Vegetation destruction in Bass Coast Shire

 Bass Coast Shire Council has shown contempt for the community by failing to honour commitments made about the protection of native vegetation and wildlife. The Shire is developing a Forest Strategy, which it claims will help to ensure Bass Coast’s Forest continues to thrive.

On its website, the Shire says forests are made up of all trees and vegetation, including street trees and other vegetation on nature strips, in parks and open space, as well as in backyards, along waterways, in industrial areas and in conservation areas. It asserts that they ‘help cool our townships during summer, clean up air pollution, support biodiversity, reduce storm water run-off, boost the economy, support social cohesion and connection to country.’ It adds that trees and green spaces are highly valued for their beauty, by both locals and visitors. Despite these exemplary statements, the Shire is enabling the destruction of key areas of native vegetation, destroying wildlife corridors and the amenity of the area. It has ignored provisions in it own planning scheme designed to protect the natural values of the area. The Regional Sand Extraction Strategy, 1996, established basic principles for resource development, but the Shire has failed to implement the requirements. As a result, clearing of vegetation has been carried on one site in Grantville for which a sand extraction permit has been issued. Bulldozer cuts removing native vegetation have been made right down to the Bass River, creating erosion and pollution problems as well as displacing native animals such as Mountain Brushtail possums wombats and tree goannas.        the vegetation is where one of Victoria's faunal emblems was first identified - Leadbeaters Possum,


which was rediscovered in the Bass River valley. The vegetation also hosts the State floral emblem, Common Heath.


Council officers are aware of the importance of the vegetation on the site, which forms part of the only remaining riparian forest on the Bass River. Shire officers claim that a permit was not required as the vegetation was removed for ‘ fire control’.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Protection from Government propaganda?

  Attempts to prevent the spread of false information are long overdue. However the Australian Government’s Bill should only be supported if if it covers all the deceptive propaganda spewed out by Government. We all remember the nonsense peddled by Ministers and bureaucrats over Covid 19 and The Voice referendum – all designed to panic the community and force compliance with the official line. The Government says that its Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2024  aims  to reduce the spread of seriously harmful misinformation and disinformation on digital communications platforms. However, it is unclear if the Bill will operate in a manner compatible with Australia’s international human rights obligations related to freedom of expression. The definitions of misinformation and disinformation are not clear and create uncertainty. The Bill introduces transparency requirements for certain digital...
Read more

Bass Coast Councillors should be personally liable for their mistaken decision

  Bass Coast Shire councillors should be held personally liable for any costs resulting from their decision to reject an application by Heidelberg Materials to widen Stanley Road, Grantville, It seem likely that ratepayers will face a huge bill to defend Councillors’ decision at VCAT. The road widening has long been a requirement of the planning permit previously issued by the Shire and was approved by Shire planning staff as well as DEECA. Rather than make ratepayers foot the bill, councillors who refused the planning application should be personally liable. All councillors other than Jan Thompson, who had the sense to vote for the application should pay every cent.
Read more

God Save the King

 With King Charles III and Queen Camilla in Australia, it's time for some to take a reality check.It is tiresome of the ratbags in the Republican movement to persevere with their flawed campain.   In 1999, Australians went to the polls to decide in a referendum whether to become a republic or to retain the monarchy. The result was clear, On the question of being a republic Australia said NO. Here's a post I put on this blog onSeptember 28 2022 Rabid members of the Australian Rupublic Movement and some politicians keep trying to revive the flawed concept of dumping the monarchy and turning Australia into a republic. The Australian Government talks about holding a referendum to gauge popular support, but before that happens, proponents need to explain what type of republic and how this country will benefit – will it cut the waste of taxpayers dollars? Will it be more democratic? Unless the answer to both those questions in “YES” why spend money on a system that offers no be...
Read more