Crayfish Creek: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Since about 1999 Crayfish Creek has been subject to heavy industrial logging in the upper catchment with local residents attributing this as a cause for a significant loss of water volume. A prominent geohydrologist in the State, Dr David Leaman, noted that it was difficult to see whether a buffer zone ever existed upstream from Crayfish Creek, observing that this could be a significant contributor to the drying up of the water body further downstream. This view was made in the context of the fact that the overwhelming majority scientists who have provided input on the need for adequate stream reserves under the Tasmanian Forest Practices Code have been clear that at least a 30 metre buffer zone around Class two, three and four streams should be implemented. |
Since about 1999 Crayfish Creek has been subject to heavy industrial logging in the upper catchment with local residents attributing this as a cause for a significant loss of water volume. A prominent geohydrologist in the State, Dr David Leaman, noted that it was difficult to see whether a buffer zone ever existed upstream from Crayfish Creek, observing that this could be a significant contributor to the drying up of the water body further downstream. This view was made in the context of the fact that the overwhelming majority scientists who have provided input on the need for adequate stream reserves under the Tasmanian Forest Practices Code have been clear that at least a 30 metre buffer zone around Class two, three and four streams should be implemented. |
||
The above is unsubstantiated rubbish from a serial defamatory offender |
The above is unsubstantiated rubbish from a serial defamatory offender. Leaman is not "prominent"; it is a plain and simple falsehood "that the overwhelming majority (of) scientists" have said any such thing. |
||
== References == |
== References == |
||
Revision as of 22:38, 26 December 2006
Crayfish Creek is listed as a protected forest reserve in North West Tasmania, Australia. It is home to the giant freshwater lobster (Astacopsis gouldi), listed as a vulnerable species and - theoretically, rather than in practice - subject to protection under the Australian Federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.
Since about 1999 Crayfish Creek has been subject to heavy industrial logging in the upper catchment with local residents attributing this as a cause for a significant loss of water volume. A prominent geohydrologist in the State, Dr David Leaman, noted that it was difficult to see whether a buffer zone ever existed upstream from Crayfish Creek, observing that this could be a significant contributor to the drying up of the water body further downstream. This view was made in the context of the fact that the overwhelming majority scientists who have provided input on the need for adequate stream reserves under the Tasmanian Forest Practices Code have been clear that at least a 30 metre buffer zone around Class two, three and four streams should be implemented.
The above is unsubstantiated rubbish from a serial defamatory offender. Leaman is not "prominent"; it is a plain and simple falsehood "that the overwhelming majority (of) scientists" have said any such thing.
References
- http://www.answers.com/topic/protected-areas-of-tasmania
- http://www.on-trial.info/
- http://www.oztoxics.org/ntn/jonkers_tas.doc
- http://www.deh.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publicthreatenedlist.pl?wanted=fauna
- http://www.abc.net.au/stateline/tas/content/2003/s1089179.htm
- 'Forest and Forest Issues in Victoria and Tasmania', A report for the Uniting Church in Australia. Compiled by David Blair and Margy Dockray, April 2004.
- http://www.tcha.org.au/Uniting%20Church%20report.pdf
 | This Tasmania geography article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |