E.nitens are naturally occurring at high altitudes in the SE Australia mainland.

Improvements by UTas & Forestry CRC would have allowed plantations to be located at lower altitudes where frost is a problem.  In Tasmania this has been allowed to happen in river catchments across the state.

These improvements would have meant less leaf wax and thinner leaves and faster growth rates.

Thinner leaves means less fungal problems.  The downside is they would be more attractive to pest larvae, like beetles, as thin leaves would tend to remain horizontal longer and beetle eggs would stick better to the underside of the leaf because oil would seep through a thinner layer of wax.

Thin leaves means faster breakdown rates in water and smaller leaf cells.  These cells may go through a sand filter such as used by a water supply authority.

A thin leaf with dense cell structure means the E.nitens leaf would not be useful as a distribution point for injected fungal pesticides ie Bt.  This explains why they are not going to be used as a “Bt trap” by Tas Forestry.  They already tried it.

So you now have a toxic, super bug, a beetle, and toxic, fast growing tree, the modified E.nitens, and toxic methods of production, the herbicides.

What happens next?

FEA is a zombie.
Gunns will become one in two weeks if it can’t get $40M refinanced with the ANZ Bank.  There is a hung parliament, so no help is going to come from the Tasmanian government.

Its unknown exactly which part of the tree, process of growing the tree or tree pests are the most toxic.  There is a committee looking into this to see what kills us first.

Looks like the only thing that may save us from more toxins is that this E.nitens business can’t make money.  The worry is that it never made money.

This is where we are today.  Any ideas would be appreciated.  I can’t see this ending well.

Did anyone see the sixty minutes program about “endosulfan” ?

  If the feds don’t act and rectify this situation, it will be criminal in my opinion.
                      d.d.

FT could replace the Parengana nitens plantations with hemp for pulp as oft espoused by save-the-earth types.

We could then readily test the good GP’s translocation-of-leaf solutes theory based on the occurrence of clusters of mellowed-out folk in St Helens; and when these are observed the toxicologists will have no doubt about what compound they are seeking.

And think of the tourism, the caravan parks would be full of mellow clusters of Combis and Winnebagoes; a generation levelling nude fest of the buff taught and wrinkled alike…and the therapeutic pools, hot springs, you get my drift. One can only speculate how the Lonely Planet would promote that.

Such a crop change is clearly urgently needed in other catchments, particularly those originating in the Western Tiers. There the hills are apparently clothed in LSD plantations, at least judging from the hallucinations, paranoia and ‘expertise is conspiracy’ incessantly espoused by landholders from that part of the world on this August online e-zine.

And William, it’s apparently in the water at Rosebery too, eh?

The short answer to Nitens planted on former Agricultural land would be to repeatedly thin the plantations, keep opening up the canopy. ASAP.
While Nitens pulpwood is still saleable at a profit in Tasmania. Even if it is profitable now? Sow grass seed to turn the land back to pasture.
Eventually the land would be opened up.
To clear fell would be an extreemly costly way to revert to agriculture. This way pasture could be utilized while the stumps and debris is rotting.

Hugoagogo you are really showing who you work for now.
The main point is that if the trees are causing such a problem to the environment then the only solution is to
PULL THEM OUT
and replace them with mixed native forest trees.
They could still be plantations but plantations of mixed eucalypts not monoculture genetically improved trees.
It is a pity when pet scientists of the industry come out with such rubbish.

Making toxic crops, with toxic chemicals, that produce toxic insect outbreaks, that can only exist with a tax dodge based on a Ponzi scheme.

It would appear that certain sections of our community believe they are scientists and therefore superior to mere mortals who are but guinea pigs for their important experimentation.  The fact that they are bad gardeners seems not to matter.

Congratulations to Drs Scammell and Bleaney for laying these cards on the table.  I trust more details (e.g. coordinates for the sampling locations) will be forthcoming.

