Retail giant Harvey Norman has come under fire for their timber sourcing habits, with the company using timber from native Australian old growth forests as well as Indonesian rainforest timber in their furniture. Elizabeth McArthur reports.

Native Australian old growth forests logged for commercial gain. Image: rodbot

The ongoing campaign driven by activist group Markets for Change came to a head when three protesters recently scaled the Sydney Opera House to unravel a banner reading “No Harvey No- stop selling Aussie forest destruction.”

Louise Morris, campaigns manager at Markets for Change said, “From floor surveys we have conducted in Harvey Norman an average of 70% of the wood products found in their stores were Australian native forest wood products.”

Miss Morris maintains that, “It is the responsibility of retailers to implement procurement policies that rule out selling high conservation value Australian native forest products- instead moving to plantation based products.

“Well managed plantations are a viable alternative to logging of native old growth forests.

“Mixed specie plantations grown in appropriate areas are the perfect way to supply our wood and paper needs, while leaving native forests to be carbon and biodiversity stores and to act as watersheds, which is what they do best.”

In response to the campaign Gerry Harvey said, on ABC radio, “You know, I’m trying my best to use recycled timber or timber from plantations and not old forests.

“But every now and again something will slip through and I’ll be caught using timber from old forests, but it well could be timber that the Government in fact has told saw millers that they can actually – they can take it. They’ve got a certificate to take it.

“So it’s a little bit dicey sometimes.”

However Mr. Harvey’s claims have been questioned by Get Up who recently posted on their website, “the reality is – Harvey Norman has contracts with loggers in Tasmania, NSW, Victoria and WA to source wood from our most precious native forests.

“Harvey Norman has started using industry spin and a dodgy industry certification scheme to try and deflect mounting public pressure and protests.”

Get Up is continuing to ask the public to sign a petition with the goal of Harvey Norman agreeing not to source timber for high conservation value forests.

They aim to circulate the petition to every Harvey Norman store in Australia, in the hope that franchise owners will take notice even if the larger company doesn’t change their policy.

Harvey Norman is not the only retailer who sources material from high conservation value forests; earlier this year envelopes from Kmart were found to contain Indonesian rainforest wood.

When asked why Harvey Norman was specifically targeted for the campaign Ms Morris said, “Harvey Norman was chosen as a campaign focus as they are Australia’s largest furniture and electrical retailer, with stores in other countries as well.

“The Harvey Norman campaign is an ongoing one whereby we are working to the aim of Harvey Norman implementing procurement policies that rule out the selling of native forests products in their stores.”

What happens to the food that doesn’t make the journey from the farm to the market or the produce at the market that won’t sell on the day? Brooke Eggleton reports.

Apple waste that will never make it to the market. Image: SO6622

At 7am on a Wednesday morning, produce grower Marce Vassallo is busy creating his display, as the smell of seasonal fruits and freshly cut herbs attract hoards of buyers to Sydney’s popular Flemington Markets.

Mr Vassallo said: “There’s a lot of stuff that gets wasted, especially vegetables.”

According to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation, approximately one third of the food produced in the world every year, which is roughly 1.3 billion tons, gets lost or is wasted.

Australia’s leading food rescue charity Oz Harvest have estimated that around 20 to 40 per cent of fruit and vegetables are rejected before they’ve even reached the shops.

This can sometimes result from poor weather conditions but is more likely the work of strict cosmetic standards or low sales.

Gourmet Herbs owner Vassallo runs an efficient operation by monitoring his customers’ demands and planting his crops accordingly.

Unfortunately, not all businesses are run as effectively as his.

Vassallo explains that when a product is cheap and plentiful, only half may be picked because you can’t sell the rest.

“There’s no market sometimes for it, you can only pick so much, the rest you have to hoe it in,” he said.

Budgetary pressures mean that it’s cheaper for the grower to destroy the remainder of the crop and start over than to sell it at a depleted price.

Tristate wholesaler Anthony Pavone said: “It all comes down to dollars and cents at the end of the day, because the cost to produce the article has to meet a certain amount.”

“The largest amount of cost becomes pallets, cartons, freight and labour, which is harvesting it and packing it.”

The problem is that there’s no organisation that collects this specific type of food wastage, that is, crops produced by growers or farmers.

Vassallo said: “There’s a lot of people like pensioners, where if you said to them I’ve got potatoes here going to waste come and get a bag of potatoes . . . but there’s no outlet anywhere.”

The incessant beeping of trucks and forklifts interrupts his train of thought as he begins to pack up his stall for the day. It’s 9am and the peak selling period is over.

Whilst growers may find it hard to donate their stock, there are food charity services, such as Oz Harvest and Foodbank that collect food donations from markets and shops and redistribute them to those in need.

Oz Harvest collects food from the Flemington Markets twice a week that is then donated to a variety of charities and refuges for consumption.

An Oz Harvest spokesperson said: “Our seven vans on the road each month are collecting 60 tons of food that otherwise would have gone to waste. 60 tons a month in Sydney alone, that’s scary.”

“Who wants to see all that beautiful food go to landfill, when there’s people out there that are hungry?”

A proposal by university professor Dr John Hadley to grant endangered animals property rights has caused a number of farmers groups and ecologists to react. Jamesina McLeod reports.

There is a silent killer taking over Sydney’s harbour. Jessica Hynes writes about the spread of Caulerpa taxifolia and how it affects biodiversity in our harbour.

Caulerpa Taxifolia is spreading across Sydney's harbour. Image: Wiki Commons

Dave Thomas fears an invasion is upon us. He isn’t talking about the type of dooms-day, war-like invasion Australians feared would happen with the Japanese in WWII. But like the soldiers who sat and waited, watching for Japanese submarines entering our beloved harbour, Thomas looks out over Sydney, anxiously awaiting his enemy: the toxic marine alga Caulerpa taxifolia.

The battle began on the coast of Monaco in 1984 where a small plot was discovered in the Mediterranean Sea. Because Caulerpa is a tropical species, it was thought the aquarium strain alga would not survive the cool waters of the Mediterranean. But it did.

Caulerpa has now conquered thousands of hectares of the world’s seafloor, including 14 waterways in New South Wales.

The alga is native to tropical Queensland, but the same cannot be said for NSW. It was first discovered in NSW waters outside its natural range, at Port Hacking in April 2000.

There is no definitive answer as to how the alga made its way into our waters, although scientists deem human intervention, the dumping of aquaria containing Caulerpa, the most likely reason.

Once at Port Hacking, discoveries were soon made at Lake Conjola, Pittwater and Botany Bay. And with a rapid reproductive process of fragmentation accelerated by anchoring boats that cut up the weed and relocate it to other areas, more populations quickly appeared up and down the NSW coast.

Since 2002, Industry & Investment NSW (I&I) has undertaken a continuous research and control program involving the treatment of over six hectares of Caulerpa with 1500 tonnes of salt in hope of its eradication. Yet 14 of the state’s estuaries remain infected.

According to marine ecologist Dr Paul Gribben, salt has been able to permanently eradicate an entire population of Caulerpa at Lake Macquarie but it has not yet been achieved elsewhere.

Dr Gribben, a research fellow at the University of Technology, Sydney (UTS), said: “There have been no wholesale efforts to remove Caulerpa from very large areas. It just can’t be done. There’s just too much of it. Too much Caulerpa and it costs too much money.

“The responsibility falls with the Industry & Investment department but they can only do what they have the funds to do. They are concerned but because they lack government funding they are restricted.”

Because of its aggressive reproduction process, Gribben argues there is no reason why it will not continue spreading.

Thomas is concerned that, because of its ability to grow rapidly, Caulerpa could eventually out-compete the luscious populations of native sea grass that occupy Manly’s Cabbage Tree Bay.

He said: “The sea grasses act as nursery grounds for many species. They are places where little juvenile fish can recruit, seek refuge from predation and have a source of food.

“Caulerpa will take over the areas populated by sea grass and this will impact on all aspects of animal life up and down the chain.”

Gribben, who has collaborated with I&I NSW on many research projects, believes the spread of Caulerpa is enhanced by deteriorating beds of sea grass and the situation is not a case of one species ‘out-competing’ the other.

“The sea grass is stressed by urbanisation, nutrients and sewerage,” he said.

“They get gaps in them or they start retreating and that opens up space for Caulerpa to come in. That doesn’t mean Caulerpa is out-competing sea grasses, it just means that it is taking advantage of the space.”

World-wide studies, including those held by Gribben at UTS, show that the composition of fish communities and invertebrates change when Caulerpa is introduced, notably because of its production of toxic substances that deter many species.

Dr Gribben said: “Fish don’t like to forage in it, they don’t like to eat it and they don’t like to go near it. What we may eventually see is a loss of herbivorous fish because they will move away.”

In Manly Cove and North Harbour, years of heavy anchoring activity has wiped out a lot of the native sea grass, which has made it particularly vulnerable to Caulerpa.

With sites including Little Manly Beach, Clontarf, Forty Baskets and Quarantine Beach infested, Cabbage Tree Bay is one of the only areas in the Manly region where there is currently no Caulerpa.

Thomas believes the weed would be catastrophic and provoke precious invertebrates and species of rays or octopuses to disappear.

He said: “It [Caulerpa] won’t support the number of species that sea grass will so you’ll loose fish species and this will impact diving and snorkeling, which are significant to the tourist activity and culture of Manly.”

According to I&I NSW, permanent eradication of Caulerpa in NSW waters is unfeasible due to the large size of existing Caulerpa beds. And that’s why its focus is on smaller populations.

But Thomas believes that I&I needs to be more assertive in protecting valuable areas that are at high risk of becoming infested, such as Cabbage Tree Bay.

He said: “There has to be a proactive way of coming in and enforcing rules. A zero tolerance ‘no anchoring’ policy would be appropriate but I think they’re just too scared to do it.”

Fishing has been illegal in the bay since it was declared an aquatic reserve in 2002 but boats have been able to continue anchoring, causing continuous damage to the sea grass.

Thomas said: “The anchors just rip at the sea grass. The chain mows the bottom, destroying anything it its path, and a lot of the boaties don’t realise what they’re doing. There are no visible signs around.”

