Tasmania Forest Administration Summons Hunters For Cleanup

After the spectacular resignation of a local area forestry official over alleged anonymous blackmail containing only thinly veiled threats concerning a placement of land mines, the Forestry Administration of Tasmania followed up with ...

After the spectacular resignation of a local area forestry official over alleged anonymous blackmail containing only thinly veiled threats concerning a placement of land mines, the Forestry Administration of Tasmania followed up with a blanket call upon hunters in the region to observe and report similar incidents. In the concerned area, a mountain-side multi-generation renaturation effort, an administrator had reported an organised force interfering with his work.

Apparently the attacker resented the fresh approach to allow people to save trees by removing death certificates from them, and retaliated by marking other trees for cutting, in forgery of the official notification thereof. The local area administrator had just taken over the place from an outgoing pensioner and said the marks were easy to recognise for a forest management professional and distinct from his own, such as the literate person can see the difference between written text and monkeys dancing the keyboard.

He added that if any instance of certification vandalism was spotted in an area, it meant that all the predecessor‘s remaining cutting marks were to be rated as invalid and ordered for removal by appropriate means. He elaborated that he believed he was selected for the post due to arbitrary reasons and requested removal of all irreversible and reversible handling marks from all trees to prepare the area for an unbiased successor. The Forest Administration said for conservation reasons it would not disclose the specific location.

After commercial contractors had been given a treaty supplement to sign that they would not arbitrarily damage vegetation just because it was there, the vandalism had taken the form of cut-down notifications put on the trees either with paint or textile markers. An official said as the department was just considering to switch the whole territory to reversible marks for higher conservation efficiency by random external review, the vandalism was likely to be a deliberate act of sabotage against the progress.

When death marks can be removed by anyone without a trace, forest administrators are better motivated to make responsible choices because everyone can save badly chosen trees simply by plucking off the death certificates. The local area administrator that now had resigned for proper procedure had earlier said he would increase the efficiency even further by making reversible marks never with fresh fabric but only by the down-cycling of otherwise spent one as to leave no doubt about the wider environmental context.

The fake cutting marks which have appeared in huge numbers appear to be deliberately designed to spoof an area administrator‘s instructions to subordinate workers and spoil his work results both in terms of conservation and material results. The department official said the local area administrator found several types of fake death certificates – from spoiling both a wood harvest and an animal conservation effort by marking trees to be cut that are economically worthless but ecologically valuable habitats, to grotesque attempts of having corporate logos cut into a hill for aerial view by selecting trees for death in a row or around a corner or circle.

Irreversible marks that require special treatment, equipment and work effort to remove them from a tree surface were also abused, but apparently they did not give the perpetrators an emotional kick of the kind provided by attempting to squeeze themselves ahead of the progress they resented as to derail it.

The administration stated that, instead of nailing medals to the trees that only another government would be able to reproduce, it was now going for a fresh start, and all cutting instructions as of this point were to be seen as invalid and removed, with new ones only to be brought out after destructive interference was ended.

“We do not take any authoritarian measures,” the forester said. Everyone can kill themselves in a forest but most people do not. Everyone can kill a tree in the forest but most people do not. “When there is a surge of either, it is to be resolved outside the forest.” But that did not mean it was not to be stopped inside.

“We are calling on all hunters in the region to check the areas of their permits for what at the first glance looks like the work of the forester, but beyond that gives them the overall impression that it is not, and contact these in charge for verification. From now on, give the benefit of the doubt to the tree not the bullet. Don’t shoot anyone feeling lucky, the person may be performing a legitimate removal of a reversible death mark. Do not kill the perpetrators in the beauty of Nature, instead let them leave and see whether any trees walk out with them.”

“Take special care where the forest looks as if apes had marched the keyboard. The risk we face by the instruction spoofing is like an invasive species that threatens to eat everything, including your shooting permit. All your administration obligations remain in the hands of the concerned homeland branches. But if you do not like your gun to be replaced with a loose cannon, you will understand a forester who does not like anyone to spoof his instructions, not even when he grants everyone an iron hand to dodge any of his bullets if they deem it worth the lifetime.”

“As forest administrators, we can learn a lot from hunters when we train our staff to respect the age pyramid of the species population. The foresters are just beginning to learn that they must not go for ivory. This heinous parasite is much like the other species you observe, when there is overpopulation it can be seen from how the treatment of the food changes to ever more careless pillage, while it is not easy to find traces where rare animals have eaten. The medical recommendation is let the parasite walk away to assert yourself you have it entirely removed, and if the triple offer to let go is not being taken you see overpopulation.”

“Let me make one more point that may concern you deeper. Where forestry is not being done properly or done wrong or improvement efforts are being attacked, hunting permits use not to last longer than a generation, although legally they could be inherited. That is so because even if you do not want to be a looter, when these in front of you in the thicket queue are nothing more than a pillage mob, independent feet will not follow up in your footsteps. You may find yourself and what you do in the role of a threatened species.”

“But here is an opportunity to change this. Look out for signs of the tree spoof invasion. The change from irreversible to reversible take-away marks is as important as it was to have hunting guns equipped with targeting telescopes. We are working to stop forestry staff from taking blind shots as you have chosen to abstain from under the risk of legal conflict when you obtained your permit.”

The announcer pointed to a court verdict which said a public relations business which had put “for sale” signs on old-growth trees three to take photographs to be used in the sale of an unrelated legacy firm somewhere in the world market bad been required to remove its decoration on leave, since the content thereof referred to the pictures not the trees.


Commenting has now closed on this article.

The Indymedia Network

Latin America
United States
East Asia
South Asia
West Asia