Information
Brief
Proposed
Logging/Plantation - Mt Arthur, Lilydale
13
November 2009
RESIDENTS
SUMMARY OF CONCERNS
Residents
and community groups from Mt Arthur, Lilydale, fear that a proposed
new clearfell logging and plantation development front could
compromise the town water supplies, put log trucks on residential
roads, degrade their living environment and be visible from many part
of the surrounding district.
Logging and plantation is proposed on an approximately 246 acre private block
that immediately abuts Lilydale’s town water intake and includes
critical areas of Rocky Creek and the water catchment for the supply.
The land is in Launceston City Council’s Scenic Protection Zone and
Water Catchment Protection Zone.
The proposal will see logging and plantations move into rural living
areas on the north-west of Mt Arthur, only a kilometre from the edge
of Lilydale village. Roads for log truck access are steep, narrow and
have blind corners, causing fears for community safety. The roads
also provide access to tourists wishing to visit Mt Arthur’s
attractive summit walk. The proposal may also impact on the property
values of land used for rural living.
Mt Arthur residents are urgently negotiating with the people proposing
the operations, and trying to gain a copy of a Forest Practices Plan,
but have also asked Launceston City Council and Ben Lomond Water to
assess the proposal and to talk to the Forest Practices Authority to
ensure any proposal does not compromise the town water supply or
cause community safety issues.
Launceston City Council and Ben Lomond Water are also being asked to consider
other ways to protect Lilydale’s town water catchment into the
future.
The giant freshwater crayfish, Mt Arthur burrowing crayfish and
threatened vegetation communities are believed to be present on the
land.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON PROPOSAL
Notification
of Proposed Forest Practices – 186 Mountain Rd
A
Notice of Intent to conduct forest practices on a parcel of land at
186 Mountain Rd (Title Ref: 158217/1 and 158217/2, PID 1809506) has
been issued to adjacent landowners (see attached location map and
title plan). The notice identifies these practices as clearfelling
and selective harvesting, then converting land to plantation as well
as regeneration to native forest.
The
notice, issued on the 12/10/09, indicated that forest practices would
commence around the 1/11/09. The notice was issued by M.J. Fitch
(Real Forest Planning), theForest Practices Officer preparing the
Forest Practices Plan (FPP), on behalf of Leigh Bardenhagen who is
provided as the contact point (phone no. provided) for further
information. A FPP was not available at the time of notification.
Additional
Information from Meeting – 28th
October
2009
Further
information on the proposal was provided to resident representatives
at a meeting with Leigh Bardenhagen and Martin Fitch (FPO) on the
28th
October
2009, and is summarised in the following.
- The
FPP was yet to be certified but forest operations were proposed to
commence in mid November 2009 and be complete by early March 2010.
The aim was to have the FPP certified within two weeks to allow a
start to operations (note
these timeframes now appear to have changed).
- Operations
will be dominated by clearfell logging and conversion to E.
nitens plantation
but also include some areas of selective harvesting (with native
forest regeneration) to the southern boundary and north-east corner.
- Aerial
spraying with pesticides could be used in plantation management if
necessary. Only non-residual herbicides (ie. glysophate) will be
used and applied through ground based delivery methods such as boom
sprays.
- Mountain
Rd will be used by log trucks at the expected rate of 4 truck
movements per day for an approximate period of 3 months. Truck
warning signs will be installed (but not maintained if vandalised)
and Leigh offered to liaise with residents to see if truck movements
can be timed to minimise impacts on residents and visitors using
Mountain Rd. (Residents
noted that log truck traffic will be significantly worse during
future harvest of the proposed plantation).
- The
Forest Practices Authority (FPA) has issued recommendations on
several matters related to the proposal, including biodiversity,
landscape, and water and soil management. The FPP will incorporate
the recommendations of the FPA.
- 1080
baiting will not be used to control browsing animals. Control will
be achieved through shooting and protecting trees from damage.
- A
fire management plan will be developed as part of the FPP.
- Forest
operations will be excluded from areas identified as Melaleuca
ericifolia swamp
forest. Areas of E.
viminalis wet
forest may be selectively logged. (It
was suggested by the residents that the current draft FPP may not
reflect the protection of the full extent of these communities.
Martin indicated he would review and adjust the draft FPP if
necessary).
- Class
2 streams will have 50m streamside buffers, Class 3 streams will
have 20m buffers and Class 4 will have 15m buffers (Note
increased streamside buffers on Rock Creek (Class 2) have responded
to the requirements of C4.4 of the FP Code. It is understood that
the FPA has sought the 15m buffers to Class 4 streams).
- Visual
terrain modelling has been undertaken to determine likely scenic
impacts based on a selection of viewing points in the wider Lilydale
area (eg near Plovers Ridge, Second River Rd). This has influenced
the proposal for only
selective logging in much of the area south of Rocky Ck, with
regeneration to native forest.
- Martin
noted that the Forest Practices Code (‘the Code’) states at C4.4
that no more than 5% of a town water supply catchment should be
felled annually. Prior to FPP certification, the FPO will determine
whether this operation will exceed this requirement. Other
operations on Forestry Tasmania and private land are already taking
place in the catchment and these must be included in these
calculations.
- The
potential for individual adjacent landowners to negotiate retention
of a buffer to
their boundary (through a payment to proponent) was ruled out.
- Martin
was unable to provide any advice on potential impacts that a
plantation may have on water recharge/yield into Rocky Ck and
related impacts on the town water intake point.
- Martin
was unable to comment on potential impacts on surrounding property
values as a result of the proposed operations.
LAND
TENURE AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS
Current
Land Tenure and Zoning.
The
current owner of the 246 acre (99.86 ha) lot is Hume and Kerrison Pty
Ltd but it is understood that the contractor proposing to undertake
the forest practices is in the process of purchasing the land. It is
unknown when the contract is due to be finalised or what conditions
are attached. The parcel is under a Private Timber Reserve (PTR).
Large
portions of the land are covered by Special Zones – Water Catchment
Protection and Scenic Protection Zones under the Launceston City
Council (LCC) Planning Scheme. Title Ref: 158217/1 is zoned as Rural
and the smaller 158217/2 is zoned Forest Practices.
Lilydale’s
Town Water Supply
Over
65% of the parcel is under Launceston City Council’s (LCC) Water
Catchment Protection Zone. The land includes long sections of Rocky
Creek and its tributaries and the associated water catchments which
feed one of the intakes for Lilydale’s town water supply. The land
abuts the parcel owned by LCC, which includes the water intake, and
appears to contain a significant part of the Rocky Creek catchment,
critical for water quality management. It is understood Ben Lomond
Water now manages the water assets (eg tanks, dam wall, intake point,
pipes) but it is unclear what their role is in regard to water
catchment management.
The
current proposal will see a relatively significant portion of the
Rocky Creek town water supply catchment converted to plantation.
Plantation development in this location has the potential to reduce
water recharge into Rocky Ck and therefore impact on Lilydale’s
town water supplies. This impact may be exacerbated by other
potential operation and conversions in the Rocky Ck catchment. The
FPP and FPA do not appear to have made any assessment of the
potential impacts of the proposal on future water recharge / quantity
in Rocky Ck.
Residents
are concerned that, under the proposed FPP, aerial spraying of
pesticides is able to be undertaken in the Rocky Ck catchment and
adjacent residences. This has the potential to impact on drinking
water quality.
Both
water quality and quantity impacts, have potential to impact on the
threatened species that are reliant on riparian habitat.
It
is understood a ‘Waterwatch’ site is regularly monitored on Rocky
Creek downstream of the proposal.
Mountain
Road Safety
The
intent is to use Mountain Road for log truck access and egress.
