The relictual Gondwanan portion of the world-famous Daintree Rainforest, exists exclusively within the central three valleys off the eastern flank of Thornton Peak, with the Cooper Valley at its centrepiece. Here the highest biodiversity and concentration of ancient, rare, primitive and endemic species, impress visitors with exceptional richness, amid magnificent fan palm galleries and rainforest giants…

Daintree Rainforest demonstrates that cost effective conservation and carbon neutral operation on the land, can be fully-funded by sustainable eco-tourism at no cost to the public purse.

Neil Hewett.

“Climate change threatens … icons like the Great Barrier Reef, the Kakadu wetlands and the multi billion dollar tourism industries they support.”

The selection and juxtaposition of these two icons is, at the very least, strategically interesting. The Great Barrier Reef is widely celebrated as one of the natural wonders of the world, epitomising environmental importance for Australians. Kakadu, in a similar vein, is resplendent with fauna and flora and resounds of antiquity and Aboriginal spirituality. It is a logical companion to the Reef and particularly if the Minister’s intention was to capture the breadth and diversity of Australia’s environmental concerns.

However, the Reef is thought to be around a half-million years old and quite obviously has endured temperature variations throughout this period. With an even greater perseverance, Kakadu is believed to have formed around 140 million years ago, with the prominent escarpment wall forming sea cliffs and the Arnhem Land plateau a flat land above the sea.

Yet, despite these environmental assets enduring against the ravages of turbulent climate variation, their imminent environmental collapse is foreshadowed alongside the devastating implication of multi-billion dollar economic losses, unless dramatic changes are implemented as outlined in the Federal Government’s draft Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.

But what of other environmental icons, like the World Heritage-listed Daintree Rainforest? Surely it is even more vulnerable to these forecast catastrophic climate changes? Being coastal, it is more proximal to inundation than Kakadu, it is more primitive, has a far richer biodiversity and endemism and attracts more than twice the annual visitation and expenditure.

Perhaps its ecological interaction with the contiguous Great Barrier Reef is spatially less inclusive of the broader environmental diversity between the Reef and Kakadu. Nevertheless, localised carbon pollution should be more of a concern in the Daintree rainforest with its greater vulnerabilities and visitation, as well as its more abundant income-earning performance. Not that Kakadu should be under-valued, but it seems entirely incongruous that for all the urgency for this necessary intervention, that nothing is being done to protect the Daintree rainforest from carbon pollution emitted from hundreds of concurrently running engine generators.

It has been conservatively estimated that the federal government will raise ten billion dollars in 2010 from the sale of permits to emit greenhouse gases. Every cent of this estimated bounty will purportedly be used to help Australian households and businesses adjust to the emissions trading scheme and to invest in clean energy options.

Perhaps the federal Government might be persuaded to embrace the Daintree World Heritage rainforest as a priority pilot project to remove the unnecessary emissions of so many generators.

Our freehold property, in particular, was compulsorily inscribed within World Heritage in December of 1988. Its classification for farming was maintained, but World Heritage responsibilities, as prescribed within domestic legislation, have progressively diminished farming activities; most dramatically through the prohibition of harvesting native forests. At a local government level, World Heritage has been used to separate planning areas, to effectively deny development capabilities for the greater importance of protecting ecological values within the inscribed estate. In truth, the income-earning capabilities of freehold World Heritage lands have been progressively diminished.

On the basis of these mounting constraints, we lodged an objection to the new valuation, detailing the legislated conservation land-use and the lack of rateable services – no reticulated water, no reticulated electricity and a road that is frequently impassable due to the inadequacies of the existing infrastructure.

Not only was the decision on objection disallowed, but also a new valuation was simultaneously dispatched, with a further increase in unimproved value of an additional 250%. Details within our objection apparently alerted valuers to changes in land-use that no longer qualified for concession for farming. So what was once eligible for rateable concession, because of an existing right to harvest forest product, became ineligible, for the higher importance of protecting forest product. Go figure!

This reminded me of another valuation milestone in the Daintree rainforest, back in the mid-1990’s. Around $16million of Commonwealth and Queensland Government funds had been allocated for the voluntary conversion of Daintree freehold rainforest to National Park. Properties in the Cooper valley were prioritised for acquisition, because of their intrinsic values of rarity, endemicity and primitiveness.

In an act of perceived skulduggery, property values within the priority acquisition area, unexpectedly tripled. In response to the outrage of incensed landholders, officials insisted that those affected should have rightfully rejoiced, with the discovery that they had long enjoyed a ‘rate holiday’, brought inevitably into line with contemporary market-driven valuations.

I must confess that I remain unconvinced.

About two months ago, this magnificent adult female cassowary (above) traversed alongside our house with a dreadful limp. At the time, cassowaries had been fighting, so I assumed this one had suffered an injury in such conflict.

However, the big bird was not seen again for about two months and this was remarkable for this well-known inhabitant. She re-emerged late last week with no improvement in her gait, but with a dramatic loss of weight and this has presented an awkward dilemma for the land-manager.

