Contrasting positions
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Cr Keith Hughes’ “interesting take” on the council's sale of Central Waste Facility land to NBN Co (BDN, 27/11), suggesting it “could only increase pressure on the council to make sure the Central Waste Facility is being managed as well as it possibly can”, contrasts with his position on the management of national parks.
The illegal logging of Biamanga Aboriginal Place (BAP) early this decade would suggest this area isn't being managed as well as it possibly can be and this mismanagement is compounded by other issues.
In particular the determination of the NSW Scientific Committee finding extensive canopy dieback is a threat to koalas in the catchments from Dignams Creek to Wapengo, an area that includes most of Biamanga National Park.
As Nature Conservation Council representative on the Biamanga Board of Management, Cr Hughes would seem to have some responsibility in ensuring the park is managed as well as it can be.
I wonder what sort of pressure it would take to get Cr Hughes to talk about such matters, because while it isn't a concern for key stakeholders, it is a concern for some close neighbours.
Robert Bertram
Bermagui
Prevention better than cure
Paul Cozens’ letter (BD, 27/11) reminds us all – yet again – of the dreadful tragedy that occurred on the Tathra Wharf four years ago.
Will another such tragedy have to occur before our council erects a safety barrier around the wharf?
Yet another expensive study to restore the ring road has been commissioned.
Surely some of these hundreds of thousands of dollars could be but towards making the wharf a safer place for all to visit.
Does not anyone realise that if the ring road is restored and tourist buses are then able to access the wharf, many of the passengers will be elderly, disabled in wheelchairs for whom an unfenced wharf is equally as dangerous as it would be to a baby in a pram?
Even fit, able-bodied people can trip and fall, and no amount of angel rings, phones or ladders will prevent that happening.
While I can appreciate that a lot of Tathra folk are anxious to see more tourists and locals have easy access to this icon, I am old enough to remember the tragedy that occurred from that same ring road in heavy seas many years ago.
When will our council understand that prevention is infinitely better than cure?
Elvie Preo
Bega
Forest claims wrong
While I agree with Tony Hastings (BDN, 27/11) that the reasons for knocking back the wind farm on Jews Head appear ingenuous, he is wrong on two counts.
The forests around Eden have never been heritage listed.
When the wood chip mill was approved in Eden 45 years ago, they were on Crown land and considered second-class having been damaged by fire and picked over for saw logs and sleepers.
There are numerous press clippings, documents and historic accounts from the time that prove this.
Nor were these forests cleared.
Cleared forests are now paddocks, car parks and housing estates.
The only forest clearing the chip mill is guilty of is for the site it stands on.
Timber industry logging around Eden is managed to ensure there is healthy regrowth to keep it going in perpetuity in the name of “jobs, jobs, jobs”.
The only things that have been drowned out are the facts in yet another ill-conceived attack, again apparently based on gut feeling, on a carefully managed and regulated industry that supports more than 300 families on the Far South Coast.
Perhaps Mr Hastings should visit Brazil or Malaysia where his concerns would be justified.
Justin Law
Eden
State of Israel
I respond to the letter of Terence Carpenter (BDN, 23/11) regarding the modern state of Israel.
He gives quite an interesting potted history of the land known to us as Palestine or Israel, concluding that the present day Jews have every right to be there.
So be it, this is modern history.
However, the curious thing about his letter is the last paragraph where he says “Bible-believing Christians have even more irrefutable evidence supporting the Jewish people to more of the land than they now have.”
You may ask, what have Bible-believing Christians to do with all this?
Well, there are a small number of Christians who believe the Jews have to return to Palestine before Christ returns, where they will convert to Him and welcome Him when He lands at Jerusalem at His Second Coming.
So these people see some sort of sign in every move in Middle Eastern politics.
The Christian Church in general knows the Jews rejected Christ when He was here on earth and still reject Him to this day.
They have to reject Him in order to be Jews.
Christians believe when Jesus died on the cross His death covered the sin of the world.
The sin of all humanity, including Jews.
What we are asked to do is accept Him as our Saviour and Lord, responding to His love and He by His Holy Spirit will guide us into living a life worthy of Him.
The Jews play no part in any of this.
I hope this helps to explain to you the purpose of the curious last paragraph to the letter.
Roger Jones
Bemboka
Animals in harm’s way
News of the more than two dozen animals who died during the production of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey has left fans reeling.
The filmmakers themselves have admitted many of the deaths and have acknowledged that the horse deaths could have and should have been avoided.
While millions of dollars went into making this film, the animals used as living props and unpaid "talent" weren't given even basic care to ensure their safety - including one horse who had the skin ripped from his leg and another who had his feet tied together for more than three hours as he was deemed "too energetic" for his rider.
Two horses went over steep embankments and died (one was found with her head submerged in water), sheep broke their legs in sinkholes, and chickens were mauled by dogs - all instances of extreme negligence.
Contrary to public perception, representatives from the American Humane Association do not monitor the training or housing of animals used in movies.
The vast majority of the scenes in the movie using animals were computer generated, so it’s puzzling that the producers felt the need to put any live animal in harm’s way.
In the age of advanced CGI technology, there is no need to use live animals in film and television productions.
People who want to drive this message home can make their opinion known by refusing to buy a ticket.
Jason Baker
Director of campaigns
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Australia
* Letters to the editor are most welcome. They should be no more than 300-400 words and should be typewritten or in clearly legible handwriting. Excessively long letters will be shortened and edited for length and legal concerns. Letters must contain the writer’s name, street address and daytime phone number for verification. Letters can be emailed or posted to the addresses on page four and will be published at the editor’s discretion.