The Australian Commonwealth Ombudman's opinion on the matter of the AFMA-Seafish Tasmania alleged conflict of interest concerning allocated fishing quotas

Letter from Commonwealth Ombudsman to Andrew Wilkie MP concerning the matter of Seafish Tasmania's fish quo...

The Australian Minke Whale Project

The Minke Whale Project

Dwarf minke whales visit the northern Great Barrier Reef each austral winter, forming the only known predictable aggregation of these whales in the world. Growing up to eight metres and weighing several tonnes, they are exceptionally inquisitive and often approach boats, divers and snorkelers closely, sometimes interacting for extended periods.

The MWP (based at James Cook University, North Queensland Australia) conducts multi-disciplinary research into dwarf minke whale biology and behaviour, the social and economic values of the whales and the sustainable management of swim-with-whales tourism. The MWP research team works collaboratively with the GBR swim-with-minke whales tourism industry, Reef managers and wildlife conservation NGOs…….

More here.

Clancy: "Chris Gulaptis, will now have blood on his hands after having the reduced speed limit on the Iluka Road reversed"

“The state local member, Chris Gulaptis, will now have blood on his hands after having the reduced speed limit on the Iluka Road reversed.  The blood will be that of the many animals that will now be killed as a result of this stupid decision” said Dr Greg Clancy Ecologist of Coutts Crossing.  Dr Clancy who narrowly missed hitting a Koala striding across the Iluka Road, 600 m east of the Esk River Bridge on Friday night, believes that a great variety of animals will be killed. “I was driving at 80 km and always look out for wildlife.  Just imagine if it was someone driving at 100 km per hour without wildlife awareness.  The koala would be dead now” he said.  I have driven the Iluka Road many times since 1978 and my casual observations indicate that since the 80 km speed limit was introduced the number of road kills has significantly decreased.  Over the years I have seen Swamp Wallabies, Eastern Grey Kangaroos, Red-necked Wallabies, Koalas, reptiles such as the Land Mullet and birds such as the Variegated Fairy-wren and Lewin’s Honeyeater and many more killed on the road.  A number of Coastal Emus were also killed in that time.  What is really sad is that this decision, which will shave a couple of minutes of the trip from the Highway, is being hailed as a triumph.  My contacts at Iluka say that the majority of residents were happy with the 80 km speed limit.  It was a mere political decision that will cost lives, not human lives, but lives of animals that don’t have a vote” Dr Clancy said.

Dr. Greg Clancy, Media Release, 20 August 2012

Has Clarence Valley Council finally abandoned all pretence of openness and transparency with Mayor Williamson and General Manager Greensill at the helm?

On 12 June 2012 there was a workshop for Clarence Valley shire councillors on the matter of proposed staging of the Yamba Road Bypass and shortly afterwards Council’s own Civil & Corporate Committee met to decide on its recommendation to the forthcoming Ordinary Monthly Meeting of 26 June on this issue.

The first red flag which went up in the Yamba community was the realisation that councillors, residents and ratepayers were being inaccurately advised at the workshop and in business papers/minutes that there were only three endangered species in the path of the proposed road works – an unidentified orchid, the Grey Crowned Babbler and (very inaccurately) the Sugar Glider.

The second red flag was the discovery that a flora and fauna report (commissioned by Council in February 2012 which assessed possible negative environmental impacts along less than half of the Bypass stage under consideration) was not included as an attachment to any of the business papers.

By and large the Yamba community remained in the dark concerning this public document when a local resident made a deputation on 12 June.

To date the document continues to be unavailable for viewing on Council’s website and is not included as an attachment to the 26 June business paper.

The report clearly indicated that in the proposal before Council there were up to eight scheduled threatened species which may be impacted by land clearing associated with the Bypass route between Shores Drive and Deering Street alone.

It also properly identified the Squirrel Glider, Grey-Crowned Babbler and Scented Acronychia tree as being under particular threat by road construction in that area.

These species are respectively listed by the NSW Government as Vulnerable, Vulnerable and Threatened.

The Commonwealth also respectively lists these three species nationally as Vulnerable, Near Threatened and Threatened .

All in all the field survey revealed a total of 191 flora species, comprising 112 native species and 79 introduced species and Eight plants of significance were identified during the field survey including Umbrella Cheese Tree, Willow Primrose, Pink-flowered Doughwood, Scented Achronychia (also endangered), Queensland Silver Wattle, Zornia, Swamp Lilly and Narrow-leaved Cumbungi....

Results of a desktop search of the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage Wildlife Atlas identified thirty two threatened fauna species as occurring within a five kilometre radius of the proposed activity site.

As matters now stand, next week Clarence Valley councillors will also be making further decisions concerning the Bypass between Shores Drive and Coldstream Street without any information on biodiversity values in the other half of this Bypass stage, which would have to pass through what appears to be forested Crown land.

In the interests of the openness and transparency which Clarence Valley Council’s Mayor, Executive and Management appear to have abandoned, here is a transcript of North Coast Environment Planning’s Flora and Fauna Report: Proposed Construction Freeburn Street to Yamba Road*.

Clarence Valley Council Flora and Fauna Report 14 March 2012

* I apologise for the fact that Page 4 Contents did not upload successfully.

On the NSW North Coast the third tier of government continues to chaff under short-sighted O'Farrell Government policies

Clarence Valley Shire Council

Committee: ENVIRONMENT, ECONOMIC & COMMUNITY
Section: Notice of Motion – Councillor Sue Hughes
Date: 12 June 2012
Item: 14.005/12 COAL SEAM GAS

To the General Manager, Clarence Valley Council
SUMMARY
I propose that the following report and notice of motion be submitted to Council.

PROPOSED MOTION

That Council:
1. Acknowledge their statutory responsibilities in relation to planning development applications and assessment, Council as a matter of social responsibility and in the long term sustainability interests of the environment and the community which they represent, support a moratorium on Coal Seam Gas activities within the Clarence Valley area until there are clear land use legislation and policies enacted by the NSW Government to responsibly guide and regulate the Coal Seam Gas industry.
2. Note the 35 recommendations in the Report from the NSW Government's General Purpose Standing Committee No. 5 on Coal Seam Gas and write to the NSW Government expressing the desire for the outcomes to be dealt with as a matter of urgency.
3. Notes the list of roads handed to the Mayor in Lismore at the regional rally 12 May 2012 by residents of the Ewingar district declaring the road reserves CSG free.....................

Coffs Harbour City Council

NOM12/3 – Opposition to Private Shooting in National Parks.
14 June 2012

Councillor Mark Graham has given notice of his intention to move:

Purpose:

That Council note:
1. The NSW Government is seeking to allow private shooting in national parks and other conservation reserves.
2. The NSW Government proposes to allow private shooting in conservation reserves in the Coffs Harbour Local Government Area.
3. It is irresponsible for any government to be proposing an activity which will be dangerous to members of the public and others who use conservation reserves for recreational purposes.
4. While feral animal control is an important activity, it is only safe and effective when undertaken professionally and as humanely as possible. This can only be achieved through the resourcing of professional control programs implemented by state conservation agencies.

That council:
1. Oppose this dangerous proposal by the NSW government; and
2. Write to the Premier and the Environment Minister in opposition to the proposal to allow private shooting in conservation reserves.

A rare frog the NSW Minister for Resources and Energy & Anchor Resources intends to ignore?

Giant Barred Frog found on the Wild Cattle Creek property

Scientific name: Mixophyes iteratus
Conservation status in NSW: Endangered
National conservation status: Endangered

Image found at

Protect & Preserve the Dorrigo Plateau

It is no secret that NSW Minister for Resources and Energy, Chris Hartcher, is enthusiastic at the prospect of mining on the Mid and Far North Coast – particularly when it comes to gold and antimony mining on the Dorrigo Plateau.

A plateau which takes in the Clarence River catchment high country which supplies fresh water to an estimated 125,419 residents (based on 2010 ERP figures) in Coffs Harbour City and Clarence Valley Shire local government areas.

Local government areas falling within a region which has a population expected to grow more than 28% to around 424,400 by 2031.

Given the ongoing exploration within Anchor Resources Limited’s Wild Cattle Creek EL 6388 lease and the corporation’s recent history of environmental degradation, one has to wonder why Minister Hartcher and his department head have not yet thought fit to insist on a formal environmental assessment of the lease area.

NSW Department of Environment and Conservation:

Description

Giant Barred Frogs are large frogs, up to 115 mm in length. They are olive to dark brown above with paler or darker blotches, and cream to pale yellow below. The skin is finely granular. The pupil of the eye is vertical and the iris is pale golden in the upper half and brown in the lower half. The call is a deep ‘ork’ breaking into a series of ‘orks’ and grunts. The Giant Barred Frog can be most easily distinguished from other barred frog species by the black thighs with smaller yellow spots, distinct barring on the limbs, dark blotches on the sides, absence of a creamy stripe on the upper lip and the distinctive eye colour.

Location and habitat

Distribution

Coast and ranges from south-eastern Queensland to the Hawkesbury River in NSW. North-eastern NSW, particularly the Coffs Harbour-Dorrigo area, is now a stronghold. Considered to have disappeared south of the Hawkesbury and there are no recent records from the Blue Mountains. [my bolding]

Habitat and ecology

• Giant Barred Frogs forage and live amongst deep, damp leaf litter in rainforests, moist eucalypt forest and nearby dry eucalypt forest, at elevations below 1000 m.
• They breed around shallow, flowing rocky streams from late spring to summer.
• Females lay eggs onto moist creek banks or rocks above water level, from where tadpoles drop into the water when hatched.
• Tadpoles grow to a length of 80 mm and take up to 14 months before changing into frogs. When not breeding the frogs disperse hundreds of metres away from streams. They feed primarily on large insects and spiders.

Threats

• Reduction in water quality, from sedimentation or pollution.
• Changes in water flow patterns, either increased or decreased flows.
• Reduction of leaf-litter and fallen log cover through burning.
• Timber harvesting and other forestry practices.
• Vegetation clearance.
• Predation on eggs and tadpoles by introduced fish.
• Weed spraying close to streams.
• Chytrid fungal disease.

Antarctic: When is the Government of Japan going to get its priorities straight?

Photograph from Hervey Bay Tourist Centre

When is the Government of Japan going to get its priorities straight?  Hopefully before 2013. Its state-sponsored whale killers must be must be near a financial bottom of the ocean by now.

News.com.au March 9, 2012:

JAPAN has ended this season's whale hunt in the Antarctic Ocean having caught less than a third of its original target, the Fisheries Agency says.

Japanese whalers killed 266 minke whales and one fin whale, the agency said, well below the roughly 900 they had been aiming for when they left Japan in December.

The West Australian March 9, 2012:

The Japanese whaling fleet has pulled out of the Southern Ocean and is heading home three weeks before the whale hunt was scheduled to end.
The Japanese consul in Perth and the Institute of Cetacean Research have both confirmed the whalers are heading back to Japan.

Japanese whalers receive setback in U.S. Court

FRESNOBEE7: AP - In this photo taken on Sunday, Feb. 12, 2012 and released by Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, the Japanese whaling vessel Yushin Maru No. 2 shoots its water cannons at the Sea Shepherd crew on a inflatable boat during an encounter by the whalers and anti-whaling activists in the Antarctic Sea. (AP Photo/Sea Shepherd, Billy Danger

JOINT MEDIA RELEASE

The Institute of Cetacean Research / Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha

17 February 2012

Joint Statement on Court ruling by the U.S. District Court

The Institute of Cetacean Research and Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha Ltd. are disappointed that the Court did not award a Preliminary Injunction that would prevent Sea Shepherd from physically attacking their vessels during the current research season.

The Institute of Cetacean Research and Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha Ltd. will study the details of the ruling once it is issued. The court has not yet issued a ruling on Sea Shepherd’s motion to have the case dismissed.

The Institute of Cetacean Research and Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha Ltd. are now evaluating their options to ensure safety at sea in the future.

For more information contact: Gavin Carter, Washington, DC: +1-571-243-6030

'Steve' Gulaptis MP - Wannabe Koala Killer

When I first heard on the grapevine that Nats MP for Clarence Chris Gulaptis was going to honour one particular so-called promise of that notorious speedster and disgraced former Clarence MP Steve Cansdell I was gobsmacked.

Last Saturday The Daily Examiner confirmed the gossip – Gulaptis is asking NSW Roads and Maritime Services “to review the speed limit on Iluka Road within the next two months, with a view to returning the limit to 100kmh from its present 80kmh”.

For the sake of cutting 2-3 minutes off a journey into or out of the sleepy little coastal village of Iluka, former land developer Gulaptis wants to risk local wildlife – including the increasing rare coastal emu and koala populations.

I’m betting fellow Nat and Roads and Ports Minister Duncan Gay is probably endorsing this move. He doesn’t have a clue about this local road or how the Lower Clarence feels about its wildlife and I'm sure Gulaptis will be careful to keep it that way.

Grandpa Koala's response to this irresponsible political vandal:

ABC Radio NSW Sound & Reference Library - Koala - grunting and growling Powered by abmp3 search engine

One of the first really bad ideas of 2012?

From ABC TV AM program on January 13, 2012:

STEVEN GAINES: Scientists determine what the maximum sustainable harvest (of whales) could be and then the maximum quota. Shares for that quota would be allocated around to both countries and interests that want to whale and countries and interests that want to see whaling ended. Then it becomes a tradable market.

The article which raised this idea again - Whales for Sale

A reminder of the 2008 Federal Court of Australia ruling against Japanese whaling in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1519 OF 2004

BETWEEN: HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL INC

Applicant

AND: KYODO SENPAKU KAISHA LTD

Respondent

JUDGE: ALLSOP J

DATE OF ORDER: 15 JANUARY 2008

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

1. THE COURT DECLARES that the respondent has killed, injured, taken and interfered with Antarctic minke whales (Balaenoptera bonaerensis) and fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus) and injured, taken and interfered with humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) in the Australian Whale Sanctuary in contravention of sections 229, 229A, 229B and 229C of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth), (the “Act”), and has treated and possessed such whales killed or taken in the Australian Whale Sanctuary in contravention of sections 229D and 230 of the Act, without permission or authorisation under sections 231, 232 or 238 of the Act.

2. THE COURT ORDERS that the respondent be restrained from killing, injuring, taking or interfering with any Antarctic minke whale (Balaenoptera bonaerensis), fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus) or humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) in the Australian Whale Sanctuary, or treating or possessing any such whale killed or taken in the Australian Whale Sanctuary, unless permitted or authorised under sections 231,n232 or 238 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth).

Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

Reasons for Judgement

Ramifications of Judgement

Is the Japanese whaling fleet overfishing the Antarctic?

From IWC Report of the Scientific Committee 2011

On July 25, 2007 a The Sydney Morning Herald article stated :

Japan's whaling research body, the Institute of Cetacean Research, today said 91.6 per cent - or 262 of the 286 mature female minkes taken during the last hunt - were pregnant.

In June 2011 the International Whaling Commission (IWC) REPORT OF THE SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE 2011 addressed the issue of declining Minke Whale stocks in the Antarctic:

WHALE STOCKS……..

Two different methods for estimating Antarctic minke whale abundance from these data have been developed in recent years (see below) and although they gave different estimates of abundance, both were consistent in showing an appreciable decline in estimated circumpolar abundance between CPII and CPIII……..

It is clear from Table 5 that while circumpolar Antarctic minke whale abundance estimates have declined during the period from CPII to CPIII, there are substantial differences in relative changes between Areas, with only relatively moderate increases or declines in some Areas, but appreciable declines in others (Table 6). No significant decline is seen in Areas III, IV and VI, whilst estimated abundance is substantially lower in CPIII for Areas I, II and V. Areas II and V encompass the Weddell and Ross Seas

As noted above, large declines in estimates of Antarctic minke whale abundance occurred in Areas I, II and V (there were no statistically significant changes in the other three Areas). The Committee agrees that these declines do indeed reflect genuine changes in abundance in the open-water areas surveyed that need to be explained. Such changes may be due to changes in distribution or reflect a true decline (or some combination of both)……

There are two classes of explanation for possible true declines in abundance. The first, quantitative approach involves the population dynamics statistical catch-at-age analyses (SCAA) from Area III East to VI West, which can potentially account for the changes in overall abundance in terms of variations over time in mortality and recruitment (note that this may explain how but not why changes occurred). The second, less quantitative approach involves attempts to identify mechanisms whereby mortality and recruitment may have changed (e.g. ecosystem effects, interspecies competition, climate changes, etc.).

It may be time to reflect on the fact that one of the management areas identified in the IWC report as experiencing an agreed marked decline in minke whale numbers is also one of those areas in which Japan’s whale fleet has actively hunted these whales, for at least twelve austral summer seasons during its approximately twenty-three year history of Antarctic commercial whaling conducted under the guise of scientific research.

During that time Japanese research documents show that the fleet has consistently taken both lactating and pregnant minke females.

From Polar Biology, Vol 31, Number 12

Click on image to enlarge

The Government of Japan’s whaling fleet is heading towards its Southern Ocean killing grounds as I write.

During the 2011/12 season the inappropriately named Institute of Cetacean Research will sponsor so-called ‘lethal research’ on as many as 930 minke whales and possibly a handful of fin whales and even humpbacks according to Japan Times Online on 11 December 2011. The IWC's own documents clearly indicate that the whaling fleet again intends to operate in one of the management areas showing significant minke whale decline.

One of the reasons why Japan thumbs its nose at Australia and continues to slaughter whales in the Southern Ocean?

A Japanese ship injures a whale with its first harpoon.

 It took three harpoon attempts to kill the mammal.

Photograph: Kate Davidson/EPA/Corbis,

The Guardian UK December 14, 2011

Perhaps this is the answer to the puzzle of why, in the face of ongoing Australian opposition, the Government of Japan (under the guise of research) continues to needlessly kill whales in Antarctica for a dwindling domestic whale meat market – it thinks it owns us.

According to the Australian Parliament’s About the House Magazine in December 2011:

Japan [is] ranked as Australia’s third largest source of merchandise imports in 2010 (after China and the United States), worth $18.2 billion. The automotive sector dominates this trade, with Australia constituting the third-biggest market for new passenger motor vehicles manufactured in Japan.

The economic relationship between Australia and Japan is not only about trade. Japan has been Australia’s third largest foreign investor for many years (after the United States and the United Kingdom). The total stock of Japanese investment in Australia at the end of 2010 was $117.6 billion, almost twice as large as that of China (including Hong Kong). When both trade and investment are included – and taking account of both the depth and breadth of that investment, which has been critical to the development of Australia’s most important industries – Japan could still be considered to be Australia’s most important economic partner overall.

Japanese demand for Australia’s resources – and the accompanying investment – has contributed enormously to the development of Australia’s mining industry. In the area of agriculture, over 40 per cent of ‘Aussie beef’ imported into Japan comes from Japanese-owned farms in Australia. Kirin Holdings now owns Australia’s largest dairy company, as well as some of Australia’s largest beer producers. In the field of manufacturing, Toyota not only exports passenger vehicles to Australia, but – through its in-country production facilities – is also the largest producer of these vehicles in Australia. Furthermore, Japanese investment is increasingly targeted at using Australia as a springboard into the emerging economies of Asia. Japanese investment has been remarkable for its breadth, continuity and steady expansion over time, regardless of fluctuations in the global economic situation.

Australians can noticeably alter this scenario if enough individuals refuse to purchase goods imported from Japan or goods produced by Japanese–owned companies operating in this country, for as long as Japan acts as an inhumane environmental vandal in the Southern Ocean.



Japan the Unspeakable

Whale image from RealPhoto


ABC News 6 December 2011:

Harpoon ships from Japan's whaling fleet have left their home port and could now be heading towards the Antarctic for this year's hunt.

Japan says it is going ahead with the expedition despite falling demand for whale meat.

Paradise lost in Maclean

A letter to the editor in The Daily Examiner November 19, 2011:

Paradise lost
I'M visiting the Clarence area, having been away for some time.
I'm appalled at the lack of re-vegetation of the Maclean Rainforest Reserve, the amount of trimmings and vegetation removal in the high school area and the resulting movement of the flying fox camp to the gully/sub station area.
I was a member of the Maclean Rainforest Reserve Trust before the 1999 dispersals and I remember having a conversation with one of the residents of Harwood St, who stated from experience, that flying foxes had used the gully area in the past at times of dispersal/disturbance.
At the time, no one planning the dispersal would take any notice of this statement.
The "belief de jour" was that the disturbed flying foxes would move to Yaegl Nature Reserve - known then as Farlow's Swamp - despite the fact that there was no evidence that this was so.
The residents of the gully are certainly currently living daily with the results of this decision.
All evidence at the time stated that flying foxes are best managed in their original camp site.
I don't know what it takes to make those in authority take notice of evidence and consequences before they make decisions that others are going to have to live with.
They obviously use other criteria to make their decisions.
I wish I knew what they were.
It's interesting to note that Chris Gulaptis, who led the Maclean flying fox disturbance regime, is once again standing in the position of decision-maker for the people of this area.
I wonder if he ever reflects on the consequences of that earlier decision.
It certainly worked well for him, jump-starting his political career.
But the residents of the gully and a threatened species have not been so fortunate.

Carole West

Port Macquarie

Photograph from Google Images

O'Farrell Government exposes itself as a ship of fools

The Hon Robyn Parker, Minister for the Environment, and Minister for Heritage, exposes the level of her incompetence concerning matters affecting the NSW North Coast.NSW Parliament Legislative Council Environment and Heritage Committee - Estimates Hearing, 27 October 2011

Dorrigo Environment Watch on the subject of mining at Wild Cattle Creek

Stuttering Frog

Dorrigo Environment Watch is on a mission to raise community awareness of risks to human and environmental health. The following can be found on its website at

http://www.dorrigoenvironmentwatch.org.au/index.html:

With 70% of NSW under mining exploration licences it seems no place is protected, regardless of known high conservation values and environmental legislation requirements.

There is considerable potential for endangered frogs to be at risk from renewed mining development on the Dorrigo Plateau. The site of the antimony deposit known as Wild
Cattle Creek is well known habitat of a number of rare and threatened frog species, in particular the Giant barred frog (Mixophyes iteratus) listed as nationally endangered
and the Stuttering Frog (Mixophyes balbus) listed as nationally vulnerable. These frogs and their habitat are supposedly protected by the Australian Government’s Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC) and the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC).

Dorrigo Environment Watch has located both the Giant Barred frog and the Stuttering frog in the streams just below the current drilling activity zone. Frog surveys, conducted by DEW members with scientific and environmental education expertise, have been underway since November 2010, with the data validated by an independent frog expert and sent to the DECCW Wildlife Database Unit.

Under the EPBC there are no third party referral procedures for an individual or community group to report these frogs to and it seems that proponents such as Anchor Resources Ltd are required to ‘self assess’ as to whether they would be required to submit ‘notice of an action’ to the Australian Government. Similarly under the NSW Department of Industry and Investment, Anchor Resources drilling program was considered low impact and deemed not to require a ‘Review of Environmental Factors’. DEW considers that both the Australian and NSW Governments are failing in their legislative responsibilities to protect these nationally listed frogs and their habitat. In particular it is concerning how this exploration licence managed to avoid
any environmental assessment under either State or Australian legislation given that a quick Google search of ‘Wild Cattle Creek NSW and frogs’ leads straight to the Government web sites for threatened frog species.

As required under the EPBC Act, DEW has written to the NSW State Government requesting that they notify the Australian Government of the need to trigger the EPBC for this mining development site and for a Review of Environmental Factors to be undertaken.

As yet, the EPBC has not been triggered on any NSW mining exploration licences. Wild Cattle Creek Dorrigo provides both the NSW and Australian Governments an opportunity to use the legislation they have enacted to protect threatened species and to regain a balance of appropriate land use in rural Australia currently dominated by the mining sector.

Giant Barred Frog

Deputy Leader of Opposition Business in the House of Representatives & MP for Cowper betrays the Clarence

From A Clarence Valley Protest on 26 September 2011:

Federal Nationals MP Luke Hartsuyker betrays the Clarence as he aligns himself with the China Shandong Jinshunda mining group

The Federal Nationals Member for Cowper, Luke Hartsuyker, well-known for his lukewarm support of the social, cultural, environmental and economic aspirations of local communities in his electorate, is now aligning himself with the Chinese multinational mining corporation China Shandong Jinshunda Group and its plans to create an antimony mine in an environmentally sensitive section of the Nymboida River catchment (part of the wider Clarence River catchment) which supplies drinking water to people living in the Coffs Harbour City Council and Clarence Valley Shire Council local government areas.

The Australian 21 September 2011:

PLANS by a Chinese company to start exploration drilling for rare earths and gold on the pristine Dorrigo Plateau in NSW has triggered community fears of contamination of the water catchment for Coffs Harbour and nearby Grafton.

Anchor Resources, 96 per cent-owned by the Shandong Jin Shunda Group, wants to start a $2.6 million drilling program around an old antimony mine at Wild Cattle Creek and a gold prospect at nearby Blicks River.

But many local residents fear the drilling is a precursor to the start of large-scale mining that would threaten the crucial Macleay catchment.

More than 100 concerned residents from Dorrigo and nearby Bellinger Valley attended a community meeting at the weekend to vent their concerns and learn more about the mining proposal.

Dorrigo Environment Watch spokeswoman Gwen Hanna said any full-scale mining operation posed unacceptable pollution risks in an area that lies close to the World Heritage listed Dorrigo National Park, a major tourist attraction.