It is pretty obvious that the bird is suffering. Then again, being a declared endangered species under EPBC, different protocols are invoked for response and intervention. She is a dominant female of a population of perhaps fewer than one-hundred birds remaining in the Daintree Cape Tribulation rainforests. She is also a wild animal with really scary feet.

Queensland’s EPA has the delegated authority for such matters. For the importance of the bird they are compelled to have the animal assessed by a veterinarian for diagnosis. If it is perceived that the animal is suffering from an infection, strategically placed fruit with antibiotics could be deployed. If the trauma was identified as a dislocation, the animal might be tranquilized or netted for manipulation. On the other hand, if the injury required resetting and immobilization for weeks, say for a broken bone, then the bird would be euthanased.

Trouble is, a vet with cassowary expertise cannot really expect to travel from Cairns or Ingham or wherever, to the Cooper Valley in the Daintree and the expectant arrival of a wild cassowary.

In a stroke of good fortune, a departing client rang through to the office from our entrance courtesy phone, that the injured cassowary was halfway along our driveway. I drove down and managed to get about ten minutes of video of the brid, limping and feeding and hopefully this will allow the vet to make the necessary determination.

In response, Mr. Phil Reeves MP, Parliamentary Secretary to the Premier of Queensland, has referred to advice from the Minister for Mines and Energy, the Hon. Geoff Wilson,

“The aim of the Government’s policy is to protect the rainforests in this World Heritage area and to safeguard the aesthetics of this unspoilt region.”

From Minister Wilson’s Office,

“We’re not about to bulldoze through ancient rainforest to put in power lines north of the Daintree River. We’re talking about world-famous, world heritage-listed rainforest and everyone would want it to stay that way.”

Such a response has born false witness, inflaming public opinion against the custodial community. Bulldozing World Heritage rainforests was never proposed; the mere suggestion is as mischievous as it is unethical.

Mr. Reeves MP, has admitted,

“The Government has not changed its position of discouraging development north of the Daintree River…”

This admission, in itself, is appalling, except for its candour. Members of the local community have long suspected that such a position was at play, but can now deal with the formal acknowledgment from the Office of the Premier.

Development in the Daintree is heavily regulated by the Queensland Government, under the Integrated Planning Act 1997 and to an even greater extent through the Iconic Places of Queensland Act 2008.

Development in the Daintree is already more rigorously constrained than probably anywhere else in Queensland. So the ‘development’ that the imposition of prohibitively expensive, polluting and aesthetically contemptuous electricity specifically ‘discourages’, can only be existing development; that being the only development that exists.

Despite the Queensland Government having previously promised freehold landowners within the World Heritage Area, that they would be helped to implement the Wet Tropics Plan to the maximum extent, the impacts of the Government’s discouragement of existing development is manifestly anti-environment and anti-tourism.

Breakfast at Cooper Creek Wilderness took a dramatic turn this morning with the unexpected arrival of a distressed cassowary chick. Not more than a month old, its separation from its family unit was cause for great concern. It ran about whistling for its father, but without response.

The image (above) shows the striped pattern providing a degree of concealment amongst the forest ground-cover. The second image shows the young cassowary, standing on our concrete verandah. After taking the shot, the chick then moved into the kitchen, which has no doors and then onwards to explore other aspects of our dwelling.

Perhaps ten minutes after its arrival, the dad made its presence known with another two chicks in tow. Re-united, the family walked quietly off into the wilderness, allowing our own kids to re-focus on readying themselves for the start of school’s third term.

Clinical trials of a previously untreatable type of cancer in horses have produced dramatic results: “The cancers were the size of a tennis ball to begin and following the injection of this drug have shrunk, died and then fallen out. Finally the skin around the tumour area has healed.”

As originally reported in the Cairns Post, Dr. Reddell said, “We are now looking to move the drug to testing against obstructive tumours and skin cancers in humans.”

Bio-discovery is emerging as an increasingly important and value-added attribute of bio-diversity, with important economic implications for conservation. In 2004, following the Commonwealth Government’s ratification of the ‘Convention on Biological Diversity’, the Queensland Government enacted its Bio-discovery Act, to facilitate access by biodiscovery entities to minimal quantities of native biological resources on or in State land or Queensland waters, to encourage the development, in the State, of value added biodiscovery and to ensure the State, for the benefit of all persons in the State, obtains a fair and equitable share in the benefits of biodiscovery..

Queensland’s former Douglas Shire is no more. Under amalgamation, the new Cairns Regional Shire extends where Douglas once existed, but not so far that its constituents remain entitled to elect representatives for the genuine care for development. Rather, for the first time in Queensland’s modern history, this entitlement has been usurped by Parliament, so that its Minister for Infrastructure and Planning, currently the Hon. Paul Lucas MP, can decide who to appoint for such a care.

Former member for Toowoomba (1966-1972), Mr. Peter Woods, has been appointed. So too, former head of the Planning Institute of Australlia, Mr. Leo Jensen. Mr. Ken Dobbs, of the Port Douglas Chamber of Commerce and Port Douglas-based architect Mr. Gary Hunt have also been endorsed. Cairns Regional Councillor for Division 10, Ms Julia Leu, completes the appointment.

So, that portion of the new Cairns Regional Shire, declared as ‘Iconic’ by Minister Lucas, can forget about developmental self-determination. And rather than defending the jurisdictions of their respective divisions from the possibility of being similarly stripped of democratic integrity, the other nine councillors remain deafening in their silent opposition of the relinquishment. Then again, so too are the other elected officers around Queensland that have current custodianship of representative authority.

One can almost here the collective expression of environmental conditioning, “Yes, but the ‘pristine Daintree’ is far too precious to be spoilt by reticulation.”

So, by implication, if Australia regards the Daintree exclusion area as the most deserving of protection from environmental harm, why is it condemned to the most polluting form of electricity? Surely, if its environmental importance supersedes any other area in Australia, its electricity supply should be the cleanest in Australia?

Residents and businesses within area of excision have a rigorously regulated conservation land-use responsibility. They are also quarantined from development, particularly through World Heritage and Iconic Places legislation. Now that conservation targets and planning scheme objectives have formally been met, the custodial community would like to be supported in the development of an alternative energy policy that is not reliant upon the concurrent operation of hundreds of polluting, emitting engine generators.

To this end, a delegation travelled to Brisbane to meet with Minister for Energy, the Hon. Geoff Wilson MP, to appeal for environmental relief from the existing flawed policy. It called upon the Queensland Government to embrace a new partnership, that protects, to the greatest possible extent, the exceptional environmental and ecotourism values, including the people and communities, through renewable optimisation, innovation, development and provision of world’s best-practice electricity supply.

The Minister’s Office has recently issued the following media statement:

We’re not about to bulldoze through ancient rainforest to put in power lines north of the Daintree River.

I would encourage householders in the Daintree to contact Ergon Energy in Cairns.

The media advice is contemptuous of the people of Queensland, who in 1998 funded a $450,000 EIAS that established that reticulation through directional boring could be achieved without any adverse effect on the natural environment. It is also contemptuous of the local community that travelled from the Daintree to Brisbane to explain their very serious concerns for the pollution that the Queensland Government’s existing electricity policy has forced into their income-earning rainforest.

Indeed, the description of bulldozing ancient World Heritage rainforests is deliberate and mischievous fear-mongering. World Heritage is protected from state government degradation under international law & the Commonwealth’s EPBC Act, in addition to its own state government legislation, including the NCA, IPA, Wet Tropics Management & Protection & Iconic Places Acts.

Land acquisition by the Queensland Government was an integral part of an agreement, defined in the Rainforest CRC’s Daintree Futures Study, which built upon the concurrent delivery of conservation, regulation of development and power.

Minister Wilson suggests Daintree landholders contact Ergon Energy in Cairns, which has been relieved of its distribution responsibility towards the Daintree area only, for technical advice. In point of fact, the FNQ Regional Electricity Council has recommended:

In light of the State Government’s ClimateSmart 2050 strategy to reduce emissions from fossil fuel and increase use of renewables, the REC would recommend that the Minister review whether solutions could be found under this or related policies.

Given the particular environment, an the many facets of the problem, the REC also recommends that other departments with interests in sustainability and World Heritage environmental management also be asked to consider solutions to the concerns.

On the 11th July 1987, Australians voted the ALP and Bob Hawke into federal government. Labor’s campaign promise, to stop logging within Queensland’s Wet Tropical rainforests via World Heritage nomination, was well supported and true to its word, inscription was ratified a mere sixteen months later.

World Heritage listing for the area’s Cultural Heritage was not sought in Australia’s nomination. The listing of the Wet Tropics was for natural heritage only. The tenor of the nomination rather celebrated the extraordinary natural values as if they had been found, like a hidden treasure, for the remarkable good fortune of humankind. Their urgent protection, through the highest order of protection available to Australia, was justified by their discovery.

But for the people whose lives and livelihoods were a part of the nominated landscape, there was also dishonour and disenfranchisement. Under the nobility of World Heritage, domestic maneuverings usurped economic benefits and amenity towards emerging interests with lesser familiarity.

The indigenous peoples of the Wet Tropics, in particular, were offered tokenistic recognition of traditional ownership, but were structurally excluded from management authority. The fact that the very values identified for World Heritage listing remained a living testament to indigenous land management practices, was not only overlooked by Australia, it was also severed from continuity.

After more than twenty years of effort to convince Australia to re-nominate the Wet Tropics for Cultural Heritage values, indigenous interests have recently won the support of federal environment minister, the Hon. Peter Garrett MP, for inclusion on the National Heritage List; whilst not quite World Heritage, it is a step in that very direction.

Taken from the Wet Tropics Management Authority website: story places (natural features such as mountains, rivers, waterfalls, swimming holes, trees) are parts of the Wet Tropics landscape that are important to Rainforest Aboriginal people as they symbolise features that were created during the ancestral creation period (sometimes called the “Dreaming” or the “Dreamtime”). These places have powerful meaning and properties. They may be considered dangerous to approach or take resources from, except in prescribed ways or by the right person. These places must be respected, not damaged and must be managed carefully by the expert guidance of the relevant Traditional Owners.