Is there a chink appearing in the armour??....finally

If you have had good or negative results from other theories, you might let others know here.

The forum, its administration and Peter Andrews do not endorse any posts nor have any public statements to make about any theory other than NSF.

Individual poster's are responsible for all their own posts. This forum has no comment to make on them, however in the public interest we will allow them to be viewed.

Moderator: webmaster

duane
Posts: 1159
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Central Coast, NSW
Contact:

Is there a chink appearing in the armour??....finally

Postby duane » Sun Apr 27, 2008 10:31 am

This article appeare recently in the Kyeamba Valley Landcare Groups Newsletter:

Removal of Woody Debris from Rivers and Streams

The NSW Department of Primary Industries has recently released the Threat Abatement Plan for the Removal of Large
Woody Debris from NSW Rivers and Streams. The actions outlined in the plan may have significant impact on
traditional drainage and flood control activities carried out by councils around NSW.
The ‘removal of large woody debris from NSW rivers and streams’ is listed as a key threatening process under the NSW
Fisheries Management Act 1994. Large woody debris includes trees, trunks, branches, tree heads or root masses that
have fallen, been washed or placed into rivers or streams, and were previously referred to as “snags”.
Removal of large woody debris – or 'de-snagging' – has been widely practiced since at least the mid-1800s, initially to
clear river channels for navigation and later continued with the aim of increasing channel capacity, reducing flood risk,
removing safety hazards, protecting infrastructure and preventing bank erosion. Recent research has shown that many
of the justifications for removing large woody debris were unfounded and that large woody debris has a critical
ecological function in rivers and estuaries. Removal of large woody debris threatens several vulnerable and endangered
species, populations and ecological communities.


Public authorities (including councils) must take appropriate actions to implement the measures in the plan for which
they are responsible, and ensure that they do not make decisions that are inconsistent with the provisions of the plan
without consulting the NSW Minister for Primary Industries.

The plan can be found at:
http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/hab ... ody-debris

If you require any further information, contact DPI Threatened Species Unit on 4916 3811

MAYBE at last the Dept is getting to understand whole systems ecology and the message Peter has been promulgating for decades.

duane
Posts: 1159
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:44 pm
Location: Central Coast, NSW
Contact:

Postby duane » Sat May 10, 2008 3:02 pm

It takes a snag to bag those fish

by Jennie Curtin
SMH May 10, 2008


THE long mechanical arm reaches over to pick up another huge log, manoeuvring the several tonnes of cargo as though it were a matchstick. The excavator rumbles perilously close to the edge of the embankment and then gently, even delicately, places the log in the water, nudging it into position. One down, 203 to go.

The logs are being returned to the Darling River between Bourke and Brewarrina in an attempt to restore life to the waterway.

More than 120 years ago, white settlers thought it a good idea to remove logs to free a path for paddle steamers that shipped thousands of tonnes of goods such as wool along the river.

For centuries the logs, or snags, had provided essential habitat for native fish. Within them, they could shelter from predators, feed, spawn or even just have a rest out of the main river flow.

Hundreds of trees along the river were chopped down to fuel the boilers to power the paddle steamers and the snags were deemed a problem. In 1888, a surveyor from the harbours and rivers department, G. H. Halligan, reported to the NSW Parliament: "I would advise the removal of all timber from the bed."
His words were heeded, with the result that the native fish population in the Murray-Darling Basin has declined by an estimated 90 per cent since 1770.

It was a situation deemed critical by the Western Catchment Management Authority, which is working with the Department of Primary Industries to manage the resnagging.

The general manager of the authority, Daryl Green, this week said it was hoped the 204 snags would help with the recovery of endangered or threatened fish populations, which include silver perch and western populations of olive perchlet and purple-spotted gudgeon.

The logs don't come cheap. Each costs between $800 and $3000, some travelling hundreds of kilometres. All were felled as part of approved clearing for fence lines or road improvements.

The project's manager, David Cordina, from the department, said large logs with branches provided the ideal complex habitat.

The native fish populations will be monitored to assess the success of the program.....end of article

In 1888 this was Govt policy...in 2008 it is still Govt policy to remove willows....Peter Andrews has been advocating and saying these things for yonks,,,finally someone is getting the message but its still only part of the complete picture.


Return to “Your experiences with other theories and practices”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest