![]() |
Upper Bunyip Action Group 'U B A G' |
|||
|
Damning
evidence from DSE...
|
||||
|
Oh! What a feeling! |
But you won't find this document on the Web - unlike most of the other cited references in the current Forestry Management Plan! Perhaps this is not surprising because it contains clear expressions 'from the horses mouth' that the 350 Block should not be logged for a variety of environmental reasons! Here are some relevant extracts: Section 2.4.1 Section 2.4.5 Section 3.1 Sections 3.8 - 3.24 contains "Further investigations into the bat fauna of the area is required to determine their distribution and habitat preference." "Investigations into the distribution and breeding status of the Sooty Owl (Tyto tenebricosa) in the northern area of the catchment should be continued." "Further investigations into the status and distribution of the Powerful Owl (Ninox strenua) should be undertaken." "Further investigations into the effects on the terrestrial vertebrate fauna of current forestry practices should be undertaken." Section 6.2.1 contains (with reference to Leadbeater's Possum) Section N1 - The Blue Range - Mt Beenak Delineation: This site includes the catchment of the upper reaches of the Bunyip River north of its confluence with Back Creek [now 'Black Snake Creek'] and the catchment of Back Creek (refer Fig. 5). (...) Management: Areas in which Leadbeater's possum was recorded or are thought to provide important habitat for this species, such as the stands of mature Mountain Ash in the upper reaches of the Bunyip River, should be protected and excluded from logging practices. (...) All of the catchment of the Upper Bunyip River should be included in the Bunyip State Park. Logging should be excluded from this area. (..) In some areas, e.g. the Upper Bunyip River, trail bikes should be excluded to allow for more passive forms of recreation, i.e. bushwalking, birdwatching." The UBAG challenges NRE to reply to the following : During the period since this CFL report was
brought down 1. Has NRE commissioned scientific studies (as suggested above) to thoroughly investigate occurrence and distribution of threatened faunal species referenced in this report in the area(s) referenced - and in particular, the 350 Upper Bunyip forestry block? 2. If detailed scientific study has been carried out as suggested by these authors, what findings came out of these studies, and where are these published? 3. If detailed scientific study has not been carried out as suggested by these authors, what possible justification can NRE provide at this time (2002/03) for logging of the 350 Block, in clear contradiction of the recommendations of these respected in-house authors? In the light of this damning evidence, the UBAG appeals to all forest-loving people to JOIN THE UPPER BUNYIP ACTION GROUP and begin writing letters NOW that call for a halt to logging in the 350 Upper Bunyip forestry block while proper scientific studies are conducted throughout the block! |
|||