(letter to Braidwood Times, published March 3, 2010)

With deliberations on the new Palerang LEP working draft just begun, it is clear that environmental issues will not receive the support that some may have expected. At last Thursday’s meeting, Clause 26D, Ecologically Sustainable Development (local), was the first to go. It stated: Before granting consent for development, the consent authority must have regard to the principles of ecologically sustainable development as they relate to the proposed development. Not long after that, the fifth objective of the section RU1 Primary Production was debated - to ensure that the development and management of the land has proper regard for the environmental constraints of the land and has a neutral or beneficial impact on environmental assets including waterways, riparian land, wetlands and other surface and groundwater resources, soil fertility, remnant native vegetation, and existing and potential fauna movement corridors. With Cr Turley safely out of the room after it was suggested in no uncertain terms that she had an unexempted pecuniary interest, this clause was successfully deleted also, with the casting vote of the mayor. (more…)

(printed in March 2 edition of the Canberra Times)

Since your January 26 story “Koalas face big logging threat”, nothing much has changed except that, despite numerous representations to Ministers and further attempts to highlight the issue in the media and elsewhere, logging may begin as soon as Monday March 1. The support given by current and past governments to the ongoing, taxpayer-subsidised woodchipping of native forests and these governments’ blatant disregard for the protection of forests for biodiversity, water quality, habitat, climate change mitigation and tourist attraction reasons is hard to comprehend. How does continued logging of native forests in this way, without even value-adding in Australia, contribute to the nation’s financial or environmental well-being? (more…)

(letter to the editor, published in the CT January 28)

Let’s be honest. Every day more light is shed on why there is no hope for humanity and all those species whose survival depends on our making the right decisions, and your report “Koalas face big logging threat” (January 26) is yet another example. We ought to be doing everything we can to protect biodiversity by retaining habitat, in this case for the last known koala colony on the far south coast. Forest protection has many benefits. As well as providing habitat, forests help to soak up the massive amounts of CO2 we are pumping out, improve catchment and regulate the water table. But no, we prefer to turn our forests into woodchips to meet the demands of insatiable overseas markets, not just in Japan but also China, whose demand for woodchips currently and frighteningly outweighs the huge amounts we already are producing. As with climate change, it is easier to pretend the problem does not exist, or at least, that humans have nothing to do with it, because recognising that our voracious consumption is jeopardising our very existence would mean that we had to do something about it. Australians all let us rejoice? I don’t think so.

Catherine Moore, Charleys Forest

(letter to the editor, Sydney Morning Herald, not published)

Let’s be honest. Every day more light is shed on why there is no hope for humanity and all those species whose survival depends on our making the right decisions. SMH, January 25 – p. 2: “Snowy in dire state ‘on life support’ “ demonstrates that our inaction is ensuring that the Snowy River is “dying through neglect”. Page 5: “Logging plan poses threat to precious koala colony” warns that the last known koala habitat on the far south coast of NSW is at risk of annihilation because we prefer to turn our forests into woodchips to meet the demands of insatiable overseas markets than do everything we can to protect biodiversity (and maximise our contribution to soaking up the CO2 we are putting out). Page 2: “Storm brews over glacier blunder” highlights yet again the desperate attempts of climate change sceptics who will do anything to try to prove that climate change science is flawed. All this is on a backdrop of the underlying problem – our inability to come to grips with our voracious consumption, because if we did, we would have to do something about it. Australians all let us rejoice? I don’t think so.

Catherine Moore

(The Braidwood Times asked councillors to provide approximately 150 words on their hopes and wishes for Palerang for the coming year. Seven out of nine councillors responded.)

My priority would have to be the finalisation of our new LEP, which I hope will be a forward-thinking planning instrument based on Council’s recognition that water is precious and drought is not an unusual event but something that we will have to accept as the norm.

I hope we can get away from the idea that unending growth is the solution to all our financial and social problems.  Ideally, all new sub-division proposals need to be formulated to go gently on the land and be acceptable to the communities they affect.

It would be good to see better communication and consistency amongst State Government departments, especially those involved with planning, industry/engineering and the environment. Situations like we have at the moment with the RTA pumping large amounts of water out of the Shoalhaven for roadwork need to be reassessed so that not only river health but water supplies to the settlements that rely on them are guaranteed.

Happy New LEP Year to everyone in Palerang.

Catherine Moore

(letter to the editor, Australian newspapers; published Canberra Times December 18, additional publication unknown)

In 1997 I attended the Kyoto Climate Change Convention with a petition - The Australian Peoples’ Declaration on Global Warming - signed by 150 000 groups and individuals opposing the stance taken by the Howard Government on climate change. At that time I was astonished (perhaps naively) at the hold that fossil fuel corporations had on the governments of the world, including our own, but it appears that despite the 2007 election and its attendant promises, nothing has changed. (more…)

(letter to local papers, April 2 editions)

In a recent letter to this paper, I concluded by saying “as for the cost to the ratepayers of these developments, well that’s another question again, and will only be answered in future rates notices.”

Council is in the process of determining the Management Plan and Budget for the coming year/s and rates and some charges are set to rise again, with the motion to apply to the Minister for a Special Variation which will fund a number of roadworks having been approved at the last meeting.  Council subsidisation of the OOSH ($8 901) and the CTC (now the grant has run out, Council would need to start funding the management of this facility to the tune of $31 825) seems to be causing quite a problem, yet the issue of the cost to the community of development is not addressed at all. (more…)

(letter to the Braidwood Times, February 20)

Abolishing Section 94 developer contributions – now there’s an idea (“Section 94 rorts”, BT, Feb 6). Perhaps at the same time we could encourage all developers to make their sub-divisions into the 99 year lease variety as opposed to strata title, something that Council almost approved for a local development at its Feb 14 meeting. I say almost because the business papers recommended that the conditions be modified as per the developer’s wishes but a late report to the meeting revealed that it was probably not in Council’s (or the community’s?) best interests to agree to this as it would mean that only one, not 70, set of rates and charges could then be applied. A close call. (more…)

(letter to the Sydney Morning Herald, with a similar letter also sent to The Age)

The decision by the NSW and Victorian premiers to lift the ban on genetically engineered canola is a tragedy for both consumers and the environment, and the rationale of Ian MacDonald that NSW farmers can now compete on a level playing field with overseas farmers because GM canola now accounts for 70 per cent of the global canola market is staggering in the extreme.

What this decision does is remove the capacity for Australian farmers to realise premium prices for and corner the market on non-GE canola, highly sought after by an increasingly large Asian and European market, not to mention a growing number of consumers here in Australia. And as for GE canola needing fewer pesticides and herbicides, this is a furphy, given that farmers can and have used more chemicals because the canola remains unaffected, so every time a weed comes up, it’s out with the spray pack. (more…)

(councillor contribution for November 22 edition of Bungendore Bulletin; shorter version sent to local papers in Eden-Monaro and the Canberra Times)

The election is only days away and like most campaigns before it, this one has been dominated by the major parties, as if there were only two voting options. It would be good if we could release ourselves from the ALP/Coalition stronghold and let them know that their policies are not good enough for a just and environmentally sustainable future. Every time there’s an election, The Greens are vilified by one group or another, including the major parties. (more…)