Lapang Islanders in Indonesia

"A Summary" – Apr 2, 2011 (Kryon channelled by Lee Carroll) (Subjects: Religion, Shift of Human Consciousness, 2012, Intelligent/Benevolent Design, EU, South America, 5 Currencies, Water Cycle (Heat up, Mini Ice Ace, Oceans, Fish, Earthquakes ..), Middle East, Internet, Israel, Dictators, Palestine, US, Japan (Quake/Tsunami Disasters , People, Society ...), Nuclear Power Revealed, Hydro Power, Geothermal Power, Moon, Financial Institutes (Recession, Realign integrity values ..) , China, North Korea, Global Unity,..... etc.) -

“ … Here is another one. A change in what Human nature will allow for government. "Careful, Kryon, don't talk about politics. You'll get in trouble." I won't get in trouble. I'm going to tell you to watch for leadership that cares about you. "You mean politics is going to change?" It already has. It's beginning. Watch for it. You're going to see a total phase-out of old energy dictatorships eventually. The potential is that you're going to see that before 2013.

They're going to fall over, you know, because the energy of the population will not sustain an old energy leader ..."

(Live Kryon Channelings was given 7 times within the United Nations building.)

Question: Dear Kryon: I live in Spain. I am sorry if I will ask you a question you might have already answered, but the translations of your books are very slow and I might not have gathered all information you have already given. I am quite concerned about abandoned animals. It seems that many people buy animals for their children and as soon as they grow, they set them out somewhere. Recently I had the occasion to see a small kitten in the middle of the street. I did not immediately react, since I could have stopped and taken it, without getting out of the car. So, I went on and at the first occasion I could turn, I went back to see if I could take the kitten, but it was to late, somebody had already killed it. This happened some month ago, but I still feel very sorry for that kitten. I just would like to know, what kind of entity are these animals and how does this fit in our world. Are these entities which choose this kind of life, like we do choose our kind of Human life? I see so many abandoned animals and every time I see one, my heart aches... I would like to know more about them.

Answer: Dear one, indeed the answer has been given, but let us give it again so you all understand. Animals are here on earth for three (3) reasons.

(1) The balance of biological life. . . the circle of energy that is needed for you to exist in what you call "nature."

(2) To be harvested. Yes, it's true. Many exist for your sustenance, and this is appropriate. It is a harmony between Human and animal, and always has. Remember the buffalo that willingly came into the indigenous tribes to be sacrificed when called? These are stories that you should examine again. The inappropriateness of today's culture is how these precious creatures are treated. Did you know that if there was an honoring ceremony at their death, they would nourish you better? Did you know that there is ceremony that could benefit all of humanity in this way. Perhaps it's time you saw it.

(3) To be loved and to love. For many cultures, animals serve as surrogate children, loved and taken care of. It gives Humans a chance to show compassion when they need it, and to have unconditional love when they need it. This is extremely important to many, and provides balance and centering for many.

Do animals know all this? At a basic level, they do. Not in the way you "know," but in a cellular awareness they understand that they are here in service to planet earth. If you honor them in all three instances, then balance will be the result. Your feelings about their treatment is important. Temper your reactions with the spiritual logic of their appropriateness and their service to humanity. Honor them in all three cases.

Japan's Antarctic whaling hunt ruled 'not scientific'

Japan's Antarctic whaling hunt ruled 'not scientific'
Representatives of Japan and Australia shake hands at the court in The Hague. (NOS/ANP) - 31 March 2014
"Fast-Tracking" - Feb 8, 2014 (Kryon Channelling by Lee Carroll) - (Reference to Fukushima / H-bomb nuclear pollution and a warning about nuclear > 20 Min)

China calls for peaceful settlement of maritime disputes

China calls for peaceful settlement of maritime disputes
Wang Min, China's deputy permanent representative to the United Nations, speaks during a meeting to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the enforcement of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, at the UN headquarters in New York, on June 9, 2014. The Chinese envoy on Monday called for a harmonious maritime order, saying that maritime disputes should be settled through negotiation between the parties directly involved. (Xinhua/Niu Xiaolei)

UNCLOS 200 nautical miles vs China claimed territorial waters

UNCLOS 200 nautical miles vs China claimed territorial waters

Monday, March 3, 2014

Great Barrier Reef authority argued against dredge dumping, FOI reveals

Disposal of 3m tonnes of spoil an unacceptable risk, said draft report to environment department before permit was issued, Bridie Jabour, Sunday 2 March 2014

Dugong grazing grounds could be put at further risk by dumping of Abbot
 Point dredge spoil, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority suggested
 in a draft report now made public under freedom of information. Photograph:
Rex Features

The dredging and dumping of 3m tonnes of spoil in Great Barrier Reef marine park waters posed an “unacceptable social and environmental risk”, the authority in charge of the world heritage area wrote in draft assessments just months before it approved the permit to carry out the disposal.

