We Need Strzelecki National Park

Independent Gippsland West MP Susan Davies today strongly criticised National Party MP Peter Ryan for what she described as very premature comments debunking the proposal for a National Park in the Strzelecki forests.

"Peter Ryan will not be making the final decision on this proposal and I believe at this stage he is merely testing the water for the Minister," said Ms Davies.

"All of those involved acknowledge the importance of the forest timber industry and associated jobs."

"However, there is a great deal of difference between sustainable logging of publicly owned state forest and a permanent sell-off which will allow licensees to buy the land once they've decided they no longer wish to keep taking logs."

"The National Park proposal is a compromise. It recognises that the last remnants of the Great Forest of South Gippsland have a special place in the heritage and ecology of the area and that the current reserves are just too small to be viable in the long-term on their own."

"It's only very recently that those concerned with the proper management of our water catchments and tourist assets have really become aware of the ramifications of this sell-off," added Ms Davies.

"Mr Ryan's comments are designed to discourage residents and those responsible authorities as well as the regional forest agreement negotiators."

"There is still time for compromise before the sell-off proceeds and I would urge all interested parties to let both Treasurer Stockdale and Mr Ryan know of their opinion on the issue," Ms Davies concluded.

Copied from Susan's website

FROM A Terrell
 Published Foster Mirror, 15,10.97

Sir, I find it deeply disturbing that 400 square kilometres of public land in the Eastern Strzeleckis (ie the hills north of Foster) has been decreed private land with the mere stroke of a pen from our present government.
This area includes land set aside for future generations for 'multiple-use', water catchment, recreation, bio-diversity, sustainable timber production, tourism.
It includes extremely valuable land, the use of which significantly influences the viability of towns in the South Gippsland Shire.  We're promised jobs, but history has shown corporations bring their own short term labour forces from outside the region.
Why are we spending millions of dollars, and energy, on landcare and waterways when the source of these issues lies in responsible water catchment management which the present government, despite all the papers, all the research, all the promises, has blatantly undermined by its latest Strzelecki "sustainable" timber strategy.

Dear Mr. Ryan
As promised recently at the launch of the Charrettes Handbook in Toora, I am enclosing a copy of 'Strzelecki Blues', with my previous request that you approach APM about a programme for establishing tree plantations on private properties.
Approximately 4 years ago a representative of APM came to this area in a public relations exercise to achieve this and subsequently APM established a number of bluegum plantations on different properties, for the cost of the seedlings (to the owners).  It was understood that they would come in the following years to extend these plantations on suitable properties, with the agreement of the owners.  However this scheme was axed, much to the disappointment of the participants (myself included).
In my view there are many run down and under utilised private properties throughout the Strzeleckis that would be ideal for replanting with native trees and given the right incentives by State and Federal Governments, property owners and the timber industry, would be glad to comply.
This policy would take the pressure off the old growth forests, provide employment and add to our credentials in making a sincere effort to combat he greenhouse effect. (The article I am also enclosing says it much better than I can and with more authority).
Hoping that you will have enough time and interest to give this important issue your attention.
Yours S. Deutschbein
P.S.  Personally I believe that a fully comprehensive plan should be drawn up for the whole of the Strzeleckis to join up all the reserves into one conservation corridor of viably sustainable dimensions.  The remainder could be reserved for plantations.  In this way, conservation, tourism and the timber industry would all be accommodated.  What a job for the Green Corps.
 yours,
 S. Deutschbein

 Open letter from J Meyer, Fish Creek 5/5/98
 
 

Dear Sir / Madam,
Through the efforts of two people, Julie Constable and Kim Devenish, locals to my community, I have been made aware of some discrepancies involving the sale of public land (namely the Strzelecki Forest), Federal information regarding land use for forests, the Forest Code of Practice, the Deferred Forest Agreement and a general lack of awareness over the whole issue.
I read Julie and Kim's booklet, 'Strzelecki Blues' and urge you to do the same.  It explains how 20,000 hectares of native bush has been parcelled in with 167,921 ha. of pubic land given to the Victorian Plantations Corporation to manage when it was formed in 1993.
At the time of writing, changes are being discussed and may have enventuated, enabling land controlled by the VPC to be privatised for use by timber companies.  I hate to think of the consequences for this and other beautiful, unique and beneficial tracts of bush.
Having viewed a Federal issue map of Victoria, zoning area for forests, logging etc. (basically forest management), I noted that the band covering the area in question was coloured green - not for logging - yet logging/clearfelling has already occurred here recently.  The role of policing the 'Forest Code of Practice' has been handed over to our newly amalgamated shires.  The Strzeleckis cover three shires.  It would seem they haven't had time to carry out inspections as logging activity has been carried out with little or no regard for steep slopes, gullies, waterways, bush corridors or rainforest belts.  Where trees have been replanted, they have not been the species removed, but rather blue gums - this is also outside the Code of Practice.
I joined a peaceful demonstration on 28/4/98, on the steps of Parliament House in Spring Street.  The aim was to talk to politicians and raise public awareness.  I was surprised at the ignorance of this affair as expressed by politicians including, Mr Kennett.
I appreciate that you are busy, but could you please take the time to address and investigate these claims.  If the amendment to the VPC act has take place, how can we reserve this and other pieces of native bush?  Can we return them to their previous status of public land not for logging?
This land has been referred to as 'native scrub regrowth'.  In my view it is mountain ash forest and home to many species of flora and fauna, some endangered.  It is also vital for its role in balancing the waterflow for a large part of the Shire in which I live.  Having endured two consecutive dry summers this point alone is worth considering.
I am not in the habit of attending protests or writing to politicians, but I feel that something is amiss here.  What happened to the deferred forest area agreement which protects the Strzelecki State Forest until the Regional Forest Agreement is complete?
I am questioning the continued sale of public assets to raise money short term and concerned over the long term effects of these actions.  My feelings are mirrored by many.
Show your concern for Rural Victoria.  Address this situation fully and with an open mind and please do something about it.
Thank you for your time.  I await your response.
Yours sincerely, J Meyer..

Dear Sir,
I refer to my letter of April 27th and appreciate receipt of the reply dated May 8 from your revenue manager.
I am greatly concerned as to the effect of logging on the environment in the Strzelecki State Forest.
The map received from your revenue manager sets out the objectives of your authority which include the prevention of water quality decline, pest, plant and animal infestation, vegetation and habitat loss, soil structure decline, soil erosion and waterway degradation.  I understand that the headwaters of many of the rivers and streams forming part of the Strzelecki State Forest provide part of the water supplies to local towns and they drain into the local marine park as advised by Cr. Peter Western of the South Gippsland Shire in the Mirror newspaper of May 25th.  He poses the question 'Why are we logging further up when Landcare groups are doing a terrific job downstream clearing up the lower parts of the rivers?"  I ask the same question in view of the fact that is in complete opposition to the objectives of your authority as set out above.  I note in the brochure received from your revenue manager that each authority is referred to as a Catchment and Land Protection Board.  It would therefore appear incumbent on your authority that it should protect the catchments and land in these areas by taking every step to prevent logging.
The brochure also points out that the natural features of the landscape, flora and fauna and coastal areas support a strong tourism and recreation industry estimated at $48 million annually.  Any extension of the stature of the Strzelecki State Forest to protect them from logging would significantly increase the local tourist and recreation industry.  At the present time most of this industry is concentrated in coastal areas.  There is great potential for the recognition of our hinterland as a major contributor to this industry.  Desecration of the landscape by logging interests has a deterrent effect on tourism.   It will be further restricted by denying public access to logging areas.  This situation exists at the present time with the closure of the Dingo Creek, Devils Pinch and Morwell River roads, which previously provided scenic drives enjoyed by tourists.
The brochure refers to the authority's role 'to provide community awareness and understanding of the importance of land and water resources and  their sustainable use, conservation and rehabilitation'.  The public outcry at the proposed logging of the Strzelecki State Forests and the protest rally at Parliament House by local residents, clearly indicates that the local community is fully aware of the need to protect the land and water resources of this area, while local landcare groups lead the State in reafforestation management.  In contrast the activities of logging interests are contrary to the sustainable use and conservation of water and land resources and the main cause of damage to the environment requiring rehabilitation.
The brochure states that' reduced water quality' and I add quantity is rated as the most important issue in the region.  Your brochure also states that proper management of the local environment is critical to the ongoing prosperity of the area.  It emphasises the need to 'ensure that the natural resources of the area remain available to future generations'.  It relates to the need to maintain the natural drainage function of Gippsland streams.  The logging industry has an appalling record of clogging streams and rivers and desecrating and destroying the landscape thereby causing widespread erosion.  Their activities are to be condemned as contrary to the aims and aspirations of your authority.
Your brochure emphasises that soil erosion is already widespread in the Strzelecki Ranges resulting in a reduction in productivity and deterioration of downstream water quality.  As logging is one of of the greatest causes of soil erosion in mountain areas, any improved management practices should result in its exclusion.  it refers to the need to integrate riparian habitat protection, recreation and establishment of corridors and waterway programs.  This is of major importance in the Strzelecki State Forests, which now constitute small isolated areas, requiring protection of existing areas but also an extension of reserves to provide corridors for birds and animals and prohibiting logging.
There is major concern in the community that up to 20,000 hectares of natural forest will be passed off as plantation and logged by a future operator.  The bill passed through Parliament allows the government to sell off the freehold title to the land to timber harvesting interests, thereby opening it up to exploitation and future sale for private profit.  There has been misrepresentation as to the position to the extent that the Treasurer, Alan Stockdale was unaware that there was native forest in the Victorian Plantations Corporation holdings.  The Forest Taskforce in Canberra has also been misinformed by the Victorian government that all the land vested in the VPC was all plantations or 'worthless scrub'.  One of its senior advisers, Phillip Fitch, is anxious to ensure that vegetation and flora and fauna in the Strzeleckis are assessed so that, 'we don't foreclose options' for a reserve system that could cover the whole or part of the Strzeleckis.
Ms Susan Davies, local member for West Gippsland, is concerned to ensure protection of the native forest in the Strzelecki State Forest.
The Council of South Gippsland Shire recently expressed its opposition to logging in the Strzelecki State Forest.   Its interest in the environment was recently recognised by the receipt of the State Local Government Award for being the most environmentally conscious local government body.  Cr. Peter Western of that Shire stated in the Mirror of May 27th, 'the Strzeleckis are an extremely valuable resource in  terms of water ecology and tourism.  It is a resource owned by the public and not by a government or a government department.''
The alternatives are to either maintain and protect this area in its natural state for the benefit and enjoyment of the present and future generations or desecrate and destroy it for short therm financial gain of the logging industry represented by wealthy foreign companies.
Your authority and the South Gippsland Shire can either gain a reputation for integrity in the maintenance and protection of the environment and the water catchment areas under its control pursuant of the objectives or a sordid reputation as a toothless tiger representing a lap dog and lackey of the present state government.
J Wilson.

Dear Mr Davis,
I was impressed by the way you knocked on the head, the proposal to farm pacific oysters in our local waters.  Now it would seem another threat to our environment looms.  If the local bushland is treated as private land it could be clearfelled every 25-30 years, a state of affairs which would never be allowed in ordinary state forest.  This is our water catchment under threat.  What is the point in our local landcare groups spending time and money fencing and planting out local streamsides when the headwaters are set to be destroyed.  These extracts from the local newspaper say it all really.
Yours, A Bos.

 FROM A Bos, Welshpool, 3966 19/7/98
Dear Mr. Davis,
Thank you for your letter MC11......... dated 8/7/98.  I must disagree with you on several points.  I feel that it is false to suggest that reforested farmland outweighs the area of native vegetation in the Strzeleckis and would suggest that the reverse is true.  I would also suggest that eucalypt re-afforestation was not solely done for the purpose of harvesting for timber.  The re-afforestation which was the result of a Royal Commission in the 1920s, (far too long ago for anyone alive today to take the credit) was put in place to reverse a major mistake made earlier, not just to grow trees as a crop.
Far too little of the Strzeleckis is reserved for future generations, as a glance at the BUSHCARE MAPS will show, and Reserved Forest in this area could soon be taking pressure off the Prom, which is fast approaching maximum visitor load.  A Plantation Corporation would seem to be the least appropriate custodian of this remnant forest.
Contrary to the views expressed in your letter, re-forestation in this area occurs naturally and does not depend on human intervention.  True, the state re-purchase  and replanting of farmland led to an increase of forest cover, but the planting program only served to increase the proportion of mountain ash and the introduction of non-endemic Monterey Pine.  Left to itself the forest cover would have been equally extensive, just a different mix.
You also state that the 'Audit' of harvesting operations on the vested lands have shown that there is a high level of compliance with the Code.  Since the Code of Practice only describes the minimum standards, surely we are entitled to better than a 'a high level of compliance'?
To suggest that the Government involvement is a 'risk' and an 'impediment' to an enterprise is to suggest that the Government is incompetent and obstructionist by its very nature.  This is a very peculiar message to send to the Victorian public.  Government enterprises have enjoyed much success in the past.  Telecom, as it used to be known, was a nice little earner for the people of Australia, and the Commonwealth Bank used to hum along quite profitably and independently alongside the privately owned banks, before the current economic rationalist lunacy took hold.
I look forward to your prompt reply.
Yours,  A Bos,

 Open letter from J Wilson, Foster, Vic 3960  28/7/98

Prior to election the present state government promised open government.  Subsequently it has gained a reputation as the most secretive government in the history of this state.  It maintained its reputation for secrecy and subterfuge on June 1st, when it introduced regulations making it a criminal offence to enter a forests operation zone without a written permit, unless you are a policeman or a logger.  Innocent sightseers and picnickers are faced with a fine of $2,000 and ignorant or inadvertent entry is no excuse despite the fact that there are no signs or fences to denote these areas.
Large areas of East Gippsland and the Otways have already been zoned as exclusion areas and it would appear that a substantial part of the Strzelecki State Forest is under consideration.  As this area is so dear to many local people, I recommend that you ask your local politicians why it is necessary to obtain a permit to walk in public owned bushland, which has always been part of our heritage and constitutes a major tourist asset.  I also suggest that you visit your favourite areas in the Strzelecki State Forest before it involves a criminal offence with a penalty of $2,000.
The reason for secrecy is to allow high conservation value forests containing endangered species of wildlife and rare flora to be desecrated by logging interests often represented by wealthy overseas corporations.  The excuse of contractual confidentiality is used to hide the cost of logging native forests, including the exorbitant subsidies in taxpayers' payments for roads, rehabilitation of clearfelled areas and countless other costs not covered by timber royalties.  It is most regrettable that coalition politicians consider that the financial interests of the logging industry are more important than the heartfelt concerns of many of the local community and conservationists generally.

J. Wilson

FROM South Gippsland Conservation Society, Foster Branch 22/7/98
To K Devenish, J Constable & A Standering

Dear Kim, Julie and Alan,
The Foster Branch of the South Gippsland Conservation Society fully supports your proposal for a 30,000 hectare National Park in the Strzelecki State Forest.
We agree that the proposal shows how about 6% to 7% of the original 'great forests of Gippsland' can be easily reserved without great expense; how this change would be more lucrative than present land use; and how the resulting advantages of such a change - increased tourism opportunities, increased catchment protection, decreased soil loss etc. - far outweighs disadvantages.
This proposal is also of considerable urgency in the light of current Gippsland Regional Forests Agreement process, and conforms to the RFA commitment to establishing formal reserves covering 15% of pre 1750 forest cover.
Yours, Marg Rudge, Secretary.

