Home' Napier Mail : October 25th 2011 Contents 4 NAPIER MAIL, OCTOBER 26, 2011
from 15 November 2011
199 Meeanee Rd, Napier
Our new seasons menu will focus on
Open 7 days for lunch and dinner
fresh summer æavours
Saturday 12 November 7.30-12pm
available via email
or from Shed 2
Hawke's Bay Events Trust
Bring ID if you are under 25yrs. Intoxicated persons will be refused entry. Intoxication will be monitored during the evening
R20 / SMOKEFREE / FORMAL DRESS
(MEN: TIE OR STUD / NO POLONECK / NO OPEN NECK)
The winner of a cartoon of Emerson St statue Sheila
by top French caricaturist Gerard ''Gega'' Gargouil is
Tony Mairs of Marewa. Mr Mairs' winning caption
was: ''I told you to use a roll-on rather than a spray.''
Other entries included ''Vive Les Bleus!'', ''Au revoir.
Go All Blacks. Sorry Gega'' and ''Statue of Liberty.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Regarding Dexter McGhie's letter (Oct 12) and
Hawke's Bay Regional Council manager Michael
Firstly, just because roundup is commonly used
in no way confers any degree of safety. In fact
we've all accepted it as this rather benign product
which breaks down to harmless salts upon contact
with the soil. This begs the unfortunately way-too-
late, question, Who said so?'' Now the consensus
is beginning to turn against the product, in part
spurred by birth defects in Argentine families
residing close to soya bean crop dusters. Studies
also, not surprisingly, from Argentina show
abnormal embryo development in amphibians
(frogs) at the so called acceptable levels''. The
part where it degrades immediately to harmless
salts is, sadly, wrong. Its degradation is
unpredictable and seems to partly accumulate
instead. Lastly it is not non toxic'' but very toxic
at low levels to liver cells, kidney cells, testicular
cells and the endocrine (hormone) system.
Remember DDT anyone?
Secondly, ERMA seems to totally rely on the
toxicology data as supplied by the manufacturer.
When defenders of a chemical claim that there is
no evidence of it being a carcinogen or otherwise
toxic if used as recommended, they are probably
right, as no independent study is likely to have
been done. Therefore obviously no-one can claim
that it is safe either. The fish and everything else
(us too) are, in effect, the guinea pigs. Lastly, Mr
Adye implies a further safety margin in that all
operators are GrowSafe'' certified. As a farmer so
am I. To be so you have to demonstrate an ability
to understand the label and calibrate the sprayer
to apply the correct dose. Perhaps it should be
GrowerSafe'' as a large part of the course is how
to protect yourself from whichever nasty you
happen to be wafting into the atmosphere. Rubber
gloves, overalls, breathing mask, goggles etc.
Could it be something to do with that bit of the
label that reads poison''?
Considering the fish and...accumulation of
biocide, why are we spraying by waterways at all?
Malcolm White, Puketitiri (abridged)
I read Dexter McGhie's letter with great interest,
and also Mike Adye's response. So I took myself off
to the computer to google Roundup''. It made for
some very interesting and sobering reading. It
states quite clearly that Roundup'' can be
harmful to fish life, among a host of other life
forms. It's interesting, too, that Monsanto'' who
manufactures Roundup'' was also one of the
major players in developing Agent Orange.
Unfortunately a lot of us just go blithely along
with what manufacturers and governments tell us
to be true. I believe, though, that we really need
to be questioning a lot of this information, and it
would appear that we are starting to do that more
and more. As far as the Roundup'' issue is
concerned, there is just too much at stake, here.
We only have one planet and all of the amazing
things in it. Do we really need to be killing weeds
with Roundup'' at the expense of our fellow
creatures? I think not.
Heather Scherger, Hawke's Bay
Re: Fracking Hell (October 12): The community
should thank Stuart Nash for endeavouring to
bring to their attention the dangers of the fracking
method proposed to be used by two North
American oil companies in Hawke's Bay. Some of
us have already seen video on national television
of household tap water bursting into flames when
run, and residents complaining of the taste of oil
and chemicals in the drinking supply.
As Stuart says in his article, fracking is banned
in a number of countries worldwide, and has
anyone yet followed up on the prospect of oil and
chemical polluted water from our aquifer affecting
the local production of our vineyards, orchards
and market gardens, let alone urban households
across The Bay?
I am sure many support oil development
provided it is undertaken under controlled
circumstances without obvious risk. Obviously
fracking does not allow this. There will be little
point in phoning Tremain and Foss for assistance
once the problem surfaces.
What stance is our HB Regional Council, the
responsible body for monitoring of our water
catchment, taking on this issue? Fracking
interferes with the natural environment and once
undertaken is completely outside the control of
anyone to manage what occurs below the surface.
No fancy wording in a Resource Management
Act application will save the day if fracking gets
out of hand. Have a look on Google for more real
examples that have already occurred and then
demand our water watchdogs think long and hard
before any fracking drilling permits are issued.
Les Hewett, Napier
Links Archive October 18th 2011 November 1st 2011 Navigation Previous Page Next Page