'Mr. Monsanto' bravely soldiers on through hyperspace

It seems that biotech/chemical giant Monsanto just can't help itself recently. It has to have a daily peek at North Coast Voices.

Not once, not twice, but three times it visited in the early hours of yesterday morning our time.

And, bless its sweet little toes, even some of those commenting on our posts were pursued back through hyperspace to see where they came from.

What is fascinating about Monsanto's obsessive blog monitoring is that it is inadvertently networking Australians who have concerns about genetically modified crops and food, but who haven't sought to contact others before.

North Coast Voices remains very happy to indulge 'Mr. Monsanto', so here is a little something for the 'employee extraordinaire' to read today.

Monsanto's U.S. website helpfully provides a little financial information on share performance.

In the spirit of ethical investing, perhaps readers world-wide might check their portfolios for Monsanto stock and adjust accordingly.

One has to wonder if Monsanto will continue to enjoy investor confidence, in light of the fact that not only has consumer resistance obliged it to try and off-load its dairy synthetic hormone business this year - last year the U.S. Patent Office reviewed and rejected four of its existing GM patents and the European Patent Office revoked a GM soyabean patent.

See here for previous post about Monsanto's monitoring.

Crikey takes a tilt at political opinion polls

From Crikey yesterday.

Today's Crikey poll has revealed that almost 20% of Australian voters would like to see A Presentable Fellow With A Nice Hat as the next leader of the federal Liberal Party.
The poll, which closed at 9.30am today, sampled the views of 588 respondents, with A Presentable Fellow With A Nice Hat garnering 19.2% of the vote, just ahead of Kevin Rudd's Cat with 18.7%

Poor Brendan Nelson's hair only scored 5.60% of the vote, thereby coming in second last.

Full poll table here.

The sports industry is full of Oliver Twists

I let my digits loose on Google late yesterday afternoon to find out why "athletes need more funding".
Suddenly the computer screen was filled with bitches, moans and groans from Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Britain and whatever sporting rep could get themselves published on the subject.

Each and every one yelling about standards, inequalities and the overwhelming need for government to fork out more money so that every Tom, Dick and Harriett could turn themselves in top-notch professional athletes.

Well I'll be b*ggered if I will agree that government should do more for these jocks.

There are still too many people living in poverty in Australia, health services which are spread too thin, inadequate community care of the very young and very old, and vast inequalities in access to decent education.

So to everyone from the Australian Olympic Committee, Institute of Sports, down to Alan Thompson and the newest Olympian - don't even think of bringing the begging bowls out after the Aussie teams come back from Beijing.

Your gold, silver and bronze just don't stack up against the real problems this country has to fix and Federal Sports Minister Kate Ellis would be mad to ask for more money for her portfolio which already has a budget of around $260 million.

Saddest baby whale in the deep blue sea: photos

Colin, the abandoned or orphaned baby humpback whale discovered trying to suckle from a yacht at Pittwater in Sydney Harbour this week.

International operation to save stranded baby humpback

Link to video

Photos from The Daily Telegraph and NECN

Spectre of the death of grass: GMO licenses in Australia

If one traces back to historical origin most of the world's cereal crops, one finds that they were first wild grasses either native to specific areas or more widely spread across regions.

One of the fears about genetically modified organisms (GMO) is the possibility of contamination and weakening of the genetic material of traditional grains used for commercial cropping.
My principal fear has always been that GMOs would make their way into grasses and go on to weaken the genetic robustness of both wild and cultivated varieties.

The death of grass is one possibility for a continent such as Australia if things go badly wrong (after all the country has a history of introduced biological controls getting out of hand and introduced plants/animals overwhelming native habitat/populations).

Australia has moved one step closer to being vulnerable to this scenario, with limited GM Canola crops due for harvest next month and the consideration of licenses to test plant:

• GM White Clover in Corowa Shire, NSW.
• GM Perennial Ryegrass and Tall Fescue at Southern Grampians local government area, Victoria
• GM Maize in the ACT

The Office of the Gene Technology Regulator is also considering a license for GM Torenia, a flowing creeper which has only been commercially available here for about 5 years but which has already become a non-indigenous weed in parts of Africa, USA and Asia.

Of further concern is the test plot application for GM Sugarcane in Burdekin, Caboolture, Hitchinbrook, Cairns, Bunderberg and Mackay areas of Queensland, along with further GM Cotton plots in Narrabri, NSW and Balranald, Bourke, Central Darling, Carathool, Coonamble, Hay, Lachlan, Lake Tandou, Moree Plains, Narrabri, Narromine, Walgett and Warren; Queensland shires of Balonne, Brisbane, Chinchilla, Jondaryan, Murilla, Paroo, Pittsworth, Tara, Toowoomba, Waggamba and Wambo; and the Western Australia shire of Wyndham-East Kimberley.

Unsurprisingly, amongst the named applicants are GM seed giants, Monsanto and Bayer.

Some of these limited GMO release applications are listed as having been open to submissions to OGTR before consent is granted.
Now I didn't see any newspaper advertisements notifying these applications - did you?

Given the importance of sugar crops to parts of the NSW Northern Rivers, it is time we all became more vigilant concerning the introduction of genetically modified material into Australia.

P.S. A little light reading for 'Mr. Monsanto'.

GENETICS AND GEOGRAPHY OF WILD CEREAL DOMESTICATION IN THE NEAR EAST

List of Victoria's top chefs opposed to GM food

Greenpeace on the GM-free Chefs Charter and online petition to the Rudd Government

What are you waiting for Iemma - Noah's Ark?

Now a boffin from the Commonwealth Department of Climate Change and a proff from the ANU are warning us all that sea levels may rise even further than expected before the century ends.

 

With "700,000 homes located within 3km of the coast and less than six metres above sea level" Australia is running out of time.

 

News.com.au reported:

"Speaking on the first day of the Coast to Coast 2008 Conference in Darwin, Dr Mummery said there were "major information gaps'' in Australia.

Preliminary modelling has found that if there is a rise in sea levels, 269,505 houses could be at risk in NSW and 2,875 houses in the NT.

Dr Mummery - from the federal government's Department of Climate Change - said a rise of only one metre could put a number of Gold Coast properties at risk and impact on canal development."

 

You don't have to be Einstein to see how things might shape up for the NSW North Coast on these projections.

So where're the maps, Morrie?

We know you have them - fork 'em over so we can all plan an orderly retreat from the sea if need be.

Coastal developers, take note

A piece hidden away in The Sydney Morning Herald (Tuesday 19 August 2008) should be compulsory reading for all persons associated with local government, and especially those in coastal areas of Australia.

The Herald reports:

Sea levels thwart new homes
A decision by Victoria's Civil and Administrative Tribunal to overturn a South Gippsland Shire approval for six new homes because of the potential effect of rising sea levels could have ramifications for coastal areas around Australia. The tribunal found a "reasonably forseeable risk" of inundation, which it deemed unacceptable.

EnviroInfo has this to say about the decision:

Environment Defenders Office Victorian Principal Solicitor, Brendan Sydes, says the tribunal’s decision that the likelihood of sea level rises should be considered by councils when making planning decisions could have significance within Victoria and nationally.

Mr Sydes says VCAT’s decision may be an indication of the approach planning tribunals nationally could take when considering planning decisions made in coastal areas.

The case before VCAT involved the assessment of six planing permits granted by the regional South Gippsland Shire Council for dwellings located in a farming zone close to the coast.

In making its decision to overturn the council’s planning approval of the dwellings, VCAT considered the potential impact of sea level rises caused by climate change on the proposed developments.

To this end, the tribunal found increases in the severity of storm events and rising sea levels would create a “reasonably foreseeable risk” of inundation of the land and proposed dwellings, which VCAT deemed to be “unacceptable”.

While the tribunal noted the relevance of climate change considerations to planning decision-making processes is presently in an “evolutionary phase”, it concluded that sea level rise and the risk of coastal inundation are “relevant matters to consider in appropriate circumstances”.

The tribunal said climate change would lead to extreme weather conditions beyond the historical record that planners rely on when assessing the potential future impact on proposed developments.

Read the VCAT’s decision here.