The habitat of three endangered frogs – the Giant Barred, Stuttering and Pouched – lies within the proposed exploration area, Ms Hanna said.

"This area is in a unique environment and we're really concerned that if they do open cut, which they're proposing in addition to open shaft – it's going to be a really serious blot on the landscape," she said.

In addition to pollution fears, she said residents were worried about the prospect of ore-laden lorries travelling through Dorrigo to what would be the most likely processing facility at Hill Grove, near Armidale.

But local National Party member Luke Hartsuyker, the federal MP for Cowper, said any plans to resume mining on the plateau would create up to 60 jobs in a hard-pressed rural economy.

"This not an Olympic Dam," Mr Hartsuyker said referring to the South Australian mine site containing the world's largest known single deposit of uranium.

Antimony is used in the manufacture of fire retardants, plastics, medical applications and next generation computer memory drives. Demand for the metal is so strong, its price has rocketed from $4000 a tonne in 2006 to $16,000.

Federal Environment Minister Tony Burke told The Australian he was closely monitoring developments.

"If the company was to propose to mine following exploration, it is more likely federal powers would be triggered at that point," he said.

The Coffs Coast Advocate Letters to the Editor 24 September 2011:

Mining catastrophe

It is immensely concerning that the member for Cowper, Mr Luke Hartsuyker, has publicly stated that the 60 jobs that will potentially be created through the establishment of an antimony mine at Wild Cattle Creek by Anchor Resources and its owner, China Shandong Jinshunda, will be a good thing for our regional economy.

This is because the tourism industry down the Clarence River (rafting, fishing and swimming), the southern-most cane growing lands in Australia and the nationally renowned and highly valuable prawn fishery at the mouth of the Clarence River will all be heavily impacted should this mine proceed.

These major industries underpin the economy of our region.

Furthermore, our three-year-old regional water supply, in which Coffs Harbour and Clarence Valley Councils have invested approximately $200 million, faces a great risk because of the toxic antimony, arsenic and mercury known to exist within the ore body that China Shandong Jinshunda seeks to mine.

On March 31, 2009, approximately 900mm of rainfall fell on the mine site.

There is nothing that can be done to capture all run-off in such extreme rainfall events.

It is inevitable that the Clarence River will be polluted should this mine proceed.

At a meeting yesterday at Coffs Harbour City Council chambers, the managing director of Anchor Resources, Mr Ian Price, stated that the lifespan of the mine will be measured in years, not decades.

Please explain your reasoning for supporting this mine on economic grounds, Mr Hartsuyker?

Councillor Mark Graham

What is galling about Mr. Hartsuyker's support for this mining venture is the admitted short life of this mine and the small number of jobs it will create in the Coffs Harbour-Dorrigo area (a possible sixty jobs of less than ten years duration) when set beside the enduring environmental and health dangers it will leave behind for a significant portion of the Clarence River catchment area.

Especially since ongoing antimony contamination of water bodies and land protected by Environmental Planning Instruments is not unknown from previous mining ventures in northern NSW.

The Macleay Argus 2 September 2011:

HIGHER than average levels of heavy metals have been recorded in the Macleay River at Bellbrook after a dam overflowed at a gold and antimony mine near Armidale.

NSW Health and Kempsey Shire Council said higher than normal levels of metals including arsenic, zinc and copper had been detected in the waters of the Macleay River.

But both organisations said the concentration of the heavy metals was not high enough to warrant concern to people.

As a precaution NSW Health has contacted residents in the upper Macleay to inform them not to drink water from the river unless it has been processed through the Bellbrook water treatment plant.

Council has undertaken further testing to determine whether the contamination has spread beyond Bellbrook….

The Office of Heritage and Environment (OHE) reported the breach occurred on Tuesday when there was a release of material from a sediment erosion control dam at the Hillgrove antimony and gold mine.

"The mine is currently not operating but is in 'care and maintenance' mode," a spokeswoman said.

"The spill occurred after continued wet weather produced excess stormwater which exceeded the amount of water that could be stored in the dam resulting in the spill - when the mine is operating the stormwater would normally have been used for mineral processing."

NSW Office of Environment and Heritage Media Release 5 July 2010:

Straits (Hillgrove) Gold Pty Limited has been fined $50,000 and ordered to pay costs of $24,000 in the NSW Land and Environment Court today after being found guilty of polluting waters.