Due
to its narrow, steep, gravel surface and blind corners, residents
have very high safety concerns in regard to proposed use of Mountain
Rd by log trucks. A number of resident’s driveways also enter onto
Mountain Rd and the road needs grading annually to maintain an
acceptable surface. Due to these conditions, the level of proposed
log truck movement can only increase the probability of accidents and
‘near misses’ as well as the consequences of such events. Even at
low speeds vehicles often have to quickly pull close to the verge of
the road to avoid collision with vehicles travelling in the opposite
direction. With wide log trucks, the ability to take such actions to
avoid collision will be significantly reduced and potentially
dangerous. In many sections of road where passing log trucks will be
near impossible, it will also be difficult to safely reverse
considerable distances to find a point where trucks can pass each
other. As we presume log trucks will not wish to reverse, it will be
other road uses that will have to do this.
Leigh
has offered to further discuss the timing of log truck movements on
Mountain Rd but residents do not believe this will provide any
significant mitigation of the increased risks.
Scenic
Amenity and Landscape Character
Over
75% of the parcels is under LCC’s Scenic Protection Zoning
suggesting that tree cover on the land is likely to be visible from
parts of the Lilydale-Karoola-Lalla area.
Mountain
Road, which is a rural living precinct, is lined by almost contiguous
tracts of bushland. Any development or land use visible from the road
is rural residential in character. The road is used by bushwalkers and
tourist walking to the summit of Mt Arthur. Given the scale of the
proposal, there appears to be potential to adversely impact on the
landscape character and residential amenity of the area, with
subsequent impacts on property values.
Natural
values
Both
the threatened giant freshwater crayfish (Astacopsis
gouldii)
and the Mt Arthur burrowing crayfish (Engageus
orramakunna)
have been recorded in very close proximity to the parcel and both are
likely to be present within it. Both species
habitat
is associated with waterways and drainage seeps. Skemps snail may
also be present.
Two
threatened vegetation communities Melaleuca
ericifolia swamp
forest and Eucalyptus
viminalis wet
forest are mapped (TasVeg) as being present on the parcel. Other
threatened mammal fauna species, including spotted tail quoll, are
likely to utilise habitat on the parcel. Approximately 90 acres of
private land to the east of the proposal is covenanted under the
Nature
Conservation Act 2002,
given its significant natural values.
The
proposal has potential to impact on all these natural or conservation
values.
Economic
Values
This
is potential for forest practices in this location to impact on
property values associated with rural living in the immediate area as
well as the broader Lilydale area. There is also potential impacts on
any future local tourism pursuits in the area (eg. visitor
accommodation)
MT
ARTHUR RESIDENT ACTION TO DATE
Mt
Arthur residents’ response to proposed forest practices
Nearly
all Mt Arthur residents, who have been regularly meeting since
notification, are generally opposed to clearfell logging involving
conversion to plantation on this property. This opposition is due to
potential impacts to water, the visual and rural living environment,
and ongoing community safety issues into the future.
Conversely,
some residents have indicated they may be willing to accept a
selective logging regime across the property (retaining buffers to
streamsides, roadsides and threatened communities), with regeneration
to native forest, as long as Mountain Rd is not used for log truck
traffic.
To
date, the affected group of Mt Arthur residents have agreed to focus
on direct discussions with the proponent and relevant authorities
(Council, Ben Lomond Water, Forest Practices Authority) rather than
trying to work through the mass media or to secure wider community
opposition through public meetings and the like. Residents have taken
this approach because they believed it was the decent thing to do,
because they are loathed to further destabilise the Lilydale
community, because they hoped to demonstrate that their individual
concerns are sincere and that they are seeking discussions in good
faith.
Discussion
with Proponent and FPO
Residents
have been meeting with Leigh to obtain further information and to
determine if he will compromise on the proposal. At this point the
only area of likely compromise appears to be around protecting a 20m
visual buffer to Mountain Road and potentially ruling out any
activities in the far north-east corner of the block, due to the
presence of multiple drainage lines and paperbark swamp.
Residents
are also discussing other potential land use options with Leigh but
there is currently no clear indication that such options would be
acceptable to Leigh (see Other Land Use Options).
The
FPO has only provided residents with a draft map of proposed
activities (see attachment). At the first meeting, the FPO indicated
he would provide a complete draft
FPP
(at a cost of $50) but, after further follow up by residents, he is
yet to provide this detailed document. The FPO has since indicated he
does not intend to provide residents with a draft FPP at this point
in time. The reason provided was that consultation with Launceston
City Council has potential to change to the plan and, if the plan was
provided to residents in its current form they may become
unnecessarily concerned about its content.
