community – Page 13 – ANGFA Queensland

Red crabs overtake Christmas Island

community, threatened species

Nov 122013

Original story by Rachel Sullivan, ABC Science

Each year as soon as the wet season rains start, Christmas Island's red crabs race to meet their partner before the new moon rises.

Red crabs migrate once a year during the wet season. Photo: Director of National Parks/Parks Australia

Located in the Indian Ocean, Christmas Island has a tropical monsoonal climate, with highly variable annual rainfall.

When the rain starts to fall in October and November, one of the world's great migrations gets underway.

The island becomes a seething mass of crustaceans as countless red crabs brave roads and vertical cliffs to reach the sea and breed.

The red crab Gecarcoidea natalis is one of 23 land and freshwater crab species inhabiting Christmas Island.

It is by far the most numerous of all these crab species, with tens of millions of the bright red crabs found in shady sites all over the island.

Red crabs are also the only land crab species where both males and females migrate to breed; other land crabs mate inland with only the females making the long march to the coast to deposit their fertilised eggs into the sea.

Highly sensitive to moisture loss, red crabs live in a variety of habitats from the coastal shore to domestic gardens, however they are most abundant in the deep shade of the rainforest floor.

There, they live a fiercely solitary life in burrows dug deep in the moist soil or in humid cracks in rocky outcrops.

During the driest months they plug the burrow entrance with leaves to maintain high internal humidity levels and aestivate (become dormant) for several months.

They emerge from their burrows to feed on fallen leaves, fruit flowers and seedlings only after showers of rain.

"Red crabs have no natural predators and drying out is their main natural threat," says red crab expert and Christmas Island National Park ranger Max Orchard.

"Conserving moisture drives everything they do, from when they eat, to when they migrate."

Fact File

What: Red crabs Gecarcoidea natalis

When: Migration of the red crabs begins in October to November, when the rains start to fall during the island's annual wet season, but is also dictated by the phase of the moon, with the female crabs needing to deposit fertilised eggs into the ocean during the last quarter of the lunar phase.

Where: Christmas Island is the summit of a submarine mountain, located 2600km north-west of Perth, Western Australia. It is part of the Australian Territory, but is geographically closest to Java, Indonesia.

Other: The crabs have no natural predators, but are threatened by human activity, particularly traffic, and introduced species, especially the yellow crazy ant, Anoplolepis gracilipes.

It all depends on the moon

Red crabs amassed on a rock. Photo: Parks Australia, Director of Parks

Red crabs amassed on a rock (Source: Director of Parks/Parks Australia)

Red crabs start their annual breeding cycle when they are around four to five years old. Although no one knows for sure, Orchard believes that the crabs live for 20 to 30 years, based on the life-span of other animals that start breeding at a similar age.

The timing of the breeding migration is dictated by the start of the wet season, and by the phase of the moon.

"The crabs need the humidity so they don't dry out on their journey, but they also need to deposit the eggs into the sea during the last quarter of the moon," he says.

There is the least difference between high and low tide during this lunar phase, and it is therefore thought safer for females to approach the water.

The main downward migration from the plateau can last up to 18 days. Started by the males and joined progressively by females, the crabs mass and march in broad columns until they reach their destination.

"When they arrive at the sea they have a quick dip in the water to replenish body moisture, and then mate in burrows dug by the males on the shore terraces," explains Orchard. "Basically a male digs a burrow with a chamber big enough for two crabs. He sits at the entrance and drags in a passing female, mates with her, then leaves."

When mating, the male deposits sperm into body cavities inside the female. The eggs are fertilised when she exudes them through these body cavities into a 'pouch' formed between her distended abdomen and body. The eggs are held in place under her body by appendages called pleopods.

After two weeks the female crab releases the eggs into the sea at a specific moment: before dawn, on the turn of high tide, during the last quarter moon phase. The eggs hatch as they enter the water and become larvae called megalops that grow through various stages of metamorphosis and emerge from the sea 30 days later.

Christmas Island road sign warning motorists to slow down for migrating red crabs. Photo: Parks Australia, Director of Parks

"The whole migration hinges around the egg release date, so even if the rains have started, and the crabs can't make it to the coast and go through the various phases of the breeding cycle, they will aim to spawn the following month instead," Orchard says.

This year for example, it started raining and there were signs that the males were getting ready to start marching.

"There were lots of trigger-happy males out of their burrows and being more active than usual in early October, but the rain stopped and the migration halted, only beginning again on 28 October. This was too late for them to make the spawning date of 1 November, but gives them lots of time to meet the following spawning date of 30 November."

Although they don't participate in the breeding spectacular, younger animals take advantage of the migration by moving inland to occupy vacant burrows while the mature crabs are away from home. Max Orchard believes they gradually progress further inland over the five years or so before they start breeding, which firmly imprints the migration route they will follow for the rest of their lives.

A red crab crossing a closed road on Christmas Island Photo: Director of Parks, Parks Australia

Warning: crabs crossing

Apart from the occasional attack by the much larger robber crab, crabs are only threatened by human activities such as road traffic, forest clearing for phosphate mining, and introduced species.

Crabs have right of way on the island but this is not always practical, says Orchard, so a series of underpasses and bridges have been constructed to help separate crabs and cars.

"They have an inbuilt urge to follow a direct route and while they will walk around an obstacle, such as plastic fencing to stop them crossing the road they can only handle being deviated from their path by about 200 metres before they become confused," Orchard says.

Infant red crabs on Christmas Island. Photo: Parks Australia, Director of Parks

"They crawl down cliffs and vertical walls so are quite happy to use these facilities, as long as they have the right surface and are not too far off the beaten path," he says. "We've trialled synthetic surfaces like carpet, but it seems to interfere with the tactile receptors on their legs and they don't like it.

"However they are perfectly happy to walk on roads so covering bridges with tarmac should encourage them to use this route; the 2010 season will put this theory to the test."

With phosphate miners now prohibited from clearing primary rainforest to protect the island's endemic wildlife, the crabs' major concern comes from introduced yellow crazy ants, Anoplolepis gracilipes. Thought to originate in Africa, they are believed to have arrived on Christmas Island sometime between 1915 and 1934, but only became a problem in the 1990s when supercolonies formed and the ants started to dominate the ecosystem.

Red crabs migrating on Christmas Island Photo: Director of Parks, Parks Australia

When migrating the red crabs move through areas infested with crazy ants that spray a defensive formic acid, lethal to crabs. Furthermore, studies show the crazy ants have killed an estimated 15-20 million crabs by occupying their burrows-forcing the crabs out into drier areas where they dehydrate and die-and then using their burrows as nest sites.

Once the crabs and other forest floor species have been displaced in an area, crazy ants dominate the local ecosystem. Seedlings that were previously eaten by crabs start to grow, rapidly changing the forest structure, while weeds, such as the stinging tree Dendrocnide peltata, that are normally kept in check by the crabs flourish.

In response, Christmas Island National Park staff in collaboration with scientists from Latrobe and Monash Universities developed poison baits to kill the ants. Initially spread by hand, it was soon realised that this method would take too long to be immediately effective and would not reach ants established in the more rugged areas of the island, so a helicopter-based aerial baiting program was also established. Although research is continuing into possible alternative control measures, Orchard says this has quickly and significantly reduced ant populations across the island, while remaining populations are continually monitored so that any new outbreaks can be detected quickly.

"It's been a very successful program so far," he says.

"Although there are millions of them, red crabs are critically important to the ecological health of Christmas Island and we need to remain vigilant about any threat to their survival."

Backs turned on wild rivers fate

community, government, waterways/wetlands

Nov 092013

Original story by Lyndon Schneiders at The Australian

IN the next few months the Queensland government will release for comment a new regional plan for Cape York. It is the intent of the Newman government that this plan will remove a raft of conservation protections provided by existing "wild river" declarations and will open up large areas of Cape York to mining and development.

Public comments about Queensland's wild rivers at the Wilderness Society.

If successful, the revocation of the declarations will be a win for vocal opponents of wild river protection, including the mining industry and Noel Pearson. But will it be a Pyrrhic victory, particularly for Pearson?

Proposals to protect wild rivers were first put by the Beattie government in 2004, with legislation passed unanimously by the Queensland parliament in 2005. Wild river declarations are in place on rivers on Cape York, in the Gulf Country and in the Channel Country.

The rivers protected under the act are some of the last truly healthy river systems left. A study in Nature in 2010 found that about 65 per cent of the world's river systems are "highly threatened" from over-development and that global efforts to reduce and manage these threats are limited. The magnificent Wenlock River on Cape York, protected under the act, but again threatened by strip mining for bauxite, is home to more species of freshwater fish (48) than any other river system in Australia.