Straits pleaded guilty to the charge; pollution of water under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act.

The company 'Straits' conducts gold and antimony mining activities at the Hillgrove Mine, near Armidale in NSW.

In sentencing today, Justice Biscoe convicted and fined Straits $50,000 and ordered it to pay the prosecutor's legal costs of $24,000.

The court heard that in April 2009 a protective bund at the premises had been lowered to allow access for an electrical contractor. When a screening device used in the mine became blocked and 'slimes' discharged and spilled into the bunded area, it then overflowed the bund and discharged into the local environment.

The spill, of up to 3000 litres of 'slimes,' contained antimony, arsenic and lead and is toxic to some aquatic life.

Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW), Director General, Lisa Corbyn said the penalty provided a timely reminder to companies that they must ensure measures are in place to contain pollution.

"This case highlights the potential for serious damage to occur and highlights the importance of companies having safeguards and operating procedures in place to control pollution at all times. Carelessness meant that simple containment structures which could have prevented the spill from leaving the mine site were not in place. Fortunately the environmental harm from this particular spill was low.

"Importantly, the company did report the spill to the DECCW Environment Line and cooperated with the DECCW officers throughout the investigation."

Anyone who sees pollution is urged to contact the Environment line on 131 555.

Bellingen Shire Council State of the Environment Report 2009-2010:

Urunga antimony processing site

A seriously contaminated site has been identified at Urunga, Portions 138 & 169 Parish of Newry. Contamination also affects adjacent Crown Land and a SEPP 14 wetland. The site was previously used for antimony ore processing, since abandoned without rehabilitation of the site. DECCW have undertaken an investigation of the site and researched remediation options.

General

Council maintains records of properties known to be affected by contamination. Council must consider the requirements of the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997 and State Environmental Planning Policy 55 – Remediation of Land in assessing proposed changes to the use of land.

Antimony and arsenic dispersion in the Macleay River catchment, New South Wales: a study of the environmental geochemical consequences February 2007:

A baseline geochemical study of stream sediments and waters of the Macleay River catchment in northeastern New South Wales indicates that although most of the catchment is unaffected by anthropogenic or natural inputs of heavy metals and metalloids, the Bakers Creek - trunk Macleay-floodplain system has been strongly affected by mining-derived Sb and As. The dispersion train from the Hillgrove Sb - Au mining area to the Pacific Ocean is over 300 km in length. Ore and mineralised altered rock from Hillgrove contains vein, breccia-hosted and disseminated stibnite, arsenopyrite, pyrite and traces of gold. Historic (pre-1970) mine-waste disposal practices have resulted in high to extreme contamination of stream sediments and waters by Sb and As for ∼50 km downstream, with high Au values in the sediments…..

Estimates of sediment migration rates and amounts of Sb and As transported in suspension and solution imply that the catchment contamination will be long-term (centuries to millennia) such that environmental effects need to be ascertained and management strategies implemented…

[Ashley, P. M.; Graham, B. P.; Tighe, M. K.; Wolfenden, B. J  in Australian Journal of Earth Sciences, Volume 54, Number 1, February 2007 , pp. 83-103(21)]

Water body in antimony contamination area Urunga 2011

Dorrigo Environment Watch has online links for further information concerning antimony and the NSW North Coast.

Beating up on bats has become the favourite pastime of the environmentally ignorant

"The stink is so bad it wakes us at night and we can't open the windows of a day.”

“…I'm always cleaning bat poo off the patio..”
"rodents"

“…. they have to be eradicated,"

"In the summertime, kids swim in there. Quite frankly, their health is at risk,"

These are selected quotes given by the pair pictured above (and a handful of unidentified neighbours) when interviewed in The Mainbrace, Yamba by The Daily Examiner on 19 September 2011.

Sounds like a terrible state of affairs having what is probably a seasonal flying fox camp in a very large reserve on the opposite side of the road, doesn’t it?

The reality is somewhat different. No street thick with guano, no terrible smell, flying foxes roosting to the middle of the wide reserve and not in the trees and shrubs adjoining the footpath and, even at high tide no area suitable for swimming as the reserve is predominately mudflats and marsh with a heavily silted up creek running through its centre.

The clean street

The flying foxes (zoom lens)

Some of the trees at the reserve edge with no flying foxes

A section of marsh