I have a dumb question.  I understand (from Australian Story) that the test for toxicity involves plonking water fleas in the sample, and seeing how they go.  Presumably this bug relies on oxygen dissolved in the water for respiration.  Is it possible that very high concentrations of organic matter in the surface skimmer samples are taking up all the oxygen, leaving insufficient for the fleas?  This effect might be particularly acute if some time has elapsed between sampling and analysis.

I’m not a biologist, so as I said, this may be a dumb question.  Any enlightenment would be welcomed.

#3. ‘Ere we go again’, to quote Ivan.
Hugoagogo, please distinguish between taut (stretched tightly) and taught, (having been instructed.)
And you’re not the only one…

#7 Quite correct Mark,

Dissolved oxygen, pH and temperature are monitored throughout these experiments for the very reason you’ve eluded to.  It is my understanding that dissolved oxygen is controlled via aeration when required.  Again it is my understanding that it is not used if it is not needed as aeration will drive off volatiles.

I believe EPA will put up the full study on their web site.  If they don’t I’ll hit Lindsey up for more space.

Regards Marcus

Wiz, Gunns have announced that the $40 million debt that it owes due to Auspine has been ‘restructured’ and has been deferred for a later time. A great deal of Gunns debts have been ‘restructured’ in a Harvey Norman type payment.

Hugo, why not trial industrial hemp cropping? Industrial hemp hasn’t the sought after qualities of its cousin, so shouldn’t attract too many Kombies and whacked out campers. Farms can be re established along with processors and the towns that farms once supported.

Pete (5), I can envision a new employment opportunity, a new paid labour force in removing poorly sited plantations and the restoration of the land and our river systems.

Defamatory imputation deleted

Re #3 Where is Parengana?

Assuming the water in the rivers near native forests where E.nitens is indigenous, is not toxic.
Perhaps a missing ingredient is lack of biodiversity in plantation forests. E.nitens forests may require many symbiotic relationships to create a balance.

Just a thought

#13 “Balance”
Are you talking about forests or simplistic tree plantations?
The mixing of words just helps to confuse the debate.
Let us be clear about this:
Tree Plantations planted, sprayed and clearfelled in area rotations are simplistic, primitive crops of trees.
Forests are more than trees growing side by side.
The trick by some was to pretend as there are such things as short rotation tree - “plantation forests or forest plantations”...
All Eucalyptus nitens and Pinus radiata plantations in Tasmania are managed as short to medium term rotations (12 to 30 years).
They are locked in as clearfelled crops of desired tree vegetation, any natural reseeding and any form of biodiversity is seen and dealt with as alien and inferior.

Sponge effects, carbon accumulation, and continuation of natural successive processes are eliminated just like a crop of onions, corn, wheat or potatoes. 
There is no “Balance” in clearfell, as simple as that.

The burn-offs are toxic.
The fertilizers are toxic.
The herbicides are toxic.
The pesticides are toxic.
The leaves are toxic.
The beetle larvae are toxic.

The trees are located in the water catchments.
The finance is a Ponzi scheme.
There is no profit generated.

Governments should not to support the growing of E.nitens monoculture plantations.

I have read the downloads - they are pretty poor experiments.  They don’t point towards toxicity from Nitens at all.

Except of course, nitens leaves by themselves are toxic to certain things if you mash them up and chew them.

What a hoot and a waste of time.

I wonder what the date will be when the ABC provides an apology.

Frank

I must disagree with you assessment of plantations as not being bio-diverse.  It is simply quite incorrect in probably 90% of the coupes that I have visited over the last few years.

Also, clear felling is a normal practice, even in your home country of Germany (and the rest of Europe).  And I know this from personal experience.

However, your last statement is also not quite correct.  Tree plantations do mimic natural forests ore than any other commercial crop.  I am sure that you have found such proof from mainstream research when you are googling.

Cheers

I also wouldn’t call our plantations here simplistic either, they have been genetclly improved in this same manner as spuds, poppies, carrots, apples an so forth.  This is because the plantations are grown for a commercial purpose.