Less than pawns in the governments game....

 Recently I received and email with this blazoned in the text:

[quote]

Despite koalas facing extinction, OVER THE PAST 2 WEEKS ENVIRONMENT MINISTER SUSSAN LEY HAS SIGNED OFF ON PROJECTS THAT WILL SEE MORE THAN 150 HECTARES OF PRECIOUS KOALA HABITAT DESTROYED.

[end quote]

What does one expect from this minister? She is ***not*** protecting the environment or any wildlife. Her role, and the reason Morrison put her into that portfolio, is to attempt to make it easier for business and developers to bypass the legislation that is supposed to protect the Australian heritage of environment and wildlife.

This is the ongoing process and purpose of the environment departments of state and federal government.

Attempting to save individual ecosystems, habitat and wildlife by letter writing and protest to the minister is not working. Because everyone who cares about environmental conservation is working on different projects and splitting their effectiveness, allowing ministers and public servants to continue being the method by which to destroy all that is important, irreplaceable and therefore of most value in Australia.

The protest must be against those that allow these things to happen; give their permission for destruction. The concentration of protest must be from all quarters, regardless of the peculiar, unique interest in one species exclusively. The platypus, the koala, the kangaroo and others, if concentrated on singularly, will divide and dilute the protest. If we do not all work together for the one purpose, stopping the minister from willy nilly allowing various projects to proceed with projects that damage some element of the environment. Then that minister has truly achieved their purpose, having divided and conquered the hoopleheads who are in disarray, so they can get on with their destruction.

Opportunism or Something else................

 The lockdown has eased in Victoria, and the numbers of infected people has already risen back to four from one and before that 2 infections. There will be many more now. Will there be a third lockdown, if that madman Daniel Andrews attempts to keep everyone alive, hale and hearty. That is his excuse for all this disruption. However, it is also to benefit him, in that, he can hide all manner of expense for the rail programs he has put in place, and also keep people away from the areas where the rail, tunnelling work is being carried out.

Daniel Andrews is an opportunist, who is trying to get as much done as possible while people stay away and find it difficult or impossible to physically scrutinise what he is doing. He and his ministers are rubbing their hands together, because they can do whatever they want and without the usual examination that would otherwise be conducted to ensure he doesn't take shortcuts or overspends.

Is this recognised by anyone? Probably not, because people are being distracted by the coronavirus pandemic. Do the people of Victoria understand they are being held in thrall, by what appears to be for their good. They are, but there are wheels within wheels. Do they realise that Michael O'Brien, the opposition leader is hamstrung, but also too weak and without the charisma to have people vote for him?

Admittedly, you would have to be crazy to vote for the Liberals at this point. There are other political parties that present better choices. The greens certainly. The smaller parties should be thrown into the political mix of government of Victoria, Not only so the decision making is more environmentally friendly, but also to slow things down and make the decisions more widely accepted, or if the government presents legislation proposal that are suspect, are suitably amended. We need greater public diversity.

The law is the only recourse when government doesn't listen to the people

The Federal Court ruling that environmental laws were breached by the Victorian government owned timber company VicForests, logging, and thus destroying sections of the Central Highlands inhabited by the critically endangered Leadbeater's possum. Thus curtailing at least one of iniquitous practices and non compliance of the the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 [EPBC] by the Andrews government, is a great result. Demonstrating that cowboy industries, even if backed by government ownership; are not beyond the reach, or above the law.

This ruling brought about by the legal services of the Environmental Justice Australia work, instigated by the friends of Leadbeater's Possum and the Wilderness Society in Victoria, is so important; that it will be something to celebrate by all thinking people for decades, possibly centuries to come.

VicForests have criminally logged so much forest that they didn't have permission to or even look at over the years. Yet it seemed that state government arm thought they could log anywhere with impunity. That they often overreached their governmental permissions to engage in these iniquitous activity have often been cited, and required they be taken to task.

This from Katy Gallagher on Thursday, 11 June 2020:

[quote]

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Hansard source

Labor won't be supporting this motion. We believe issuing a running commentary—and we acknowledge the Greens have drafted this motion in a way that forces that—on court decisions is not how you protect the environment or ensure certainty in regional employment. It's reckless for the Greens to claim that the decision sets an important legal precedent. Labor support the social, economic and environmental benefits that flow from sustainable management of our native forests and support regional forest agreements. We are committed to ecologically sustainable development within the forestry industry. Furthermore, the EPBC Act is under review, and we shouldn't pre-empt it. Labor support the protection of threatened species, and we know this government isn't doing enough. The motion does nothing to address the key challenges we as a nation need to confront on climate action, protecting our environment and threatened species. For that we need real change, not motions which seek to wedge the Labor Party, which is what the Greens excel at.

[end quote]

Is this to be read that curbing logging of habitat of threatened species will not benefit the environment?

It also appears to ignore that the law is the only way that people, the voters can get the governments attention and actually have them do as the voters want, and to stop government from riding roughshod over the will of the people.

Regional forest agreements are the worst kind of legalised vandalism to our flora and fauna that the government can devise. The current review of the EPBC is actually trying to dilute and reduce or eliminate the checks and balances that protect our flora, fauna and landscape. It only requires reading of the guidelines to see this is why it was instigated in the first place.

VicForest structure should be dismantled, and a new entity created that is more aware of wildlife and flora ensuring these are not just an afterthought; but front and centre of management. We are no longer new in a country and know now it is only ours by right, or ours alone. We must acknowledge and make allowance for many different species that also share this land with us and whom the first nation people respected and cherished and allowed to thrive, in many different ways.

This court decision is so right at every level, and so long has it been required, that one wonders why it took so much time to come about?

There can be no complacency now. Every Australian states wildlife carers, conservationists and environmentalists must now strike while the iron is hot, taking advantage of the population of Australia's knowledge of what is happening in our forests, to our wildlife and landscapes since the fires. Making certain the laissez fair attitude of the extractive industries make the changes that that will ensure our forests, landscapes, wildlife and well being are preserved for many generations to come.

A great Joy and a new beginning

The slap on the wrist to, and curtailing of iniquitous practices and non compliance of the Andrews government through the actions of VicForests; is a great result. Demonstrating that cowboy industries, even if backed by government ownership; are not beyond the reach or or above the law.

This ruling brought about by the legal services of the Environmental Justice Australia work, instigated by the friends of Leadbeater's Possum and the Wilderness Society in Victoria, is so important; that it will be something to celebrate by all thinking people for decades, possibly centuries to come.

VicForests have criminally logged so much forest that they didn't have permission to or even look at. Yet it seemed that state government arm thought they could log anywhere with impunity. That they often overreached their governmental permissions to engage in these iniquitous activity have often been cited, and required they be taken to task,

Ideally the whole VicForest structure should be dismantled and a new entity created that is more aware of wildlife and flora and that it should not be just an afterthought; but front and centre of management. We are no longer new in a country that is ours by right, or alone. We must acknowledge and make allowance for many different species that also share this land with us and whom the first nation people respected and cherished and allowed to thrive, in many different ways.

This decision is so right at every level, and so long has it been required, that one wonders why it took so much time to come about?

There can be no complacency now. Every Australian states wildlife carers, conservationists and environmentalists must now strike while the iron is hot, taking advantage of the population of Australia's knowledge of what is happening in our forests, to our wildlife and our landscapes. Making certain the laissez fair attitude of the extractive industries make the changes that that will ensure our forests, landscapes, wildlife and well being are preserved for many generations hence.

Attack on the natural native beauty of Australia....

Melissa Price was the most hopeless federal minister for the environment in Australia. Taking the baton of that position from Josh Frydenberg, who was the most intentionally destructive politician of native Australian wildlife and flora.

Then Sussan Ley was made the minister of environment. She is an environmental vandal in the mould of Frydenberg. She is against all native wildlife and flora as he was, and is attempting to allow every industry that sees wildlife as an impediment to their plans and destruction of the natural balance to further their wealth, to get a free pass to achieve their aims.

Since the Liberal party has been in power in federal politics, Abbot; Turnbull and Morrison, we have seen the natural beauty and attributes of Australia being destroyed. Sacrificed to the greedy god of mammon. It is difficult to see how we can recover from this constant pressure and attack on our native treasures, animal and plant.

The Victorian government still sanctioning the barbaric practice of allowing the shooting of all water birds, even though only some of these can be legally shot. Logging of forests that have survived the fires of 2019/20. There seems to be a state and government instigated effort to drive us down and embed the people of this country, in the horror reputation of being the most bloodthirsty, destructive country in the world.

Rubbish spoken, but why?

When a tyro politician who has no idea what he is talking about, makes statements which are both incorrect and obviously attempting to instil hatred, especially against a native Australian species of wildlife. We all have become worried. Statements that are contrary to what has been proven again and again to be wrong, obviously have a hidden agenda and by trying to fool the Australian public show a very low integrity of any individual who utters them in private, and something worse when they are spoken in public.

Referring to this: https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/expert-bats-away-call-for-ridiculous-cull-of-yarra-bend-flying-foxes-20200421-p54lvb.html

The enormous value in every action, in every possible way that the Grey Headed Flying foxes perform for Australia, surely can not be in doubt. Nor can the bad press about them “spreading” disease be raised again, proven again and again to be spurious and mendacious, for any reason other than hate. It becomes obvious that anyone who would voice this is trying to make mischief, or has too little to do as a representative for the people in his electorate.

It beggars belief that this sort of thing is not censured more strongly.

The fire 2019 to 2020

An event like the recent fires, demonstrates just how inadequate and slowly reactive the federal and state governments are, though in a Royal Commission they would not like this to come out, so they don't want any blame laid out.

