Peter Garrett

http://www.growthcentres.nsw.gov.au/strategicassessment-94.html

This is very late notice, but public comments close tomorrow (Friday 25th June) at 5pm on a very important NSW Government Report. This report authored by the NSW Planning and DECCW is required by Peter Garrett's Environment Dept who is doing a Strategic Assessment of the Sydney Growth Centres. The Strategic Assessment if approved by Peter Garrett means that development proposals affecting matters of national environmental significance will not need to be referred to him for approval. It is a broad brush approval to 27,000 hectares of Western Sydney and replicates at a Federal level what NSW has already done with their Biodiversity Certification of the Growth Centres.

Within the Growth Centres nearly 1900 ha of veg listed on Garrett's EPBC Act is to be bulldozed therefore requiring his consideration of that destruction

The documents on the Growth Centres website are massive but from what we can see we must reject what is proposed outright

Some of you may recall that the NSW Gov had committed $530 million to a Growth Centres Conservation Fund with 25% to be spent within the Growth Centres and 75% outside but within the Cumberland Plain. We were promised this would herald a new era for conservation on the Cumberland Plain (Western Sydney). This report however has suddenly shifted the goal posts and appears to be cynical move by the NSW Gov to win approval from Peter Garrett for the Growth Centres development. Suddenly 70% of the 75% (some $280 million) is going to be directed towards protecting only matters of national environmental significance (EPBC listed veg). This means that thousands of hectares of bushland that is not listed on Garrett's EPBC Act has been abandoned by the NSW Gov, areas such as the Castlereagh Woodlands claimed by the Deerubbin Land Council (who wish to develop these areas)

The double whammy is that this report now makes a huge emphasis on taking that funding outside the Cumberland Plain and spending it protecting bushland in the Sydney Bioregion. Meaning hundreds of km's out of Western Sydney and even across the Great Dividing Range. The report is arguing that protecting Western Sydney veg including Cumberland Plain Woodland (which is EPBC listed) may be too expensive and best value can by obtained outside the Cumberland Plain. They then argue that Grassy Woodlands within the Sydney Bioregion are scientifically similar to CPW.

This report is a disaster for Western Sydney and you need to send an urgent email to: [email protected] with subject draft Sydney Growth Centres Strategic Assessment Report and draft Sydney Growth Centres Program Report

Simply state;

* I oppose the report.
* The ecological assessment of the Growth Centres by the NSW Government is flawed and grossly inadequate
* The Federal Environment Minister must demand the Growth Centres be properly ground truthed before making his decision
* The Federal Environment Minister demand that all Western Sydney Priority Conservation Lands by ground truthed before making his decision
* That all of the $530 million Growth Centres Conservation fund must be spent within Western Sydney protecting the DECCW Western Sydney Priority Conservation Lands as per the draft Cumberland Plain Recovery Plan
* That the NSW Government use compulsory acquisition as a means to conserve Western Sydney Priority Conservation Lands
* That the Federal Environment Minister not be party to using Growth Centres Conservation funding to protect matters of national environmental significance outside the Cumberland Plain. The offsetting of the clearing of EPBC listed vegetation within the Sydney Growth Centres is to occur by protecting Western Sydney Priority Conservation Lands
* That the NSW and Federal Govt's ensure the protection and conservation of the former Crown Lands claimed by the Deerubbin Local Aboriginal Land Council

Anything you can send will help

Regards
Geoff

The Red Kangaroo and Emu that support the shield are the official animal emblems of the nation. They owe this recognition to the fact that they are native Australian fauna (found only on this continent).

...and then we go and massacre them.

The 2008 Belconnen Massacre - lest we forget

We are reminded of the brutal belconnen massacre of 500 kangaroos yesterday two years ago on 19th May 2008, followed shortly afterwards with another 4000 or so kangaroos massacred at the Majura Army training area. "Kevin Rudd or Environment Minister Peter Garrett declined to stop the killings. It was supported by the RSPCA's Micheal Linke." ['Two years since the shameful Belconnen slaughter in Canberra']

Then around this time last year Australia's Defence Minister, Joel Fitzgibbon MP, approved a similar kangaroo massacre at the same place on Saturday, 9th May 2009. [Fitzgibbon's Massacre - 9th May 2009]

These wildlife massacres reflect a prevaling backward colonial attitude by our government towards native animals. Native animals were regarded as vermin by early colonists. This attitude prevails.

Labor's Big Ecological Lie

At the time, outright propaganda lies were told by government officials and politicians that the kangaroos were starving and the kangaroos threatening native grassland and three threatened species on the site, the striped legless lizards, golden sun moths and Ginninderra peppercress. Read More

Such propaganda is right out of Joseph Goebbles "Big Lie" technique based on the principle that a lie, if audacious enough and repeated enough times, will be believed by the masses. Goebbles' propaganda attacks on the Jewish population culminated in the Kristallnacht assault of 1938, an open and unrestrained pogrom unleashed by the Nazis all across Germany, in which scores of synagogues were burned and hundreds of Jews were assaulted and murdered. [Source]

The truth at Belconnen is that the government wanted new housing estates to go up where the kangaroos lived, so they slaughtered the kangaroos. Simple and brutal as that.

The Truth about the 2008 Belconnen Massacre

Colonist Australia - a history of slaughtering native Australians

The truth across all of Australia through its colonial history right up to recent times, is the government wanted the land where Aborigines lived, so they slaughtered the Aborigines. Simple and brutal as that. Today's 21st century official slaughter of Australian native animals is no different to the official slaughter of Australian native people by European colonists, who treated Aboriginal people as vermin.

The following massacres are shocking testament. Such truths of Australian history remains excluded from the Australian school curriculum. Such truths of Australian ecological present remain excluded from the Australian school curriculum.

[List_of_massacres_of_Indigenous_Australians]

1790 Botany Bay Genocide In December, Governor Arthur Phillip issued an order for "a party...of two captains, two subalterns and forty privates, with a proper number of non-commissioned officers from the garrison...to bring in six of those natives who reside near the head of Botany Bay; or, if that number shall be found impracticable, to put that number to death".

1824 Bathurst Massacre Following the killing of seven Europeans by Aboriginal people around Bathurst, New South Wales, martial law was declared and many Aboriginal people were killed.

1828 Cape Grim Massacre On 10th February in the North west of Van Diemen's Land, now known as Tasmania, four shepherds with musket guns ambushed over 30 Tasmanian Aborigines from the Pennemukeer band from Cape Grim, killing 30 and throwing their bodies over a 60 metre cliff into the sea.

1830 Fremantle Punishment Raid The first official 'punishment raid' on Aboriginal people in Western Australia, led by Captain Irwin took place in May 1830. A detachment of soldiers led by Irwin attacked an Aboriginal encampment north of Fremantle in the belief that it contained men who had 'broken into and plundered the house of a man called Paton' and killed some poultry. Paton had called together a number of settlers who, armed with muskets, set after the Aborigines and came upon them not far from the home. 'The tall savage who appeared the Chief showed unequivocal gestures of defiance and contempt' and was accordingly shot. Irwin stated, "This daring and hostile conduct of the natives induced me to seize the opportunity to make them sensible to our superiority, by showing how severely we could retaliate their aggression." In actions that followed over the next few days, more Aborigines were killed and wounded.

1833-34 Convincing Ground Massacre of Gunditjmara On the shore near Portland, Victoria was one of the largest recorded massacres in Victoria. Whalers and the local Kilcarer Gunditjmara people disputed rights to a beached whale carcass.

1834: Battle of Pinjarra In Pinjarra Western Australia, official records state 14 Aboriginal people were killed, but other accounts put the figure much higher.

1838 Myall Creek Massacre 10 June: 28 people killed at Myall Creek near Inverell, New South Wales. This was the first Aboriginal massacre for which European settlers were successfully convicted. Several colonists had previously been found not guilty by juries despite the weight of evidence and one colonist found guilty had been pardoned when his case was referred to Britain for sentencing. Eleven men were charged with murder but were initially acquitted by a jury. On the orders of the Governor, a new trial was held using the same evidence and seven of the eleven men were found guilty of the murder of one Aboriginal child and hanged. The successful prosecutions resulted in pacts of silence becoming a common practice to avoid sufficient evidence becoming available for future prosecutions. Many large scale massacres were to go unpunished due to this practice.

1838 Waterloo Creek Massacre A Sydney mounted police detachment attacked an encampment of Kamilaroi people at a place called Waterloo Creek in remote bushland.

1838 Faithfull Massacre Benalla -In April of that year a party of some 18 men, in the employ of George Faithful and William Faithfull, were searching out new land to the south of Wangaratta. Then, in the vicinity of, or possibly on, the present townsite of Benalla, it is alleged that a large number of Aborigines attacked the party's camp. At least one Koori and somewhere between eight and thirteen Europeans died in what became known as the Faithfull Massacre. Local reprisals lasted a number of years, resulting in the deaths of up to 100 Aborigines. The reason for the attack is unclear although some sources claim that the men took shots at local Aborigines and generally provoked them.[15] It also seems they were camping on a hunting ground

Additional murders of these people occurred at Warangaratta on the Ovens River, at Murchison (led by the native police under Dana and in the company of the young Edward Curr, who could not bring himself to discuss what he witnessed there other than to say he took issue with the official reports) Other incidents were recorded Mitchelton and Toolamba.

This "hunting ground" would have been a ceremonial ground probably called a 'Kangaroo ground'. Hunting grounds were all over so not something that would instigate an attack. The colonial government decided to "open up" the lands south of Yass after the Faithful Massacre and bring them under British rule. This was as much to try and protect the Aboriginal people from reprisals as to open up new lands for the colonists. The Aboriginal people were (supposedly) protected under British law.

1839 Campaspe Plains Massacre At Campaspe Creek, Central Victoria in May-June saw the genocidal slaughter of the Daung Wurrung and Dja Dja Wurrung people.

Mid 1839 Murdering Gully Massacre Near Camperdown, Victoria saw the genocidal "wiping out" of the Tarnbeere Gundidj clan of the Djargurd Wurrung people.

1830s—1840s Wiradjuri Wars Clashes between European settlers and Wiradjuri were very violent, particularly around the Murrumbidgee. The loss of fishing grounds and significant sites and the killing of Aboriginal people was retaliated through attacks with spears on cattle and stockmen. In the 1850s there were still corroborees around Mudgee but there were fewer clashes. Known ceremony continued at the Murrumbidgee into the 1890s. European settlement had taken hold and the Aboriginal population was in temporary decline.

1865 The La Grange Expedition was a search expedition carried out in the vicinity of La Grange Bay in the Kimberley region of Western Australia led by Maitland Brown that led to the death of up to 20 Aboriginal people. The expedition has been celebrated with the Explorers' Monument in Fremantle, Western Australia.

1868 Flying Foam Massacre - Dampier Archipelago, Western Australia. Following the killing of two police and two settlers by local Yaburara people, two parties of settlers from the Roebourne area, led by prominent pastoralists Alexander McRae and John Withnell, killed an unknown number of Yaburara. Estimates of the number of dead range from 20 to 150.

1874 Barrow Creek Massacre - February (NT): Mounted Constable Samuel Gason arrived at Barrow Creek and a police station was opened. Eight days later a group of Kaytetye men attacked the station, either in retaliation for treatment of Kaytetye women, the closing off of their only water source, or both. Two white men were killed and one wounded. Samuel Gason mounted a large police hunt against the Kaytetye resulting in the killing of many Aboriginal men, women and children - some say up to 90. Skull Creek takes its name from the bleached bones found there long after.

1876 Goulbolba Hill Massacre In Central Queensland thre was a large massacre involving men, women and children. This was the result of settlers pushing Aboriginal people out of their hunting grounds and the Aboriginals being forced to hunt livestock for food. A party of Native Police was sent to "disperse" this group of Aboriginals. This led to the deaths of over 200 Aboriginal people including all the women and children.

1880s-90s Florida Station Massacre In Arnhem Land a series of skirmishes and "wars" between Yolngu and whites occurred. There were several reported massacres at Florida Station. Richard Trudgen also writes of several massacres in this area, including an incident where Yolngu were fed poisoned horsemeat after they killed and ate some cattle (under their law, it was their land and they had an inalienable right to eat animals on their land). Many people died as a result of that incident. Trudgen also talks of a massacre ten years later after some Yolngu took a small amount of barbed wire from a huge roll to build fishing spears. Men, women and children were chased by mounted police and men from the Eastern and African Cold Storage Company and shot.

1884 Battle Mountain Massacre 200 Kalkadoon people killed near Mount Isa, Queensland after a Chinese shepherd had been murdered.

1887 Halls Creek Genocides In the Kimberly, colonist Mary Durack suggests there was a conspiracy of silence about the massacres of Djara, Konejandi and Walmadjari peoples about attacks on Aborigines by white gold-miners, Aboriginal reprisals and consequent massacres at this time. John Durack was speared, which led to a local massacre in the Kimberley.

1890 Speewah Massacre In Queensland early settler, John Atherton, took revenge on the Djabugay by sending in native troopers to avenge the killing of a bullock. Other unconfirmed reports of similar atrocities occurred locally.

1890-1920 'The Killing Times' - East Kimberleys: About half of the Kimberley Aboriginal people massacred as a result of a number of reprisals for cattle spearing, and payback killings of European settlers.

1906-7 Canning Stock Route Massacre : an unrecorded number of Aboriginal men and women were raped and massacred when Mardu people were captured and tortured to serve as 'guides' and reveal the sources of water in the area after being 'run down' by men on horseback, restrained by heavy chains 24 hours a day, and tied to trees at night. In retaliation for this treatment, plus the party's interference with traditional wells, and the theft of cultural artefacts, Aborigines destroyed some of Canning's wells, and stole from and occasionally killed white travellers. A Royal Commission in 1908, exonerated Canning, after an appearance by Kimberley Explorer and Lord Mayor of Perth, Alexander Forrest claimed that all explorers had acted in such a fashion.

1915 Mistake Creek Masacre Seven Kija people were alleged to have been killed by men under the control of a Constable Rhatigan, at Mistake Creek, East Kimberley. The massacre is supposed to be in reprisal for allegedly killing Rhatigan's cow, however the cow is claimed to have been found alive after the massacre had already taken place. Rhatigan was arrested for wilful murder apparently due to the fact that the killers were riding horses which belonged to him, but the charges were dropped, for lack of evidence that he was personally involved.

1918 Bentinck Island Massacre In 1918 part of the Mornington Island group, Bentinck Island was home to the Kaiadilt clan of just over 100 people. In 1911 a man by the name of McKenzie (other names unknown) was given a government lease for nearby Sweers Island that also covered the eastern portion of the much larger Bentinck Island. Arriving on Bentinck with an Aboriginal woman and a flock of sheep, he built a hut near the Kurumbali estuary. Although the Kaiadilt avoided contact and refrained from approaching McKenzie's property he is alleged to have often explored the island, shooting any males he found while raping the women.

In 1918 McKenzie organised a hunt with an unknown number of settlers from the mainland and beginning from the northern tip of the island herded the Indigenous inhabitants to the beach on its southern shore. The majority of the Kaiadilt fled into the sea where those that were not shot from the shore drowned. Those that tried to escape along the beach were hunted down and shot with the exception of a small number who reached nearby mangroves where the settlers horses could not follow. Several young women were raped on the beach, then held prisoner in McKenzie's hut for three days before being released.

1924 Bedford Downs Massacre a group of Kija or Gija men were jailed for spearing a bullock. On release from jail they had to walk the 200 kilometres back to Bedford Downs, where they were set to work to cut the wood that was later used to burn their bodies. Once the work was finished they were fed Strychnine, and the bodies were burned.

1926 Forrest River Massacre In the East Kimberleys in May 1926, Fred Hay, a pastoralist, was speared and killed by an Aboriginal man, Lumbia. A police patrol led by Constables James St Jack and Denis Regan left Wyndham on June 1, to hunt for the killer, and in the first week of July, Lumbia, the accused man, was brought into Wyndham. In the months that followed rumours circulated of a massacre by the police party. The Rev. Ernest Gribble of Forrest River Mission (later Oombulgurri) alleged that 30 people had been killed by the police party. A Royal Commission, conducted by G. T. Wood sent an evidence-gathering party and heard evidence regarding Gribble's allegations. The Royal Commission found that 11 people had been massacred and the bodies burned.

1928 Coniston Massacre - A WW1 veteran shot 32 Aborigines at Coniston in the Northern Territory after a white dingo trapper and station owner were attacked by Aborigines.

Lest we forget.

ADI Site -

Vandals prevail

JK Williams Bulldozers roll over precious woodland habitat

Bulldozers today rolled at the ADI Site in Penrith clearing 6 hectares of the critically endangered ecological community, Cumberland Plain Woodland. The clearing by J K Williams on behalf of developer, Delfin Lend Lease, is the first of 6ha of a total of 360 ha within the Penrith LGA. 3500 lots dwellings, with some up to 6 stories are proposed.

Garrett protects malignant growth lobby project

The news of the clearing has been met with sadness by the many opponents of the development. Recently they called on Peter Garrett the Federal Environment Minister to intervene in the imminent clearing. Peter Garrett was called on to act to overturn a dubious approval decision by the former Howard Govt in 2002 that allows Delfin Lend Lease immunity from Peter Garrett's Federal Environmental Law. Meaning they do not have to refer any development proposals to the Federal Minister for assessment. Peter Garrett was asked to consider, as he is allowed to do under section 207A of his federal environment law, to list additional areas of the sites critically endangered CPW as Critical Habitat.

But correspondence recently received from the Minister in response to that call from the Western Sydney Conservation Alliance indicated a complete lack of political will and an unwillingness to interfere in Delfins development plans.

Geoff Brown, President of the Western Sydney Conservation Alliance Inc., said,

"Peter Garrett could of acted, he has the capacity under his legislation to intervene, but he has turned his back on us and our environment. The reality though is he is just one of many of our political leaders that have done the same. The same is true of Kristina Kenneally who had the opportunity when she was Planning Minister to amend the ADI Site zoning plan. She was called on by WSCA to rezone CPW at the site from urban to conservation. She ignored our calls. So sorry is this ADI story is that the finger of blame must be pointed at hundreds of political leaders across all levels of government. This has been a shameful chapter in the history of Western Sydney one which its residents should never forget".

Keep fighting for what is right!

Brown added:

"People should never give up though. This is just 6 ha's and there are many more approval processes that Delfin need to get in order to get their way. We must take a stand and say enough is enough. In this day and age we should never accept housing that comes at the cost of our critically endangered natural heritage. Everyone should pick up their phones today and speak directly to their local elected representative from Council, State and Federal Government to let them know enough, its just not on anymore. What is happening here at ADI is the thin edge of the wedge and unless we collectively say no to the overdevelopment of our suburbs, this development cancer will move right across Western Sydney and before we know it we will have no bushland, no rural areas and another million people to cope with."

Merciless Moonscaping

Only one tree appears to have been left on the 6 ha site. The massive bulldozers of JK Williams, a local civil engineering firm, remain on the site ready to resume earth works on Thursday

Comments attributed to Geoff Brown President of the Western Sydney Conservation Alliance Inc
0431 222602
www.wsca.org.au

Western Sydney Conservation Alliance
Wednesday 28th April 2010

Despite Southern Bluefin Tuna (Thunnus maccoyii) being endangered, the Australian Government continues its weak policy of appeasing the Japanese - the main poachers and customers of Bluefin Tuna.

The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora is abbreviated ‘CITES’. The Australian federal Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. Government is a signatory to CITES and since and CITES international trade regulations have been enforceable under Australian law since 27 October 1976. Every signatory to CITES is required to designate a management authority. In Australia this is effectively the Threatened Species Scientific Committee.

On 7 September 2005, Australia’s Threatened Species Scientific Committee concluded that the Southern Bluefin Tuna (SBT)... “continues to be overfished despite the international management arrangements which have been formally in place since 1994.”

“The parental biomass is currently in the order of 3 to 14% of that in 1960 (its unfished size). In addition, BRS has classified SBT as being 'overfished' every year since the first BRS fishery status reports were first produced in 1992.

“Stock assessment models have shown a significant historic decline in the biomass of SBT. The mature population of SBT has declined significantly over its last three generations (since the 1980s) and is currently at a very low level.

Therefore, the species is eligible for listing as endangered under Criterion 1.”

The Threatened Species Scientific Committee recommended this to the Australian Government.

Australia’s then Minister for the Environment and Heritage, Senator the Hon Ian Campbell decided against listing the species under the EPBC Act…“as it may weaken Australia's ability to influence both the management of the global fishing effort and the global conservation of the species.”
SOURCE.

CITES COP15 DRAFT RESOLUTION March 2010 on Bluefin Tuna (Thunnus thynnus)

* Fishing capacity is at least double that needed to catch the current legal quota and that recent estimated catches have been four times greater than the maximum catch recommended by scientists to prevent the collapse of the population.

* A 78.4% cut would be needed in the fishing effort by the fleet targeting East Atlantic and Mediterranean Atlantic Bluefin Tuna

* East Atlantic and Mediterranean stock status, fell by 80% in the southern Iberian
Peninsula between 2000 and 2006

* The loss of groups of older fish in the shoals present in the Eastern Atlantic and
Mediterranean fishery and the drastic fall in the reproductive biomass, which is currently only 36% of the level that existed at the beginning of the 1970s, are clear symptoms that this population is in imminent danger of collapse.

CITES has recommended to:

a) establish a science-based recovery plan for the East Atlantic and Mediterranean stock
... and to ban industrial fishing – particularly purse seining- during the entire spawning season (May, June and July)

b) establish immediately an interim suspension of the East Atlantic and Mediterranean bluefin tuna fishery

c) permit resumption of fishing activities only according to the strict science-based ICCAT population-recovery plan

d) set up protection zones for spawning grounds in the Mediterranean, including the waters within the Balearic Sea, Central Mediterranean, and Levant Sea, during the spawning season

The Japanese, consumers of 80% of the world's Bluefin, have rejected the ban and the recommendations, while Australia has not accepted the ban. Australia's federal minister for the environment etc, Peter Garrett, has refused to join the United States and the European Union in seeking a trade ban.

READ: 'Garrett rejects bluefin trade ban' in the Sydney Morning Herald, 13-Mar-2010.

Call to Boycott Japanese Cuisine:

Japanese cuisine includes sashimi, which typically is Bluefin Tuna. Bluefin is the raw fish used in Japanese 'maguro', and 'o-toro' dishes and in many sushi combinations.

The Australian government may pasty to the Japanese, but that doesn't stop ethically driven citizens boycotting Japanese restaurants and sushi shops, which sell raw fish which is typically the critically endangered Bluefin Tuna.

It's time to send a blunt message to the Japanese that their fettish for Bluefin is backward! Some are labelling the plight of Bluefin SUSHICIDE.

With northern bluefin populations falling dramatically, a proposal by Monaco to prohibit sale under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species has won US support, but not Australia's. 

The Atlantic, or northern bluefin tuna has lost 72 per cent to 82 per cent of its original stock is under pressure also from illegal or unregulated fishing for the sashimi trade.

(Photo: Northern Bluefin or Thunnus thynnus)

Japanese, Korean, Indonesian and Taiwanese Bluefin tuna fleets use long line fishing which results in the incidental deaths of thousands of seabirds, particularly petrels and albatross.

However, the Australian Government has decided not to support a global ban on the trade of the northern variety of the bluefin tuna. Instead, the Environment Minister, Peter Garrett, has decided to support stronger trade control measures and fisheries management.
 
Japan, the biggest consumer of the fish, has indicated it may not honour the ban on northern blue fin tuna.  Japan says that bluefin is not facing extinction, but acknowledges that recent rates of exploitation are probably not sustainable.  Sushi is a popular dish in Japan, where fatty bluefin – called o-toro – sells for as much as 2,000 yen (£13) apiece in high-end Tokyo restaurants.  The solution, they insist, is stricter management of fisheries, which have consistently exceeded their own quotas.  They feel their "culture is under threat" - a culture of poaching, bullying and powerful lobbying!

The trade ban would allow individual countries to continue to catch atlantic bluefin tuna for domestic consumption.   Imports from the East Atlantic and Mediterranean, which could be completely shut down by the threatened ban, would reduce Japan's sources of bluefin tuna by about 20 per cent.

(photo: Northern Bluefin)

The northern bluefin fishery has a poor record of compliance with control measures, and Japan  consumes  up to 80% of the world's tuna.  Japan holds the line on whaling and they are also sending a signal that limits on bluefin tuna aren't up for debate either.

 Southern bluefin tuna stocks have also been fished to even more dangerously low levels.  Southern bluefin tuna has long been considered endangered and overfished, yet the Australian Government had not reduced the quota given to the Australian southern bluefin tuna industry since 1989.

The Southern Bluefin Tuna is one of the sea's most impressive creatures. A beautiful and powerful fish, it is well suited to a long life endlessly swimming the open seas.  An adult Bluefin grows to around 200 kg and over 200 cm long. Its close relative, the Northern Bluefin Tuna, Thunnus thynnus, can grow to a massive 700 kg.

Glenn Slant, global marine program leader for TRAFFIC, a program of WWF, put the situation more bluntly last year: The southern bluefin tuna is at an all-time low, below 10 per cent of its original population size, and what that means is at any time it could collapse.

Our Government supports Japan's illegal whaling through non-action, and now they will be supporting their on-going cultural pursuit of tuna-based sushi eating  through non-action and compliance. 

The Australian Government continues to sanction fishing of southern bluefin tuna and perhaps is making this decision to block the protection of northern bluefin because it fears embarrassment that we continue to allow fishing of a critically endangered species in our own neighbouring waters. 

Every indication is that the Bluefin Tuna population is crashing toward extinction, said Felicity Wade from The Wilderness Society last October. While it is heartening to see governments finally acting on its plight, the 20% international cut is inadequate for the crisis the blue fin tuna is facing. Australia had the largest quota reduction .

If we were serious about bringing this fish back from the brink, concluded Ms Wade, the fishery would be completely closed while populations recovered.

Sea Shepherd plans to oppose illegal bluefin tuna fishing in the Mediterranean region and will employ the same hard-line tactics it uses against Japanese whalers in the Antarctic waters, Paul Watson said.

The decision by Peter Garrett, and Japan, makes mockery of "fisheries management" and principles of "sustainability". 

To his credit, NSW Premier, Nathan Rees in the days preceding the 4th December 2009 (his ousting as Premier) announced the creation of a massive new red gum national park along the Murray River near Deniliquin to protect much of the state's remaining river red gum forests from logging.

Loggers have complained because all the 300 year old trees they chainsawed have gone but won't magically grow back, so they want more old red gums trees to chainsaw 'to feed their families' and to 'keep their jobs' and to preserve their 'tight-knit communities' which depend on logging... just like in the 1800s when similar 'tight-knit communities' in Hobart and Albany depended on whaling.

Someone enlightened should play them a DVD on Easter Island's history.

Peter Garrett's decision to stop the building of the Traveston dam is to be heartily applauded. However, he did no more than what should be expected of a Federal Minister for the Environment when faced with such an environmentally reckless proposal.

This is the second significant occasion, that I can recall, on which Garrett has acted in favour of the environment, that is, in other words, treated his statutory obbligations seriously. The other occasion was when he blocked the Bligh Government's similarly environmentally reckless plan to build a coal loader in Shoalwater Bay..

Garrett's overall dismal environmental record

On every other significant issue that I can recall, he has acted against the environment.--- Uranium mining, the Dredging of Port Philip Bay the Tasmanian Pulp Mill, the Car Rally in the environmentally sensitive Tweed and Kyogle Shires, failure to act to protect the Murray Darling system, the building of a massive deslanation plant on Victoria's Bass Coast, the North South pipleline, the overall massive expansion of Australia's coal exports, not to mention his failure to take a visible stance against the Federal Governent's reckless plans to grow our populaiton, etc., etc.