“It only takes one fragment and by the time the weed becomes obvious, it will be too late to do anything,” he said. “It will be rife just like it is everywhere else.”

Environmental activists like Thomas and Manly Greens Councillor Cathy Griffin are in support of moves by the NSW Parks and Wildlife Service, who control the reserve, to ban boats from the bay entirely.

But they face fierce competition from the boating community who believe their right to enjoy public space will be infringed.

Michael Chapman, President of the Boat Owner’s Association of NSW, said: “We recognise that the sea grass is precious and that Caulerpa is a threat to Cabbage Tree Bay but with the installation of some sea grass friendly public moorings and clear signage boats should be able o co-exist with the environment.”

“Boats have been anchoring here for years, it’s a safe-haven from southerly winds, and there’s still no Caulerpa. Completely banning boats would be way too extreme.”

In 2002, Caulerpa was also discovered in South Australia’s Port River and its state government imposed an anchoring ban on all vessels.

Although Caulerpa is still present in the river, the ban was lifted in March 2011 and is now classed as a ‘containment area’, with Biosecurity SA pleading boat users to continue being vigilant to ensure the weed does not spread beyond these new boundaries.

This raises the question: Are anchoring bans effective?

One Adelaide fisherman commented on an online fishing forum Strike & Hook: “The no anchoring thing wasn’t taken seriously at all and never policed. The weed is still in the system so figure that one out. Bloody waste of time and many people missed out on fishing in there that whole time.”

Gribben argues that sea grasses, which are damaged by anchoring, are vital to the prevention of Caulerpa invasion so a ‘no anchoring’ policy in a site like Cabbage Tree Bay would be valuable.

He said: “Most of the research shows that if sea grasses are healthy Caulerpa can’t get a foothold and for this reason it’s essential we care for areas where sea grass exists.”

But it’s not just the sea grasses that need protecting, said Gribben, it’s the bare sand too.

“They have really high biodiversity of bivalves, clams, mussels and worms and, although they don’t sound exciting, they’re really important to how our estuaries function and their health.”

According to Gribben, Caulerpa is an ecosystem engineer and while other invasive species eat and compete with other organisms, Caulerpa transforms and engineers the environment.

He said: “It’s the environmental change that affects other species, it’s not Caulerpa per se. Caulerpa affects the environment and the environment affects the animals.

“The Caulerpa sucks all the oxygen out of the sediment, makes the habitat toxic and most of the animals that cannot adapt to that environment will die. It’s likely we will see localised extinctions of some species.””

Caulerpa is also rife in the waters of Pittwater, with beds at The Basin, Bayview, the western side of the Barrenjoey Peninsula and surrounding Scotland Island.

It is one of only two Caulerpa affected estuaries where commercial net fishing is still allowed.

Most of the areas in Pittwater that were commercially hauled in the past have a Section 8 Caulerpa netting closure but other Caulerpa infested areas in the region remain open to commercial net fishing.

At the present, I&I NSW is considering further closures in Pittwater to protect beds of native sea grass and, if these are implemented, the Caulerpa closure in Pittwater will be revoked.

Dr Jonathan King, Greens candidate for Pittwater, believes this would be a viable option for Pittwater.

“Given that there is a clear lack of funding that makes the prospect of eradicating Caulerpa in our area improbable, the idea of closing off areas where native sea grass exists would be effective in securing their protection.

“Although a removal program would be ideal, this would be affordable for the state government and certainly cost-efficient.”

The proposal at Pittwater would be suitable for Cabbage Tree Bay, Thomas said.

“If it can be done there, if sea grass beds could be closed to anchors and boats, then why can’t it be done here? All we need is a ‘no anchoring’ zone really!

“This really is a battle worth winning. And while it may be too late in some places, there is still a chance [for] victory here.”

Whatever it is, King is adamant something needs to be done.

“Caulerpa beds are as bad as cane toads. They’re like submarine cane toads.”

And no one likes submarines in our harbour.

Kept a secret among the Bolivian tribes for thousands of years, quinoa or the ‘grain of the gods’ has recently become a highly sought-after food in the West. Jemma Nicoll reports.

Lauran and Henriette Daman in their Kindreds Organics farm. Image: Honest to Goodness

For five thousand years the key to human survival lived amongst the early tribes of Bolivia. Quinoa, known locally as the ‘grain of the gods’, nourished soldiers, strengthened communities and was worshiped as a life-preserving necessity.

But the secret’s out, and this superfood has revolutionised Australian supermarkets.

Containing the eight amino acids essential for human growth, quinoa is the new top-shelf hero of the organic and health food sector. Never before has a gluten-free, high in protein, low GI superfood entered our market at such speed. Quinoa’s superior taste and ease of adaptation to cereals, breads, pasta and snack foods has suppliers rubbing their hands together and Aussie pantries stocked with the latest health trend.

However as with most trends, quinoa’s increased popularity comes with its own quandaries.

According to the New York Times, Bolivian quinoa consumption has fallen 34 per cent in recent years. Increased western imports have tripled prices forcing the local population to bid farewell to their staple ingredient.

Richard Seymour, General Manager of Melbourne’s Mount Zero Olives launched an Australian grown quinoa into retailers and began supplying to restaurants in December 2010.