Yet to become better prepared and to make improvements, it must be shown how things was badly done in the recent fires, otherwise there is no relevance, no reference why something suggested, should be implemented in the future. Or not?

Below are questions for the asking, and though there is no trust that the government either state or federal will answer truthfully. These questions, though not exhaustive will give some idea to those agencies, that the public know what is going on. Some of the answers will be known, some be discovered with a reasonable guess. Some find answers, if we just look at the Victorian governments policies and actions. However, it would be nice to get an honest answer.

• Does any tier of government believe that the people of Victoria should be satisfied, because being pleased is impossible, that they were prepared for any fires, much less horrific fires like the ones that caused so much trauma to, and placed so many people on, almost a war footing?

• Do the people of Victoria believe they have placed the right people into government, if they are not happy with how the various tiers of government have performed in this fire event, and now the following floods that have, much as the fires closed so many roads?

• Are there still people who believe that Climate Change is not responsible for these events?

• Why does the government need another Royal Commission into these fires, and stipulate there should be no blame?

• Has the government read submissions and recommendations made by previous Royal Commissions into previous fire events to see if any of these were either taken notice of or acted upon?

Wildlife [mis] management and DELWP questions

• Is the DELWP responsible for wildlife management, and if so, what kind of management?

• Did the DELWP send teams into the fire grounds with a dart marksman, so that native animals could be accessed at close range, and if so why?

• Did the DELWP send teams into the fire ground without at least one experienced wildlife carer/shelter operator who handle wildlife in all manner of conditions and circumstances all the time, if so why?

• Did the DELWP sent shooters into the fire ground, to destroy native animals on the inspection through binoculars, and were these animals checked for pouch young?

• Why did the DELWP not hand over wildlife orphans from the shot or burnt mothers to wildlife carers and/or shelters?

• Were there no orphans or slightly injured native animals found that could be rehabilitated?

• Were all native animals euthanized, killed, if they were burnt even in the smallest amount, and could have been rescued?

• Did the DELWP shooters have any wildlife caring experience or knowledge of wildlife of any kind?

• Did the shooters just shoot wombats summarily and not realise they may have had babies in the burrow?

• Is that why emaciated baby wombats round the 6 to 10 kilogram weight, were found roaming the fire ground, looking for their mothers who had left them in their burrows to find feed, were summarily shot and therefoe didn't get back to feed their babies?

• Is this and other iniquitous activity conducted by DELWP personnel by instruction from the Victorian Minister for the environment or the Victorian Premier?

• Is one of these reasons why the Victorian Minister was never available to be interviewed by one of the media outlets?

• Did the DELWP officers confiscate water point infrastracture from a burnt forest area in Corryong?

• Did the DELWP officers install a gate at a burnt forest at Corryong to prevent a wildlife carer from continuing to put out food and water for native animals until their was food growing again?

• Was this under the instruction of the Minister?

• Why were authorised wildlife carers/shelter operators sidelined, not allowed onto the fire ground when others less qualified, and tradesmen were permitted access those areas?

• Does the DELWP and the Minister not realise that all Australians and people in other countries, world wide, care for about our wildlife?

One hundred and thirty six wedge tailed eagles poisoned..

The number of wedge tail eagles poisoned, 136, is obscene. Yet we have been informed that the maximum jail term, yes, the maximum, for anyone that kills that many birds is 6 months jail. The fine for killing a wedge tail eagle is $7,928.50? How do they come to that figure. Because it was derived back in the dark ages when shooting Aboriginal people during drunken soirée's was finally forbidden. Moving to decimal currency moved this penalty to this ridiculous figure. For every extra bird killed there is a discount. They can be killed for only $792.85. Another ridiculous figure for the same reason as above.

The more discovered about wildlife in Victoria, proves that it is considered a nuisance in this state. People are permitted to do what they will with wildlife, and in fact perpetrate despicable acts upon all species of native animals almost with impunity. The penalties are so small that they beggar belief, but in reality show the low value in which they are held, in this case, the state of Victoria.

Shooters and farmers are ubiquitous and great in number, they are able to vote, so are permitted to do almost anything they want.

The Andrews state government is possibly the weakest government running under the Labor flag that this state has ever been voted into office. Certainly in wildlife and law and order issues. Which in the case of these poisoned eagles, proves the point.

Internet really crook..........

We live in a pretty isolated area, which is great for soft releasing wildlife where they will be disturbed, as all wildlife generally are where people live, as little as possible. This area requires good internet coverage because we are over 100 kilometres from a fully functioning library and other things that people in the city, who have better if not great internet coverage and are close to all these information outlets, take for granted.

So more than any others, we need really good internet coverage and we have satellite, which is a Clayton's NBN. We are also some distance from the closest mains power, which of course is not the best option for power by a long shot and even if it wouldn't cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to connect to, is becoming even more expensive. So with a small solar power system, we have to turn things off, as we cannot leave things on standby or on all the time.

When we start our satellite modem, it takes at least 15, usually 20 minutes to connect. So the modem is on for 20 minutes before it's even sensible to turn on a computer, dragging power out of the deep cycle batteries. All this has been recounted to Malcolm Turnbull and Mitch Fifield who replaced him as telecommunications minister, with a small “m”.

It was the Abbott government that found the cheapest possible internet delivery system, and then found a couple of consulting firms that would declare it as being the best, and proceeded to install it for Australians. Made up mostly of a population that had no idea about what a good internet system was if they fell over it in their lounge room and no idea whatsoever what a really good system could do for the economy and people in general. Turnbull sold this system to people of Australia too easily and never again mentioned it in the election and Labor hardly touched on it either. Because it was not an issue for most Australians.

Turnbull was voted into being head of the country and Fifield took on the role of communications minister for a substandard system. Bought the wrong modems and thought he could sit back and everyone would be silly enough to just accept the catch cry, “the internet is slow, or down” with impunity and most did.

The satellite modems are rubbish and they can be tweaked to pick up the satellite signal faster, because after many letters of complaints Fifield did actually have them tweaked so they picked up the satellite signal after a few minutes. Still too long but it could be lived with. But that was soon replaced by the same old problem of waiting 20 minutes for the modem to pick up the signal. Fifield was not the man for the job, and after a while it was disclosed that technicians working for the NBN were not allowed to compare notes. Not allowed to even talk to one another. They being like most of the community wanted to keep their jobs so they obeyed.

This is just one of the side effects of our society, and no one wants to take up the subject, because politicians are not accountable. Some kind of inquiry will show them to be remiss, culpable of absolutely dumb, and nothing will ever be done. The issue with the satellite internet is just one such. They are like the rest of our society and yet we give them credence they don't deserve.

A Fire of Holiday Places

The recent fires on the Victorian coast burnt much wildlife. It demonstrates again that humans always think it won't happen to them, again.

The pictures tell the story of the fire coming into the yards of houses and the fire increasing in strength height and ferocity as the house is burnt. The trees stand stalwart, and are also burnt. But were they alone there without houses, which are after all just fire fuel, the fire would not have been as intense. Though they will probably now be cut down because it will be proclaimed, they are dead

The way the houses were set out seems to be in a line along the contour of the hill, and the houses that were not touched mostly away, out of that line, placed further back or just a bit more out of the way. The flames would have lapped each house, where these were built close together, or the wind sent the flames along the ground to the next house in line, where they would have increase in height and burnt many koalas.

Sadly it's never recorded that the worst fire hazard are houses. They are full of, and quite often built from combustible material. It can only be a subject of wonder what was lying round the houses that should have been cleaned up before summer but not being done so only added to the ease of travelling the line the fire took.

Only time will tell if the local government will make it a requirement to rebuild houses along that shoreline with steel frames and fire retardant cladding or if they will be happy not to do so again. If the latter, probably allowing another holiday resort fire to come through and burn almost every house as it did 32 years ago.

Wildlife in areas where house are built close together have very little reasonable chance of survival. A fire becomes particularly powerful where houses are close together.

Knowing Life Isn't Fair Doesn't Help...

There was a story today, of what was apparently an American Bulldog, who chased a wombat into a burrow and was trapped and people spent tens of thousands of dollars and a great deal of time to dig him/her out. I assume there was some truth in this?

The action sounds commendable, but it's very much looked at in a lopsided way. The wombat, who is indigenous to this country, and when in large numbers kept the forest floor excavated and aerated in such a way as to speed the decomposition of leaf and bark litter and reduced forest fires by so doing, was chased by a pampered pet. Not because it was in any way doing anything wrong, but was just there.

The dog went in where it had no place being. A child being chased by an adult should be able to get to their home and once through the front door be safe? Maybe not, if this story is anything to go by.

The dog gets rescued, dug out of the burrow, but in the process the wombats home is virtually destroyed. How can that be right? Why are we humans like this?

The yacht that has it's keel ripped off when it hits a whale has all the attention paid to the multi-million dollar yacht, replaceable, and the crew. No one considers the whale, whose only place of residence, the sea. Which is being used as a sports ground by a creature that has all the areas of the planet to play in? How badly was it hurt, and were the sharks already on the blood trail, even before the crew was rescued?

Our priorities are definitely skew whiff.

I made much the same mistake many years ago, and I feel shame about it still. Having gone to visit an old woman, we allowed our two Kelpies out of the car and they explored the woman's yard. We had no idea they had found, and were tormenting a snake till one of them was bitten and yelped. I called them off.

Before the dog fell over and we knew she was in trouble. The old woman asked me to kill the snake. I asked what reason there was for this, because the snake would go away on its own and it was the dogs who were the trouble makers. They attacked the snake defending itself against two adversaries, not the other way round. But she was adamant and I felt sorry for her irrational fear and to my shame killed the snake.

We raced the dog to the vet and the all up costs were over $1,000.oo to save her life. Yet she and her mate were the tormentors turned attackers and what they got they deserved. But I killed the snake? I must have been too young or still too stupid to do something like that. The dogs are not a snakes food item, because it wasn't a constrictor and they were at fault anyway.

Lessons to be learned here. But we see this sort of thing every day. The victim getting the blame for being hurt.

Bare Nosed Wombats Not Protected All Over Victoria........

It beggars belief, but the bare nosed wombats, before white settlement called the "common" wombats are no longer such or protected all over Victoria. Endless entreaties to do so and the reasons they should be protected are not endorsed or possibly understood by the Victoria Government or their environmental arm.

So many parishes where there is no protection for wombats

So letters to the DELWP have not produced any reason why the protection of the bare nosed wombats in some parishes is in force, but not in others? It appears a very hodge podge legislation, and no explanation forthcoming?

There is a paper: REVIEW: Is the loss of Australian digging mammals contributing to a deterioration in ecosystem function? Mammal Review ISSN 0305-1838 That clearly shows how important digging mammals and by their actions, probably reptiles and insects, are to the continued fertility level as it is, and increase if we allow enough of these little diggers to survive.

You don't need to be a university graduate to know that wombats of all kinds and digging animals have been part of the shaping of our landscape. The landscape most of us enjoy when we leave the suburbs and cities and attempt to salve our souls and rescue our sanity. But it seems to be forgotten that they have a role to play still.

Farming of every kind needs so much expensive input, that farmers are screaming about lower profits yields and production of every kind. The consumer is supposed to pay for these increases in costs that could be avoided. Hard pans are a result of shallow ploughing and the Yeoman deep ripping is no substitute for the wombat and other digging and earth disturbing animals that come at little if any real cost.

It's well known that many property owners kill wombats because they really can't see beyond the hole in the ground, to all the benefits it bestows to their little fiefdoms and our world.

From the paper above:

[quote]
Digging mammals therefore create a range of disturbances in the form of nose pokes, scratchings, shallow to deep digs, long bulldozing tracts and complex subterranean burrows (Eldridge & Mensinga 2007). They manipulate the substrate and create a variety of disturbances that affect resource availability, contributing to land, soil and water quality (Martin 2003). In this review, we investigate how the loss of Australian
[end quote]

It's beyond the grasp of the Victorian government to see the value of bare nosed wombats, but one hopes at sometime in the future the penny will drop. Yeah, that's likely to happen.

During the time that Gavin Jennings had control of the environment and Climate Change portfolio, there was to be a review of the status of the Bare Nosed Wombat [aka the Common Wombat]. But it was never implemented. One wonders why this was? It was such an excellent opportunity to highlight the importance of these little diggers and others that helped to spread soil over leaf and bark litter in the forest and reduce the occasion and intensity of forest fires.

But there was an overstated consideration for farmers and landholders upset when a couple of wombats came onto their property. The damage that wombats were supposed to have caused was also overstated and laced with hyperbole.

So we are currently in this situation and one could assume that there will not be a review in the near future. No point in mentioning that the non lethal methods of excluding any animal is supposed to be the first considered. It's just too easy to reach for a firearm.

Ban Fuel Reduction Burns

Be Constructive Rather Than Destructive

Fuel reduction burn philosophy is flawed in so many ways that it's impossible to name them all.

This method of attempting fire control destroys the values that make Australia what it is and for what it's known. One of these is the natural landscape, beauty and the way it has been crafted by all the elements of the natural world. Fire being one of these.

Fire, as has been pointed out in just about every paper ever written about its danger, is a part of Australia just like the wildlife which we love, or most of us love and which is part of our heritage and identity. It's not rational to expect to live without fire in Australia, and it's irrational to believe that by lighting fires we are in some way protecting ourselves from them. It's just plain crazy to think that lighting fires in the forest, far from population centres will give us either, protection or safety, from fires in the areas where we live.

So we have to think about the area where we actually live and adjacent to it if we want to be destroyers or creators. The former is negativity at it's worse and that's fuel reduction burning. Torch everything that will burn. There is no guarantee if, or even when a fire might get close to a population centre or an individual dwelling. We would have to light the fire and burn everything each spring and hope after the fuel reduction or elimination fire, that growth through the rest of spring and summer will be limited. That during early summer, grass will not go brown and tinder dry, or the trees drop more leaves and bark and nothing that could be described as fire fuel will be blown in by the wind. That's not rational or clever.

To understand and respect fire is good. But people have an irrational fear of fire, because they are indoctrinated by society that the government will look after and keep them safe and that's never going to happen. This foolishness, and dependence on it that government loves. Keeps the population tractable and stops individuals from going out and doing their own thing, looking after themselves to some degree.

To put up a fire break of fire retardant plants and instead of using water to put out fire is rational and constructive. Then using the water to keep a verge green to prevent fire from entering certain areas is sensible. If the money used to put out fires and do fuel reduction burning should be spent, because government or other agencies which to encourage employment. Then it can be deployed on employment for people to keep the fire verges and buffers both green and clear of debris that might allow fires to take hold during the summer months. Though in actuality this should be left to each individual householder where they are capable and a percentage of the water used billed to the government or reimbursed by the government.

Green fire breaks all year round are the way to ensure fires never reach the population centres or individual properties of residents. There are tree species of various kinds that are well adapted to the protection of properties from fires and few have been utilised for this purpose. Tagasaste is one, but many tree species that can be made into fire retardant hedgerows exist.

Tagasaste has many benefits as well as the attribute of protecting against fire. Some of these are nitrogen fixing, hard coated seed that cracks open ready to take advantage of moisture even after their parents are destroyed by it. Fodder for stock if pruned or cut back. etc., etc.. Tagasaste is just one of the many trees that are natures buffer against fire.

Others can be formed to be a more effective fire retardant. Hedgerows of coppiced oaks to ensure they grow only to a medium height and remain sappy, filled with moisture to retard fire. They will probably be killed by what they a protecting property and people from should a very hot fire attack them, but they can be replanted. Experimentation would enhance the result.

More About Fire Retardant Hedgerows

Persecution of a Different Species.......

Something that has always been a worry, is how some plants and animals brought to Australia from other countries are called exotics and as they thrive and grow in number, are then labelled pests. These plants and animals from countries far away in most cases, and amongst these animals are humans that come from other lands. Some that came or were brought here, prospered, thrived and multiplied, rather too well in some cases, are excluded from being naturalised by the term exotic, feral or pest. These human immigrants and their descendants are the ones pointing the finger at the descendants of plants their parents brought with them, and/or spread throughout the land; calling them pests?

This policy of removing these naturalised Australians, stems from some misguided idea that natives are the way to go and that introduced people can live with the first nation people, or rather the other way round. But these plants/animals designated as nuisance, cannot. Even though without the wheat, corn, cattle, sheep etc., Australia could not support the population it now contains nor would it earn enough money to sustain it. The aforementioned are not the ones that are branded as pests or feral or needing eradication. But the natives were removed, killed, cut down and burnt, so the “desirable” exotics would thrive.

The selective choice of the species which are labelled pests or for that matter feral is distinctive. Wheat is not a feral or pest or even considered as anything but beneficial. Yet because people haven't been able to bend their mind round finding a use for white poplar [Populus alba] it's considered to be undesirable and now one of the pest species? The same is applied to certain animals. The fox is a pest and yet ovine and bovine species are not. The fox assists in cleaning up much that might spread disease to the ovine and bovine species?

In the case of the East Gippsland Shire Council [EGSC] white poplar is seen, as it can be, invasive. That's not in evidence where this species of tree is the framework of a Grey Headed Flying Fox maternity roost. But it's used as an example because it is elsewhere. Though it should not be eradicated, because its usefulness to a native Australian in this case makes it important, the [EGSC] see it as something they must destroy.

However, there is a hidden agenda. It's the native protected and in danger of extinction, flying fox species that uses the tree which the EGSC sees as a pest and is trying move on. The ploy is to use the excuse of removing something which in some areas is invasive. So remove the poplar which is the framework for the flying fox roost and you move the flying foxes. If it was suggested that the flying foxes were the problem, then it would be halted very quickly, there would be no footing for removal. Remove this invasive exotic tree, is accepted [Tongue in cheek] It's just unfortunate that a Grey Headed Flying Fox maternity roost hangs in it's welcoming branches.

The shire doesn't care where the flying foxes move to. Because if they move to a place where they really are going to be seen as a problem. The shire will suggest they are justified in moving them, on that they are a problem pretext. Actually moving the flying foxes which is what's supposed to happen by removing the poplars. Because they are unable to move them just now, due to their protection by law and because they are doing no harm, they use the poplar removal ruse.

If the flying foxes move right out of the area, well then, that's what the shire want. So either way, it's a win win situation for the shire. A pogrom of sorts that some people suffered in the past, now used on another species, the flying foxes. It succeeded with some dictators applying it to people. People tend to forget what persecution is all about, and how it's carried out.

The problem is not a pest tree, it's the native animal that some people consider a pest. It's a local government experiment to see if it is possible to persecute a minority, by using a subterfuge that will appeal even to people who want something particular. Have them work against what they want. People want native plants and yet don't mind tormenting and threatening and persecuting native animals to do it? Can that be real?

Allowing the apathy of the majority to just stand by and watch. Not realising what they are doing or allowing. Tacitly giving power to and playing into the hands of those who will eventually use it against them.

