Bushwalk Australia

From ABC

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-29/s ... od/7672504

A patch of forest at Buckland, in southern Tasmania used as a breeding ground for the critically endangered swift parrot has been targeted by illegal wood cutters.

People were discovered cutting down trees in the Crown land earlier this week by researcher Dejan Stojanovic from the Australian National University.

"When I turned up on site, there was two cars worth of blokes standing around the base of one of my nest trees, and I could hear the chainsaws actually running out the window of my car when I arrived," he said.

Geeez this makes me wild, get some photographic evidence of these tools entering empty and leaving full and then impound their cars and crush them and their tools of trade whilst they are at it. Then off to court and fine each person$50,000 and put them on a 2 year good behavior bond. Do it again and it's off to jail.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And yet we have state sanctioned destruction of ecosystems that make this look utterly insignificant, and here's a thread on the forum with this name about the stupid actions of a few wood-hookers...ask yourself who should be demonised and who are the idiots?

Both are idiots and both shoulds be talked about. No reason to belittle what these few bogans have done. The most important sentence from the article is this :

"Since 2010, of the 18 nest trees that I've been monitoring with motion-activated cameras, 10 of them have been cut down."

This is not an isolated incident but a trend that actually threatens the survival of a species...

History tells us too, that the state sanctioned destruction is virtually untouchable. Until "we the people" can bring action against a minister (as far as I know you cannot bring court action against a ministers decision) then the big stuff never gets sorted. This on the other hand is easily prosecuted, trouble is our courts will slap them on the wrists and send them on their merry way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

stepbystep wrote:And yet we have state sanctioned destruction of ecosystems that make this look utterly insignificant, and here's a thread on the forum with this name about the stupid actions of a few wood-hookers...ask yourself who should be demonised and who are the idiots?

It is perfectly possible to be outraged by more than one thing at time.
The ban on political posts makes talking about forestry in Tassie rather problematical.

Thanks for reminding me about the political posts rule NNW.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

north-north-west wrote:

stepbystep wrote:And yet we have state sanctioned destruction of ecosystems that make this look utterly insignificant, and here's a thread on the forum with this name about the stupid actions of a few wood-hookers...ask yourself who should be demonised and who are the idiots?

It is perfectly possible to be outraged by more than one thing at time.
The ban on political posts makes talking about forestry in Tassie rather problematical.

Political discussion related to bushwalking is not banned - at least that's what the rules say. Forestry in many areas is related to bushwalking, and therefore would not be banned, I would assume.

In any case, both types of idiots deserve to be called on it. This lot because the are breaking the law, the other lot because they control the law and manipulate it to their own benefit. All of them because they are unnecessarily destructive and putting commercial short term gain ahead of long term conservation values.

Son of a Beach wrote:In any case, both types of idiots deserve to be called on it. This lot because the are breaking the law, the other lot because they control the law and manipulate it to their own benefit. All of them because they are unnecessarily destructive and putting commercial short term gain ahead of long term conservation values.

Yep, this.

Son of a Beach wrote:In any case, both types of idiots deserve to be called on it. This lot because the are breaking the law, the other lot because they control the law and manipulate it to their own benefit. All of them because they are unnecessarily destructive and putting commercial short term gain ahead of long term conservation values.

Right on, brother!!!

Son of a Beach wrote:In any case, both types of idiots deserve to be called on it. This lot because the are breaking the law, the other lot because they control the law and manipulate it to their own benefit. All of them because they are unnecessarily destructive and putting commercial short term gain ahead of long term conservation values.

Yes, well said Nik, and very succinctly put.

Dismal indeed mate. Probably inevitable, but sad.

I just noticed this thread.

Rule 4 states "Political content unrelated to bushwalking is not permitted, either for or against any particular issue, party, person or organisation."

Providing posts are polite, factual and comply with other rules, my view is that reasonable political discussion about the above issue is fine. This is a conservation issue about a forest where we walk, a place we value.

Lophophaps
Moderator

From the Mercury

http://www.themercury.com.au/news/tasma ... 4bf354342b

Perhaps given the recent election, and the result of the two partied preferred, with compulsory voting, along with preference voting we are the only fools. A system manipulated to funnel a result for the power hungry, and not a word about the environment along the way.
Until a $ value can be placed on a square meter of bush I'm afraid it will always be just a free asset humans have put a commercial value to. Or something used to calculate how much money can be made from. Until the time to create soil is calculated, the micro organisms and insects in the soil, the time taken to grow the tree and surrounding vegetation at its foot and branches. The liken, insects, birds, seed distribution and pollination of that tree. Mammals breeding patterns and their part in the food chain. The purifying of air, the slowing of water run off and purification, the catchment of natural silt and root integrity to hold the earth in place nothing will change. The direct link to that square meter of earth and humans existence won't mean a thing while there is money to be made from the environments destruction.

I believe there is also a deep seated religious side to it as well. "Natures abundance", and a view that it's all "meant to be" suggests why many of our elected leaders with a faith appears to do little for the environment.

To Lophophaps, I hope my comment is not removed. I don't feel I am attacking anyone, just an observation of our country, it's political system, and the continual destruction of the environment. They are all linked to bushwalking.

30 native animals have become extinct in Australia from just 228 years of European settlement-occupation. Just 4 generations for some of us.

According to Wild Life Conservency, perhaps Australia biggest and premier environment protection group:

Feral cats and foxes. For example, feral cats kill an estimated 75 million native animals every night across Australia.
Feral herbivores including pigs, goats, rabbits, donkeys, horses, camels, buffalo and feral cattle.
Changes in fire regimes, especially an increase in the extent and severity of wildfires.
Clearing native vegetation.
Weeds.

are the major causes. See here http://www.australianwildlife.org/wildlife.aspx


If you changes the animals to humans, work from the Industrial Revolution just 116 years ago, or 2 generations for some of us; and replaces the reason just a few observations

Legal or illegal drugs, alcohol abuse, increasing domestic violence, gambling, and family structure break down. Ever increasing me, I, because I'm worth it attitude.
Massive consumption of her now chuck tomorrow products.
Tax avoidance, disregard for was and rules, relaxation of various acts to allow favourable development and dodgy deals. A generalised view of nothing is sacred when a dollar is to be made.
Allowing further land clearing for farming in ares not particularly suited or sustainable for the local or broader environment. Also include deforestation for new sardine sandwiched housing estates with 0 greenness to them except for insulation. You can't hear the birds from the roar of the air conditioners, and beside there isn't a local native tree in co-wee anyway.
Opening up the world biggest coal mine when not just one scientist are suggesting the oceans are full of carbon and dying. We need to drop coal/fossils fuel immediately. Great Barrier Reef top 1/3 and lower 1/3 are virtually gone, higher water temperatures killed Australia Southern kelp forrest in 2012-2013. Continual evidence of out of season extreme weather becoming as regular as a US massacre.
and the list can go on and on........

Why do humans think habitat destruction is beyond them?

It more than just some goons cutting down trees where endangered species live. We tend to get distracted by checking the latest superannuation funds worth, or see how many likes one has on Facebook. Humans need to move somewhat, perhaps with some speed, in direction away from money means everything. To the environment means everything. The world around us, that sustains us, the hardest thing to replace with all its biodiversity and unknown understanding. It needs to be cherished as much as family is, friendship, and happiness is. It needs to be far beyond what money is currently.

Newhue, your two posts above, thanks for the facts. OT slightly, global warming scares me. I'll probably be long gone but what about the kids? Falling biodiversity is another scare. Too much focus on the short term will be at the expense of the future. My environmental footprint is tiny - I feel uncomfortable using too many resources.

hey lophophaps lol, I'm not sure about the facts, just how it seems to me.
We humans rely on the environment far more than it relies on us, and we are as interwoven and connected to it as any other animal on earth, but contribute perhaps the least to it. The environment is the first and most common thing humans have with each other besides our needs for emotional gratitude. So off topic yes, but possibly not, as well.
Have you seen the children's movie the Lorax. It all starts with the cutting down of a tree for commercial gain. I wonder if the first crack of the axe in Sydney cove back in 1788 was for similar gain, however disguised as something rather different. The movie doesn't have the time, and kids don't have the attention span so the destruction is fast tracked, but the profits keep rolling on until the environment eventually dies. It's a good mirror really.

As for fearing for the kids, I agree. In my efforts to figure out the $ of a square meter of bush I came across a scientific approach to how many trees it takes to keep a human in air per year. That's just breathing, it's not allowing for filtering of carbon from ones car usage, electricity, and average daily consumption. It takes about 7 to 8 15 meter high trees to keep a human going per year. I look around and I don't see many planting trees, and certainly not of that size. But I do see plenty councils, developers, farmers killing plenty of trees that size. And when we are capable of bulldozing an acre flat within an hour, and turn it into piles of mulch in the next hour, the odds of growing 15 metre high trees that take 80 to 100 years to get there on mass; I too fear our kids are in serious trouble.

Be it some muppet cutting down a tree for fire wood where an endangered birds lives, is no different in may ways to a council trimming another 15 meters of decent bush to simply build a bike path next to a motorway. Our biggest problem is we don't see past 5 years let along our own life time. When it takes nature 1000 or millions of years to develop the biodiversity to keep that 15 metre high tree healthy, happy, and doing what it does best. It makes one shudder.