‘Greenies’ were responsible for putting boulders on the road and throwing rocks. In fact we do not know who was responsible. However, let us take his other assertions in this paragraph. He says that we could expect such activity in a third world country, but not in an educated society. However it has been the anti-rally protesters’ contention that an educated society would not put a rally through international heritage rainforest national parks including 16 km of koala habitat. To many people the notion that we are an ‘educated society’ does not hold up because of this. Regarding third world societies: what are the criteria that make this kind of protest likely in the third world? Perhaps the quality of not having any other means to protest?

Is the writer actually unaware that 12 environmental laws were overturned to permit the rally?

Is the writer actually unaware that 12 environmental laws were overturned to permit the rally? This event has been enabled by the NSW Motor Sports (WRC) Bill 2009, which overrode 12 different planning, environmental protection and heritage laws and removed all right of appeal.[1] Or has his enthusiasm for the rally diminished the importance of this fact in his eyes? If that is the case, I suggest that he reconsider these inconvenient facts.

What more effective ways are open to people in the Green Cauldron? They have protested peacefully in the streets, written to politicians, and invoked the law. The response from the government was extreme: The government abrogated the very environmental laws that the people had invoked to stop the race. Then, when a councilor took the matter to the courts, she felt that it was given the bum’s rush. Behind the abrogation of the 12 environmental laws was pressure from Repco, a global corporation of retailers of car parts, which apparently had far more pull with the NSW Government than the democratic wishes of members of its electorate.

Even some of the competitors sound as if they understand.

"Some people don't like us in front of their house but I didn't ask to come here," French competitor, Loeb reportedly said.
"I can understand why some people don't like the rally, but I have to do my job."

Indeed he does. But the problems are not the fault of the people defending their rights and their environment. (Source: "Rock throwers halt Rally Australia", ABC News, 4 September.)

What would have been much better is if the FIA had adhered to its stated high principles of environmental standards and good governance, saying, “No, Premier Rees, we want to be good global citizens. You must find a venue for this event which is acceptable to your citizens. We cannot stand by and let you overturn your own peoples’ laws in order to run a mere race. It will not do our reputations or yours any good. People have a right to self-government. We cannot impose things they hate on them. The French Revolution taught us that.”

So much for an educated, first world society.

“And do not bother denying it had anything to do with your movement, you ARE tarred with the brush in the same way that you like to tar motorsport with the "hooning" brush.”

Why didn't the FIA or drivers stand up for democracy against Repco and the NSW Government?

It would be reassuring if people in the rally movement had stood up for democracy. Since they have not it is hard not to see them as hoons. And since their representatives have not spoken up, they look like representatives of hoons. Those perceptions will change when rally-people stand up for democracy and justice along with the environmentalists. As long as you do not you defend the wholesale destruction of laws by a dictatorial government. Candobetter.org cannot comment on allegations about people who used rocks as weapons since we have absolutely no idea who those people were. It is even conceivable that people wishing to give the environmentally concerned a bad name threw the rocks themselves. That would seem to me more likely since, from the point of view of an environmentalist – a person who defends wild spaces – throwing rocks is rather similar, although not as bad, as driving racing cars through world heritage landscapes and biodiverse hotspots.

False argument pretends area not worth protecting

"I watched the you tube video and I have never seen so much rubbish in all my life,
Mostly it looks like farming country, overgrown with weeds, so much for the environment."

I am not a resident of the area, but, to me this is what the videos have conveyed. We saw a koala crossing the road and we have been told elsewhere that the rally passes through 16km of koala habitat. We know that koalas are endangered. That, to me, is enough to tell me that the area cannot be totally degraded.

Secondly, it would not be surprising if the area is being degraded, given the kinds of forces it is subjected to. That is not the fault of environmentalists. The area was rural with forested parts. There is obviously a tension between rural, other commercial values and the environmental values of local constituents. Environmental has to win out, however, because the area is internationally recognized for its biodiverse and landscape qualities. Car races, shops and farms already take up substantial parts of this country and if we still cannot make a go of what we have already got economically, then destroying more wildlife habitat is not likely to help.

Impact of farming

"Farming does far more harm to the environment than Rally could ever do!

After having experienced Rally Australia in Western Australia for 18 years I can assure you that there will not be hundreds of wild animals killed, in any way!
If the people who live and run businesses in the towns involved have any clues they will see the prospects for adding value to what they do or in fact even starting up new ventures all because of the Rally."

Farming is certainly problematic because it converts wild-spaces for food. However the farms are already there. The rally was not. It was an additional stressor. As for the damage it might do. I have compared it to racing through cathedrals and I stand by that. This country is absolutely covered and ringbarked with roads, for Pete’s sake – how could racing car drivers possibly justify taking roadspace in National Parks? And, I do not see how you could argue to put a koala at risk just for some ephemeral potential ‘profits’ which will not sustain any human in the long term.

Little evidence for much touted 'economic advantages' and no amount of money could make this right

The Rally will bring economic benefit to the area and to the state in general, you lot rave on about eco tourism, I can assure you that if the area does indeed have something to offer then the Rally will bring thousands of international tourists.

The insistance that this rally will bring lots of money to Tweed has been knocked down over and over. Our definitions of what constitutes 'economic benefit' must differ.

"Same Rally cost WA tax-payers $6m+ p.a.

Previous speakers who praised the rally indicated that it will bring $100 million of value to the area. They do not understand what they are talking about. For example, $100 million over what period? It is certainly not for this one race that is coming up; nor for the one in two years time or the one in 10 years time. It is the accumulated value they think they might get if everything is done and all options are accepted between now and 2027. A more true picture comes from Western Australia. The Western Australian Government no longer wanted the rally, indicating that it was costing Western Australia $6 million a year and it was not getting economic value to make up for that $6 million." Source For more on the debate read here.

Our definitions of ‘eco-tourism’ must also differ. Who want’s tourists in national parks who come to watch noisy cars go round and round and tear up the earth and vegetation, kill wildlife, and pollute the atmosphere with petroleum fumes and dead soil organisms from the dust? How could anyone consider that desirable? For someone who likes quietly walking through a forest amid a community of other species, just like someone who might enjoy praying in a cathedral and looking up through the stained-glass windows and imagining they were in God’s house, your idea that racing cars through these quiet and otherly places might add to their ‘value’ seems really strange.

And the thing is, nature preservation does not cause the extinction of car-rallies, since there are roads for rallies everywhere, but roads and rallies do destroy nature. I mean, what environmentalists do and like does not stop rally fans from doing what they do and like somewhere else. For instance, the Goldcoast Super GP Rally will be staged next month, through city streets, just across the border from this one. However, if you want to do your thing in our quiet places, you destroy what we have. Look around you: the world is absolutely full of roads and noisy cars. Your kind of ‘paradise’ is proliferating daily. Ours isn’t. It is disappearing. Have a sense of proportion.

There is a huge contingent of International Rally people who follow the WRC around the world, just like the people who follow Tennis or Cricket or Footy, Yep just the same, and they will be coming to your part of the world, generally speaking they have a few bucks in their back pocket and have great fun unloading the stuff, so do not think there is no money to be made.

Obviously money is very important to you, much more important to you than beauty, wildlife, peace and quiet and democracy. Even if money were more important than place for environmentalists, it has already been shown many times that the rally has brought a net financial loss when costs are taken into account or no benefit to other communities where it has been held.

You need to try to see that environmentalists need to protect what they love and that rally values will harm what they treasure most. The rally is invading green environmental space and trying to change it. It has also destroyed democratic space, by forcing the overturning of laws. That alone should signal "Danger! Danger!" On the other side, environmentalists are not invading road-space. The huge contingent of International Rally people have lots of places made of concrete and tar and cement where they can go and they will possibly even be welcome there.

"If you think however that you should just need to stand in line with your hand out to get your share then you have your head in the sand (or somewhere else!)"

Honestly, this stuff about making lots of money out of these rallies just sounds like pie in the sky. After the rally has been run, however, I think that residents would be justified in demanding compensation for the trauma of having their democratic self-government annihilated and their environmental laws overturned, as well as their peace disturbed and their happiness destroyed by the need to go out of their way to try to protect what they love due to the failure of their governments to enforce protections which were available at law prior to the rally and were overturned because of the rally and for no other reason. Those environmentalists would be justified in demanding ongoing compensation since the intention is to continue to stage this rally for decades.

Democracy is the big question

"An event like this will always have those who are against having it, well we live in a democracy, so if it is taking place then there must be a higher number of people who want it than don't, bad luck!"

But that is the very problem. We DON'T live in a democracy in Australia anymore, and things have got particularly desperate in Tweed Shire due to the Repco Rally. By removing legal protections from the community's right to environmental protection and self-government the NSW Government has left the community in a situation of lawlessness and injustice. Did you not realise that 12 laws were put aside to run this rally? Why would the NSW government and Repco have had to go to such extraordinary lengths to impose the rally - and overturn democracy - if so many people, as you believe, wanted this rally? Why did they not just allow democracy to prevail, instead of removing it?

"I suggest that you greenies would be better off spending your time and money trying to fix up a couple of the countries biggest environmental disasters which are on your back doorstep, like the Murray Darling disaster for one!"

At candobetter we continue to represent problems with the Murray Darling and other threatened waters. If environmentalists were not busy defending multiple cherished places under attack by developers and now democracy under this rally, they would indeed have more time to dedicate to these ongoing other threats. If the rally were withdrawn from the Green Cauldron we could all get on with the other jobs.

[1] "" Source: http://www.norallygroup.org/

Photograph of Edgar Creek Site 15 Edgars Creek Waterfall & Geological Structure in Coburg below a newly sited Kodak development. Source: Merri Creek Management Committee: http://www.mcmc.org.au/content/view/164/261/

Once again, Northern Suburbs Federal Labor MP, Kelvin Thomson, has come through to represent the public against the falsely positive coasian economics of Victoria's grubby and despotic government!

He has written to Victorian Environmental Assessment Council's inquiry into metropolitan Crown land asking for the land to be given to the Council gratis as long as it is kept as public parkland. Thomson's arguments impressively cogent, demonstrating far better grasp of biology than the average Melbourne parliamentarian, and serious students of climate change would benefit from reading them. Moreland Council has also asked for the land to be kept public and undeveloped.

Note that illustrations, most emphases, and some headings have been inserted by Candobetter. The original document is accessible to the public at http://www.kelvinthomson.com.au/public_documentsdocs/090219%20EdgarsCreekSubac.pdf

"The extent to which parklands, trees, shrubs and wall gardens can cool places has been
greatly underestimated. Estimates by the Co-operative Research Centre for Irrigation Futures are that they can lower temperatures by 2-8 degrees because increases in evapotranspiration reduce building energy use by 7-47%. Average electricity saving per tree due to lower air-conditioning use ranges from 70-90 kilowatt hours a year, with savings
greater at peak times reducing overall energy demand by 10%" (Fisher 2009).

Kelvin Thomson MP, Federal Member for Wills

Submission to the Victorian Environmental Assessment Council Metropolitan Melbourne Crown Land Inquiry
Edgars Creek Parkland; the lungs of the Coburg Community
February 2009

1. Overview

I make this submission to the Victorian Assessment Council, which is investigating the use of Crown owned land across 29 of Melbourne’s municipalities. I make this submission with regard to the Edgars and Merri Creek Parkland, located in my electorate of Wills in Coburg.

This land should be retained as public open space. It was originally acquired by VicRoads with the intention of running a freeway into the City along the Merri Creek. Fortunately the freeway reservation was deleted and it is now time to protect this fine open space forever.

The Victorian Government instructed the Victorian Environmental Assessment Council to investigate the use of Crown Land across 29 Melbourne Municipalities. This inquiry’s terms of reference include investigating the use of Crown owned land in Moreland. The areas to be investigated include parks- but not parks that are freehold land owned by councils- small
slivers of land, areas used for community purposes, VicTrack and VicRoads land set aside for future infrastructure or land owned by a public authority such as Melbourne Water (Fyffe 2009).

The purposes of the investigation are to:

(a) Systematically identify and assess the uses, resources, condition, values and management of Crown land, and public authority land in metropolitan Melbourne;
(b) assess values of Crown land, and public authority land for areas not committed to a specific use, and report on appropriate future uses relevant to Melbourne's liveability and natural values; and (c) report on the contribution of Crown land, and public authority land to Melbourne's liveability and opportunities for enhancement of this contribution.

The Victorian Environmental Assessment Council will prepare a discussion paper during 2009 and a final report by May 2010 (VEAC 2009).

A Victorian Parliamentary inquiry last year found that important open space and Crown Land- such as areas set aside for roads, rail lines and water authorities, is often sold off to developers for the highest price, with little consideration to the long term community and environmental ramifications (Fyffe 2009).

The sale of the Edgars Creek Parkland is being negotiated between a number of government agencies. VicRoads has had a number of meetings with Moreland Council’s CEO to explore options for the land that would be suitable for all parties. The role of the Government land monitor is to provide Government with an assurance of accountability and integrity in land transactions. State Government policy has been that surplus land is to be sold at market value as assessed by the Valuer-General Victoria. As the City of Moreland expressed interest in obtaining the land for a public purpose, the land was offered to Council on this basis (Madden 2008).

The Edgars Creek Parkland site is an extremely important piece of public parkland to the Coburg and surrounding communities. The parkland has been maintained free-of-charge by the Moreland City Council (2008:2), its predecessors and local voluntary community groups such as the Merri and Edgars Creek Parkland Group (2009) over the last 25 years.

The true value of this site cannot be placed in monetary terms. Its environmental, ecological and recreational importance to the community of Coburg far outweigh any short term profit the State Government may be able to derive from its sale.

My submission will outline the ecological, environmental and social reasons for securing the future of this site. I will also set out the pressures that the growing population is having on the local community in terms of public open space.

2. Executive Summary

VicRoads owned land in the vicinity of Edgars Creek should be retained as public open space.

This land was originally acquired by VicRoads with the intention of running a freeway into the city along the Merri Creek. Fortunately the freeway reservation which hung over this land was deleted. It is now time to move forward and protect this fine area of open space forever.

Increasing population is putting even greater pressure on our living space, and parks like this one are not simply important now; they are destined to become even more valuable in future.

Coburg needs all the open space it can get. It is largely built up and has been now for many years, and the new Pentridge Village and Kodak developments will add new pressures. This parkland is one of the largest areas of open space in Coburg, and should not be lost to housing or other developments.

The land readily links in with the existing open space and wildlife corridors along the Merri and Edgars Creeks. The State Government, Moreland Council and the local community have worked in partnership now for over 25 years in restoring the Merri and Edgars Creek Valleys and they are a major asset. Their value will be enhanced if the Vic Roads land is added in.

The Victorian Budget has been well managed and is in a state of healthy surplus.

The need
for real estate dollars from the sale of public land is much less than the need of the Coburg and Newlands community for room to live and breathe.

The land is the largest open space in Coburg and acts as lungs, pumping the oxygen throughout the veins of our community. On the basis that Moreland Council and the local community is willing to maintain the land as public open space, the land should be handed over to them by VicRoads.

3. History of the Edgars Creek Parkland

The Edgars Creek flows along a 17km course from its headwater in Wollert through the highly urbanised suburbs of Epping, Thomastown and Reservoir, finally joining the Merri Creek in Coburg in the electorate of Wills (FoEC 2009).

Edgars Creek, along with many of the water bodies of Melbourne's north, is of spiritual and cultural significance to the Wurundjeri People, its indigenous Aboriginal People. Several sites of cultural and spiritual significance to the people of the Wurundjeri-willam have been recorded along Edgars Creek. At the old Kodak plant site, and further north in Wollert &
Epping, numerous scatters from the making of stone axe and spear heads have been sighted (Freshwater 2006).

Some historians believe that the signing of the Batman Treaty may have taken place along Edgars Creek. Edgars Creek, like many other Melbourne creeks and rivers, provided a vital source of food and water to the local Aboriginal community. Family groups consisting of somewhere between ten and twenty or more people would make up a single clan, or tribe
(Freshwater 2006.

The Wurundjeri People had, and continues to have, an intimate physical and deeply spiritual connection to the land. There are many descendents of the original Wurundjeri People who still live in and around Melbourne (Freshwater 2006).

The Edgars Creek Parkland, located at the junction of the Merri Creek, is Coburg’s largest parkland and public open space, approximately 10ha in size (O’Connell 2008). Edgars Creek passes through the boundaries of the Cities of Whittlesea, Darebin and Moreland, through rural, industrial and residential areas. It is a seasonal creek, susceptible to drying out during
the hot seasons, particularly in its northern most regions, and is likewise prone to flooding (Freshwater 2006).

Though a considerable part of the creek is in an artificial state, through much of Epping to Reservoir, over half of the creek remains in a semi-natural state, particularly in its upper and lower sections. Further downstream Edgars Creek feeds the picturesque Leamington St Wetlands Reserve and Edwardes Lake Park in Reservoir, which is home to many bird
species (Freshwater 2006).

Edgars Creek departs the lake via a weir wall at the southwest end, continuing from Livingstone St through to the City of Moreland, where there are lovely walking areas on both escarpments (Freshwater 2006).

The reserve is a significant piece of parkland not just because of its size, but because of its ecological, environmental and social role in making the Coburg community a better community.

The Department of Sustainability and Environment 2006 Atlas of Victorian Wildlife records 48 fauna species within 1.5km of the Kodak Bridge over Edgars Creek. Approximately 280 trees already exist on the site, and included in the parkland are areas of remnant vegetation. The land has high intrinsic value due to its position at the meeting point of two linear open space and wildlife corridors (Merri & Edgars Creek Parkland Group 2009).

VicRoads acquired numerous parcels of land in the 1970s for the proposed F2 Freeway and associated East-West Links. The Edgars Creek Parkland was part of the planned route for a freeway along the Merri Creek Corridor into inner Melbourne. Following strong opposition from the local community, the proposal was abandoned (Moreland City Council 2008:2), and it is now time to protect this fine open space.

Following the freeway reservation being removed, VicRoads still owns the land. The original asking price by VicRoads was around $10 million, with developers having expressed interest. There have been ongoing discussions between VicRoads and Moreland City Council for the land to be gifted to Council on the proviso that it remain as public open space
(O’Connell 2008).

Moreland City Council (2008:2) and its predecessors have developed and maintained the land as public open space over the last thirty years at no charge to VicRoads. Thousands of trees have been planted, pathways constructed, weeds managed and fire risks reduced. A significant amount of time and money has been invested into the parkland by the local
community.

This inquiry provides the Victorian Government with the opportunity to write the final chapter in the history of the parkland through securing the Edgars Creek Parkland as public open space forever.

4. Moreland City Council and Community maintenance and protection of theParkland

A considerable effort has been made to restore indigenous vegetation within both the Darebin and Moreland boundaries by both councils in conjunction with the Merri Creek Management Committee and other local community groups (Freshwater 2006).

The public have paid many times over for this land in rates and voluntary labour

Moreland property owners have contributed millions of dollars to the Parks Charge which has been included on their water, sewerage and drainage bills since 1958. They receive no direct benefit as there are no Parks Victoria regional parks in Moreland (Moreland City Council 2008:3).

Over the last thirty years that Moreland City Council (2008:2) and its predecessors have maintained the land, thousands of voluntary hours have been invested by local residents at the park in undertaking tree planting, weeding and general maintenance activities. In 2007 alone, over 400 volunteer hours were dedicated to the creek restoration and
enhancement projects by the local community as part of the Friends of Edgars Creek Activities (Merri & Edgars Creek Parkland Group 2006:3).

The Friends of Merri Creek has been making a significant contribution to the local community through its environmental protection and enhancement projects for the last twenty years. It has accumulated 400 members, planted thousands of trees and has undertaken weeding, water quality monitoring, tours, information stalls and removing litter
from the Creek (Gencturk 2008).

The Edgars Creek Parkland should be gifted to Moreland Council in its entirety on the proviso that it is maintained as public open space in its entirety.

The sell off of certain sections or parcels would compromise the parkland’s ecological integrity (Craig 2009).

To keep this land in public ownership also represents a return for the Melbourne Water Parkland fee paid annually by local ratepayers.

To date precious little of the $3 million in funds collected each year by the State Government in the form of an annual Melbourne Water Parkland fee has been used for parkland maintenance in the City of Moreland (Merri & Edgars Creek Parkland Group 2009). All parkland maintenance has been undertaken by volunteers throughout the community and at the expense of ratepayers through Moreland City Council activities.

5. The Social, Recreational and Health benefits of the Parkland to the local Community

The Edgars Creek Parkland is used as public open space for a wide range of activities by residents of Coburg North and surrounding suburbs. The land is used by walkers, golfers, runners, Coburg Harriers Athletics Club and dog walkers. The parkland is a place for gathering and meeting and fosters social interaction and community connectedness (Merri
and Edgars Creek Parkland Group 2007).

Nearly one in three Australians, 29%, play sport or exercise twice a week or more. The most popular sport or physical recreation activities amongst Australians include walking (25%), aerobics (13%), swimming (9%) and cycling (6%) (ABS 2006).

Nearly half of the Australian population, some 10 million people, exercise or play sport at least once a month, with more than half (54%) reporting ‘health and fitness’ as their main reason for exercising. This was followed by enjoyment (22%), well-being (7%) and social or family reasons (7%) (ABS 2006).

Walking is the most commonly reported sport and physical recreation activity amongst Australians, with a participation rate of 25%. People aged 55-64 years reported the highest participation rates for walking (35%), followed by those aged 45-54 (31%) and those aged 65 years and over (29%) (ABS 2006:10).

Coburg and the area in the immediate vicinity of the Edgars Creek Parkland have a somewhat aged population compared with the rest of Moreland. Residents aged between 55-64 years make up 8.2% of the Moreland population and those of 65 and over make up 16.6% (ABS 2007).

The North Coburg area has 9% of the population aged between 55-64 years old and 19.1% aged over 65 (ABS 2007A).

Walking is the most popular exercising activity undertaken by seniors across Australia. It is therefore important that seniors have adequate access to suitable parkland and walkways to continue undertaking this activity.

According to the ABS (2006:7) there were over 1.0 million (6%) people aged 15 years and over who had been cycling between 2005-06, with more than twice as many males reporting to have cycled than females.

There were 875,500 or 6% of Australians aged 15 years and over who participated in golf between 2005-06, with Victoria recording the highest number of participants along with New South Wales (236,900 and 277,000 respectively) (ABS 2006:7-8).

Running, which is another popular activity undertaken through the Edgars Creek Parkland, has a high volume of participation according to the ABS (2006:8). There were an estimated 681,300 Australians who participated in running between 2005-06, with Victoria recording the second highest participation rate (171,000).

The Edgars Creek Parkland has been enabling local residents to undertake physical and recreational activities for many years now. Its sale for commercial, residential or other development would deal the Coburg community a severe blow in its aspiration to stay fit and healthy.

Providing local communities with the resources and parkland to take part in physical activity has become ever more important, especially with the ever increasing frequency of media reports and concern that Australia is in the midst of an ‘obesity epidemic’ (Biggs 2006), with child obesity in Australia being at an all time high (Houghton 2007).

Statistics show strong and consistent increases in the rates of combined overweight and obese children over the past 20 years, such that these now affect one in every four school children. Obesity affects 6%-8% of Australian schoolchildren. This equates to 260,000 school aged children. This figure has increased by 1.8% in the last five years, which is an additional 65,000 children (Gill & Baur et al 2008).

Childhood and adolescent obesity is associated with a wide range of immediate health concerns, as well as increasing the risk of disease in adulthood. Some weight-related health problems are also found in overweight children (Gill & Baur et al 2008).

If healthy dietary and physical activity environments and behavioural patterns can be established for young children it may help prevent the onset of overweight or obesity in adolescence and adulthood (Victorian Government 2006A). The State Government should be working to reduce obesity rates amongst the community, particularly young people, through the provision of adequate open space and recreational sporting infrastructure.

Keeping the Edgars Creek Parkland as public parkland will ensure the Coburg community has the space to live and breathe so they can continue undertaking popular recreational activities such as walking and cycling.

6. Edgars Creek Parkland; ‘The lungs of the Coburg Community’

The Edgars Creek Parkland is a significant piece of parkland not just because of its size, but because of its ecological and environmental role in making the Coburg community a healthier and environmentally friendly community. The parkland acts as the lungs of the Coburg community, allowing residents to live and breathe; providing essential open space with a variety of flora and fauna in our otherwise urbanised and developed area.

The Department of Sustainability and Environment 2006 Atlas of Victorian Wildlife records 48 fauna species within 1.5km of the Kodak Bridge over Edgar’s Creek. Approximately 280 trees already exist on the site and included in the parkland are areas of remnant vegetation.

The land has high intrinsic value due to its position at the meeting point of two linear open space and wildlife corridors (Merri & Edgars Creek Parkland Group 2009).

I regard climate change as the issue of our time, the issue which will define our success or otherwise as policymakers.

Each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet (Obama 2009).

The phrase ‘think global, act local’ has never been timelier. Removing the parkland would certainly add greenhouse gases in the Coburg community (Parliamentary Library 2009:4).

We can help play our part in the broader solution of reducing carbon emissions by retaining the Edgars Creek Parkland.

Governments are overlooking what city trees and parklands can do to reduce water use and fight climate change. For some years Australia has experienced a staggering growth in the installation of air-conditioners, with sales surging by around 10% each year, and some houses having more than one (Fisher 2009).

These air-conditioning units are ravenous electricity users, imposing heavy demands on peak-load generating capacity, especially older less efficient models. The more airconditioners to fight the climbing temperatures, the more black balloons and carbon emissions, the more the planet heats up. Adding to their workload is the explosion in hard surfaces, patios, pebble gardens, car parks, walls, roads and buildings that retain heat, causing an urban heat island effect (Fisher 2009).

The extent to which parklands, trees, shrubs and wall gardens can cool places has been greatly underestimated. Estimates by the Co-operative Research Centre for Irrigation Futures are that they can lower temperatures by 2-8 degrees because increases in evapotranspiration reduce building energy use by 7-47%. Average electricity saving per tree due to lower air-conditioning use ranges from 70-90 kilowatt hours a year, with savings greater at peak times reducing overall energy demand by 10% (Fisher 2009).

Melbourne has a rich assortment of trees, shrubs and grassed areas, a resource known as the urban forest (Fisher 2009), with the Edgars Creek Parkland being a prime example.

A study of two forested urban parklands in Chicago found total carbon stocks of 230-260 tC ha-1 and annual carbon uptake of 3-5 tC ha-1yr-1 (Jo & McPherson 1995:109-133). They found that 80-90% of the carbon was stored in the soils. In contrast, a study of green space in three Korean cities found storage ranging from 26 to 60 tC ha-1 and annual carbon uptake of 1.6 to 3.9 tC ha-1 yr-1 (Jo 2002: 115-126). The continuing carbon sequestration by the parklands offset carbon emissions of the cities by 0.5-2.2%. Another US study found that urban forests across the country store an average of 25tC ha-1, or about half the storage density in natural forests (Nowak & Crane 2002:381-389/ Nowak 1993: 207-217).

Vegetation represents a carbon store. All plants perform photosynthesis in the presence of light. This process absorbs carbon dioxide gas from the air. When plant material decomposes or is eaten or cleared, the carbon is converted back to CO2 and returns to the atmosphere (Parliamentary Library 2009:2).

The Edgars Creek Parkland’s role in storing carbon should be valued. If part or all of the land is sold and developed, it would result in carbon which it has captured over the last thirty or so years being re-released back into the atmosphere.

A further factor that I urge this inquiry to consider is that the land is vital in maintaining a green buffer between the Newlands Industrial Precinct and surrounding residential areas. This buffer mitigates emissions and manages noise pollution and other impacts emitting from the around the clock industrial operations (Merri and Edgars Creek Parkland Group 2007).
It should also be noted that the Edgars Creek Parkland is subject to inundation. This status is unlikely to change as the frequency of flash floods, related to global warming, increases (Hodge 2008).

7. Demographic and population demand for open space

Increasing population is putting even greater pressure on our living space. Parks like this one are not simply important now; they are destined to become even more valuable in future.

Victoria’s population is forecast to increase from the current 4.8 million to over 6.2 million by 2031 (Victorian Government 2006:11). As of June 30th 2006, Melbourne’s population was 3,744,982 people, and has been growing at an annual average rate of 1.5% annually for the last five years. Over the previous five years there were no local government areas in
Melbourne that declined in population. Moreland has grown by 0.9% (Victorian Government 2007).

Between 2001 and 2006 the population of Moreland grew by just over 5000, from 130,531 in 2001 (ABS 2001A) to 135,764 in 2006 (ABS 2007). This growth is placing extra pressure on local services, schools and infrastructure, including open spaces. This pressure is forecast to grow particulary in the North Coburg area where the Pentridge and Kodak residential
developments will result in a major influx of new residents.

There are long term requirements for open space in the area resulting from high to medium residential developments in the Pentridge Village and Kodak sites. [Ed. See photo at top of article.] The City of Moreland already has one of the lowest percentages of open space allocations in metropolitan Melbourne. Retention of this land as public open space is fully supported by Melbourne 2030 Policy 5.6; to ensure long term protection of public open space (Merri & Edgars Creek Parkland Group 2009).

The Melbourne 2030 plan supports the position of the Merri and Edgars Creek Parkland Group, who are in favour of retaining the parkland as public open space. The recent Audit Expert Group Report on Melbourne 2030 notes that the provision of neighbouring amenities, including parks, open space, facilities and services, is an essential component of maintaining
neighbourhood liveability. Further it recommends improving open space provision and services in line with population increases (Hodge 2008).

The Audit Expert Group on Melbourne 2030 also notes the reduction of tree canopy and loss of open space are two of the most easily felt and resented potential outcomes of urban consolidation.

The allocation of surplus government land for open space is an area that should be taken into consideration (Hodge 2008).

We get told that population growth is inevitable and that it is desirable. Population growth has traditionally come at the expense of open space. Future public policy must take into consideration the threat which population growth poses to our existing public open spaces. Managing population growth so that it does not threaten the liveability of our city ought to be
a priority of this State Government and Governments to come.

The Edgars Creek parkland must be protected not just for ours but for future generations. Its value cannot be placed in monetary terms. Its ecological, environmental and social value far outweigh any short term profits the State Government may be able to derive from its sale.

8. Recommendations

Recommendation 1: VicRoads owned land in the vicinity of Edgars Creek should be retained as public open space.

Recommendation 2: VicRoads should hand over the land to Moreland City Council free-of charge on the proviso that it will be maintained as public open space.

