Most of the talk around the Frogs Hollow flight school refers to it as being contentious. Taking into account all that has been said and done I would say ludicrous was a more apt description of the proposal.
I would like to thank all councilors for their sincere words in support of denying the DA.
I would also like to thank Barry Irvin and Bega Cheese for their very strong support. From the sound of his voice this issue is very close to his heart.
The Chamber of Commerce also deserves a huge thank you for their support.
Lastly and most importantly to all the residents who spoke thank you. You are a living example of what community is about, standing up for what you believe is right regardless of the might of “others”.
After all that has happened and been said on this matter if the cashed up developers were given the go ahead it would be the greatest travesty of justice of all time.
I know nothing about the intricacies of government, but I am really curious why if Andrew Constance is the Minister for Infrastructure he is not in some way involved in determining this issue.
Frank Pearce, Bega
Argument burnt down
Peter Rutherford’s letter (BDN 3/8) omitted the fact he is a long time employee of the Eden woodchipping industry, so it is not surprising he has a particular perspective on native forest management.
His argument, that logging reduces fire risk, simply does not stand up. Indeed, logging increases fire risk, starting with the large quantities of highly flammable debris left behind every logging operation.
But it doesn’t stop there. Increased fire risk lasts far beyond the following bushfire season; it’s there for the next 45 or more years.
Forests in this region remain more fire prone today because of the intensive logging from the first decades of the woodchipping industry and will be so for many years to come.
Even-aged young trees of uniform height in a dense, dry regrowth forest are always a greater fire hazard than a mature moist forest. Even when it inevitably ends, the legacy of the woodchipping industry will be more fire prone forests in this region for decades to come.
Next time Mr Rutherford writes a letter like this, I think he owes it to readers to declare his interest in the woodchipping industry.
Harriett Swift, Chipstop convener
State and federal governments are handing out hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to farmers to feed animals dying in the drought, while ignoring the real problem.
Climate change, largely caused by animal agriculture, is making droughts, fires and floods more frequent and more severe.
The animals dying on the cracked earth are motivating floods of hypocritical tears from those who would rather they die in the slaughterhouse, profitably. Raising animals for flesh, milk or eggs is responsible for over half of global greenhouse emissions, as well as supplying products which cause consumers to suffer from obesity, coronary heart disease, strokes and various cancers.
They also cause the most appalling suffering to billions of innocent, sentient animals every year: dehorning, beak trimming, mulesing, branding, castration without pain relief – the list of atrocities goes on and on.
If farmers want assistance with the costs of the drought, they should demand a meat tax, which will ensure only those who consume their deadly products pay for its production.
Meanwhile, those who repeatedly keep animals on land known to be prone to drought should be charged with animal cruelty, just as you or I would be if we let our dog or cat starve.