“The guiding principles for Mount Zero have always been sustainable, regional and quality.

“So I would hope that we will never sell imported products based on [these] principles,” he said.

“Reading about the impact of exporting quinoa from South America on the local population, only confirms that we have made the right decision.”

Similarly, Sydney-based suppliers Honest to Goodness opt for domestic production. The company likes  “to stock Australian grown products as much as possible, supporting our farmers and also low food miles which is all supportive of sustainable and environmental practices,” said Marketing and Communications Officer Amanda Powell.

Kindred Organics farm in Tasmania is where Australia's first organic quinoa is being grown. Image: Honest to Goodness

A supplier’s decisions to “think global, act local” is big business for Lauran and Henriette Daman, pioneers of Australia’s first and only organic quinoa crop. As the masterminds behind Kindred Organics, a family-owned and operated farm in northern Tasmania, they have successfully grown three seasons of quinoa.

Mr Daman thinks it’s strange that imports take the main focus.

“As a nation I think it is far more important to be self-sufficient for environmental reasons and for food security,” he said. “And I like a challenge.”

Australian representatives of the internationally renowned fair trade food suppliers, Alter Eco, travel to Bolivia three times a year to visit quinoa producers. They have recently assessed the impact of the higher quinoa prices on local populations. Founding Director, Ilse Keijzer said the increase has had positive results.

“What is happening in Bolivia today is a fantastic opportunity to help these communities, as long as fair trade standards are guaranteed,” she said.

“The rising profile and price of quinoa on the world market is a unique opportunity for one of the poorest regions in the world to transform itself.”

Ms Keijzer acknowledges that quinoa is expensive for local populations, however says that it is not the only reason for changing food habits in the region.

“Globalisation in general has accelerated the taste for western processed foods and diets,” She said. “The purchase of fair trade quinoa has a very positive impact on the people.”

Mixed messages about the impact of foreign grown quinoa will not stop the Damans from leading the way in supplying Australian-grown produce.

“Quinoa is a primitive plant and only grows where it likes to grow. Lucky for us, it wants to grow on our farm,” Mr Daman said.

Man’s best friend is facing a crisis as puppy farming rapidly becomes one of Australia’s most pressing animal welfare problems. Christie Sinclair reports.

This litter of neglected puppies is only one of thousands suffering that fate. Image: Don A. Elbourne Jr

Thousands of puppies across the country are caged in appalling conditions for breeding as the puppy farming industry places profit over the welfare of dogs. And despite the thousands of lost, unwanted and abandoned dogs that are killed in animal shelters each year the practice of puppy farming continues to contribute to this oversupply of dogs.

But the escalation of this problem lies in a misinformed public and a lack of adequate legislation.

The RSPCA characterises puppy farming as the “large- scale commercial production of puppies for sale”. Often hundreds of dogs live in the same area, are confined to tiny cages and receive little social interaction, exercise and basic care. The dogs are forced to live in damp and unsanitary conditions, often in their own faeces and urine.

Dr. Camilla Babington of Mount Martha Veterinary Clinic in Victoria reports that there are a number of health as well as moral issues associated with puppy farming.

“Do we want dogs to be in a farmed situation? When people think about dogs they think about pets, rather than animals that are kept in a similar way to that in which pigs are kept. They are not treated as a companion animal rather treated as a production animal. That’s a moral issue,” she says.

And to maximise profit female dogs are often forced to produce litter after litter, resulting in major health issues. Once they reach the end of breeding life they are often euthanised rather than being re-homed, devoid of a chance to live a normal life.

Babington also points out that puppies need a key socialisation period within which they adequately socialise with both humans and other dogs. When they are kept confined to cages, the puppies often out on a lot of this essential socialisation that can ultimately lead to behavioural problems later in life.

It seems the only way to ensure all puppies are raised in an ethical environment is to help place pressure on the government to stop the operation of puppy factories.

Animal welfare groups have long been campaigning for the regulation and abolishment of puppy farming. Passionate people like president of Oscar’s Law Debra Tranter and director of Australian Teens Against Animal Cruelty(ATAAC) Elizabeth Anile and their teams work diligently to bring the issue into the media and the public spotlight.

The Oscar’s Law campaign is about legislative reform and lobbying politicians to abolish factory farming. The campaign was named in memory of one of a number of severely neglected dogs rescued from a puppy farm in Central Victoria in January 2010.

To raise public awareness and support the Oscar’s Law campaign, a Puppy Farm Awareness Day Rally was held on Sunday 19 September at Parliament House in Melbourne to further highlight the need for changes to be implemented. Tranter says the rally was a great success and she has since been overwhelmed with support.

“We’ve been inundated with people offering their support. In a lot of those emails, people are saying they didn’t even know that this actually happened in Australia. They thought it was a problem that only happened overseas. We have succeeded in raising so much public awareness about what goes on behind pet shop windows. That was a clear goal of the campaign, to educate and raise public awareness.”

It is clear the rally was a success, with The Oscar’s Law website recently upgraded from a Victorian initiative to a national campaign to accommodate the tremendous amount of support from people wanting to lobby in their own states.

ATAAC, the first Australian animal protection group operated entirely by teenagers, use social mediums such as their website, Facebook and Twitter pages to help educate fans on the truth about puppy farms and how people can help in the abolishment of such institutions.

“ATAAC is proud to be one of the official supporters of the rally and of the campaign itself,” says Anile, its director.

“We help to promote any demonstrations or campaigns the people behind Oscar’s Law have come up with in an effort to get as many young Australians to attend as we can. It’s so important for the youth of Australia to be made aware of these issues so that they too can in turn make informed decisions which will hopefully create change.”

Anile says the first step in raising awareness is to reach out to consumers who are unaware of the concept of puppy factories and the cruelty masked by inviting pet shop windows.

“We need to keep this issue in the media so that the Victorian Government can see that Victorians want these cruel institutions closed down. We also urge people to continue writing letters to the Premier and to never, ever buy from pet shops – always adopt.”

In 1994, a mandatory code of practice against puppy farming came into existence although its application has never been enforced. It is problematic as the RSPCA (the body responsible for the prevention of cruelty to animals) was frozen out of the legislation, giving them virtually no powers under the act at all. If persons are caught violating the code of practice there are financial penalties or they can have their permit revoked, however Tranter said that has never been the case.

“The only person who can enforce the laws on a puppy farm is a local council officer. Most of the time they don’t understand the legislation, they haven’t got time and it’s just not a priority. It’s basically a self-regulated industry,” says Tranter.

Driving this industry are the inviting displays in pet shop windows that encourage impulsive buying behaviours and successfully mask the cruelty behind the puppy farming industry. A key problem when buying a puppy from a pet shop is that it is difficult to identify where the animal has been sourced.

“In terms of helping people avoid buying from a puppy farm, my advice would be that they are best not to buy from a pet shop. It is pretty rare that at a pet shop you can guarantee what the origin of the their stock was. The best you can say is if it is pure-bred and it’s got its papers then it has probably has come from a breeder,” says Babington.

The best way worried consumers can ensure they are not supporting puppy farms is to adopt a puppy or dog from a pound, vet or animal shelter. The benefit is that the animal’s life is saved, it is checked by vets, de-sexed, vaccinated and costs a fraction of the price a breeder or pet shop would charge.

“It comes back to whether people fall in love with some cute fluffy thing that they see in a pet shop window or do they want to give an animal a home that would otherwise be put to sleep,” said Babington.

Dominic Geiger | The Wire

Plans to build nine dams along the Mekong in Laos will have both environmental and social implications. Image: Themiz

Plans to build nine dams on the main stretch of the Mekong river in Laos has outraged environmentalists and humanitarian groups.

According to the Laos government, the plans are designed to lift many people out of poverty by selling off hydroelectricity to the country’s energy hungry neighbours; Thailand and Vietnam.

“Mekong is a fantastic river. It has an amazing diversity. It is one of the most prolific rivers in the world for fish with more than 1000 species,” says Marc Goichot, senior adviser on sustainable infrastructure at the World Wildlife Fund.

Goichot says the benefits the Mekong fishstocks bring to the people of the region is unequal elsewhere in the world.

“It produces some, brings in $7 billion within a year and produces more than $3 billion tonnes of fish a year.

Listen to this story on the Wire:
[See post to listen to audio]

“[The proposed dam] would affect the fisheries because it will breach the connectivity and affect the fisheries and the people along the Mekong depend on the fisheries.”

Professor Stuart Bunn, Director of the Australian Rivers Institute at Griffith University agrees with Goichot and says that the proposed dams will radically change the way of life for people living on the Mekong.

“The Mekong is one of the last of the relatively unscathed large rivers and that’s largely due to the fact that it hasn’t had a large number of dams put on it. Building the dams and particularly the ones that are talked about are likely to have a big environmental and social impact down stream.”

“On the river itself, there is not going to be, I don’t think too much in the sense of displacement of people. These are not dams that are designed to backflow them and move people out.

“I think the most significant environmental issue for communities is the potential damage to natural fisheries downstream and that, the social impacts of that, in terms of removing a major source of protein for communities down stream is probably the most significant effect.

The World wildlife Fund has predicted that species of fish including the Mekong catfish are likely to become extinct if the proposed dams are built. A prediction Bunn agrees with.

“Yes… the Mekong has an unusually high fish species diversity. It’s something like 1300 species of fish are already described and many of the ones in the river migrate large distances up… And there are other more charismatic ones, like the giant Mekong catfish which, you know, they are under a pressure already from fishing and these are ones that simply won’t be able to navigate their way through a series of barrages and dams.”

On 20 April a disastrous explosion on the BP-owned Deepwater Horizon rig killed 11 workers and subsequently caused the rig to sink. A damaged wellhead underwater was left leaking over 1 million litres of oil per day for a month. In the aftermath of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in April, the world is left wondering how this could happen, whether or not it was preventable – and more importantly, will it happen again? Bjorn-Ruban Thomassen reports.

Rescue of a Brown Pelican from the Barataria Bay in Grand Isle, La., June 4, 2010. U.S. Coast Guard photo by Petty Officer 3rd Class Ann Marie Gorden. Image: Deepwater Horizon Response

Deepwater Horizon is not the first major devastating oil spill in the world. A little closer to home, it was only last year that one of Australia’s worst oil disasters occurred.

On 21 August 2009, a blowout on a rig in the Montara oil field in the Timor Sea off the northern coast of Western Australia left a well leaking 64 tonnes of oil per day. The well did not stop leaking until 3 November when the blowout was capped.

The World Wide Fund for Nature reported that the oil leak had significant impact on marine life, occurring in a fragile conservation area. Consequently green groups have been calling for better emergency response plans at oil and gas sites, as well as improved safety measures.

In more ways than one, the Montara Wellhead spill foreshadowed what would be an even worse disaster.

While the official investigative report on the spill is yet to be made public, conservationists and experts claim that lessons clearly have to be learned in the field of security and safety measurements on oil rigs worldwide.

And while the public discussion on the safety over oil rigs continues, others question the severity of impact oil spills have on the environment.

In a report published on the University of Technology Sydney’s Newsroom website, professor and marine biologist Peter Ralph argues that the Montara Wellhead leak had little impact on marine life.

“This is not refined or processed oil leaking from the Montara Wellhead platform.

“It is the same natural oil that leaks from natural fissures in the sea floor.

“The highly toxic components of this oil evaporate far more readily than other oils such as the bunker oils. As the slick breaks down, components of the oil will dissolve in the water but the large volume of the surrounding water means the impact is quickly diluted.”

While Professor Ralph’s statements might indicate that oil spills of a major size like the Montara Wellhead are not as dangerous as they are made out to be, other experts say there is simply not enough knowledge of the subject.

Professor Ross Coleman is the director for the Centre for Research on Ecological Impacts of Coastal Cities at the University of Sydney. He says more research is needed before we can truly define the environmental impacts of oil spills.

“The environmental impact of an oil spill is often actually not known because it’s an area we don’t have much knowledge of.

“People don’t necessarily define what they mean by environmental impact. For instance, conservation groups often use emotive imagery in their work. A bird covered in oil spill trying to take off from a rig is not a pleasant sight, but it is not necessarily indicative of environmental damage.”

After the Deepwater Horizon spills, birds were largely reported to be affected and Coleman agrees this is a problem.

“The effects of oil spills on sea birds are reasonably understood,” he says.

“Oil causes birds to lose the capacity to insulate themselves, so they often die of hypothermia. And while there is the option of cleaning the birds, it usually adds stress and the birds end up dispersing anyway.”

However, Coleman argues that it is very hard to know in detail how oil spills affect other marine life, as in general we know very little about the deep sea.

“We generally know more about the surface of the moon than we do about the deep sea. So understanding ecological impact on deep sea marine life, such as organisms living on the sea floor is simply something we need to do more research on. Better research on oil spills in these habitats would mean we would better know what would happen if they were contaminated,” Coleman says.

A greener future

Environmental groups worldwide argue that oil spills on the whole should be avoided no matter how much or little of an impact they have on marine life.

Alex Moore, spokesperson for Friends of the Earth US says all new oil drilling should be avoided.

“Offshore drilling is inherently dirty and dangerous. The only way to protect our coasts and our economy from oil spills is to ban any new offshore drilling,” he says.

The organisation also remains highly critical of the US government and BP in light of the recent disaster.

“For far too long the U.S. Government has allowed oil companies to set the rules for safety and environmental protection”, he says. “Do-nothing regulators have looked the other way as companies like BP drilled deeper and deeper, putting the coastal ecosystems and fisheries at unacceptable risk.

“President Obama needs to take over the spill response to ensure that people and the environment are put ahead of BP’s profits,” says Moore.

BP themselves have openly declared ultimate responsibility for what happened and are responsible for making things right.

While their response to the oil spill has been under extreme amounts of scrutiny, even President Obama acknowledged at a recent press conference that some of the criticism hurled at BP has been unfair or overly harsh. And as the company progresses with the clean-up, the very future for offshore drilling is looking bleak.

Green organisations warn of future environmental disasters caused by offshore drilling, and while President Obama has put a moratorium on drilling permits until November, experts are beginning to question whether our dependency on fossil fuels must come to an end once and for all.

Professor Coleman says there are resources that unlike fossil fuels, are not currently being used to their full potential.

“There is a fine supply of oil and coal on the planet, and the less there is the harder it is to get, and the pricier it will become. I think we will suffer stress long before the supplies run out,” he says.

He adds that Australia has a “shockingly bad” reputation in this respect.

“We have the possibility to provide solar power a lot more than we do. And yet successive governments have unsuccessfully done so, by failing to fund necessary research.

“For instance,” he adds, “the University of New South Wales did research on solar power but was cut back on funding.

“Another indicative of a poor attitude towards the issue is the lack of use of water power. In Sydney, it rains more than it does in London but still most of the rainwater goes out to sea so we suffer periodic droughts.”

Greenpeace International recently announced a new blueprint showing how governments investing in green energy jobs could save the climate and fossil fuel addiction.

“Our Energy Revolution scenario shows how to eliminate unpredictable fossil fuel costs, destructive mining and oil exploration and with it catastrophes such as the current BP Gulf oil spill,” said Sven Teske, Greenpeace International’s Senior Energy Expert in a statement.

“Investing in people, rather than dirty and dangerous fossil fuels not only boosts global economic development but stems catastrophic climate change,” he added. The report goes on to show that cutting our dependency on fossil fuels is not a matter of technology, but investment.

“The 2010 Energy Revolution report outlines pathways towards a 100% renewable energy supply for the world. It demonstrates that there is no technological barrier to achieving this vision and reaping its many benefits in terms of the environment and jobs,” said Christine Lins, Secretary General of the European Renewable Energy Council (EREC).

She added, “The barrier is political. All that is now needed to set sustainable energy future for our planet is the political will.”

The Lofoten Islands – potential disaster

This political will might see a rather significant boost after the Deepwater Horizon disaster, if environmentalists are to be believed.

In Norway, plans for test drilling were recently dropped.

With its 4.8 million inhabitants, it might seem rather insignificant in comparison to the bigger, more powerful European nations, but Norway is no small player on the European economic market.

With large resources of oil, natural gas and hydroelectric power, it is one of the wealthiest countries in the world, benefitting from its large coastal areas, strategically kept to itself by opting out of affiliation with the European Union.

Since the 1960’s, successful offshore test drilling for oil and gas has quickly sent the country to the top of the world’s list of financially wealthy countries, and Norway invests its Petroleum Fund, saving up capita for future generations.

While Norway has avoided any major damage from oil spills, there are still concerns about its offshore rigs.

As the government announced new plans for more test drilling close to potentially very fragile marine environments, green groups throughout the country panicked and quickly opposed the government’s plans.

However, it was not until the Deepwater Horizon disaster that plans were officially dropped.

The proposed new drilling was to take place in the Barents Sea, just off the coast of the Lofoten Islands. For the 25,000 inhabitants living on the islands, an environmental disaster such as an oil spill could have devastating consequences.

Frederic Hauge, of the Norwegian Environmental group Bellona, says the area is one of the world’s most important fishing grounds.

“The Lofoten Islands and the Barents Sea is one of the world’s cleanest sea areas, and is the natural habitat for over 150 different fish species,” he says.

“The areas are grounds for spawning for some of the world’s most important fish stocks. The Northern areas are regarded as internationally important sea bird areas, and are the homes to a lot of endangered species. These unique resources are vulnerable to pollution from oil spills.”

Bellona says the Norwegian government so far has insufficiently taken this into consideration, as well as failing to acknowledge how there is very little knowledge about the natural resources in the area.

“Accidents and spills in these vulnerable areas will generally have bigger consequences than other places in the world,” Hauge says.

With the government currently revising its plans for expanding offshore oil drilling, the vast fishing and sea bird grounds of the Lofoten Islands are momentarily safe, but for other areas of the world offshore oil drilling is the only option in the search for energy fuels.

Joshua Reichert of the Pew Charitable Trusts in the US says while offshore oil drilling probably will not come to an end anytime soon, environmentalists are happy with the focus that has been put on safety measures and risk assessment.

“All uses of the ocean should be considered through rigorous, scientifically valid assessments of the potential impacts and benefits,” he says. “If offshore oil and gas development continues to be a part of the picture it should not be at the expense of either safety or the other economic and environmental values our oceans provide.”

The Australian Maritime Safety Authority and BP Global declined to issue any comments, and directed information requests on to their respective websites.

Bjorn-Ruban Thomassen was on an Global Environmental Journalism Education Initiative exchange at UTS is now back at City University where he is completing a Bachelor in Journalism.

Recreational fishing at Devilbend Reserve on the Mornington Peninsula could allow more feral populations of marron, a noxious freshwater crayfish, to establish in Victoria writes Kim Brooks.

By opening up Devilbend reserve for recreational use, the potential for the spread of the toxic crayfish increases. Image: Janet Oliver

Devilbend Reserve is one of two known locations of the invasive Western Australian crayfish in Victoria.

Dr Ross Thompson, co-author of Devilbend Aquatic Habitats Ecosystem Study, said one of the reasons marrons haven’t spread from Devilbend is because the reserve is not open to the public.

Devilbend Reserve has been closed since it became a water catchment in the 1960s.

Between 2000 and 2001, Melbourne Water removed the reservoir from the water supply network and initiated plans for its future use.

VRFish, the Victorian recreational fishers representative organisation, and recreational fishing interests have been lobbying for recreational fishing at Devilbend Reserve for over ten years.

When Parks Victoria open Devilbend Reserve to recreational fishers, as confirmed in the Final Management Plan released in May, the potential threat of marron to spread into other fishing spots in Victoria becomes a real concern.

The marron are considered a Noxious Aquatic Species under the Fisheries Act 1995 (Vic). Existing legislation prohibits the possession of marron at any time.

Additionally, it is illegal for a person to bring into Victoria, or take, hatch, keep, possess, sell, transport, put in any container or release marron.

Parks Victoria have noted in the Management Plan that restrictions on the type of fishing equipment permitted in the reserve will be employed to manage the spread of marron.

“It’s actually a declared noxious pest, it’s illegal for Parks Victoria to allow it to spread,” said Dr Thompson.