Launceston
City Council
After
some lobbying by residents and key Aldermen, LCC have drafted a
fairly comprehensive letter to the FPA (see attachment) requesting
that any certification of a FPP be suspended until such time as
Council has had an opportunity to assess potential impacts and full
consultation between Council and the proponent has taken place. In
this letter Council has also indicated it is seeking to undertake
impact assessments in regard to hydrology, flora and fauna, visual
amenity and heavy vehicle movement.
It
is noted that Section A3.2 of the Forest Practices Code 2000 states
that consultation with local government will occur prior to
certification of FPPs involving: - areas with landscape protection
provisions in planning schemes; operations which potentially affect
water quality in a listed town water supply catchment (see Appendix
2); operations within 2km upstream of a town water supply intake;
construction of new access or major upgrading of existing access for
timber harvesting onto local government roads.” Rocky Ck intake
(028) is listed in Appendix 2 of the code. This provides LCC with a
mandate to pursuit these issues with the FPA or proponent.
Ben
Lomond Water
While
Ben Lomond Water has been tardy in responding to residents’
concerns, it is understood they have now written to the FPA seeking
some involvement in the issue.
Forest
Practices Authority
The
FPAs only response to date has been to encourage residents, prior to
certification of an FPP, to seek information relating to their
concerns from the proponent. The FPA indicated that if a copy of the
FPP cannot be obtained from the proponent after certification, then
residents should request a copy from the FPA via Freedom of
Information processes.
Exploration
of Other Land Use Options
The
current land owner, Hume and Kerrison, have had the land parcel on
the real estate market for at least 8 (?) months. During this period
adjacent landowners are
aware
of a number of parties that have been interested in purchasing the
land to build a house. It is understood that LCC had advised some
potential purchasers that there are likely to be issues associated
with rezoning of the land and removal of the PTR. This may have
resulted in parties withdrawing their interest in purchasing the
land.
Residents
have explored several alternative land use options amongst
themselves, with the proponent and other authorities. While
problematic, one option for the community is to try and negotiate
with the current owner, Hume and Kerrison, and the proponent (who is
in the process of purchasing the parcel) to purchase the land
themselves. If this were achievable, the intent would be to covenant
the land (to prevent future forest practices) and to then on sell for
development of 1-3 dwellings. However, this would rely on the
community being able to raise finances and LCC providing some sought
of ‘in principle’ approval allowing development of dwellings. It
is presumed that LCC would see such development as a better outcome
for water quality than the proposed forest practices.
A
more preferable option would be for LCC or Ben Lomond Water to
consider a joint purchase and reconfiguration of the parcel,
potentially in partnership with the community, to covenant and
protect key parts of the water catchment while allowing building
envelopes for sustainable development of dwellings.
FUTURE
ACTIONS
Mt
Arthur resident are continuing to negotiate, lobby authorities and
inform the community on a range of fronts.
The
following actions are currently being pursued by Mt Arthur residents:
- Ongoing
meetings and correspondence with Launceston City Council and Ben
Lomond Water
- Ongoing
meetings and correspondence with proponent (Leigh)
- Coordination
of Information Evening for wider Lilydale community
- Provide
detailed information and meet with other local community groups (eg LPG,
MEAMG, LPA)
- Explore
options for independent assessment and audit of proposed Forest Practices
Plan
- Coordinate
independent forest hydrological assessment to identify likely
impacts on
water
- Discussion
with Tasmanian Land Conservancy about covenanting/purchase options
- Further
contact with FPA to determine what actions they are undertaking
As
previously noted, Mt Arthur residents have avoided a media campaign
(radio, TV, newspaper, community rallies, fund raising) to date.
However, residents group recognise this issue has implications for
the wider Lilydale community and that the residents cannot prevent
other individuals or groups taking what ever action they see fit. It
is acknowledged that once current avenues for discussion and
negotiation have been exhausted, there may be a mood to involve the
media in seeking to gain a satisfactory outcome.
.jpg)