Under a declaration, conservation occurs through the regulation of a small number of highly destructive developments by ensuring a setback away from waterways and wetlands (the "high preservation area"). The protection of river systems this way is a departure from more conventional approaches to conservation that rely on the creation of a small number of strictly protected national parks and nature reserves to protect a "sample" of nature.

The wild rivers approach protects those areas that are sensitive to the most damaging developments such as dams and mines, and supports a vast range of development opportunities outside those sensitive areas including mining, pastoralism, aquaculture and agriculture. In the case of the Wenlock, 80 per cent of the catchment remains available for the full range of development purposes while the most sensitive wetlands, springs and waterways are protected.

This is precisely the sort of conservation approach, which protects values and encourages multiple use of the landscape, that has been promoted by critics of the environmental movement who accuse us of trying to "lock up" the entire landscape. This is why the protection of wild rivers in the Channel Country and the Gulf Country has been uncontroversial.

The same cannot be said for the rivers of Cape York. It is on the Cape that debate has raged fiercely, with traditional owners divided between pro and anti-wild river camps.

Yet even the most passionate opponents of the wild river declarations support the protection of the Cape rivers. Interviewed in 2008, Pearson said: "And when it comes to the protection of rivers, there's absolutely no disagreement on our part that those rivers should remain in the way they've been managed by Aboriginal people for thousands of years and for the past 200 years."

Even Queensland Environment Minister Andrew Powell, who ultimately may be responsible for stripping away river protection, said in September last year that the government was committed to the protection of pristine waterways.

The issue is not the protection of these rivers. Rather, it is the way in which the rivers are protected and the process in which traditional owners decide what happens on homelands.

In 2009, the federal government became a signatory to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples following years of opposition by the Howard government. Enshrined within UNDRIP is the concept of free, prior and informed consent of indigenous peoples in respect to all decisions that affect their communities and rights and interests.

In March 2011, Pearson cited the failure of the wild river process to obtain consent from traditional owners consistent with UNDRIP as a chief reason for opposing the protection of rivers on Cape York.

In November 2010, Tony Abbott said that the motivation for his failed bid to introduce a private member's bill to overturn wild rivers protection was to ensure the "absolute necessity of consent by Aboriginal people for a Queensland wild rivers declaration to apply over their land".

Of course consent as defined under the UNDRIP is not just the right to say yes or no to conservation measures. Article 32 clearly states that signatory states should obtain "free and informed consent prior to the approval of any project affecting their lands or territories and other resources, particularly in connection with the development, utilisation or exploitation of mineral, water or other resources".

A transparent consent process that empowers communities to truly decide the future of their homelands would be embraced by most Australians. Now that Abbott has the ability to put his words into action, and now that Pearson has friends in high places in the Queensland government, the opportunity to deliver a true consent-based process is in their hands.

To achieve this, The Wilderness Society would support further review and reform of the Wild Rivers Act 2005 at state level and reform of the Native Title Act 1993 at commonwealth level to fully embrace the concept of free, prior and informed consent for conservation and development.

This principle would apply across the board: to mining, agriculture and other development as well as environmental protection.

The alternative, to which the Queensland and federal governments appear committed, is to strip back environmental protections, fast-track development proposals and turn their backs on their previous lofty works of support for the principle of consent by traditional owners. That certainly seems a long way from the halcyon days of 2010.

Lyndon Schneiders is the national director of The Wilderness Society.

What do young people really know about climate change?

community, environment, government

Nov 092013

Original story by Vaille Dawson, Curtin University and Katherine Carson, Curtin University at The Conversation

The next generation will be the ones to feel the increasing effects of climate change. But how much do they really know about it?

After all, it’s one thing to say: yes, I believe in climate change. But another to say: yes, I understand it and how it works.

Young people are harbouring misconceptions about climate change. But what can be done about it? Photo: www.shutterstock.com

There is a lot of research which supports the idea that until a person understands the science behind climate change, they may not support political regulation or make personal decisions to help reduce greenhouse gas production.

Our new study, published in the latest edition of Teaching Science, has investigated the scientific understanding of 438 Western Australian Year 10 students in relation to the greenhouse effect and climate change.

The results are startling.