9. References

- Australian Bureau of Statistics (2007) 2006 Census QuickStats: Moreland (LGA). Released 25/10/07 [Online] www.abs.gov.au [Accessed 13/02/2009]
- Australian Bureau of Statistics (2007A) 2006 Census Quick Stats: Coburg North (State Suburb). Released 25/10/07 [Online] www.abs.gov.au [Accessed 13/02/2009]
- Australian Bureau of Statistics (2006) 4177.0 Participation in Sport and Physical Recreation Australia 2005-06 [Online] http://abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/ProductsbyCatalogue/9FD67668EE42A738
CA2568A9001393AC?OpenDocument [Accessed 12/02/2009]
- Australian Bureau of Statistics (2001) 2001 Census Quickstats: Coburg North (State Suburb). Released 9/03/06 [Online] www.abs.gov.au [Accessed 13/02/2009]
- Australian Bureau of Statistics (2001A) 2001 Census Quickstats: Moreland (LGA) . [Online] www.abs.gov.au [Accessed 13/02/2009]
- Biggs, M. (2006) Overweight and obesity in Australia E-brief. Published by the Parliamentary Library [Online] http://www.aph.gov.au/library/intguide/SP/obesity.htm [Accessed 12/02/2009]
- Craig, S. (2009) ‘Save the site bid’. Article published in the Moreland Leader Newspaper on 12/01/2009.
- Fisher, P., Dr. (2009) ‘It’s time literally to go green’. Article published in The Age on the 23/01/2009 [Online] http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/its-time-literally-to-gogreen-20090122-7nv5.html [Accessed 23/01/2009]
- Friends of Edgars Creek (2009) Melbourne’s Freshwater Systems Community Natural History [Online] http://www.freshwater.net.au/community/foec.htm [Accessed 3/02/2009]
- Freshwater.Net.Au (2006) Melbourne’s Fresh Water Systems; Edgars Creek [Online] http://www.freshwater.net.au/nature/about_edgars_creek.htm [Accessed 11/02/09]
- Fyfe, M. (2009) ‘Review, and you, to bring order to open-space race’. Published in
The Sunday Age 4/1/09, Page 7.
- Gill, P., T., & Baur, A., L., et al (2008) Childhood obesity in Australia remains a
widespread health concern that warrants population-wide prevention programs.
Published on the Medical Journal of Australia [Online]
http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/190_03_020209/gil10817_fm.html [Accessed
12/02/2009]

Another famous koala - from Norman Lindsay's Magic Pudding

"Sam, we were all so glad to hear of your rescue, which gave us hope that the world would realise the plight of you and your fellow koalas and other wildlife in Australia and that our politicians might then wake up. We enjoyed seeing that you had made a friend at the wildlife shelter and it seemed that your future looked comparatively rosey. We are now so sorry to hear that you are no longer with us."
-- Ed.Candobetter

Sam was actually a female koala and, soon after she was rescued, she became fast friends with a male koala who was recovering in the same shelter.

Sam was a victim of controlled burning, not of 'bushfire'

Sam was a victim of the practice of "controlled burning-off" to prevent bushfires. She was not actually a victim of an out of control bushfire. Burning-off is a practice of which the frequency is criticised soundly and scientifically here. In many cases it benefits loggers and land-clearers. Managed and thinned forests are overwhelmingly more frequently linked to uncontrollable bushfires than old growth forests. There is a case for burning off on ridges which are prone to lightening attacks, but, as writers argue in these pages, we should use an entirely different approach to fighting fires in Australia.

Although Sam became known, admired, and undoubtedly loved, by millions of people, due to the terrible fires last February in which hundreds of people died and over a million native animals died, she actually succumbed to chlamydia.

Chlamydia in koalas

Chlamydia is a disease which was found to be epidemic in a number of koala populations about 20 years ago. Since then, the mixing up of different populations in new places in an effort to save the species from extinction due to traditional habitat destruction, has probably contributed to a rise in the incidence of infections. Stress in its own right is also an obvious likely factor in the prevalence, seriousness and chronicity of this illness.

Chlamydia bacteria occur in many different animals, including humans. In koalas clamydia can infect the urinary tract the genetical tract and the respiratory tract. It may cause infertility and blindness and the animal may die from these. They get pink rimmed eyes and cannot keep themselves clean due to incontinence.Source:

How safe are koalas in Australia?

Koalas only live on the South and South Eastern coast of Australia and most wildlife carers consider them in danger everywhere. Unfortunately the way that animals are classified as threatened and endangered in Australia means that you have to wait until the entire population of koalas Australia-wide is on the brink of extinction. Meanwhile, as we head quickly towards this situation, local and regional populations are being extinguished with barely a protest registered in the mainstream media and with only the merest token gestures from parliamentarians.

Wildlife Carers finance most of their work themselves, with little help and much hindrance from the government. People around the world who may read this: please place pressure on our Australian State and Federal governments to start protecting our wildlife instead of killing them through neglect or demonised as 'pests'.

In some cases koalas are endangered by being marooned by human development, so that they cannot get out and they exhaust the food trees where they are boxed in and die of starvation, fighting and disease. Throwing animals together from different populations, without a normal population structure means that these artificially created new colonies lack brakes on reproduction which occur normally through incest avoidance and the Westermarck effect.

However, the greatest direct killer is loss of habitat due to suburban development. This loss of habitat is driven by the growth lobby which has caused Australia to become severely overpopulated to the extent that we are now running out of water and land for farming and for wildlife is being stolen for human development. This means less water and less land for animals and forests.

Koalas are also killed by dogs, humans, stepped on by cattle, and run down by cars.

Brigitte Bardot's site has a very good page on this, devoted to Victoria's Mornington Peninsula Wildlife carer, Jenny Bryant's Koala Refuge.

But koalas are also loved by many Australians

As you can see from this page
In Australia one of our most famous books was Norman Lindsay's The Magic Pudding, where the hero was a Koala called Bunyip Bluegum, who left his home because he couldn't stand sharing it with his untidy uncle.

This picture shows him eating outside to avoid watching his uncle drag his whiskers in his soup. You can see that Bunyip is being importuned by two small goannas, who want hand-outs.

Original Source: http://www.climate4you.com/images/OperationBarbarossa1941.jpg

Submission by Jill Quirk, headlines and teaser by Admin, candobetter

Growth is discretionary but the Government doesn't want Victorians to realise this

We have just learned from a newly issued State Government report that building on the outer urban fringes -taking into consideration the infrastructure needs for making new suburbs from scratch- costs more than twice as much as building within established areas.

The hackneyed arguments about urban sprawl vs. urban densification are usually presented and reported as either forced choices or choices of the most suitable recipe of proportions of one or the other.

What is rarely questioned is the actual need to have the rate of population growth that forces these dilemmas on us.

The State Government and planning authorities as well as developers and all those who lobby for higher population growth must be well aware of the extent to which the level of population growth in Victoria is discretionary. These aforementioned must also be well aware that logically, growth at the present rate or indeed at any rate is not possible into the indefinite future.

http://www.liveinvictoria.com.au is a Government website to drive population growth upwards

Even without the State Government recklessly inviting people from overseas and interstate to join us in our water depleted state e.g. via the website http://www.liveinvictoria.vic.gov.au, Victoria would still experience population growth- but at a far more manageable level- roughly 30-40,000 per annum as opposed to the present nearer 100,000 p.a. increase . Eventually with a balanced level of incomings and outgoings and our natural birth and death rate , Victoria's population would level off in the next 40 odd years.

Victoria now in ecological overshoot

Victoria is now in ecological overshoot-as clearly demonstrated by the need to industrialise our water supply with a desalination plant and by the parlous state of our environment as described in the State of the Environment report 2008.

That is why we need to stabilise and then allow natural attrition

This is why Victoria, for a secure future needs to look towards stabilising its population in future decades. As long as our population increases, our environment will be in decline. The present scenario of high population growth guarantees a poorer existence for future citizens than that of present citizens just as the present residents are poorer than those of 40 years ago when the environment was in much better shape and we had adequate water supplies.

As Victoria is in overshoot in 2009, imagine what it will be like in 10 years with 1 million more people,many of them living on the Melbourne outer fringe in large poorly designed houses on small blocks of land with few transport options. 10 years from now, more of our agricultural land close to the city will be either built on or earmarked for development. At the same time we will be further down the one way road towards oil depletion which will adversley affect car travel economy, agricultural output and transport of goods.

In ten years people on the outer edges will be much closer to the edges of survival - food, water, petrol

The people of Melbourne especially those in the suburbs of the urban fringes will be much closer to the edges of survival. Their lives will be more difficult as they struggle to find economical transport and their opportunities for self sufficiency in a climate of rising food prices will be limited by lack of land and time.

These are all arguments against a mindset of continual population growth and expansion of our city which has so many unwanted consequences right now for the bulk the population.

Higher urban density not the answer; we are already going upwards and outwards

The alternative to extending the urban growth boundary given continued population growth is the densification of the established parts of the city which the State Government report says is the cheaper option for accommodating population growth. Unfortunately, at a massive 2% socially engineered p.a growth rate, we will get both more urban sprawl and urban densification . Urban densification has distinctly negative consequences for affected residents- overcrowding , uncertainty of what will be built next and where, loss of natural light in houses, loss of gardens and of open space and increased traffic. Eventually everyone will be adversely affected except those with enormous property buffers within the city i.e the very rich.

Apart from major conservation and wildlife considerations on which other organisations will be making separate submissions especially as extension of UGB affects the Green Wedges, the proposal to extend the UGB totally lacks vision and any will to make a different future in the interests of Victoria's citizens.

The Victorian Government should totally revise its modis operandi with regard to its own part in population growth in Victoria and work towards a sustainable future with first a future stable population and then inevitably a smaller one after mid century. This kind of foresight is needed if we are to have a future and not ecological collapse.

Jill Quirk

(Submission by Jill Quirk, on behalf of Sustainable Population Australia (SPA) Victorian Branch)
If you want to contact Jill, send her a message to [email protected]

***

See also on the financial cost alone:Jason Dowling and Clay Lucas, "Suburban sprawl costs billions more," The Age, July 17, 2009

"PLANS to build thousands of homes on Melbourne's fringes will cost Victorians around $40 billion more than if they were built in existing suburbs, a new State Government report shows.

In an embarrassment for the Government on the day that submissions close on its plans to further expand Melbourne's urban growth boundary, the report released on Wednesday shows the total cost of building homes in new outer suburbs is more than double that of building in existing areas.[...]"

Ed. But don't believe that writing to the Age will save you or even that the Age owners care - the Fairfax Press and the Murdoch Press would be backing this growth to the hilt, since they have corporate investments in property development and its marketing throughout the world, as indicated by, for instance, www.domain.com.au and www.realestate.com.au