 FROM  S Gunson, Toora 24/7/98
 To Hon. Marie Tehan

Dear Mrs Tehan,
I write to support the proposal for a 30,000 hectare National Park in the Strzelecki State Forest, which your Department will have recently received, and which has been widely distributed to State, Federal and Local Governments as well as many interested groups, after its launch in Foster on Monday July 20th.
This excellent proposal, produced by Julie Constable, Kim Devenish and Allan Standering, demonstrates, that through the establishment of this new National Park, the necessary balance between the interests of the environment, recreation, tourism and forestry can be achieved, so that the whole Gippsland Region would benefit.
The Strzelecki Ranges, with its magnificent forests, is one of Victoria's most beautiful areas, and for Gippsland an area of great tourist potential.  The proposed National Park would easily be accessed by tourists visiting the small towns of Toora, Welshpool, Foster and Yarram, communities which are currently feeling the economic decline in country Victoria.
Without immediate action, this tourist potential will be lost for ever as beautiful rainforest in the Strzelecki State Forest is locked up by the imminent sale of the Victorian Plantations Corporation to private owners.
The protection of important water catchments, as well as the protection of a great variety of flora and fauna, including rare and endangered species, will also be important outcomes of the establishment of this new National Park.
There is no doubt that a new National Park in the Strzelecki State Forest would receive widespread support throughout Gippsland and the whole of Victoria.  In the year when the State and the Gippsland Region are celebrating the centenary of the establishment of Wilson Promontory National Park, the proclamation of a new National Park in the Strzelecki State Forest would demonstrate to the people of Gippsland the Government's commitment to this region and would be a very significant way of celebrating the centenary.
Yours... S Gunson.  c.c. J Kennett, P Davis, P Hall, P Ryan

Madam,
I wish to voice my concern regarding the privatisation of the Victorian Plantation Corporations holdings in the Strzelecki Ranges.
In my opinion privatisation would lead to increased logging in the area by companies in an effort to maximise returns on their investment.  Increased pressure on local flora and faun, along with soil erosion and associated water quality problems should be avoided.
A recent estimation of sixty tonnes of suspended sediment passes through Agnes Falls daily.  We should be embracing land management practices which would further reduce this figure rather than lease large areas of the watershed to companies with dollar signs in their eyes.
A recent article in 'The Mirror' spoke of a proposal to reserve 30,000 hectares of public land in the Strzelecki State Forest for a National Park.  I support the idea of linking existing protected reserves to form a wildlife corridor.  The linking together of the gene pools of Turtons creek, Mt. Fatigue and Gunyah would be of value in preserving the biodiversity in the in the Strzelecki State Forest.
Yours. J. McIntyre

To Kim and Julie,
I have been keen to send you both a letter now for months, as soon as I read the latest article in the Mirror about turning part of the Strzelecki State Forest into National Park and saw the address in the article I began writing this letter immediately.
Thank you so much for working so hard in the fight to save the forest.  You must have put in countless hours of research, writing letters etc,  in your effort to protect the forest.  Your hard work is appreciated by many people.
I myself have written many letters to the relevant authorities about the issue even before the Stronachs Road logging became an issue through the local paper, The Mirror.  As soon as the issue was highlighted in the Mirror my hand started to work hard writing four page letters to Parks Victoria, South Gippsland Shire, Wellington Shire, Marie Tehan, Shadow Minister, Ms Garbutt, and local member Susan Davies.
My family ........... regularly visit the Strzelecki State Forest and enjoy our visits there immensly.  At times I am just awestruck by its beauty, its a place that must be protected.  It will be a real tragedy if logging takes place in this precious place.
Its strange how we think so much alike on this issue without even meeting.  In my letter on the subject previous to the issue being shown in  The Mirror, I was expressing my views on having many sections of the forest including corridors linking sections to be protected and given State Park status, with the hope of being given National Park status eventually.  I suppose people who care about the environment, think alike.  Who wouldn't after visiting the area.
Thank you again for you hard work, I am now going to write another letter to Marie Tehan in support for the push for a National Park. .............
F Sammut

 TO  Kim and Julie
 FROM  P Enders

....  Thank you for the paper 'Strzelecki Blues' it helped a lot on my assignment.....

Dear Minister Stockdale,
The sale of the Strzelecki State Forest to private concerns is an issue that I find deeply disturbing.  I think that the forest is precious and the little that is left is too important to squander.  Such a sale of land I consider as theft.  It cannot be justified.  Especially not economically.  The consequent land degradation of clearfelling imposes not only a death sentence to the vast array of wildlife as well as a threat to our own spiritual life, it creates very serious problems for water quality, the fisheries, agriculture and the forestry that supports our life.  The preservation of the forest is the only practical and economic means of maintaining these already failing industries and services.
The Strzeleckis must be preserved.  To endorse the sale of the state forest is not only a allowing the ludicrous act of recucing what is rare and beautiful to chips, mud and pulp, it is abusive in its disregard for the people who live in and love South Gippsland, who having firstly had their public land stolen from them, will then be forced to pay for the damage and the repercussions of this juvenile management yet again in their taxes, rates and land levies.
Please help to preserve yours and my heritage.  Don't sell the forest, create a National Park instead.
Yours.   T Wheeler

 TO Kim and Julie
 FROM  M. Rudge

Dear Julie and Kim,
On behalf of the Foster branch of the Conservation Society, we would like to express our gratitude and congratulate you on the tremendous efforts you have made in the fight to save the Strzelecki's forests. We can appreciate that you have both invested an enormous amount of time and hard work in this campaign.
Our group continues to offer you our support and we share your hope for a successful outcome.

 To K Devenish & J Constable
 FROM  M  Hamilton  23/8/98

I support your proposal to reserve 30,000 hectares of public land in the Strzelecki State Forest for a National Park.
Congratulations for bringing this to the notice of people in this area through the report in Churchill News, 20,8.98.

  FROM M Stewart
 Published Foster Mirror 6/5/98

-State Forest Management in Private Hands-
Sir,  As a ratepayer in the South Gippsland Shire, I don't have a problem with coughing up my $25 tariff contribution in the hope of imporving and safeguarding our waterways.  Our most vital resource is, before all - water.
However, something doesn't add up.  My $25 won't be going very far while areas around the headwaters of the very rivers we're aiming to protect downstream, are being logged.
Hang on, I don't have any objection to sustainable logging practic, but I recognise that our Strzelecki State Forest's most valuable resource to us, is not timber, but water.
The Strzelecki Forest allows our rivers to continue flowing throughout months of drought conditions and helps protect the lowlands from severe flooding during the wetter months.
So just how far should we be concerned that in the near future, our local State Forest - public land, could be managed by a private timber company?  Of course profit is the priority in any industry, but let us be mindful of the fact that increased harvesting rates and other bad forestry practice will jeopardize our beautiful forest and threaten the future of our local water supply.
How? you may ask, could a private company (who omost likely won't give a rat's about our water supply), come to be managing our local State Forest - public land?
Give Peter Ryan or Philip Davis a call - they'll no doubt have a version of events as your elected members of State Parliament.
I'm off to pay my bandaid, I mean my tariff contribution and save myself some interest - hope I caught yours - Yours etc.  M Stewart.

