News 
 Local News 
 News 
 Politics 
 Two-thirds of Tasmanians against foreign control of Gunns pulp mill 

Two-thirds of Tasmanians against foreign control of Gunns pulp mill

29 Jun, 2009 03:11 PM
A new survey shows that two-thirds of Tasmanians do not want Gunns' Bell Bay project to proceed if there is foreign control of Tasmanian air, water and forests.

TAP into a Better Tasmania, formerly Tasmanians Against the Pulp Mill, commissioned the EMRS poll.

The survey involved 800 adult Tasmanians who were interviewed by telephone during mid-June.

The preamble to the question stated : ``The planned Tamar Valley pulp mill would be the fourth largest in the world and will consume large amounts of water and four million tonnes of trees from plantations and State forests. Gunns is seeking money from foreign companies to fund the project.''

The Question asked: ``Should the government allow the planned pulp mill to go ahead if it results in foreign control of Tasmanian water, land and forests?''

Sixty five per cent or respondents said no, 26 per cent said yes and 9 per cent were unsure.

TAP spokesman Bob McMahon used the results to hit out at Federal Forestry Minister Tony Burke, who last week endorsed Gunns' project in Parliament during an update on the industry.

``The federal Minister has gone out on a limb and ignored the agriculture and fisheries responsibilities of his own portfolio by publicly backing Gunns' proposed pulp mill for the Tamar Valley,'' Mr McMahon said.

``At risk are many wine-making, organic food and horticultural small businesses that thrive in the region and 2600 tourism-related businesses in Launceston and Tamar Valley.''

Gunns set June 30 as the date by which it would have made an announcement to the Australian Stock Exchange about a joint venture finance partner.

It is not commenting about the latest poll.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

RELATED COVERAGE

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Face it Bob, the majority of Tasmanians support the pulp mill, as do the State and Federal Goverments. Why doesn't TAP work with, instead of against the development? Your old headline grabbers have been ridiculed and put to bed by fact. This mill will not use old growth, will be plantation based, and Gunns has enough resource to feed the mill from its own forests within 5 years. Water will be purchased from the Hydro that would otherwise would have been put though Trevallyn power station, NOT sent down the Gorge. Get on board everyone and support a great value adding project providing renewable energy, employment and State pride.
Posted by Allforit, 29/06/2009 11:12:10 AM
After the recent scientific report on the immense value of Australian old growth Forests, how can Tasmanians let profit come before future. From the Gunns Official Site (Get the Facts ALLforit) Why does Gunns continue to harvest wood from native forests? "The primary reason for harvesting native forests is for the production of sawn timber and veneer. Sawn timber cannot be produced economically from young (<20 years old) plantation trees, and it will be many years before sufficient quantity of plantation trees of sufficient maturity is ready for harvest. Present technology has difficulty producing high quality sawn timber from young eucalypts in an economically viable manner. In the meantime there is a strong demand for the finished products that can be produced from native forests."
Posted by Leon, 29/06/2009 11:57:18 AM
Yes, you are right Leon, Gunns harvests native forest for veneer/sawlog production from sustainable, well managed forests (by the way, 47% of Tassies native forest are in reserve, compared to an average 15% Australia wide). The alternative is illegal, cheap, black market timber from other countires. Every stick of native forest that is harvested is re-established as native forest by the major forest managers in Tasmania. Don't try and confuse the issue. The comment above was regarding the pulp mill, as the headline suggests. Pulplog is a by-product of veneer/sawlog production. So to re-phrase, the pulp mill will use mostly plantation timber for pulp production with some native forest pulpwood by-product from veneer/sawlog production from regrowth forests, NOT old growth at start up. Within 5 years, the pulp mill will be 100% plantation based.
Posted by Allforit, 29/06/2009 12:23:01 PM
It would appear that anti-mill campaigners will now turn their attention to foreign ownership of Tasmanian air, water, and forests. All of the other arguments have been successfully argued against, ie pollution, water usage, old growth logging, carbon footprints, location, so now it's foreign ownership. Leon appears to be confusing the Pulp Mill with Veneer production and Sawn Timber Production which is entirely a different argument. As the saying goes, throw enough mud, some is bound to stick.
Posted by Andrew, 29/06/2009 12:54:00 PM
I get the argument put forward by Allforit and as I recall this is broadly the argument promoted by the forest industry. But I don't get your argument Leon. Are you saying the Gunns pulp mill will use old growth forest? The Company is on the record as saying it will not. And if the old growth forests are immensely valuable - can you say what that actually means? How many dollars per tonne is that carbon worth, how many jobs will this carbon create, how much will that carbon contribute to the Tassie economy? I get it that these forests may have intrinsic even spiritual values for some. That is why most of it (around a million hectares of old growth) is already protected in Tassie. But I struggle with the idea they have immense economic value as carbon reserves given all forests, including regrowth or plantation, will be storing carbon. And if Gunns are not looking to use old growth forests in the pulp mill why try and make the argument in the first place?
Posted by Thommo, 29/06/2009 1:04:40 PM
A report comes out saying two-thirds of Tasmanians don't support the mill, but the head-in-the-sand group are in denial, we just have to have this mill, after all what does the environment matter, it's taken all the rubbish we have chucked at it for years - why stop the garbage dump now?
Posted by salamander, 29/06/2009 1:24:32 PM
Andrew, "All of the other arguments have been successfully argued against, ie pollution, water usage, old growth logging, carbon footprints, location, so now it's foreign ownership." When and where were all of these arguments successfully argued? Or are you confusing that with the industry and Gunns ability to successfully avoid addressing the issues? The majority of Tasmanians do not support this mill nor do the majority of Australians.
Posted by Chris, 29/06/2009 2:11:58 PM
The mill will source its water from.......??? There is no access allowed for the water pipeline. Bartlett has ruled out compulsory acquisition of farmers land. Where will the water come from in times of drought? Face it, this is another 'non announcement' of 'we are close'. Google back to 2005 and read John Gay's words then.
Posted by Tony, 29/06/2009 2:30:26 PM
Just whose heads are in the sand. We have elected governments Federally, at State level, and also now recectly in Windermere with the Legislative Council Elections, the most relevant electrate in the country for this issue. The Green vote does not increase, and the elected parties are all on the record as supporting the mill. As for your comment that the rest of Australia does not want it, on what information do you conclude that? Geoffrey Cousins may be loud, but he does not speak for the country.
Posted by Andrew, 29/06/2009 4:24:06 PM
If you phrase an opinion poll question so far biased in one direction, what kind of response to you expect! Come on Tasmania, lets get out from behind all the politics and make an informed decision on the facts. To the editor, Reporting like this on inflamatory information does not help anyone except the publisher to sell papers.
Posted by krob101, 29/06/2009 6:40:35 PM
1 | 2  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES

Most popular articles

Stevenson Prestiges
1) Apple iPhone 4 32GB44 plans 12%
2) Apple iPhone 4 16GB44 plans 14%
3) Motorola Quench7 plans 3%
4) HTC Desire4 plans 1%
5) Apple iPhone 3GS 8GB33 plans 2%

Mobile Phones | Broadband Plans

Get the best deal at Fairfax Digital - Rural Press



Membership: login | join

The Examiner Newspaper







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Navigate

Classifieds

More Ways to Read

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2010. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...