What we know they know

When asked for a written response to the question “what is climate change?” only half of the students gave an answer which showed some understanding of the science behind climate change. Furthermore, one-third of the students included some type of alternative conception in their answer.

When answering the question “what is the greenhouse effect?” the results were even more disappointing with only one third of students able to provide an answer showing some understanding of the science behind the greenhouse effect. Over 40% of the answers included at least one alternative conception.

So what does this mean? Well, on the surface, the results obviously show that the majority of Year 10 students do not understand the science behind the greenhouse effect and climate change. However if you look deeper, it is their alternative conceptions that reveal how misunderstanding climate change science can affect the decisions students make.

Mysteries and misconceptions

The most common misunderstanding we found was confusing the ozone layer with the greenhouse effect. This is also common in the general population and is completely understandable, given that the purpose of both is to protect the Earth from ultraviolet rays in one case, and infrared rays in the other.

The problem is that chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are associated with the degradation of the ozone layer, whereas greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, are involved in the enhanced greenhouse effect which contributes to global warming.

This is an important distinction because the moderating behaviour is different for each. To protect the ozone layer we need to decrease the escape of CFCs, still found in air conditioners and refrigerators. The release of one chlorine atom can destroy over 100,000 ozone molecules.

But to mitigate the consequences of the enhanced greenhouse effect, we need to reduce our energy usage in all its varied forms or invest in low emissions technology.

Our study also found up to 15% of students thought carbon dioxide was the only greenhouse gas. This really isn’t surprising given the focus carbon receives in our debate on climate change. After all, the media talks mostly about “carbon taxes” and “carbon footprints”.

It’s good there is some knowledge there, but this study shows it remains incomplete. And without the basic scientific understanding, students and the public in general do not fully understand the consequences of their decisions.

Water (the most abundant greenhouse gas), methane and nitrous oxide are all important contributors to the enhanced greenhouse gas and are affected by human activity. Methane in particular contributes to the enhanced greenhouse effect and is 21 times more potent than carbon dioxide.

It is important then for meat and dairy eaters to recognise that livestock (mostly cattle) are responsible for up to 20% of the world’s methane production. Farmers and scientists are currently investigating steps which can be taken to try and reduce this percentage.

What can be done?

So where do these misunderstandings spring from? And what can we do to improve young people’s information on climate change?

There are several problems with the way science is taught in Australian schools that makes improving young people’s understanding difficult.

To start with, climate change is not explicitly mentioned in the Australian Curriculum in Science until year 10, despite young people’s exposure to the topic in the media much earlier. In fact, the results of our survey showed that TV was the most frequent source of information about climate change, with school science coming second (although school science was seen as the most trustworthy).

Then there’s the fact that climate change science is multidisciplinary, drawing from chemistry, physics, biology and earth sciences. Even the recent Australian curriculum divides science into four discrete sections, which means young people are not able to make the links between the scientific aspects of climate change.

The fact that climate science is sometimes seen as a socio-scientific issue is also problematic. It means that some don’t see it as a legitimate topic for school.

And finally, young people are failing to select science in the final two years of secondary school thus depriving them of the opportunity to examine these types of issues in depth.

If we want to improve this situation, it needs to begin in school with a curriculum which promotes understanding of climate science as well as pro-environmental behaviour. Teachers need to be aware of common alternative conceptions (often held by teachers themselves) and be given the resources and skills to overcome them.

But without addressing this, through better education, we may see the current apathy around climate change, continue into the next generation.

Vaille Dawson receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Katherine Carson does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has no relevant affiliations.

This article was originally published at The Conversation.
Read the original article.

High Court casts a line on right to fish

community, fisheries, government

Nov 072013

Originalstory by Mark Schliebs, The Australian

THE right of Aborigines to take any fish caught for traditional purposes from waterways and oceans has been confirmed after the High Court yesterday handed a father and son victory in a four-year legal battle, ruling that native title meant state fishery laws did not apply to them.

Narrunga man Owen Karpany at West Beach in Adelaide yesterday after the High Court upheld his right to fish on the Yorke Peninsula. Photo: Kelly Barnes, The Australian

The Aboriginal men had been embroiled in a legal fight with South Australia's Labor government since 2009, when they caught 24 undersized abalone at Cape Elizabeth on the Yorke Peninsula. In a unanimous decision yesterday, the High Court ruled that South Australian fishing laws enacted in 1971 did not extinguish native title rights as the government had argued and found the Narrunga men had done nothing wrong by keeping their catch.

