Page 4269 - Week 15 - Tuesday, 20 November 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The issue of front fences always brings up the issue of the dog problem. The committee noted that the Government has taken up this challenge, which I might add was initially started by Mrs Grassby in her capacity as the previous Minister responsible for dogs and dog problems, to ensure that the community participated in this process. The current Government has announced a number of measures which are aimed at bringing the dog problem under control and we recommend, as a committee, that action be started on them very quickly. Once again, of course, another important aspect is the need for adequate resources and staff to ensure that the new policies in relation to the control of dogs are fully and effectively enforced. What we also recommended, which was very important, was that the implementation of those new control measures was required to be subject to ongoing reviews.
Two problems that we noted during our investigations related to environmental issues. We followed this up by inviting comments from conservation groups and the Parks and Conservation Service in the ACT. There seem to be some problems with some of the plants identified as suitable for hedges. Some were causing problems in the indigenous ecosystems of the ACT, particularly the Canberra Nature Park. The committee was concerned to ensure that those plants that were identified on that list and which were not suitable for hedges were removed from that list. That was one of the issues that we took up.
Another issue that we considered was the concern about the current practice of using brush fencing in the ACT. Following some investigations it was identified that the material for brush fencing is brought into the ACT mainly from an area in New South Wales. In fact, there are problems. Problems have been identified in Victoria and South Australia where this material has been used for similar fencing in those States. There was some concern that this could be causing some problems to the ecosystem in the area from which the plants had come to the ACT, which is the area of West Wyalong and Mount Hope. However, unfortunately, unlike Victoria and South Australia, no work has been done on the possible effects on the environment there.
In the absence of any clear evidence to suggest that this was the case, the committee decided that it would recommend that the ACT Government take action to initiate, through its membership of the Australian and New Zealand Environment Council, an examination of the effects of the use of this material as a fencing aid and its effect on the environments of New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia. I think it is important to remember that, where a product or a process that takes place in another State is having an effect on the environment, we are, indirectly, affecting the environment of another area. Action should be taken in much the same way as the Government has adopted a policy not to accept any gravel that is removed from the Murrumbidgee River because of the effects on that river. It is a similar sort of policy.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .