Dear Andrew WilkiePeter Brenner, Denison voter25.02.11 12:00...

Dear Andrew Wilkie

Peter Brenner, Denison voter
25.02.11 12:00 am

Dear Andrew Wilkie

What makes you think and very publicly enforce the PM?s opinion that a ?majority of Tasmanians appear to support a pulp mill?? Have I missed a recent poll in this matter?

Should you indirectly refer to the ?Principles? hammered out between the forest industries and ENGOs, then I am sure you must have been made aware by now that the community was NOT represented in this semi- clandestine round table exercise. Sad and hurtful that it is for many of us, organisations such as the Wilderness Society and others have actively and vigorously excluded and rejected to integrate visions of forest management methods other than clear felling native forest or planting monoculture tree plantations for pulp.

It has been and is impossible to this day to represent the strong desire in many of the general community to move towards forest management methods that answer to multiple bottoms lines, are truly sustainable over centuries, provide quality jobs throughout the State, increase biodiversity, enhance quality and quantity of scarce water, avoid the use of dangerous chemicals and fertilisers, retain the viability of rural communities and offer an aesthetically pleasing environment for residents and visitor.

This is what the community wants. It?s neither outrageous nor impossible. What is outrageous is the Tamar Valley pulp mill proposal and you oppose it yourself.

What is unfortunately also outrageous is the continued brick walling of ENGOs and GREENS (of course along with industry) against a more comprehensive view of fundamental restructuring of forestry well beyond forest mining and monoculture fibre planting. A major global trend towards multiple bottom line forest management (also known as close to nature forest management) is actively ignored by the organisations to the point that people who try to introduce the subject into the scene are vilified and sidelined. This has been most explicitly the case in the lead up period to the ?principles round table? in Christine Milne?s office where voices outside the EGOs were effectively silenced.

I myself contributed qualified information and thoughts at various points pre ?round table? in writing but never received even an acknowledgement of receipt from a staffer.

The community has not chosen to be blackmailed into accepting either old growth forest mining or widespread monoculture fibre plantations.

Why do ENGOs and GREENS so vigourously resist a balanced, durable approach to forestry and resource management in general?

Perhaps you are independent enough to look at these options that are clearly far, far more conducive to public wellbeing than either of the solutions peddled by money hungry industries and confused conservation organisations.

I and others, more specifically qualified, are happy to brief you about sound forestry management methods any time you like.
Understanding the full scope of forest management is as important as understanding gambling and its ramifications for the population. I look forward to hearing from you.

Peter Brenner, Denison voter

from TT