At least two other states and the federal government have unsuccessfully argued that laws restricting the killing of fauna have extinguished native title.

The High Court ruled in August that federal and Queensland laws did not extinguish the native title right of Torres Strait Island communities to fish commercially without a licence.

In what was seen as a national precedent, Aboriginal man Murrandoo Yanner won a High Court battle with the Queensland government in 1999 after using a traditional form of harpoon to catch two juvenile crocodiles in the Gulf of Carpentaria five years earlier, despite state laws against the hunting of the young reptiles.

In yesterday's ruling, South Australia's Attorney-General John Rau was ordered to pay legal costs to the two men, estimated to be more than $400,000.

Owen Karpany and his son Daniel, 26, were charged by authorities with taking the abalone in their native title area at Cape Elizabeth, southwest of Moonta on the Yorke Peninsula, northwest of Adelaide. "I didn't expect it to go as far as it went, but it went to the highest court in all of Australia with an outcome in my favour," said Mr Karpany, 61.

He said other native title holders were "over the moon".

"I did have my doubters, but I just stuck to my guns," he said.

"I knew that I was right from the beginning."

The Magistrates Court had originally ruled the men could not be punished over the abalone as they had been exercising their native title rights, but the government appealed the case to the full bench of the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court last year ruled that native title fishing rights across the state were extinguished with the introduction of the 1971 Fisheries Act, which was replaced by the Fisheries Management Act in 2007. Yesterday, the High Court overruled that finding.

"The (legislation) did not prohibit or restrict the applicants, as native title holders, from gathering or fishing for abalone in the waters concerned where they did so for the purpose of satisfying their personal, domestic or non-commercial communal needs and in exercise or enjoyment of their native title rights and interests," the High Court ruled.

"The conceded native title right of the applicants was therefore a right to take fish from the relevant waters. That right comprehended the taking of abalone, including undersize abalone."

Perth barrister Greg McIntyre SC, a member of the Law Council of Australia's native title working group, said the ruling built on the August decision that fisheries laws could not override native title.

He said although the rulings would not have a direct impact on other states' fisheries laws, a principle on native title rights had been set by the court.

Andrew Beckworth, a lawyer from South Australian Native Title Services, who assisted the men, said the four-year battle had cost the government, which was always unlikely to win, hundreds of thousands of dollars. "More than anything, we were just bewildered that our state government persisted with this argument," he said. "We're not sure what they were trying to achieve."

Mr Rau has sought advice from the crown solicitor on the impact of the ruling, but said he did not fear widespread taking of under-sized fish.

Into the jungles of Papua New Guinea: a personal journey

community, threatened species, wildlife

Nov 072013

By Euan Ritchie, Deakin University at The Conversation

Much of my time as an ecology lecturer has been spent teaching students about the wonders of this planet’s biodiversity, but also regrettably, how much of this biodiversity is under severe threat. Hundreds, if not thousands, of species become extinct each year.

You never know what you’ll catch on camera in PNG. Photo: Tenkile Conservation Alliance

With such a disastrous outlook for the species with which we share Earth, it’s easy to get disheartened about where we’re headed. More personally, I often question whether my own fields of science (ecology and conservation biology) are really enough to help stem the extinction tide.

But this week I’m embarking on a journey to Papua New Guinea’s remote Torricelli Mountains. It’s part of a crowd-funded project, Discovering Papua New Guinea’s Mountain Mammals that is a partnership between myself at Deakin University and Jim and Jean Thomas of the Tenkile Conservation Alliance. Together we will count and identify mammals as part of conservation efforts in the region, including some very special species of tree kangaroo.

Just how many Tenkile tree kangaroos are left and where are they found? Our cameras will provide these answers. Photo: Tenkile Conservation Alliance

Who or what is a Tenkile?

The Tenkile (pronounced ten-kee-lay) is one of 14 tree kangaroo species found in the tropical rainforests of New Guinea and Australia.

In 2001 there were only 100 Tenkile left in the Torricelli Mountains of PNG. To put that in perspective, there are thought to be around 1600 Giant Pandas in the world today. That made the Tenkile one of the world’s most endangered animals. The reason they’re still with us today is largely thanks to the work of the Tenkile Conservation Alliance.

People are a big focus and reason for the TCA’s success. Photo: Tenkile Conservation Alliance

The conservation alliance sets itself apart from many others by focusing on causes rather than symptoms of extinction. The Tenkile had become endangered due to over-hunting, so rather than ignore the needs of local people, the alliance places a strong emphasis on these communities who share the region with the Tenkile.

The reason for the bounce back of Tenkiles is a switch from hunting to more sustainable and reliable sources of protein, including farmed rabbits and chickens. Along with improved education about the local community’s wildlife, and health and living conditions, there has been a real reversal in the once dire trajectory of the region’s wildlife. Thanks to these actions there are now more than double the number of Tenkile there were in 2001.

The Tenkile Conservation Alliance has a community-based approach to conservation

Professor Tim Flannery, himself no stranger to the wilds of PNG, wrote:

A decade on, the Tenkile Conservation Alliance is the most successful conservation organisation in Melanesia … and no other organisation I know of in a developing country has had anything like this degree of success.

What do we hope to achieve in PNG this time?

Our upcoming trip will take us to the northwestern Torricelli Mountains near the Waliapilik area in Sanduan Province. Over two weeks we’ll place 35 remote, motion-sensing cameras out along lines and an elevation gradient ranging from 500 to 1500 m above sea level. These will help us determine a number of things, including:

Are tree kangaroo species (including the Weimang, Tenkile and Yongi) found within the region?
If present, how many individuals of each species are there?
What habitats are most important for each species?
Are species only found at specific elevations and in particular climates, and hence how susceptible could species be to the impacts of global climate change?

To say this trip is full of anticipation is putting it lightly. Along with the critical information we aim to collect on tree kangaroos, we also suspect new species are to be found in the area, including miniature wallabies and echidnas.

When we retrieve our cameras in a few months time it’s going to be exciting to see what we find, and it’s almost guaranteed that there will be many firsts for science. Because camera traps detect and record anything that moves past them, we’ll collect valuable data on a large range of species.

What secrets are waiting to be discovered in these remote forests? Photo: Tenkile Conservation Alliance

Thanks to all who have helped get us this far. This is just the beginning, and if you’d like to contribute or stay in touch please contact me here.

Euan Ritchie receives funding from Pozible www.pozible.com/tenkile

This article was originally published at The Conversation.
Read the original article.

Look out for that turbine! Climate sceptics are the real Chicken Littles

community, environment

Nov 072013

By Stephan Lewandowsky, University of Bristol at The Conversation

The sky is falling! Oh wait, no: it’s just the clouds moving… Photo: Sarah Smith

Several Australian corporate figures have recently disparaged climate scientists.

First, former banker David Murray questioned the integrity of climate scientists on national TV. Casting such aspersions on scientists follows the precedent set by the tobacco industry, which referred to medical researchers as an “oligopolistic cartel” that “manufactures alleged evidence.”

Attacks on scientists proceed according to the same playbook and regardless of discipline. If there is any novelty in Murray’s slur, it is that until recently he led the Future Fund, a body that is legally tasked with delivering risk-adjusted returns on the Australian Government’s budget surpluses. The adjustment of a risk by denying or ignoring it is arguably not without precedent; see the 2007 financial crisis, for example.

More recently, mining figure Hugh Morgan confronted the issue of risk head-on and declared the world’s climate body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, to be “Chicken Littles” whose dire predictions would soon be cast aside, in the same way that the apocalyptic warnings of the Club of Rome from 40 years ago turned out to be false. (Except that when a CSIRO scientist reviewed those 40-year old projections, he found them to be remarkably accurate.)

Much is known in cognitive science about how people judge risks. It is now commonly accepted that those judgments are inherently subjective and subject to cultural biases, such as one’s attitudes towards the free market.

Thus, whereas the medical community lives up to its reputation as Chicken Littles by claiming that tobacco has adverse health effects, other institutions that arise from a different cultural background, such as Morgan’s Institute of Public Affairs (IPA), take a more heroic approach by chastising such “corrupt science” as overly alarmist. The trade-off between free-market fundamentalism and lung cancer is a matter of cultural preferences.

Perhaps then, mining executives are simply Courageous Real Men™ who can handle small problems like climate change — if need be with a bit of nuclear landscaping. Their tough but experienced hands will guide us to a safe future.

Perhaps.

There is, however, one problem, which is that this culture of heroic risk-taking falters at the sight — and the sound! — of wind turbines.

The Australian Environment Foundation (AEF), an organisation closely aligned with the IPA, has been a leader in the fight against the perfidious risk posed by wind turbines.

A recent peer reviewed paper by Professor Simon Chapman and colleagues at the University of Sydney confirmed the impressive success with which the AEF has alerted people to the hazard posed by “wind turbine syndrome”. The paper concludes that health concerns about wind turbines in Australia are primarily limited to those sites that have been visited by organisations with an anti-wind agenda. It found “the dominant opposition model appears to be to foment health anxiety among residents in the planning and construction phases.”

This health anxiety is non-trivial because wind turbine syndrome is a disease more terrifying than smoking, climate change, vaccinations, Communism, and GM foods put together.

The list of symptoms ranges from minor irritations such as the vibration of people’s lips at a distance of 10km from the nearest wind turbine, to more serious issues such as accelerated aging, aggression in cattle, death in goats, aggravated ADHD in children, autism, and behavioral changes in dogs. To date, 216 symptoms have been reported.

The list of symptoms also includes peculiar birth defects in chickens, such as crossed beaks. One might therefore be tempted to dismiss concern about wind turbines as merely another instance of alarmism by “Chicken Little” scientists.

Except that no scientists were involved, because wind turbine syndrome has no presence in the medical literature. The Chicken Littles are anti-wind agitators, many affiliated with the IPA that dismisses the risk from tobacco and climate change.

This presents us with a baffling conundrum. On the one hand, there is a cultural propensity among adherents of the free market to dismiss or deny the risks from climate change, notwithstanding the overwhelming scientific evidence. On the other hand, people steeped in the same culture suffer 216 terrifying symptoms at the sight or sound of a wind turbine, thereby experiencing a risk that is unknown to medical science.

How can those conflicting risk perceptions be reconciled? What is so terrifying about wind turbines? What is so comforting about the many hazards associated with climate change? We cannot be sure as yet, but the answer may well lie in the shadowy world of finance and corporate interests rather than the science of risk management.

Stephan Lewandowsky receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Royal Society.

This article was originally published at The Conversation.
Read the original article.

Mary River turtle nests destroyed amid breeding season

community, threatened species

Oct 312013

Original story by Jon Coghill, ABC News

A conservation group says humans and livestock have destroyed the shallow nests of the vulnerable Mary River turtle on Queensland's Sunshine Coast hinterland.

Glenda Pickersgill from the Save Mary River Coordinating Group says the reptile is in the middle of its laying season, which lasts from October to December.

Mary River Turtle with handler. Photo: Peter Gooch, ABC

She says some turtle nests have been lost after being dug up or driven over.

"There's a few areas where we've seen disturbance of sandbanks and I think that's disappointing," she said.

"The eggs are under the surface by only 15, 16cms, so any trampling, whether it be by humans or by driving over or even by stock, can damage the clutch of eggs that's underneath."

She says the Mary River turtle only lays its eggs in sandy and shady areas and it is important their nests are not disturbed.

"October through to December is the main laying period," she said.

"It'll take about 50 to 55 days to hatch.

"There's a few months there where they're really vulnerable. Unless we've got baby Mary River turtles coming through to replace the elderly, that's where the whole endangered aspect can be helped."

Disaster managers prepare for wet season at Gympie

community, government, waterways/wetlands

Oct 302013

Original story by Bruce Atkinson, ABC News

Disaster agencies are meeting today in Gympie, one of Australia's most flood-prone cities, to discuss preparations for the wet season.

View Larger Map

The south-east Queensland city has had five major floods in the last two years but is currently in the middle of a dry spell.

Police, State Emergency Service (SES), council and other emergency groups will discuss their disaster plans after a briefing from the weather bureau.

Acting Mayor Tony Perrett says Gympie is well prepared.

"One of the great lessons that has come out of it for us is to make certain that we are prepared right across the region," he said.

"Particularly flooding in the last few years has affected many of our outlying areas and we've managed to establish community information groups right across the region.

"They're our eyes and ears in respect of the way the community operates and what they're observing."

Councillor Perrett says the dissemination of information by the local disaster management group (LDMG) during and after disasters is vital.

"That's something, particularly in this region, we've been quite good at," he said.

"At the end of the day, we're only as good as the information we get.

"That's why we've established a broader network now - to provide that information directly to the LDMG so we can provide a more timely response and particularly to work on methods of distributing that information."

Economy and ecology on North Stradbroke

community, government, wildlife

Oct 302013

Original story by Melinda Howells, ABC News

Resource company Sibelco says it did not get everything it wanted in negotiations with the Queensland Government over its sand mining leases on North Stradbroke Island.

A parliamentary committee is examining new laws that would extend sand mining on the Island off Brisbane until 2035.

Sibelco CEO Campbell Jones was questioned about meetings with Premier Campbell Newman to negotiate the proposed legislation.

The sand mine on North Stradbroke Island. Photo: Giulio Saggin, ABC News.

"No we didn't get everything that we wanted," he said.

"There is not a restoration of all of our tenure."

Sibelco says it injects $130 million a year into the region and the new laws balance economic and environmental interests.

It says the previous government's plan to close the largest mine by 2019 would have hurt the local economy.

But environmental groups say an extension of sand mining on North Stradbroke will harm the island's ecosystem.

Evan Hamman from the Environmental Defenders Office says the legislation states that the Government must extend mining leases with no avenues for appeal in the courts.

"There shouldn't be special legislation in this regard, it's unprecedented," he said.

Paul Donatiu from the National Parks Association of Queensland says lakes and wetlands are under threat.

"It puts at risk these incredible, beautiful and rare places," he said.

Cleveland MP Mark Robinson's electorate takes in North Stradbroke.

He questioned the motives of some people giving evidence, asking about their links to the island.

"Are you just anti mining? How many of your members actually live on the island, are residents?" he said.

Climate debate must stick to the science

community, environment, government

Oct 272013

Original story by Heath Aston, Sydney Morning Herald

The author of a report that lays bare the connection between climate change and extreme bushfires has expressed his ''frustration'' with Prime Minister Tony Abbott and Environment Minister Greg Hunt for their refusal to accept scientific consensus on climate change.

Professor Will Steffen, who co-authored the soon-to-be-released bushfire report by the Climate Council, was responding to Mr Abbott's assertion in a newspaper interview with leading climate sceptic Andrew Bolt that drawing a link between the savage fires now plaguing NSW and climate change was ''complete hogwash''.

We never go to secondary sources like that.

"We never go to secondary sources like that.": Professor Will Steffen. Photo: Alex Ellinghausen

The Climate Council report, a summary of which was revealed by Fairfax Media on Friday, found a clear link between rising temperatures and a longer, more dangerous bushfire season in south-eastern Australia.

''We would certainly prefer that this debate be elevated to the real scientific facts as are reported in the scientific literature and as are assessed very competently by the IPCC, the CSIRO and the Bureau [of Meteorology] and the scientists we rely on,'' Professor Steffen said.

''We'd like to see a debate in this country that gets beyond these futile arguments about the science, which have been settled for decades in the scientific literature, and get on with the real debate about what is really the best way forward with dealing with the problem.

''So, yes, it is frustrating having to go back again and again and again and talk about what the science actually says.''

He said if the climate keeps warming at the current rate, the number of days of extreme fire danger each year will double by the middle of the century.

''That's a worst-case scenario and we certainly hope we don't get there. But to make sure we don't get there we have to get emissions of greenhouse gases down very rapidly and very deeply,'' he said.

''For us it's very clear cut, we are seeing an influence of climate change on bushfire conditions, particularly bushfire risk.''

But Professor Steffen said it was too early to determine whether the NSW fires are ''unprecedented'' for their unseasonal ferocity - as has been asserted by the NSW Rural Fire Service.

The Climate Council, which was reformed as an independent body after Mr Hunt abolished it on his second day in the job, will release the report in full next month. It collates 60 pieces of peer-reviewed scientific literature on climate change and fire.

Professor Steffen said Wikipedia, the crowd-edited online encyclopaedia, was not one of his research tools: ''We never go to secondary sources like that.''

Mr Hunt has been criticised for citing Wikipedia as evidence that bushfires are a perennial Australian hazard, unrelated to a warming climate.

On Friday, the Australian Library and Information Association issued a public letter urging the minister to rely on ''well-researched facts''.

The letter states: ''If the slashing of government libraries continues, we will see more politicians quoting Wikipedia and fewer using high quality scientifically proven facts when making life-changing decisions. Hopefully this gaffe will encourage the minister to use his own specialist library and inspire other ministers to ensure that their libraries are fully funded and resourced.''

Older Entries Newer Entries