Luxury camp inside Walls of Jerusalem WHA with heli access

[Son of a Beach]

More from the ABC - certainly getting a bit of traction

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-27/lake-malbena-developement-concerns-for-tas-aboriginal-community/10553720

One of the subtle, but notable, differences in this article when compared to most of the previous ones, is the way it counts helicopter flights. In most of the previous articles I've seen, they state things like "120 helicopter flights into...". Whereas this one says 240 helicopter flights. I guess that includes in and out. Which makes a lot more sense, as there will be two completely separate flights for each drop off or pick up.

On average, that's more than one helicopter flight per day throughout the year. When crammed into the summer months, that's a LOT of helicopter flights buzzing about!

[Wherever I may roam]

Another article for reference:

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/politi ... 50ie5.html

[stepbystep]

TOWN HALL RALLY TODAY 1.10PM - BUSHWALKERS STAND UP FOR OUR BUSH

*please

[Nuts]

More from the ABC - certainly getting a bit of traction

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-27/lake-malbena-developement-concerns-for-tas-aboriginal-community/10553720

One of the subtle, but notable, differences in this article when compared to most of the previous ones, is the way it counts helicopter flights. In most of the previous articles I've seen, they state things like "120 helicopter flights into...". Whereas this one says 240 helicopter flights. I guess that includes in and out. Which makes a lot more sense, as there will be two completely separate flights for each drop off or pick up.

On average, that's more than one helicopter flight per day throughout the year. When crammed into the summer months, that's a LOT of helicopter flights buzzing about!

And 480 overflights should really be expected? Or some other arbitrary number subject to foresight.
Figures now are only for start-up's. Fanciful in fact given the example on The Overland Track where there is no such uproar (yet) about doubling the number of exclusive huts and consequently the number of associated heli opps. All planted firmly within the heart of WWHA.

[stepbystep]

*uproar pending

[Son of a Beach]

*uproar pending

And I think the uproar is going to be enormous if it all gets finally approved. I don't think I've heard of this much general community opposition to an environmentally destructive proposal since the Franklin dam, except for perhaps the Wesley Vale and Tamar Valley pulp mills.

In fact, there are some remarkable similarities to the Tamar Valley pulp mill process in that the government was only able to say that the pulp mill met all the environmental conditions, because they explicitly rewrote the law to allow for the failings where it could not meet the previous restrictions. This is effectively what they've done with this proposal. It could not be done within the law, just a few short years ago. The laws that were explicitly put in place to protect the wilderness. Now the laws have been changed to deliberately exploit the wilderness.

This is the kind of bureaucratic hypocrisy which caused even some of those who agreed with a pulp mill in principle to rally against that specific Tamar Valley pulp mill proposal.

The rezoning that has been done for this project is like what they did when they revoked the Lake Pedder area from the national park in 1967. Not to the same level of destruction (I hope!), but it illustrates that national parks and world heritage status in Tasmania are meaningless and have no value. The government, GBEs, or even private enterprises can take what they like from national parks or world heritage areas, even against the advice of the government's own advisory bodies.

It almost makes me ashamed to be Tasmanian.

It's a bit like taking rich tourists trophy-hunting for elephants or lions in Africa.

[doogs]

*uproar pending

And I think the uproar is going to be enormous if it all gets finally approved. I don't think I've heard of this much general community opposition to an environmentally destructive proposal since the Franklin dam, except for perhaps the Wesley Vale and Tamar Valley pulp mills.

In fact, there are some remarkable similarities to the Tamar Valley pulp mill process in that the government was only able to say that the pulp mill met all the environmental conditions, because they explicitly rewrote the law to allow for the failings where it could not meet the previous restrictions. This is effectively what they've done with this proposal. It could not be done within the law, just a few short years ago. The laws that were explicitly put in place to protect the wilderness. Now the laws have been changed to deliberately exploit the wilderness.

This is the kind of bureaucratic hypocrisy which caused even some of those who agreed with a pulp mill in principle to rally against that specific Tamar Valley pulp mill proposal.

The rezoning that has been done for this project is like what they did when they revoked the Lake Pedder area from the national park in 1967. Not to the same level of destruction (I hope!), but it illustrates that national parks and world heritage status in Tasmania are meaningless and have no value. The government, GBEs, or even private enterprises can take what they like from national parks or world heritage areas, even against the advice of the government's own advisory bodies.

It almost makes me ashamed to be Tasmanian.

It's a bit like taking rich tourists trophy-hunting for elephants or lions in Africa.

Very well said Nik.

[ILUVSWTAS]

Indeed SOB. Very well said.

Can we get you on the opposing project team to speak at rallies?

[Nuts]

*uproar pending

I should hope so. The crowd support from this project wont necessarily follow into other WoJ battles or eg. to Lk Rodway or have necessarily much care for canyoning/ heli-landings, so hopefully more comes of it than a last minute reprieve to get the fishers back on side.

[Son of a Beach]

Indeed SOB. Very well said.

Can we get you on the opposing project team to speak at rallies?

I'm terrible at public speaking. But if required, I may find myself camped in that area at all the wrong times. I've already booked in one trip in a few weeks time.

[ILUVSWTAS]

Indeed SOB. Very well said.

Can we get you on the opposing project team to speak at rallies?

I'm terrible at public speaking. But if required, I may find myself camped in that area at all the wrong times. I've already booked in one trip in a few weeks time.

Yep what a coincidence that would be huh... at least one other member has talked about organising bush raves in the area for those wrong times you mentioned.

Still let's hope it doesn't come to that.

[Joel]

Hackett has lost it I reckon.

[bushwalker zane]

Hackett has lost it I reckon.

Mr Hackett said: “As a small family business it is horrific to hear the extremes that this small group of anglers are willing to go to in order to destroy us personally, destroy our business, and all in the fear of other projects that don’t even exist.”

The broad range of people at the meeting in the Hobart Town Hall yesterday proves that the group opposed to this specific proposal and the potential destruction of Wilderness to come is neither specifically anglers nor small. I for one felt a great sense of hope coming out of that hall yesterday.

[Nuts]

If it's such a small group why don't you jump on the flylife forum or on this thread and explain your thought process directly to the current user group Daniel? I would be very interested to hear how your ethics have changed so abruptly over the past few years.

Ethics Sharks circling, no doubt with an weather eye on this little fish.

[Son of a Beach]

He used to be a member of this forum. But that was a long time ago. Eg: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2718#p27793

[doogs]

He used to be a member of this forum. But that was a long time ago. Eg: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2718#p27793

Looking at that it appears that he's asked for his account to be deactivated? I wonder what his issue and how long ago it was..

[bushwalker zane]

He used to be a member of this forum. But that was a long time ago. Eg: http://bushwalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php ... 718#p27793

Hm. I didn't think you could delete a profile on a forum such as this. Thar you go.

[doogs]

He used to be a member of this forum. But that was a long time ago. Eg: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2718#p27793

Hm. I didn't think you could delete a profile on a forum such as this. Thar you go.

It's a hassle for the mod team (I believe) and therefore it has to be requested..

[Son of a Beach]

That's correct. There can sometimes be significant issues with deleting an account and on many forums admins try to avoid it unless it really is necessary. There were a very small number that I deleted when I was an admin here. Eg, the first one I deleted was requested by the widow of a member who had passed away, and she wanted to stop getting notification emails about replies to topics that he had subscribed to.

[bushwalker zane]

That's correct. There can sometimes be significant issues with deleting an account and on many forums admins try to avoid it unless it really is necessary. There were a very small number that I deleted when I was an admin here. Eg, the first one I deleted was requested by the widow of a member who had passed away, and she wanted to stop getting notification emails about replies to topics that he had subscribed to.

Fair enough!

Back on track. If anyone in Launceston is keen to come along to the Wilderness Society weekly meeting tonight, it's at the Wildos campaign centre on Charles Street at 5:30pm. No doubt we will be discussing the meeting yesterday at length. Meetings usually run an hour. I might add that I'm not majorly affiliated with TWS, but am simply a happy volunteer.

[Nuts]

The advisory report:

http://tnpa.org.au/lake-malbena-develop ... 6mo39cVWNw

"To assess the impact of overflights, it has been assumed that the impact would be greatest directly under the flight path, and would decline exponentially to near zero at a distance 5 km on either side. The following formula was used:
F = 3 * exp (-0.1 x d2)
where F is the deficit (deducted from WC) and d is the horizontal distance from the flight path. By this formula, the deficit immediately under the flight path would be 3.0, while at a distance of 2.5 km the deficit would be 1.6."

I'm sure it takes tremendous patience to (need to) present what is so obvious, it terms that can be understood.

[stepbystep]

The coalition of the unwilling #keeptassiewild

https://flystream.com/2018/12/04/unwill ... VyvpluXND4

Will your special place be next?

[bogholesbuckethats]

https://www.justinekeaylabor.com.au/new ... e-anglers/

[taswegian]

Haven't been reading all the way, but I see the whole island now shows as a lease.
Previously it had some odd shaped licence. That appears to have gone since I last looked.

When is the planning application being presented to council?

[bogholesbuckethats]

Haven't been reading all the way, but I see the whole island now shows as a lease.
Previously it had some odd shaped licence. That appears to have gone since I last looked.

When is the planning application being presented to council?

Yes I believe former minister Mathew Groom ordered a new lease that covered the entire island to be granted to the proponent shortly after acquiring the lease to Reg Halls Hut.

The application has been received by the Central Highlands Council and there will be an opportunity for public input at a later date. Any submissions to council outside of the specified dates will not be taken into account.

[taswegian]

Thanks
Not sure why LIST changed so late in the day.

The planning application will have to be advertised.
Hope I don't miss it

[stepbystep]

Thanks
Not sure why LIST changed so late in the day.

The planning application will have to be advertised.
Hope I don't miss it

ListMap still shows the original lease of 40m2. The expansion of the lease to the whole island means the proponant can keep everyone else out, so obviously a tactic to get the luxury huts built this was done without any consultation...

Keep an eye here for the latest updates Richard, a few of us are monitoring things very closely.

It looks like the senate will be looking at it a bit more closely, great it's being made a national issue!

https://www.themercury.com.au/news/poli ... 1567778b2c

Greens, Labor vote for rethink on Lake Malbena proposal
EMILY BAKER, State Political Reporter, Mercury
December 6, 2018 8:09pm
Subscriber only
THE Senate has urged the Federal Environment Minister to reconsider her unconditional approval of a controversial helicopter-accessed high-end tourism development within Tasmanian World Heritage-listed wilderness.

The Senate on Thursday passed the Greens and Labor motion ultimately calling on Melissa Price to declare the Lake Malbena proposal a controlled action — meaning it would be subject to environmental assessments and approval.

The motion, moved by Tasmanian Greens Senator Nick McKim, acknowledged strong community opposition to the development in the Walls of Jerusalem National Park, and advice from independent advisory bodies including the Aboriginal Heritage Council and the Australian Heritage Council warning against its approval.

“ … the Minister for the Environment should declare the project a controlled action and properly instigate a full assessment, including public participation from recreational anglers, conservationists and any other interested parties, of the proposal’s impacts on World Heritage values, including wilderness,” the motion said.

Tasmanian Labor senator Anne Urquhart and Braddon Labor MHR Justine Keay said their party supported “sensible” tourism development in and near World Heritage Areas.

“However, the federal approvals process for any developments in sensitive areas must be robust and should include the consideration of all views,” the pair said.

“Unfortunately this has not been the case with the Lake Malbena proposal.”

Launceston couple Daniel and Simone Hackett’s Lake Malbena proposal would see a standing camp built on Halls Island in the Walls of Jerusalem.

It would be accessed by helicopter, with 120 return flights – 240 individual flights – planned for the 30 tourist trips to the region each year.

This would not include servicing and maintenance flights.

The proposed development will be next assessed by the Central Highlands Council.

Ms Price was contacted for comment.

[Nuts]

There it is again, 'sensible' development, no better defined than 'sensitive'. And 'robust', for places reserved in National Parks and WHA, already excludes some views on their use..

[Paul]

"The planning application will have to be advertised."
" Hope I don't miss it "

Hi Taswegian,
Central Highlands Council ( Development & Environmental Services Dept ) are keeping a record of people who have contacted them requesting that they be notified by email when the 14 day advertising period commences. They have had a large number of people request this and they have advised me they will be advising , by email, all those that have requested this information.

So, spread the word, we need as many people as possible to lodge these requests so that they dont miss the advertised period for comment on the Development Application .

Paul.

[taswegian]

Thanks for that, Dan & Paul
Interesting.
The debate and disapproval is not just relating to or emanating from 'green groups' which must surely say something to those making decisions.

An island in the middle of a lake in a world heritage area should not be subject to interference. More so of this proposed use.

There's been permitted developments in key areas based not on the uniqueness of the development, but I'd suggest, because it has that magic 'ring' to it of those letters WHA.
Developments that could exist perfectly well along with the same experiences, but not in the proposed location.
Letters WHA on a tourism venture suddenly ups the ante and the attributable charges to the credit card such nomenclature brings.
Pure exploitation at the highest level.