-Bill to sell Strzeleckis-
Sir, I am very disturbed by the imminent passage through the Victorian Parliament of a bill which will change our area radically, but of which most people are still totally unaware.  Essentially, by a series of legal manoeuvres, the government will be selling off the forests of the Strzeleckis to the highest bidder.  At no time have the people of this area been given any input or even knowledge of this decision.
All of the bush with which we are familiar could be gone within a couple of years and its quite on the cards that some huge foreign logging company , of the sort responsible for the destruction of South East Asia's forests, will be reaping the profits and leaving us with a virtual desert.
Our local politicians have been notable for their silence.
I may be a little paranoid, but doesn't this seem like yet another pillaging of the country by the powerful in the cities?
We have seen local government stripped and emasculated, with dire economic social and economic costs to us all.
Services are disappearing on all sides of us, but isn't it curious how many more luxury car dealerships can be seen springing up like mushrooms in Melbourne?
What about the obscene profits the banks are making?  When is this rip-off of our lives going to end?
What can we do to stop it?
We are all aware of tragedies occurring in the lives of people we know locally.  How much of this is due to the intolerable squeeze being put on so many of us?  Yours L Morcom

 FROM E Szwaja
 Published Mirror, 19/8/98

-Retain Strzelecki Ranges Forest-
Sir,  In less than a century since convict settlement in 1797 at Corner Inlet, we managed to rape the surrounding South Gippsland country side.  The demise of the seal and whale population was followed by the migrant spill from failed fortunes promised by gold and tin discoveries in 1870.
Then settlers, inspired by claims of wealth from grazing and timber by Strzelecki and McMillan, stripped Toora and Foster (then Stockyard Creek) from its majestic forest, washed away its rich top soil and extinguished the Kut-wut Aborigine clan.
It seems we did not learn from that experience.  As we approach the second millennium the potential commercial gain (no matter how small) again drives to destroy what little remained from the last century.  Any recovery of vegetation and wildlife on the south western slopes of the Strzelecki Range to Mt. Best since then, is again squashed by our thoughtlessness.  The bald mountain tops that now exist are dotted by a few remaining box trees that rebutted the slaughter over those one hundred years and have now fallen to ring barking... at what expense this time!
The commercial value of slithers of mountain sides stripped by powerful machinery that tempt suicide into steep gullies is incomprehensible.  Mud choking the Woorarra Creek of its inhabitants is already evident and a warning of mistakes to be repeated.  Can we not reconsider our actions and weigh up the value of the small number of trees harvested for wood chip in twenty years against the spelendour of these hills?  Isn't it time to allow me the tranquility of their beauty as I approach my senior years and more importantly pay back the debt we owe to our future generations?
Give us the opportunity to stand in awe of the few three hundred year old gum trees that defied our wrath, the canopy of fern trees that stand ten metres tall underneath them, the gullies that still harbour charred timber from the 1906 fires that claimed five young lives and the weather beaten slopes that face the majestic Wilsons Promontory.
I look forward to your considered response in favour of retaining the Mt. Best and Strzelecki Ranges without further abuse. Yours etc.
E. Szawa

Sir,  I am greatly concerned about what the State Government is doing in regard to future managment and ownership of the Strzelecki State Forest.
The Victorian Plantations Corporation, formed in 1993 to manage state owned pine plantations has in fact been given control of 55,000 hectares of native forests.  Some 20,000 hectares of this native forest is in the Strzelecki State Forest.
The government now proposes to sell the VPC, and grant freehold over the land, giving complete control to the plantation industry.  The public is being betrayed by a government more intent on selling off our state's assets, looking after the interests of big business, and giving the impression of acting in the broad interest, than having a long-term vision incorporating environmental integrity.  By cleverly taking advantage of manipulating the facts and taking advantage of things such as:
1.  The remoteness of many of the areas in question (where few people go and know little about).
2.  The disjointed geography of the forest.  Because the areas in question are not in one contiguous block, but scattered widely, information about size and history ofuse can be manipulated with a view to clouding the the significance of the native bush.  Its special qualities are not widely recognised.
A proposal has been formulated to establish a national park over 30,000 hectares of the Strzelecki State Forest.  For both economic and environmental reasons, creation of a national park is a sound idea.  It is indisputable that thousands of people spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in regions where there are national parks.
While the Prom stands alone as the jewel in our national parks crown, a second large park within two hours drive of Melbourne would broaden the focus of Gippsland tourism.
The Strzelecki State Forest contains spectacular diversity of flora and fauna, including rare and threatened species.  The scenery is wonderful.  So much will be lost if a privatised VPC is given control of the native forests of the Strzeleckis.  So much would be gained with the creation of a Strzelecki National Park.
Please support this proposal.
A Vening.

 FROM F Sammut
 Published Foster Mirror, 26/8/98

Sir, I am writing to you in regards to the Strzelecki State Forest and the privatisation of the VPC.  I would like to thank you for keeping us informed about the issue and highlighting it so well by giving it front page importance.
I personally have been writing to the authorities about more information of the State Forest for a long time, even before your excellent issue on the Stronachs Road logging incident.  Since that article I have personally written many long letters to many different authorities concerning the forest and its protection.
Please continue to highlight the issue, it is a real concern to many of the the community.  Without your articles many, including myself, would be in the dark, not knowing what's going on.  And I am sure many politicians take notice also.
It really is a very beautiful forest and is the last remnants of the Great Southern Forests and deserves National Park status.  Thank you once again.
I have also written a letter to K Devenish and J Constable thanking them for their tireless work on the issue.
Yours,
 F Sammut

The proposal to reserve 30,000 hectares of public land in the Strzelecki State Forest for a National Park would guarantee the protection of threatened native forest, Gippsland West MP, Susan Davies, said this week.
Ms Davies was speaking after the launch of the proposal last week by local conservation, landcare and heritage groups, led by Foster residents, Kim Devenish and Julie Constable.  The proposal is being submitted to federal, state and local governments and follows the passing of the Victorian Plantations Corporation (Amendment) Act by the Kennett Government in May.
"The newly privatised Victorian Plantations Corporation has been vested with approximately 170,000 hectares of Crown Land from government.  Of this, 107,000 hectares is softwood plantation.  The remainder is native forest - the only remnant of the Great Southern Forest left, to be licensed off in perpetuity for harvesting as plantation", argued Ms. Davies.
Ms. Davies urged government, local groups and individuals to study the proposal for the national park and to formulate a response and endorsement as a matter of urgency.
Full copies of the proposal can be obtained from Susan Davies' electorate office (telephone 56723799).  Web browsers can access the proposal in full by going to http://members.dcsi.net.au/kimjulie or Susan Davies' site http://www.vicnet.net.au/~susandavies.

 from J Poppins
to Marie Tehan, Pat McNamara and  many others  21/6/98

Victoria - On the Move - Backwards

I am increasingly concerned at the direction in which you are taking
Victoria.  So concerned that I feel it necessary to discuss it with almost everyone I meet.  Parents at
Wesley College, the scout group, the church congregation, neighbours, strangers met in the streets, on trains
and aeroplanes, neighbouring farmers and the voluntary groups I belong to in West Gippsland and
Melbourne.

I can be written off as a bore, but it is surprising how people are reacting to the news, only parts of
which they had been aware of, and the extent to which they are responding with concern.  I believe that
there is a growing consciousness of the grave losses that are occurring to our community and our state.

What is it that is so upsetting?

The details are less important than the general fact that all the state's conservation assets are being
degraded piece by piece.   But the details add up to a big picture. NRE has been gutted and Parks Victoria
given responsibility for the Parks. Over the past few years we have seen:

Melbourne Parks.
First Albert Park, taken over by diktat (accompanied by lies as to how much of the year its
facilities would become unavailable) to make large sums of money for Bernie Eccleston and a
few others, by virtue of a community subsidy which can now be seen to absorb taxpayer's funds
as well as the land.

Now Royal Park and its environs are to be carved up.  Why have not the lands sold when schools
have been closed been used to build sports facilities for possible Commonwealth Games?  Why
isn't the money from school land sales available to buy more land adjoining parks?

Mt Worth State Park.
The removal of the Ranger, followed by payment to remove a sound residence, the burglary of
the works shed, the loss of thousands of dollars worth of equipment, the burning of the toilets.

Morwell National Park.
Removal of the Ranger, followed by payment to bulldoze a sound residence.  Increasing
problems with weeds, roaming livestock, motorbikes and firewood collectors, tracks growing
over.

Tara-Bulga National Park.
Removal of  the Ranger, sale of the house in Balook.  Only the work of a small group of Friends
keeps the visitor centre functional.

Gunyah Gunyah
>From a biological viewpoint the most significant but least known reserve in the Strzleckis.  The
Victorian Plantations Corporation has logged areas of importance right up to (and even into) its
boundaries, then planted non-local species which are likely to hybridise there.

Wilson's Promontory National Park.
Reduction in staffing, destruction of the Ranger's role in education, public contact.
Commercialisation of the park.  Proposals to drive a track through one of the small relatively
protected areas on the south-east coast, and to build an unnecessary 'Half way Hut' on the
lighthouse track when the lighthouse is within a day's walk of the Oberon Car park anyway.

Alpine National Park.
Excision of a large area from the park for commercial purposes, in a most visually intrusive area.
A further threat to the critically endangered Burramys parvus.

Upper Thompson Catchment.
Source of half Melbourne's water, of irrigation water and for water needed to keep the Thompson
alive.  Heavily logged, and parts regenerating badly.  The value of the water lost in the long term
due to the replacement of old growth with new growth is far greater than the royalties taken on
the timber.  Loss of diversity and the increased rate of silting of the Thompson dam.  Spectacular
blackberry thickets along the roadsides.

Land for Wildlife.
As a member I have found my newsletter to be the most informative, helpful, and enjoyable
document received from any government department.  It has been read cover to cover and filed
for reference (and it has been referenced!).  It appears that the newsletter is about to disappear,
presumably along with this wonderful little organisation.

Weed and Feral Animal Control.
The numbers of people in NRE active in the field have plummeted over the past few years,
weeds last summer were the worst I have seen them.  In our area of West Gippsland we had been
reduced to two very effective people last year (to cover a large area), now we are down to one.
Territories are so large that no effective inspection can be maintained in the farther reaches.  At
Alexandra the weed officer was reduced to borrowing a vehicle to do his job.

The removal of on-site field staff in the National and State Parks ensures that these core treasures
are being further invaded by noxious weeds, and vermin, and stray stock.  They will then act as a
source which will make it even harder for adjoining farmers.  These farmers and their
communities are battling and need more support and good non-commercial advice, not less.
Next we will see these problems used as an excuse for divestment of
these lands.

Research and Scientific Support.
The Melbourne office of NRE, the Keith Turnbull Laboratories and the Arthur Rylah Institute
have provided a wealth of experienced and dedicated people to support field staff, Landcare
Groups, and other public interest groups.  The knife keeps cutting deeper in these areas, and now
especially into those relating to Flora and Fauna protection and Freshwater Research.

Quarantine and Emergency Support.
The Keith Turnbull Research Institute provides crucial scientific skills and facilities required for
biological control of noxious and environmental weeds, and for plant disease quarantine and
control.    The physical and people costs of effective relocation are very high.  It leads us to think
that 'relocation' is just another way to cut the staffing.

The Victorian Plantations Corporation
Create an organisation, give it lots of forest plantations, but also old growth forest and rainforest.
These are forests that are also important as water catchment, for flora and fauna, and for
recreation.  A few years later declare its lands to be 'private'.  This year legislate to allow it to be
sold into private hands.  This VPC which has been publicly owned, operated on public land, yet
has infringed even the lesser standards applied to logging on 'private' lands.

Caught in the Act? - Change the Law!
When it became public that logging was transgressing legal limits in East Gippsland you
changed the law, retrospectively, to 'legalise' it.  Corruption of a high order!

Something Smelly? - Quick, the Perfume!
Slowly a small proportion of the concerned public is beginning to realise the damage being done
in Victoria.  So over the past few weeks we see a rash of advertising on behalf of NRE and Parks
Victoria.  This advertising emphasises a few activities of very local and limited impact.  It
advertises some funded projects, neglects to mention all the funding and services lost.  It
advertises Internet access that is not accessible to most Victorians, especially those in the
country.  It praises the RFA process which has been so thoroughly discreditable that many
voluntary interest groups have withdrawn, and foregone funding, rather than be identified with it.
It promotes band-aids when the substance has been cut out of our capacity to support
preservation of diversity in the state's flora and fauna and environmental values.  It promotes the
glossy booklet 'Victoria's Diversity' without mentioning that we haven't an effective capacity left
to carry out long term study or preservation work.

In short it is misleading advertising, political campaigning using public funds.
 

We are witnessing a piracy of public and environmental assets unprecedented in my lifetime, for the
benefit of a few, and to the loss for the many, for future generations, and our environment.  Constant
cutting and re-organisation leave organisations unclear as to who has what responsibility, and place the
few remaining field and scientific staff in difficult situations.  All is covered up in Orwellian
'newspeak' with talk of  'outcomes', 'competition', 'efficiency'.

The emperor has no clothes.  Victoria's public debt may have declined, but our private debt has risen
far faster and is the real problem.  A triple AAA rating is worthless unless you are borrowing anyway.
The difference in interest rates with a AA rating is insignificant by comparison with the interest rates
on private borrowings.  Victoria has lost control of its major revenue returning assets.   Now we are left
to exist by picking the pockets of those silly enough to patronise the Casino and the pokies, or to invest
in the 'highest building in the world'.    And the State is impoverished.

Sad indeed!

Yours in disgust,

J. Poppins

cc.     Geoff Coleman, Andrew Brideson, Marie Luckins, Jeff Kennett
        John Brumby, Sherryl Garbutt, Susan Davies, Tony Robinson
        The Auditor General
        The Age, Herald Sun, Sydney Morning Herald.
        VNPA, Environment Victoria
        all the relatives, friends and acquaintances I can think of.

Open letter from N. Walker  4/9/98
Dear Sir/Madam
No one who knows the area under threat in the Strzelecki State Forest could happily see it damaged or destroyed. We are, thank God, at last becoming aware of our peculiar Australian heritage and the Strzeleckis are a uniquely precious part of that heritage.
I support the Proposal to increase the reserves in the Strzeleckis to 30,000 hectares as I feel that the current proportion of formal reserves in this significant  public forest is grossly inadequate.
Futhermore, I oppose the  privatisation of this forest.
Sadly this is the age of the 'dollar effective',which is beaut for the cash registers but not so crash hot for humanity in the long run. Perhaps somewhere there is a political genius with enough brains, guts or foresight to save the area for us, and for our children, and for countless generations to come. Remember Lake Pedder?
Yours sincerely,
N. Walker

Open letter from D. Feith 8/9/98
Dear Sir/Madam,

I strongly support the proposal to establish a 30,000 hectare National Park in the Strzelecki State Forest.  There is not enough protected forest in Victoria, and I believe that the government should be doing more to preserve forests for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations.  The benefits of forests are many, and many of these benefits are not sufficiently recognised.  Forests provide homes for a great variety of animals, plants, birds and insects; they maintain ecological balance; they hold the earth and absorb rainfall.  In Victoria too many forests have been cleared without sufficient thought to the results of clearing, and we have seen subsequent erosion, soil depletion, and other deleterious effects on the environment.  Of course, forests are also beautiful, and are a place where people should be able to go, and enjoy nature.  There are also many potential economic benefits of preserving forest; particularly in developing eco-tourism.  In conclusion, I urge you to establish a 30,000 hectare National Park in the Strzelecki State Forest.

Yours sincerely,

D. Feith

From R.Whittle  4/9/98
To Kim and Julie

Dear Kim and Julie,

Your proposal for unifying existing national parks and extending
coverage to form a new 30,000 hectare national park in the
Strzeleckis has obvious merit.

The support the proposal has gained in South Gippsland, and the lack
of opposition so far, reflects the fact that preserving intact
ecosystems - especially forests - is a cause close to the heart of
virtually everyone.

There are probably a few people who see trees purely as sources of
timber products, and a few more who may directly profit from the
harvesting currently proposed for the area - but everyone else
recognises the importance of preserving forests for future
generations.

>From an ecological perspective, the arguments for preservation of
significant, viable, tracts of native habitat and vegetation are
undeniable.

Most people feel a responsibility to protect at least some areas
against human depredation.  If not for their own enjoyment or for the
sake of flora and fauna itself, most people would support rataining
at least some of our natual inheritance for the benefit of their
descendants.

Perhaps it could be argued economically that the intensive harvesting
of almost all forest is desirable - but at best these arguments make
sense over time-spans of a decade or two.

The economic benefits of tourism, when conducted in a sustainable
fashion to preserve the forest, are ever-lasting and will probably
grow over time.

It is relatively easy to calculate revenues from forest harvesting
and plantations.  Tourism is a much more diverse process with
economic benefits spread through many businesses - it is a lot harder
to predict and quantify.

Other long-term arguments for retaining intact forest include
preservation of excellent water supplies, and meeting Australia's
committments to greenhouse gas agreements.

The state government is well known for building and developing.
There is a lot to be said for getting things done - but when
irreplaceable natural assets are to be destroyed in favour of timber
and pulp production, most people would prefer a significant, cohesive
area to be protected forever.

I believe that the apparently total support this proposal has gained
with the people, businesses and local government of South Gippsland
can also be achieved to the north and to the east of the Strzeleckis.

With such support, which I believe will be nearly unanimous and often
very deeply felt, the government should respond supportively.

I am printing out your proposal and sending copies to two friends of
mine who work in the economic development field for the LaTrobe Shire
and the State Government in Traralgon.  They are both active in the
support of tourism projects and I am confident that they will be very
interested in the national park proposal.  I will ask them about long-
term economic modelling for tourism.

I congratulate you on your assiduous, constructive and respectful
approach to achieving long-term conservation in some areas together
with sustainable timber production in others.

Yours sincerely
R. Whittle

Dear Sir/Madam,
Having been away from our home territory for over seven months now, and
having travelled through 10 countries within 3 continents, all we can say
is that in Australia we are DAMN LUCKY to have every thing we do. SO
KEEP IT HOW IT IS!!!!!!! We want  to come home to a 30,000 hectare
National Park in the Strezlecki Mountain Range.
We fully support the movements to protect our land and our heritage.
- A. & A. Parry.

Headline:  Landcare awardee worries about Strz forest
PRESIDENT of the Franklin River Landcare Group, Mary Fajerman, was rapt
to receive an "excellence" award last week on behalf of her Organisation
but she's concerned that the efforts of Landcare groups down stream
might be being undone upstream.
Mrs Fajerman of Toora received the "Excellence in Landcare" award in the
group category at the inaugural GippsLandcare Awards held at the Convention  Centre in
Traralgon last Wednesday, May 27 but used the opportunity to highlight her concern for the future of forest areas at the head of the catchment areas."Here we are, doing award winning work on stream quality down here on the Franklin River while upstream they may be getting ready to log the area," said Mrs
Fajerman.
She said she was, concerned that the State Government was "selling off". forest
reserves or at least handing over control of the forests to private interests while no one really knew the detail of what was being planned.
"The object of the exercise has been to improve stream quality and they've been funding groups like ours to do just that but what will our efforts come to if they log the catchment areas. "You'd have all the slush coming down the streams, ruining them again, if the land at' the head of the streams was cleared. "It seems to be undoing the work we have been trying to do.
"I really don't think there has been enough information or public consultation on what forests will be logged."
Mrs Fajerman said that her group had done a great job of planting trees along the river banks, removing the willows that had fouled the streams and generally trying to return the areas to their original condition,
stopping soil erosion and improving stream quality. "But we don't know what they are planning to do now.  All our good work could be undone."
The  Franklin  River Landcare Group is continuing with its work but for what they have done
over the past few years, they received the top Gippsland group award.
The award was presented by David McKenzie of the EPA and was sponsored
by Simon Parsons& Co.

Forest park for all the right reasons

It will be interesting to see how the State Government responds to the
Devenish/Constable/Standering proposal for a 30,000 hectare great forests
national  park in the Eastern Strzelecki Ranges.
Everything we know about this government suggests it will force another
major community uproar; that it will automatically side with the foresters who are intent on seeing every square metre that isn't  part of our existing postage stamp reserves privatised and turned into tree farms.
It is now conventional wisdom that the same government that loves the
idea of freeways, casino palaces and skyscrapers also hates the notion
of allowing anything to grow that doesn't  earn big bucks.
We hear our local party pollies spouting about the Strzeleckis
consisting of "pure scrub" (in much the same way the pioneers who did
the original clearing described it as the "big scrub") and we know
nothing much changes in some minds except the passing of the years.
We have already heard the arguments against creating a major reserve, in the form of blinkered refusal to protect anything other than untouched bush.
However we can only hope that with so many of its materialistic goals now achieved, the State Government may decide to become a little more flexible in its approach to the bush.
It would not be a major financial concession to allow the community this national park.
Sure, some plantation timber would be lost.
But some tourism revenue would be gained.
And in 100 years, when some of the trees now barely more than saplings, are racing towards becoming the tallest trees in the world, the chlldren of tomorrow would have something truly remarkable to visit and marvel at.
(And remember this part of Australia did grow the world's tallest trees, because the pioneers measured them... after cutting them down).
We could also brag of having some of the oldest  and most ancient, trees in the world, if the VPC and Amcor Ieave any of the several hundred years old myrtle beech enclosed in the rainforest protection that they must have to survive.
The concept of previous Liberal governments of Victoria being the garden state has taken quite a hammering because of this government's commercialising out natural beauty spots.
Should it agree to this national park it would restore much needed credibility in the minds of many people who are weary from the constant struggle to protect our precious parks and reserves from inappropriate development.
Perhaps most importantly (certainly in terms of raw politics) acknowledgment of the importance of a great forests national park would remove what will certainly become another rural thorn from Jeff Kennett's foot, before it has time to fester.

From Sentinel Times, 4/8/98 Editorial 'Talking Point' by Noel Maud

Conning us out of our great forest

The State Government, aided and abetted by local National and Liberal
politicians and foresters is attempting to con Victorians out of
one of their most important environments assets.
The government is attempting to remove from public ownership thousands of hectares of StrzeIecki  bushland.
The government has already used its numbers to bulldoze through
legislation enabling it to privatise the publicly owned forest.
And the public is being lulled by claims that the the bush is nothing more than useless scrub, fit only for plantations.
But as anyone who takes the trouble to drive into the bush north of Toora will find, these claims are lies.
Stretching from a few kilometres north of Toora in a northeasterly
direction almost as far as Gormandale  is the central core of what
used to be the Great Gippsland Forest, now called the Strzelecki State Forest.
Those who would turn this 60,000 hectares or so of bush into plantations argue that it is abandoned farmland that was replanted as plantations or is regrowth.
And it is true that some of the ridges were partially or completely cleared just before the turn of the century.
But before a couple of decades had elapsed it was acknowledged by the
government of the day that this land was unsuited to farming.
Other parts of these ranges were never annexed from the Crown, or were
leased to hopefuls who often did not lift an axe before acknowledging
that this was not land for farming.
Now, deep within this born-again forest, 70 and 80-year-old trees rocket upwards in their quest to achieve the same status as their parents, the world's tallest hardwoods that were lopped just over I 00 years ago.
Many of the rainforest gullies remain as they have always been . . . damp, dark
wonderlands that provide homes for many threatened or endangered species
of plant and animal, filter the water and protect the ground below the
thick litter from erosion.
This is neither plantation, nor scrub.
It is a remnant of a great forest recovering from human interference.
But in the absence of any protection, both Amcor and the government-owned Victorian Plantations Corporation are doing their best to wreck this last remnant of what used to be one of Australia's great forests.
Considerable harvesting has been undertaken of land described as
plantation, but which opponents say could not possibly be plantation
because the trees are well over 50 years old, when the first plantations
were started.
On VPC land bulldozers are being pushed through any spaces in the younger mountain ash to clear out understorey species, pile them to be burnt later, and ash seedlings planted in the newly created spaces.
The bulldozed vegetation often ends up in what were pristine gullies,
destroying or damaging these ancient and little understood ecosystems and threatening renewed erosion.
So far little has been said about the appropriateness of this kind of tree farming in these steep, ecologically fragile hills.
Even less has been said about the absurdity of destroying the last of the great forest when it is generally acknowledged that Australia's economic future rides largely on the back of tourism.
Around the turn of the century adventurous Melbournians would travel by train and jinker to the great forest for picnics and walks along numerous trails that were blazed through the bush.
Back then, when it became obvious the forest was being progressively
destroyed, there was some public opposition, but too little to make an
impact on politicians until the damage had been done.
Now it is happening all over again.
Will we again allow ourselves to be passive observers, until even this
last remnant of one of the world's great tall forests is gone?
South Gippsland residents Julie Constable, Kim Devenish and Allan
Standering are spearheading a last ditch stand to remove about half of
the remaining publicly owned forest from privatisation and have it
preserved as a national park.
If they are successful people the world over will have the opportunity
to drive along the Grand Ridge road and gaze out on trees that will
again become the tallest hardwoods on this planet.
Two royal commissions were held early this century into the management
of the eastern Strzeleckis.
We need another inquiry, to investigate how best to preserve what is
left of this forest, that could yield millions of dollars more in
tourism than will ever come out of wood pulp and saw logs.
If the current Regional Forest Agreement process is unsuited to such a
task, then a separate government inquiry needs to be set up.

Letter to Editor, Foster Mirror 2/9/98
From: A Terrell

Sir, It is not too late Mr. Ryan to call for a postponement of the proposed sale of the Strzeleckis (sorry of the use of the Strzeleckis) to discuss the viability of redefining boundaries to include protection of important forested areas for water catchment, tourism and biodiversity.
It is not too late to bring back debate of the bill into parliament with an amendment.
It is not too late to reread the practical facts of the National Parks proposal and understand its viability.
Just what is too difficult or too late, Mr Ryan?
You have had a year and more to act in response to public requests.  You were elected to represent us.  Do it now! 'please'. - Yours etc. A. Terrell, SG

From: Society for Growing Australian Plants - Victoria
South Gippsland Group. President: Secretary / treasurer:
Tony Chipperfield Graeme Rowe
To:  A. Standering

Dear Alan,

In June it came to our attention that you are associated with a proposal
for a large reserve in the Strzelecki State Forest.  As an Organisation
with a specific interest in Australian native plants, it was voted that
we offer you our support, and confirm that we consider that this kind of
proposal would be the best outcome for the forests of our area.

Frequently it seems that too short-sighted a view is taken by decision
makers with the authority to make irrevocable changes to our
environmental heritage.  In such matters a forward vision of some
decades or even generations is essential to determine the management
parameters being put into place now, for natural forest cycling is
extremely long.  And from the policies of forest management stem the
myriad of implications to the understorey and ground flora, the fauna
(particularly survival of uncommon species), and water catchment and
erosion issues on land and in estuaries.  It is imperative not only that
significantly large areas be set aside, but that if they must be
fragmented that they be joined by substantial corridors to preserve the
genetic diversity of future generations of indigenous flora and fauna.

On behalf of the South Gippsland Group of SGAP I would like to thank you
for your efforts. so far in attempting to preserve our original native
forests as a large reserve.  We wish you well in your ongoing endeavours
to achieve these goals for the benefit of future generations, both of
people and of the forest communities.
 

Yours sincerely
South Gippsland Group secretary.

....The Strzelecki ranges used to host some of the world's greatest
trees, with a wide range of associated flora and fauna.  The clearance
by white settlers demolished all but the tiniest fragments of this
forest.  It is significant that the rainfall averages in the area
declined substantially in conjunction with the progress of the clearance.
        There are small areas of relatively untouched rainforest and
some old regrowth from days when logging was still relatively
selective.  This old regrowth is approaching the age and diversity
required to provide excellent habitat, water catchment for the
surrounding towns and tourism potential.
        The few existing State Parks in the ranges are too small to
provide effective long term protection for the ecological features of
the region.  This problem exacerbated by the removal of management
personnel who used to live within or close by the parks, and also by
some insensitive work by the Victorian Plantations Corporation.
        The proposal by Devenish and Constable is the result of
painstaking work and study of the area.  It offers the prospect for the
preservation and restoration of the core values of the area.
        The current State Government's push to sell control of much of
this recently 'privatised' public land under the misleading description
of 'plantation' is at odds with the multiple values of the land and the
fact that much of it is not plantation.
        It is to be hoped that the proposal for the National Park gains
overwhelming support.  It would greatly benefit the region, and add to
its attractions for tourism at the same time as protecting core values
of its environment and catchments.

J. Poppins,  Yarragon South & Mt. Waverley

Re: Proposal for a Strzelecki National Park

The proposed Strzelecki National Park is likely to generate considerable
employment in South Gippsland, especially for the towns of Foster, Toora
and Welshpool.  Visitors to South Gippsland currently spend in excess of
$100 per day.  The visitor number generated by Tarra Valley Bulga
national park to the west are well in excess of 40 000 visitor days or
about  $4 million per annum in the approach towns.  Unfortunately for
South Gippsland the majority of visitors to this park come through the
La trobe Valley ? and this region is the principle beneficiary of their
spending.

The proposed Strzelecki National Park will be primarily accessed through
South Gippsland.  Given the existing network of roads, the high scenic
value of Old Mountain Ash and Beach Rainforest, and the proximity of the
region to both Melbourne and Wilsonâs Promontory National Park it would
be reasonable to expect the Strzelecki National Park to generate between
100 and 200 000 visitor days. This could generate between $10 and 20
million spending per annum in South Gippsland ? or at least 100 full
time jobs or full time job equivalents.

The income this National Park generates from tourism will be determined
by its facility development.  An aerial forest walk in the tree tops of
the Gunyah reserve old forests and the development of walking trails with
toilets and picnic grounds are the kinds of development that will
greatly enhance tourism.

The development of interpretive facilities in the approach towns will
both enhance visitation to the National Park and spending by visitors in
those towns.  With the high visitation rate to Wilsonâs Promontory
National Park and the periodic extreme (bad) weather at that park there
is considerable movement of tourists back into the hinterland ?
especially in summer.  A Strzelecki National Park would be ideally
placed to develop on this tourism.

This proposal is perhaps the most constructive and fruitful development
for South Gippsland for many years.  I am confident that this National
Park will be established.

Bob McDonald
2/9/98

We would also like to protest at the loss of amenity caused by the closure of roads in the Strzelecki State Forest, and the imposition of draconian fines for accessing public land.  The further threat of privatisation increases the apprehension felt by the community for the future of this resource.  The area has been a multi-use resource since settlement and there would seem to be no clear reason for changing it at this time.  Providing as it does for a wide range of recreational pursuits, all of which can co-exist with timber extraction, it distributes and relieves the pressure of community usage.

The future prosperity of South Gippsland relies heavily on tourism.  The forest backdrop forms one of the cornerstones of local initiatives.  Public access is essential.  The preservation of a major portion of the forest and its elevation to National Park status would be a great boost to the local economy and be a great investment for the future.

The excellent proposal circulated by Julie Constable, Kim Devenish and Allan Standering deserves the urgent attention of all of our politicians, both State and National.  When you consider how small a proportion of the forest that we are asking for - how can you refuse.

Yours faithfully,   Harold Ford, Secretary

Dear Mr. Ashton,
I am writing to you to express my concerns over the Eastern Strzelecki State Forest.
Are you aware of the amount of native bush under threat?
20,000 hectares
Are you aware of the impact this will have on our native animals?
This land is home to many, some of which are under threat already.

I hope that any moves to further privatise the VPC cease until the Government divests all of the VPCs:
- non plantation forests and woodlands
- failed plantation land
- inappropriately placed plantations
- land that the public would prefer to keep
- slopes steeper than 20 degrees
- land within 100 metres of streams, creeks, rivers, gullies or rainforests
- areas that contain endangered or threatened species
- areas proclaimed Deferred Forest Areas by the Regional Forest Agreements
- public roads
- areas where timber harvesting practices are at odds with other land use objectives
- That in order to bring the level of reserves in line with the rest of the State, 30,000 hectares of the Strzelecki State Forest be made a National Park.
Sincerely, B. Thompson

Dear Mr. Ryan
I write in reference to the proposal for a 30,000 hectare national park
in the Strzelecki State Forest by Julie Constable, Kim Devenish & Alan
Standering.
Though not directly involved with the process or the politics of the
proposal I feel very strongly that a sizable tract of land in the
Strzelecki Ranges ought to be put aside for future generations.  It
seems to me that reasonable debate has been stifled in the rush to push
this bill through parliament; it leaves me with an uneasy feeling that
the issues have not been looked at properly and that favours have been
done.  The authors of this proposal have raised so many important issues
that I feel let down that you should say (if quoted correctly, Mirror 28
August 1998) ãThe practical facts are itâs just too difficultä. Mr.
Ryan, your job is a difficult one, to put aside this proposal because it
is difficult is not good enough.  I am asking you to rethink your
position, to think not just of the dollar today but of how we will be
seen by future generations and the effect on our environment.
Yours sincerely,  J. Todd

Dear Mr. Ryan
Re:  Strzelecki National Park Proposal
I am writing in earnest support of the proposal to create a new National
Park in the Stzrelecki State Forest as put forward by Kim Devenish,
Julie Constable and Allan Standering.
Let your government become renowned by future generations of Victorians
as the forward-thinking protectors of what little old-growth forest
remains in this state.
Your government has been characterised by sweeping change during its
time in office, indicating that nothing is indeed impossible.
The Stzrelecki National Park proposal takes the long-term view of
protecting a dwindling natural resource as well as seeking to put in
place an enduring and bipartisan code of ethics and practice for future
forest protection and management.  This proposal is possible through
your governmentâs timely commitment and altruistic action now.
Such an enlightened and pre-eminent code which would flow on from
legislating to protect the Stzrelecki State Forest, can and must be
given priority by yours and all future governments of Victoria.
The proposal by its very nature categorically rejects the current
short-term, develop-at-all-costs and seemingly under-handed
profit-driven forest management practices.
I urge you to support this proposal.

Yours faithfully,  C. Fooke

Dear Kim and Julie,
Have read about your work towards a Nat. Park for the Strzelecki area in Environment Victoria's newsletter.
Just wanted to congratulate you. Go for it! Very, very inspiring stuff! I've rung Susan Davies to get a copy of the petition.  Here's hoping for a great success.  Regards, L Tate.

From E. Coutant:

To all concerned,
I would like to add my support for the very constructive proposal for a new 30,000 hectare national park in the Strzelecki Ranges.  With the State Government intending to privatise sections of the already depleted forest, a park would be an invaluable for the protection of the natural environment as well as an asset for tourism.  As a part-time resident over a 19 year period, I have a great love for this part of our country and want to see an adequate protection for it.  So much damage has been inflicted in the past.
E. Coutant

From J. Coupe:

Dear Sirs,
I subscribe to Environment Victoria and read about the proposed Strzelecki National Park.  I wish to support the proposal.  We all need as many 'breathing spaces' as we can get to offset pollution and greenhouse gases affecting the ozone.  I hail from West Gippsland (Noojee district).  I was brought up at on a farm at Vesper at the foot of Mt. Taronga.  We could see the Strzelecki Ranges from there.  We 'sold' the farm in 1947 when I was 17.
I am a life member of Youth Hostels Association and pass on EV newsletters to members of their bushwalking club.  They meet weekly at the YMCA building in Elizabeth ST Melbourne.  Best of luck in your campaign.
Yours  J Coupe

Whilst it is a wonderful gesture (coincidental with election time) for Mr. Ryan to be welcoming government funding of "$73,502 for trees", its a terrible pity that the government isn't inclined to provide year round substantial incentives for people, councils, organisations, government agencies etc. to not be continually removing our native trees, shrubs, flowers and grasses from our everyday environment.
Rather it would be a commendable gesture, if it would take an active stand in preserving what precious little does still remain of our natural heritage, e.g. in our Strzelecki forest.
It is very frustrating for the few who do take the interest and the time to painstakingly replant what was needlessly desecrated in the first place, only to have ever more native areas continually being depleted through lack of care and interest.  Organisations such as 'PLANET ARC' encourage children to 'do their bit for the environment', but its not easy, when adults in general, are so negligent towards it and yet they have the power and the money to plunder our fragile world.
K. Pincini

Dear Kim and Julie,
 re: Proposal to Reserve Land in the Strzeleckis

You have clearly done an enormous amount of work to produce this detailed proposal.  We understand and are disappointed that the Victorian Plantations Corporation has not been forthcoming with information about the location of its hardwood plantations and that regenerated native forest has been incorrectly tagged 'plantation'.  This has made it difficult to create a viable reserve area without incorporating some plantations into that area, to a maximum currently of around 7,000 hectares.

Environment Victoria supports the concept of a 30,000 ha. conservation reserve in the Strzeleckis, with one proviso:  that the minimum possible viable plantation land be included in the final proposal.

The reason for our concern about the inclusion of plantations is twofold; firstly to ensure land which has the highest conservtion values is included in the reserve system and secondly to ensure industry access to plantations as an alternative to logging native forests.

We acknowledge your intention to invite the timber industry to excise 5,000 ha. of its choice of the best plantation land with this information to be used in the compilation of the final proposal.  We commend this initiative and would like to be kept informed regarding the results.

Congratulations on your efforts so far.

Yours sincerely
Esther Abram, Director

Dear Kim, Julie and Allan

Thanks for your letters and proposal for a national park in the Strzelecki forest, and sorry about the delay in replying.  I totally support the concept and wish you the best of luck in your campaign.
Yours sincerely
Senator Bob Brown

Dear Kim, Julie and Allan,
re:  Proposal for 30,000 hectare national park in the Strzelecki State Forest

Thank you for your proposal on a National Park for the Strzelecki State Forest.  The Council of management at the Victorian National Parks Association has considered your proposal and makes the following points:

*  The VNPA supports the concept of a park in this region provided that it is based on sound scientific principles and with the least amount of plantations as possible.  We define plantations as land that has been completely cleared, artificially planted and managed solely for the purpose of timber extraction.  The VNPA believes that the Strzelecki region has been severely affected by human activity and that where appropriate, remaining high quality Mountain Ash that is either regenerated from farmland clearing or clearfelling for timber or that is pristine, should be protected in reservation.

*  Before the VNPA could support the exact boundaries of such a park, we would need to clarify the current status of land use, history and vegetation status of all lands within the park, to ensure national park integrity.  We also strongly support the use of plantation timber as an alternative to native forest use and for this reason, industry must have access to plantations.  We understand that this information has been extremely difficult to extract from the appropriate Government departments and on this basis we have written to the Victorian Plantations Corporation asking them to supply you with appropriate maps.

*  We understand that land designated as Strzelecki Deferred Forest Area under the Federal-State Government's Regional Forest Agreements has lost this status, pre-empting the process.  We condemn this action on behalf of the Government and will write to both the Federal Minister for the Environment and the State Minister for Conservtion and Land Management.

Congratulations on your work and the enormous effort you have made.  Please call me if you would like to discuss your proposal or VNPA's response.

Yours sincerely
Amanda Martin, Director.

Yours respectfully
Howard Emanuel, Secretary

Home