Just when I thought I’d finished my campaign for the truth about the proposed mill, I found that the Forestry Industries Association of Tasmania is now quoting me as endorsing the pulp mill.
Yes that’s right, a full page advert in the Hobart Mercury and the Launceston Examiner by Forestry Industry Association of Tasmania stated, amongst other things:
“The anti-pulp mill kayaker, Simeon Michaels, has endorsed Bleached Kraft Pulp Mills by calling the 90 Mile Beach precinct in Victoria (an area subject to an old-technology pulp mill effluent for over 70 years) a 'landscape without the slightest indication of human presence, perhaps since time began'"
Ok, so lets start with what my website actually said. Here it is….
“I left Lake’s Entrance early this morning. The tide turned at 6:15 and I didn’t want to have to paddle against it. It was what most people would describe as a bleak sort of a day, low clouds, occasional drizzle, cold wind coming off the ocean. It was glorious out there. A slate grey ocean, the wind not strong enough to impede progress, and the endless dunes of 90 Mile Beach receding to the horizon, a landscape without the slightest indication of human presence, unchanged perhaps since time began
I stopped for lunch (some Snapper saved from the night before) and had started up again with about 16k to go to Loch Sport. ”
In other words:
- The blog describes a morning’s paddle down one small section of 90 Mile Beach (which as the name suggest, is very very long). On a clear day, you can see mountains about 20km ahead in a kayak, but on a bleak day such as that one, and with nothing to look at but low dunes, the most you could see ahead of you is 10k, probably more like 5km.
- The paragraph describes the landscape (ie sand dunes) and obviously isn't a comment about water toxicity levels. Its ridiculous to say it is. Its not like I was towing a chemistry laboratory with me, and it would be ridiculous to suggest that I was saying that pulp mill effuent is safe.
And now to the facts:
- The Maryvale Pulp mill to which the Forest Industries Association refers is located near Traralgon, on the other side of the Strezlecki mountain ranges approximately 100 kilometers from the spot which I was writing about
- The Maryvale mill does use a Kraft bleaching process but has an output of 130,000T per annum, approximately 1/10th the size of Gunns proposed Mill
- The Maryvale mill does have an ocean outfall which is located South West of Golden Beach, which I didn’t go past until the next day. If you read the blog for that day, I describe it as a “murky” sort of a day (though to be fair I was referring to the weather rather than water conditions)
- While Gunns IIS claims that its effluent won't harm marine life, public submissions to the RPDC by the Tasmanian Fishing Industry Council and expert oceanograhers indicate a high level of concern with the accuracy and the scope of Gunns study.
In other words, the Forestry Industries Association's claim that I have endorsed bleached kraft mills is a complete distortion of the facts. While we’re talking about distorting the facts, lets look at some other examples.
1. Cover Up When Julian Green resigned, Premier Lennon said he was taking an early retirement. The next day his resignation letter leaked and the real cause was the government “undermining the objectivity” of the process. Well maybe you could call that an “omission” or “telling half the truth” but in my books it’s a cover up
2. Jobs: Gunns say that the mill will create 1617 jobs, but when you read the fine print you see that most of those jobs are temporary jobs during the construction phase, and most of those will go to Mainlanders. When you look closely you realise that there will only be 300 full time jobs for Tasmanians over 30 years. Not content with quoting Gunns already-inflated figure of 1617 jobs, Labor politicians and the Forest Industry Association have been claiming that 2000 jobs will be created by the mill –well where did that figure come from, or are they just plucking figures out of the air?
3. Water use: Gunns say that the mills use of 26 Gigalitres of fresh water per years, but that’s OK because its only 1% of the flow of the Tamar. That’s not a lie, but its completely irrelevant because you can’t drink the flow of the Tamar. In fact, right now you can’t even swim in it because its polluted with blue green algae. The relevant fact is that the Great Lake, which feeds the Trevallyn dam, is only 15.7% full, having halved since 2005
And saving the best for last:
4. Lie: Lennon attempted to pressure the new RPDC head, ex-Supreme Court Judge Wright by threatening to legislate around the RPDC if he Wright speed up his time frame. Lennon denied the contents of the conversation, but written evidence has emerged which shows that Judge Wright was telling the truth, and Lennon did threaten legislation. No weaseling out of that one, it’s a lie
The list goes on and on almost every significant aspect of the mill:
I invite you to read my previous blog entries, the rest of my website, submissions to the RPDC, Gunns IIS itself, and make up your own mind.
In the meantime people who do have the courage to stand up against Gunns and the Government are criticized and ridiculed. Dr Warwick Raverty, CSIRO scientist and pulp mill specialist, was appointed to the RPDC as its technical expert. After resigning, he came out saying that it was “the wrong mill in the wrong place” Since then the Government has questioned his credentials, a tactic reperated by the Forest Industries Association. Similarly with Judge Wright, whom Lennon “ridiculed” in Parliament.
I suppose that I can expect the same treatment – smear campaigns, personal attacks, maybe even litigation, but remember this:
There will always be people who are willing to stand up for the truth, and as the crisis over the mill deepens, there will be more and more of these every day.
Now I’m going to get hold of the press and see if they are interested in setting the record straight