Mr Von Dadelszen's recent 'Watchdog” conclusions on the clearance of 110 hectares of mangroves is both ignorant and environmentally unacceptable.
The stated intention for further intervention requires challenging, and may merit consideration by any of three involved government Ministers.
Basic facts are (a) this Regional Council is officially charged with overseeing natural environments and their biodiversity; (b) mangrove beds are rich feeding areas and essential to the harbours' stocks of young fish; (c) recent research has shown conclusively that mangroves are three times more productive than rain forests, and most importantly (d) are also three times more efficient at removing CO2.
He confuses the issue with talk of the Port of Tauranga and its income, yet for example the wholesale obliteration just achieved around Welcome Bay has bugger all to do with this port's operation !
His claim of 'overwhelming community support” is dubious at best though possibly just reflects the selfish view of a few of the richer Tauranga red-necks who have ambitions for even more open launching spots for their big boats?
I do however have to confess some degree of disappointment at the as yet silence from our more informed local bodies such as Forest & Bird, and the Green Party.
Where and why are they hiding on this issue?
Dr Keith Corbett MBE.,Welcome Bay.
2 comments
INVASIVE SPECIES
Posted on 26-09-2011 15:56 | By PLONKER
I support the complete removal of mangroves as they are over running the place and so interfer with what was the existing environment.
Forest and Bird
Posted on 27-09-2011 08:32 | By greenbone
Dr Corbett raises some excellent points in his letter to the editor last Friday. With regard to Forest and Bird's involvement in mangrove removal in the Tauranga harbour. In 2009 Forest and Bird opposed the Regional Council's application to remove mangroves in the harbour using a mulching machine. Amongst other matters we believed that money spent on mangrove removal would be better spent on addressing the causes of increased mangrove distribution, i.e. sedimentation and nutrification of the harbour. In December 2010 we raised concerns that the mulched mangrove left behind by the mulching machine was not dissipating and was smothering seabed fauna. In addition the mulched areas were not recovering as anticipated and nutrients trapped in the substrate below the mangroves may be escaping to the harbour. We suggested that the council take a precautionary approach and trial alternative removal methods on a small scale combined with a comprehensive monitoring regime. The council choose to trial some alternative methods of mangrove removal while concurrently removing more mangroves using the mulching machine. The alternative mangrove removal methods were not adopted by the council. We continue to monitor the effects of mangrove removal in Tauranga harbour including the recent monitoring results undertaking by the council and proposals to spend significant amounts of money on mangrove stump removal within the mulched areas and seedling removal within the mulched areas and other areas of the harbour. We also maintain our dialogue with the National Institute of Water and Atmosphere (NIWA) who are undertaking a comprehensive research study of mangrove removal areas within the Tauranga harbour as part of a 6 year Foundation for Research, Science and Technology funded research project. Forest and Bird are focusing on solutions to sedimentation and nutrification of the harbour as part of its Kaimai Mamaku Campaign www.kaimaimamamku.org.nz and are positively engaging with the Manaaki Taha Moana research project www.mtm.ac.nz and the Bay of Plenty Regional Council, Waikato Regional Council and DOC Kaimai Catchments Project. Forest and Bird successful opposed a proposal to remove all mangroves within the Mangawhai harbour in Northland recently and have submitted a submission in opposition to the proposed removal of mangroves in Whangamata harbour. Forest and Bird www.forestandbird.org.nz
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to make a comment.