Jennifer Marohasy

a forum for the discussion of issues concerning the natural environment

jennifer

Campbell Coming Ashore

By

Still with the ‘wind in his sails’ from the vilification of whalers, Environment Minister Ian Campbell now intends to champion coastal development – or rather coastal protection. I am not really sure which.

In the various associated media reports Campbell claims the need for a solid 30 years plan (I think the Australian coast is dying a death of a thousand cuts because state governments and local government are basically planning in two, three, five-year cycles and what we need if we’re going to save the coast is a 30-year plan…)

and then in the next breath he suggests that it is OK to use the next endangered species to get his own way (i.e. invoke environment laws protecting migratory birds, endangered species… perhaps even platypuses).

I think the Minister is shaping up to be a disaster – but probably a very popular disaster.

Censoring at this Blog

By

I have received an email accusing me of censoring comment at this web-log.

The writer of the email could not have know that about 8 comments from yesterday afternoon did not get approved (they included comment from David V, Ender, Louis H and David W). My apologies.

The problem was probably in part a consequence of the two-stage approval process that sits behind this web-log and perhaps compounded by this site being down (provider/server problem) for at least 30 minutes around 6pm last night.

I do sometimes censor (i.e. not post an entire comment), but usually let the writer of the email know – unless it is spam.

I sometimes edit.

I have previously posted a piece about ‘rules’ and ‘name calling’see https://jennifermarohasy.com.dev.internet-thinking.com.au/blog/archives/000675.html (19th June).

Some of the comment following this post was interesting and useful. I think I have come to the conclusion that:

Messages that are spam, abusive, defamatory or off-topic should not be posted.

According to the ‘site traffic’ statistics for this site, there were about 2,000 unique visits to this site last month (i.e. about 2,000 people read this blog at least once, some many, many times). It is perhaps surprising (and a bit boring) that there was not comment from more of a cross-section of this potential community.

Perhaps some readers are frightened that their ideas/comments will be ‘attacked’ by a global warming skeptic or believer? There are contributors to both sides of this debate that hold very strong views, take comment personally and are not very sensitive.

Don Burke Takes Over

By

Don Burke, from Channel 9’s Burke’s Backyard, took over from me as Chair of the Australian Environment Foundation (AEF) this afternoon. Don is calling for a whole new approach to environmentalism and a focus on the management of our National Parks.

Have a read of his media release at
http://www.aefweb.info/media775.html.

And you can find out more about Don Burke at
http://www.aefweb.info/staff.php?id=20 .

There has been a bit at this web-log about the AEF, including

Principles underpinning AEF (May 15th 2005)
https://jennifermarohasy.com.dev.internet-thinking.com.au/blog/archives/000607.html

Announcing launch of AEF (9th June, 2005)
https://jennifermarohasy.com.dev.internet-thinking.com.au/blog/archives/000651.html

Piece by Michael Thomson (16th June 2005)
https://jennifermarohasy.com.dev.internet-thinking.com.au/blog/archives/000685.html.

And check out the AEF website at http://www.aefweb.info – including the rest of the team at http://www.aefweb.info/staff.php .

I will still be very active within the organisation. As Chair I had been filling a gap between Barry Cohen leaving and someone else taking over – Don Burke as it turns out.

I remain Director of the Environment Unit at the Institute of Public Affairs and a Fellow of the Centre for Public and International Comparative Law (CPICL) at the University of Queensland.

Burn the Woodchip Instead?

By

There is no campaign against the export of woodchip from Queensland’s native forests because all the forest ‘residue’ that could be turned into woodchip is burnt instead.

I understand this was the outcome of the 1999 deal between the Queensland Government,Queensland Timber Board, Wilderness Society, Australian Rainforest Conservation Society and Queensland Conservation Council. That is, that everyone agreed it didn’t matter what happened to the ‘residues’ from native forest harvesting as long as it was not exported as woodchip etcetera or used for ‘green energy’ generation.

This is so wasteful.

The Tasmanian industry has agreed to no such deal. I understand that woodchip is a good earner for their forest industry – and there is a campaign against it with at least one Japanese Company agreeing to not buy Aussie woodchip. But I don’t think they have agreed to stop making paper – and indeed there was no campaign against paper.

The Forest Industry has suggested that the Japanese should rethink their policy, and according to ABC OnLine,

The Forests and Forest Industry Council (FFIC) has made a submission to Japanese paper company Nippon Paper Group, saying the industry in Tasmania is not destructive.

Nippon Paper Group is reviewing its policy on its raw materials supply.

FFIC chairman Rob Woolley says the submission detailed the sustainability of present forest practices.

He says one of the major aims of the submission is to reiterate that any harvesting of old growth forests is minimal and only a small amount is used for woodchips.

“The harvesting is primarily done to get high quality saw log and veneer, and that the chip component that comes out is a by-product,” Mr Woolley said.

“The importance of the chip component is that is adds to the economics of harvesting these timbers.”

I am all for making use of all byproduct including woodchip for paper rather than just burning it. But as per the above media report, I wouldn’t agree that the industry isn’t destructive (it is and needs to be because involves clearfelling patches, see https://jennifermarohasy.com.dev.internet-thinking.com.au/blog/archives/000708.html)and I understand that woodchip can be a significant component of the total harvest.

Some of the campaigns against woodchip:

http://www.chipstop.forests.org.au/whatis.html
http://www.tcha.org.au/paper.html

Worst Argument in the World

By

“I know of an argument which, although it is almost-unbelievably bad, has not only escaped critism by philosophers, but has received the endorsement of coutless philosophers. I think it is the worst argument in the world…” and so began a note from D.C. Stove at the University of Sydney in 1986. To find out which argument he is referring to read more at …

http://web.maths.unsw.edu.au/~jim/stoveworstargt.pdf .

Be sure to scroll down to the second page at the link.

Louis Hissink

By

When I started this blog it was with some trepidation as I outlined in my very first post, https://jennifermarohasy.com.dev.internet-thinking.com.au/blog/archives/000549.html .

And I wondered whether anyone would comment. I like comments because I like to know what I might have got wrong, and what I might have got right and I like to read different perspectives and have my ideas challenged.

Louis Hissink definately gets the prize for the most comments at this blog.

Sometimes I laugh, sometimes I cringe, sometimes I learn something, when I read the comments from Louis.

If you do a google search on Louis you will find comment that includes:

“Regarded as the best diamond field geologist in Australia.”

“His free time is spent researching ancient history, writing comments on environmental or mining matters and, as frequently happens, re-installing the operating system on the computer. He is a book worm and writes book reviews for Henry Thornton,
http://www.henrythornton.com/contributors.asp?contributor=9 .”

Louis has won a prize for posting the “worst argument” against global warming. Given the judge (Tim Lambert) listed other contenders as
McKitrick & Michaels, Baliunas and Soon – he can perhaps feel honoured.

There was a period recently when there were no comments from Louis. I gather he had headed off bush for 3 weeks to Wooleen,
http://www.wooleen.com.au/

Louis has written about Wooleen:
“I think it (the homestead) cost 145,000 pounds to build a century ago – wool really was the go then. Not now any more – current stocking is 2000 head from the usual 14,000. Drought is in 5/7 year cycle, so another 2 years of pain apparently.”

Thanks Louis for your contribution, for taking the time to comment.