“Probably one of the reasons it’s not being spread is that people aren’t able to move in and out of the reserve, to me that’s a major issue that unless dealt with I would never open that personally for any form of recreational use.”

A confidential report on marron in Victoria conducted by the Arthur Rylah Institute for the Department of Sustainability and Environment states that the spread of marron within Victoria is likely to occur from the translocation of marron sourced from Devilbend Reservoir.

Don Ellis, President of Metropolitan Anglers Association, believes the idea that marron will spread is a “furphy”. He said that recreational fishers recognise marron and would not mistakenly remove them from the Reserve.

Devilbend Foundation, a local community group, disagree. In a letter to the Minister for Agriculture and Small Business in 2007, the President of Devilbend Foundation called the feral population of marron in the Devilbend Reservoir a potential threat to the aquatic environments of Victoria.

Tom Camp, member of Mornington Peninsula Fly Fishers and long time advocate for recreational fishing at Devilbend Reserve believes that fishers will help contain the feral population of marron at the Reservoir.

“The best way to maintain and manage marron is if you have people there keeping an eye on it, the worst thing to do is leave it unchecked.”

Related articles

Trout threatens Dwarf

Trout populations are a threat to endangered species in the Devilbend Reservoir on the Mornington Peninsula in Victoria, according to experts. Kim Brooks reports.

The Blue-billed duck is just one of the species threatened by introducing trout into Devilbend Reservoir. Image: Valorix.

The Department of Primary Industries (Fisheries Victoria) has stocked the Devilbend Reservoir with Brown and Rainbow Trout despite studies that advise the introduction of alien fish species will jeopardise populations of vulnerable native fish and birds.

“I think the decision has been made, and will be made in the absence of any scientific advice, in fact it may even be made in direct contradiction of scientific advice,” said Dr Ross Thompson, co-author of Devilbend Aquatic Habitats Ecosystem Study.

Thompson was contracted by Parks Victoria to undertake one of numerous studies they commissioned as part of a two year process involving community groups and recreational fishing interests to approve public access into the reserve.

Recreational fishing at Devilbend Reserve requires the water to be stocked with fish suitable for angling.

Thompson said there is a “genuine risk” to the native fish at Devilbend. He is concerned about the vulnerability of native fish to predation by introduced fish species.

Fisheries Victoria’s Translocation Risk Assessment for Devilbend and Bittern Reservoirs for stocking recreational (fish) species states that the Reservoir will overflow once every two years. According to the study, the introduced fish will then reach the Devilbend and Balcombe Creek system.

This prediction is alarming, as the creek system contains Dwarf Galaxias (Galaxiella pusilla), a native fish listed as ‘vulnerable’ under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 and declared ‘threatened’ under the Victorian Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988.

Dr Thompson warned that Dwarf Galaxias are extremely vulnerable to predation by salmonids, a family of ray-finned fish.

The Risk Assessment states that the risk rating for impacts of predation on the Dwarf Galaxias population is high, and the consequences to their population long-term.

Victoria’s Department of Sustainability and Environment has a National Recovery Plan for the Dwarf Galaxias that names both Fisheries Victoria and Parks Victoria as responsible for the species’ management.

The Recovery Plan recognises a Galaxias population in Devilbend Creek. The management practices to avoid threatening processes believed to be responsible for their decline recommend that proposals to translocate aquatic species into Dwarf Galaxias’ habitat be subject to relevant risk management processes.

“The Translocation Evaluation Panel (TEP) have considered those risks and considered that they are not significant,” said Chris Hardman, Parks Victoria’s Melbourne Regional manager.

Hardman said that the hydrology had not yet been resolved, and until water was put in the reservoir to maintain water levels it would not overflow.

“The TEP considers all risks, and then they determine whether those risks can be managed. In the case of Devilbend, the panel have recommended that it is an appropriate waterway for stocking. That’s based on all of the research, all of the science, all of the reports.”

Christopher Collins, Executive Officer of Victorian Recreational Fishers’ representative organisation, VR Fish, said he had seen the TEP risk assessment.

“I can assure you that I didn’t see anywhere where the words ‘big risks’ were written, there are risks, absolutely, but the risks according to that report are manageable.”

A pair of White-bellied Sea Eagles and Blue-billed Ducks, both threatened species listed under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988, also inhabit the reserve. Devilbend is the only known nesting site for the White-bellied Sea Eagle on the Peninsula.

Ornithologist Roger Richards said trout will eat the invertebrates these birds feed on.

“You’re taking away a lot of the food that the Blue-billed Ducks need.”

The Impact of recreational access and stocking with fish on waterbirds and shorebirds – Devilbend Reserve Study, conducted by the Arthur Rylah Institute for the Department of Sustainability and Environment, states that the Blue-billed Ducks are a priority species for conservation at Devilbend and there are strong reasons to resist stocking the water with fish.

The Impact Study states that evidence suggests stocking with fish would also have adverse effects on a wide range of waterbird species at Devilbend Reserve.

But Chris Hardman believes that measures have been taken to avoid this.

“Angling access has been restricted to four spots around Devilbend, so the vast majority of the shoreline is free from human activity, which ensures the protection and refuge for wildlife,” he said.

“The parks are for people to use and enjoy.”