If Garrett's decision is truly a sign of him changing heart back to become the environmentailst he once claimed to be, then we would explect to see him, from now on to act consistently in favour of the environment and to find ways to reverse previous decisions harmful to the environment.

I hope to be proven wrong, but I am not expecting that to occur.

If I am right, then it would be more accurate to conclude that Garrett's decision against the Traveston Dam was the result of a political calculation concerning how much he needs to do for the environment in order to retain any political credibility.

The Save the Mary River Group had no plan B

One alarming aspect of this controversy is that the Save the Mary River Group had no strategy for dealing with an adverse decision from Peter Garrett.

Environmentalists should never put themselves in a position where they have to virtually beg of our political representatives to do the right thing. If the Minister for the Environment does not fear environmental groups such as the Save the Mary Group and does not go out of his way to meet their reasonable demands, then they are not doing their job properly.

Prior to that Save the Mary River Group's principle strategy was to campaign for the Liberal National Party (LNP) and against the Labor Government at the 2009 state elections, thereby alienating many environmentalists who had good reason to be concerned about some of the LNP's poor environmental policies.

The Save the Mary Group explicitly damned the Greens in their election literature for their reluctance to give their preferences to the LNP when the Greens were (for all their considerable faults) at least as consistently agains the dam as the LNP.

With the re-election of the Bligh Government, and a cross-bench not holding the balance of power, that strategy got them nowhere.

In the 2008 local Government elections they failed to back the Integrity Gympie team, which was committed to fully utilising the resources of the Gympie council to fight the dam, and, instead allowed candidates who were prepared only to pay lip service to the fight against the dam, to win.

Astonishingly, in a referendum held in Toowoomba in 2006, anti-dam campaigners, together with the Queensland Greens, campaigned, ultimately unsuccessfully against community activists for the imposition of recycled water by the City Council. As a result, relations between them and a group of people in South East Queensland, who would naturally have been sympathetic towards them have been poisoned ever since, including during the critical 2009 Queensland State elections.₁

At the moment, the Save the Mary River Group can count themselves very lucky that, this time, Peter Garrett's political calculations came down on the side of the environment.

James Sinnamon

Brisbane Independent candidate for
truth, democracy and economic justice,
Australian Federal elections, 2010

Footnotes

1. ↑ For their part, anti-water-recycling and anti-fluoridation campaigners largely reciprocated the Save the Mary Group's counterproductive stance, and this appears to have also harmed, rather than helped them at the ballot box.

Dear lovers of Planet Earth, animals, nature, peace and justice

This happened at a rally in Argentina August 15th 2009

An Injunction is being served on Repco Rally Australia tomorrow Thursday 2.15pm forcing Peter Garrett to call in their ecological survey for review. Please contact the Minister ASAP before then asking him to call in the rally.

There are 12 nationally listed threatened (endangered and vulnerable) fauna in the area and 34 migratory birds that have not been adequately assessed. These are species of national environmental significance that need to be reviewed. Factors such as the stress induced by 'mitigation measures' (low-flying helicopters, compressed air sirens and hand horns) will contribute to death of species from nest/fledgling abandonment. Stress myopathy deaths of macropods were not addressed. Barriers by creeks containing endangered Giant Barred Frogs will not contain the substantial dust and sediment generated by more than 100 rally vehicles going over 200kph along 350k of dirt roads every day for 4 days.

Peter Garrett inaugurates
the Green Cauldron

It is absolutely appalling that this rally has been forced on one of the most biodiverse areas in Australia in breeding season for the next 10-20 years, especially when 2/3rds of them are already endangered! Clearly the Minister for the Environment has a duty to protect our fauna. Australia has the worst reputation in the world for mammal extinctions having driven 38% of its mammals extinct since the early settlers arrived. This is just not good enough!

What you can do:Ask the minister to use his powers and protect the Green Cauldron (that he christened) to cancel this race ASAP.

Tel: (02) 6277 7640
Fax: (02) 6273 6101

Email: [email protected]
Maroubra office
[t] 02 9349 6007
[f] 02 9349 8089

Also send this alert to everyone you know, individuals, animal rights, environmental, wildlife carers groups you know. The above photo is a NASCAR test run that hit a coyote in U.S.A. recently.

Additionally, there are three other events occurring on the Fathers' Day weekend:

1. the Australian Tarmac Challenge http://www.duttonrally.com/new_south_wales_2009.php ,
which is coming up the coast to join in with the WRC special events section.
a quote from their site
" The 2009 Australian Tarmac Challenge will be huge, and kicks off with the Victorian event in May. Entries are now open for all cars, regardless of age or specification, the only requirement is that your vehicle is registered and roadworthy (includes Rally plate cars).

"No experience is necessary, the only prerequisite is that you love your car and love driving! If you’re a first-timer, you might want to read our FAQ section HERE, or email ask and ask anything you like, regardless of how silly you think your enquiry might be."

2. Then there is the Frontier Services Classic Outback trial with another 50 rally cars to run with the WRC on the dirt http://classicoutbacktrial.com.au/cot/Links.asp
quote “With the RRA organizers running Speed on Tweed that same weekend, there will be such a massive motor sport presence in the Murwillumbah and Tweed area that it will be like a mini ‘Goodwood’ and will attract enthusiasts from all over Australia.”

Many wallabies will be in the path of the rally not to mention those who will die from stress myopathy in the weeks following.

3. And then will be the 182 entries for Speed on Tweed .

4. The WRC

Plus all of above's crews and support teams and fans. If you dont like cars then its just bad luck. If you don't being locked in your house unable to get out to go to work, take kids to school, go shopping, go to appointments etc. tough. How much did our dear councils know about that lot????

Learn more at http://www.norallygroup.org - contact us for details at email [email protected], phone (0438) 357 452

What you can do

Please attend protests against the rally

Peaceful protests against the World Rally. Each protest will be a silent vigil. Please remember to bring banners.

When?
There are 5 protest vigils planned:

The Final Ceremony will have live TV coverage, so please make a special effort to bring banners for that protest.

Thanks,
Menkit

The animals thank you ...

See also: Repco Rally route - the calm before the storm of 26 Aug 09, REPCO Rally injunction raced through court up blind alley of 31 Aug 09.

This media release with was received this morning. As an independent candidate for the seat of Mount Coot-tha, I will do my best to raise this critical issue in the remaining weeks of the campaign. If elected, I will put legislation before the Queensland Parliament to outlaw the destruction of any more Koala habitat in South East Queensland. - James Sinnamon, 5 March 2009.

Say Sorry Mr Garrett

The Australian Koala Foundation (AKF) was told yesterday that their nomination for the Southeast Queensland koala population as a critically endangered species under Federal Environment laws would not proceed because "the form had not been filled in correctly."

Despite images of burnt and desperate koalas flooding the world and on the eve of Environment Minister Peter Garrett performing with Midnight Oil this Saturday for bushfire relief - including the famous Sam the Koala - he has turned his back on the koalas that desperately need his support for the protection of habitat in Southeast Queensland.

CEO of the AKF Deborah Tabart OAM is saying Mr Garrett has lost control of his Department or worse still, does know of this decision, which would be even more disturbing.

"The ironic thing is he is the custodian of our koalas and he should be the one telling his bureaucrats to fill in the boxes - we're tired of doing the work for you, Mr Garrett.

"It is outrageous that after the AKF has poured $8 million into science proving the koala is a threatened species, they still find a loophole to avoid protecting it," Ms Tabart said.

"You have to ask, is this because of a too close relationship between political donors and the Rudd Government?

"I am convinced this situation is linked to the upcoming Queensland election and by September 2010, when the listing decision is due, all approvals for infrastructure and development will have been granted by then.

"I am shocked at the lack of compassion of the bureaucrats in Canberra who know that this bureaucratic decision will see the demise of the Southeast Queensland koala population and I want the people of the world to know.

"Our Governments are prepared to watch the Southeast Queensland population go to extinction for their own political gain," Ms Tabart said.

Even if the AKF submits another nomination, it will not be reviewed again until September 2010 despite predictions that the koala could be extinct in Southeast Queensland within just five years.

To find out ways to help the Australian Koala Foundation save our koalas, visit the website at www.savethekoala.com.

Sophia Walter
Public Relations & Communications
Australian Koala Foundation
www.savethekoala.com

GPO Box 2659 Brisbane Qld 4001
Tel: (07) 3229 7233 Fax: (07) 3221 0337
sophia [ AT ] savethekoala.com

See also: "Queensland Government killing koalas for developer dollars" of 12 Aug 09, "Wildlife also bleed, also feel, also lost their homes" of 13 Feb 09, "Development project threatens second largest Koala Colony in Tweed Shire" of 21 Feb 09.

Waratah Coals proposal for a massive mine, railway and Shoalwater Bay Coal port could be given the red light if Environment Minister Peter Garrett uses his existing powers and declares it clearly unacceptable under the provisions of the EPBC act (Section 74 B)

Outraged environmental groups, regional residents and the Australian Greens have all called on the minister to act to protect Queensland's beautiful Shoalwater Bay from the environmentally damaging project to avoid a long and expensive EIS process.

Shoalwater Protection Society spokesman Steve Bishopric said, "There is massive condemnation throughout Australia and locally to this ludicrous proposal. It is unprecedented that one project can trigger 6 out of 7 assessment criteria under the act (only lacking the nuclear component) and it is clearly unacceptable. People need to act immediately as time is almost out for this stage of proceedings. It is critical that those concerned contact the minister to voice their requests for him to declare the proposal unacceptable."

The 1994 Commonwealth Commission of Inquiry into Shoalwater Bay stated the values of this area and risks posed by enviromentally damaging developments in this pristine wilderness.

Specifically it stated:

The area's terrestrial and marine environments represent large and relatively undisturbed habitat areas for significant floral and faunal assemblages, including populations of rare and threatened species. The estuarine and marine sections of the Area contribute to important regional commercial fisheries. The area has a high level of Biodiversity and contains the catchment of the fresh water supply of the Capricorn Coast.

The geomorphological attributes of the eastern dunefields of the Area and the Clinton Lowland contribute significantly to the values of the area and to the Area's National Estate values.

The Area is the largest coastal area with high wilderness values on the East Coast of Australia south of Cooktown and, as such, is regionally and nationally very significant.

The whole of the Area's marine environment is included on the World Heritage list and on the Register of the National Estate; and the majority of it is included in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park.

People do have the right indeed an obligation to advise the minister of what they want for Australia. They should use his contact form on line at www.petergarrett.com.au/8.aspx
Or phone him on 02 62777640 or Fax 02 62736101.

Further information
Steve Bishopric
Spokesman, Shoalwater Protection Society
E-Mail info [AT] shoalwaterbay org
www.shoalwaterbay.org

(pulp mill effluent image on front page is from http://www.surfrider.org/srui.aspx?uiq=a-z/pulp_mills)

Population numbers
Decidedly, the Federal Environment Minister, Peter Garrett, is proving a substantial disappointment on some major environmental group concerns. As President of the Australian Conservation Foundation he infuriated Australians who were concerned about too much population growth in this country by heading an organisation which refused to voice their concerns and failed to uphold its own constitutional policy on population, but would act as if it was representing the Australian public and ACF constitutional values in this matter.

RAMSAR Wetlands
Since becoming Environment Minister, Garrett has outraged the Blue Wedges, a substantial environmental movement in Victoria, centred around the health of Port Phillip Bay because of what they see as his abject failure to protect the bay, including its RAMSAR wetlands areas, and his failure to meet his obligations under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC) Act to consider sustainability principles – including intergenerational equity.

Intergenerational Equity

"How," asks Blue Wedges, "can it be equitable to future generations of humans - and all other species for that matter- to leave a legacy of a toxic dump in the Bay, 60 times larger than the Hattah Nowingi site near Mildura? It is worth remembering that in 2006, the Mildura site was rejected, first by the community and then by an independent planning panel."

EPBC Act
Australian wildlife campaigners had hoped that Garrett in government would intervene to make the EPBC Act more effective. Instead he has relied upon its inherent weaknesses to support more development in and destruction of important environments around Australia. Environmentalists, many who elected him, have found his performance bitterly disappointing. (The Act had never been very strong but had been further watered-down by the Howard Government in 2006 amendments.)

Murray Darling Basin

And his failure to intervene in the Murray Darling Basin South Australia crisis has provoked disgust. Here, as with Port Phillip Bay, RAMSAR wetlands and fragile marine ecosystems are threatened.

The Arts

Yesterday, The Age reported that Garrett, as Minister for the Arts has let down the arts community badly, defending the Rudd Government’s 3.25% funding cut to small public sector agencies, such as the National Gallery of Australia, National Library of Australia and the Australian War Memorial. See: http://news.theage.com.au/national/cultural-institutions-get-enough-money-20080825-41xf.html

Broad agreement that Garrett is a dud

In short there is broad agreement that Garrett is a dud – although calling someone a dud is likely to have one ejected for the House of Representatives (ABC PM tonight – 26-8-08) …..It seems even parliamentary privilege is no protection for robust criticism any more - So much for freedom of speech in this fair land!

Green Senator denied CSIRO research report on Gunns Pulp Mill

On the 21st of August, Senator Christine Milne strongly criticized Garrett’s failure to supply her Freedom of Information request for a CSIRO research report from a member of an independent expert group which has the task of reviewing material submitted by Gunns pulp mill.

Query about pulp mill effluent dumping

According to her press release of 21-8-08, Senator Milne believes that the report relates to “Gunns’ intention to dump 64,000 tonnes of effluent into Bass Strait per day and the probabilities of it exceeding the allowable effluent concentration.”

Garrett's department mired in process?

On 22 August, Garrett, in an ABC Radio National Breakfast interview with Fran Kelly Garrett seemed basically to be saying that his department would not release the report Milne was complaining about because the material in it had not been verified and because there was a process whereby Gunns could be asked to supply more information to clarify the material in the report. One wonders if Garrett was being circumspect because of the possibility that Gunns (famous for having pursued 16 individuals - including Green MPs Bob Brown and Peg Putt - and four green organisations - including the Wilderness Society - for a total $6.3 million damages arising out of protests and campaigns against the company) could sue for defamation if a report led to financial losses and could be shown to be knowingly premature or incomplete.

Senator Milne seems to be indicating in her complaints, that she believes that the report must already be adequately informed.

Deadline for Gunns

In the interview with Fran Kelly of the ABC it was made clear by Garrett that Gunns has until October 4, 2008, to finalise its input into the Government's assessment process. It sounded like Garrett might well give Gunns more time if it requested this.

Both Senator Milne, in her 21 August press release, and Fran Kelly in her 22 August interview with Garrett, described Gunns' as if they were in severe financial difficulty and as if the question of the amount of discharge they might be contemplating was the focus of much speculation in the business community.
Senator Milne: “With Gunns stock in freefall, and rife speculation in the investment community as to the content of scientific studies, this is not the time for the Government to prioritise Gunns’ commercial interest over the public interest."

Fran Kelly: "Yesterday, shares in Gunns were at an eight year low, in fact placed in a trading halt while the company goes out seeking this funding. In the last few weeks doubts have been raised about the future of the pulp mill. Leighton Holdings boss, Wal King, says it will never be built and there are some reports that even the new Tasmanian Premier, David Bartlett is sceptical."

This kind of comment about Gunn's financial situation should, one would think, tend to alleviate any anxiety Mr Garrett might have about the possibility of defamatorily prejudicing Gunns' business outlook by the release of more information.

Milne: Since when does an environment minister protect the interests of big business over those of the public?

Garrett's close-lipped approach on this matter does seem to lend weight to the relevance of Senator Milne's question:

“Since when has the Commonwealth Environment Minister seen himself as the protector of the interests of big business at the expense of the environment and the public interest?"

Changes to defamation laws

For many years it was extremely difficult for the Australian press to report clearly on financial matters because of Australia's defamation laws, which did not support truth in reporting and which could lead to extraordinary costs in court. In those days, even if what you said about a company was true, if that company lost money over your revelation, you might lose any case they brought against you for defamation. This problem is well treated at the end of Trevor Sykes, The Bold Riders, Allen and Unwin, Australia, 1996, for anyone who would like to know more. (Trevor Sykes writes for the Financial Review as Pierpoint.)

Since 2006 these state laws have been largely harmonised and made much more reasonable, with truth a very strong defense and the public interest a non-qualifier or at most a minor qualifier. There are also limitations on costs and processes (articulated or implied through precedent) to increase motivation to mediate rather than to sue. The very unpopular Howard Government immigration minister, Philip Rudd, was responsible for placing pressure to free up these laws in favour of public expression.

Article written by Sheila Newman with Jenny Warfe