If This is True

If this is true, it will be the first step and develop into an exhilarating ride for mankind. Firstly to put a foundation under this dream, and then to really get teeth into discovering how we are going to extract ourselves from the use of fossil fuels. How to harvest the wind, sun and build on renewable recyclable energy and share the knowledge and technology world wide.

This will create employment, and allow people to bend their mind in the path of working with the natural world, working with what we have which we won't damage or destroy. It's taken too long, but now there is commitment..............

Forget space; this is the real challenge to which the human mind and will should first be directed. To save the natural world and use our renewable resources effectively and wisely.

https://secure.avaaz.org/en/paris_here_we_come/

Iniquities of Fuel Reduction Burns

We are all aware how destructive fuel reduction burns are in our forests. Fuel reduction burns are what the government uses to try to confuse the general public into believing it's actually doing something and that this will slow down and even prevent fires. Cynically omitting that the fires which burn property and towns and house on farmland are from grass fires. Grass that has been imported into Australia to feed the domestic livestock that has also been imported. Native grasses burn less easily.

Here is an article from Bob McDonald that sheds some more light on the fuel reduction burn process, and how it has been misused:
http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/article/its-time-to-stop-lighting-fires

Fuel reduction burns, if they are carried out anywhere, should be carried out around the population centres, where they will do the most good. But that's not possible because those areas are used for agriculture and usually grow imported grasses and crops. Unfortunately this is also the path the fires use to get into the towns and city outskirts.

Here also can be found some information on fuel reduction burning:
http://www.egwildlife.com.au/burns.html

Can this be real?

The apiarists of Tasmania again made it clear they wanted the logging industry to be reinstated to its former destructive level because it maintains the roads so they can get into the areas where they are able to harvest leatherwood and manuka honey in the forest. Is this for real? The first time this was mooted was in April http://www.themercury.com.au/news/tasmania/honey-producers-want-forestry-tasmania-on-road-to-financial-health/story-fnj4f7k1-1226884353072 which I thought was mistimed, as April 1 had been and gone.

It has been said to me that Tasmania is about 2 or 3 decades behind the mainland, a kind of backwardness one associates with a lack of knowledge. This is obvious because all over the mainland beekeepers are screaming against the trees being logged, the destruction and the general obtuseness of government concerning the issue of conservation of forested areas that still exist.

When working bees back in the 60's, beekeepers were considered as the guardians of the forest. The Tasmanian beekeepers obviously don't see themselves in this way? Their vision is somewhat myopic if they haven't seen what has been happening on the mainland with the logging in operation here. More than likely, few beekeepers on the mainland would want roads into forest maintained at the cost that is extracted from the honey industry and the environment to maintain these roads.

It would be better for everyone if all logging as it's practised today, is stopped, and beekeepers have to put money into better trucks to transport their hives into the areas from which they wish to harvest the nectar produced by the still in situ trees. Trees and understorey, that if left untouched would still be producing honey for future beekeepers.

Eagle shot.........

We live in a world that is difficult to bear at times. More thinking people could change that. However it seems people with the capability to be most destructive think least about what they do or the consequences of their actions. The damage they do with anonymity, as they live on the boundary of decency and the laws which have been created to protect the vulnerable, but needing the most concrete, irrefutable evidence before they are enforced.

The eagle, now dead in the tree in the pictures on this page are a shock to any reasonable person. It is testament that there is little that can be done even if a strong suspicion exists regarding who might have been the perpetrator of such an atrocity. The dead eagle is the only proof available. Assumption and speculation, no matter how well filtered through reason is not proof.

The cowardly, illegal shooting of this eagle would have caused the shooter dismay seeing the body of the bird getting caught up in the dead branches, instead of falling to the ground to be disposed of clandestinely.

Lost to us. Why?

It has often been said: Farmers observations are quite good, but their interpretation is rubbish.

Henry David Thoreau wrote: By avarice and selfishness, and a grovelling habit, from which none of us is free, of regarding the soil as property, or the means of acquiring property chiefly, the landscape is deformed, husbandry is degraded with us, and the farmer leads the meanest of lives. He knows Nature but as a robber. ......Henry David Thoreau.

In the days of old, farmers saw wedge tailed eagles on the carcases of lambs and carrying the carcases of lambs, which is a good enough and simple observation, but they interpreted it as the eagles having killed the lambs. Never suspecting their husbandry may be the cause of the ewes giving birth to weak or dead lambs. These carcases, if left lying around could spread or create disease environments, but removed, cleaned up by the eagles would circumvent that happening. Eagles are doing a service for the farmer, but that worthy doesn't think it through and reaches for the gun.

Eagles are not starlings, they don't flock. So any given area might have two or during breeding seasons only four birds would use a very large area. Lambing is generally 3 or 4 weeks. The ewes protect their lambs and after a couple of weeks, healthy lambs are too robust for an eagle to consider as live food. Rabbits are another story as are foxes

Enough to make anyone weep.

Even small struggling lambs are very heavy. Can an eagle carry one such and if so, would they pass over a dead lamb, which is their preference as they are carrion feeders, that will hang inert in their talons and feed their family just as well? It beggars belief that any farmer doesn't protect the a wedge tailed eagle and yet so many are killed through long entrenched misinformation and ignorance passed down through the generations and followed without further examination.

Wedge tailed eagles are protected by law, certainly in Victoria. It seems to make little difference as many people still can kill with impunity if there are no witnesses.

We know, or we all should know, unless there is something seriously wrong with out thought processes. Alive, eagles are wonderful, they help people who farm wisely, and they enhance all our lives by occupying their place in our world and engaging us with a beauty we can only envy. Dead, an eagle screams at human stupidity that should make us all feel guilty and ashamed.

Fuel Reduction Foolishness......

The Victorian government has decided that they start fuel reduction burning again. This can't be fair dinkum. They are even going to burn in the areas that were already burnt? Where wildlife have already been lost or managed to get away and survive and are now in areas where there is food and shelter they can use. So the DEPI are going to burn that food source and shelter and make certain that wildlife will do it really hard and any that need some time to recover almost certainly die.

One wonders where these people who run these departments get their ideas. Maybe from some tunnel visioned, biased research grants the government has supplied. Which like most research is directed and channelled in a certain way to ensure that the actual effects of the natural world don't get in the way of the desirable result.

Fuel reduction burns further than 10 kilometres from the boundary of main population centres is in fact species genocide. However, that is the aim of the Victorian government at any rate.

The wildlife of this state are a thorn in the side of the current state government. They can't log the whole state and turn it into a virtual desert so they can sell off some of the most valuable timber in the world at a bargain price and reduced to its lowest common denominator, wood chips.

The voting public seem to have very little consideration for the states wildlife. The general public vote hoping to maintain their job security. It's not going to happen. Jobs are never going to be secure again, and neither is a pay packet or a pension or anything else that was once relied upon to make people go into massive debt and become slaves to forces they never thought were anything but benign, because they were applied to others until the circumstances changed. Not themselves. They were right Jack, so who cared about the rest. Donating a little of what they could spare makes the general public feel virtuous and means they don't have to stand up and be counted. No one was giving anything more than that. Charity for most people is giving what they have spare and salving their conscience.

So when the state government uses fire as a fear element to be able to do what they want with the forested areas of the state, they realise the people who live in cities are not going to donate something that they can without any real cost. Their voice to have fuel reduction burning, out in the forested areas stopped. Think about it.

Even if fuel reduction burning worked. By halting fire in the far reaches of the forest, the last bastion of all Victoria’s wildlife, how does that help the people in the cities, towns and smaller population centres? It doesn't. The only areas that should have any protection is no more than 10 kilometres from the boundary of every city and town, and the best protection is a wall of water, created by infrastructure that only even needs to be put in place once and will not cost bucket loads of money to maintain.

Each year the Victorian government uses fuel reduction burning to reduce both numbers and species of wildlife that are hindering their efforts to denude the country it controls within the state boundaries. If the animals who live in the areas of the special places that have been saved in the state are gone. These special places can be plundered. Though it won't create many, if any jobs, rather make those already wealthy even more so. The Victorian government circus puts a positive spin on it and convinces the gullible voting public that they are being looked after and making their jobs and homes secure.

More about fuel reduction burns here:
http://www.egwildlife.com.au/burns.html

I suppose if you read about what the Victorian government is doing in a comic, you would think such stupidity could only be depicted in that sort of forum. But we see it happening, here, now, in real life and still people vote for governments that promise to help with something that they have jettisoned in reality, but appear to be doing, even as jobs and fire security is diminished.

Crucified in More Ways Than One.

The picture of the flying fox crucified on the devils wire [barbed wire] is pretty terrible. The curiosity of the cow makes it all the more poignant for me. It may not affect everyone like that, but every time I look at this I think that it typifies human beings immunity to suffering of other creatures.

Humans want to control, certainly the animals they husband, and don't think beyond that purpose.

I've always been told that barbed wire doesn't keep cattle contained, can and does in many instances cause injury and pain. It does however make human intruders think again before scaling a fence.

This picture of the flying fox shows that barbed wire should be banned. This beautiful animal helpless, pinned and at the mercy of any passing predator, human or otherwise is heartbreaking.

Humans are frightened of the flying foxes because hyperbole has been used to suggest they are a threat to the health of horses and thereby humans. At the time of writing the link has not been made by anything except word of mouth.

There is death, and we have our own right to it as does every living being. But to cause it, for whatever reason, is always a dilemma. To be the artificer of unnecessary pain and suffering to another being, and with the excuse that it's required to make money, when there are alternatives is madness, crass and cannot be justified even by stupidity.