The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA) advised the environment department not to approve the dredging of Abbot Point in a port expansion, finding that both the reef itself and threatened species could be at risk if the plan went ahead in a draft submission which it says it did not send.

The project was approved by the environment minister, Greg Hunt, in December and at the end of January the authority endorsed a permit with 47 conditions attached.

In a series of draft documents dated from 2012 to August last year the authority repeatedly warned that the reef could be irreversibly damaged by the plan and argued for an alternative that would see trestles extended 1km beyond the original plan to avoid dredging new coal shipping berths.

“The GBRMPA considers that even with best endeavours, the likely impact of the dredging and disposal on nearby benthic [sea floor] habitats and threatened species would be environmentally and socially unacceptable,” says an updated executive summary for a Capital Dredging Permit Assessment done in June last year.

North Queensland Bulk Ports Corporation, the company behind the port expansion, has always maintained there would be minimal environmental impact, with the water perhaps going cloudy for a while.

The summary, obtained by Greenpeace under freedom of information laws, says the habitats are recovering from a series of severe environmental impacts and the information in the environmental impact assessment provided by the corporation did not adequately address the potential for further damage to recovering habitats.

The assessment of the area likely to be affected was “substandard and possibly under-representative”.

“The proposal to dredge and dispose of up to 1.6m cubic metres of sediment per year for three separate campaigns between 2014 and 2020 has the potential to cause long-term, irreversible harm to areas of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, in particular seagrass meadows and nearby coral reefs,” the summary says.

Reductions in dugong and turtle populations in the reef have been linked to seagrass meadows becoming damaged or receding in area. The executive summary of the report said: “The proponent has not provided enough information to verify and provide certainty that the receiving environment in its current state can deal with degraded water quality for the next six to seven years.”

The GBRMPA chairman, Russell Reichelt, said on Sunday that the documents had been preliminary and were never submitted to the delegate who made the decision to approve the dumping permit. “GBRMPA is an independent regulatory agency which is required to make an independent decision under the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act 1975 and the Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Act 1981,” he said in a statement.

“Consistent with our Act we took into account the fact that the minister had provided an approval, as well as the recommendation report that the environment department had provided to the minister.”

He added: “Absolutely no political pressure was brought to bear on GBRMPA.”

Reichelt said the draft permit assessment had been conducted before stringent conditions - the strictest ever imposed on an application of its type - were put in place by the environment minister.

He said the draft assessment noted concerns of staff and other stakeholders but the conditions imposed on the project were the strictest ever done by the agency and it was unlikely the project would have been approved without them.

In the report obtained by Greenpeace, the authority said the ecosystem surrounding Abbot Point had already taken a battering over the past few years and was in a period of recovery. Proposals that would have been considered low-risk a decade ago could now cause irreversible damage. “There is substantial evidence to indicate that the already degraded coral reefs and seagrasses in the region will be exposed to not only six to seven years of degraded water quality due to the dredging and disposal but also to additional environmental impacts from increasing sea temperatures, cyclones, floodwaters during this time,” the executive summary says.

“These combined pressures threaten both the rate and ability of habitats to recover from dredging and disposal impacts.”

According to the authority’s draft, the ports corporation could give no assurance Abbot Point seagrasses could withstand six to seven years of degraded water quality. The authority’s preferred option of extending the trestles resulted in “superior environmental and social outcomes to the maintenance of the benthic habitats and threatened species around the proposed dredging and disposal sites”.

In the original draft report it said the proposal to dredge posed a significant risk to water quality and overall biodiversity of the Great Barrier Reef region.

“GBRMPA does not consider the additional costs of alternatives disproportionate and believes that this is the cost of doing business in the GBRWHA [Great Barrier Reef world heritage area],” it says.

Reichelt said the authority’s position has long been that a preferred environmental outcome for the Great Barrier Reef is that development should be restricted to existing ports and a focus be given to ensuring high environmental standards are in place.

“Our decision is entirely consistent with that strategic long-term viewpoint as Abbot Point is one of five major existing ports,” he said.

“It also has access to deep water, which means less dredging would be required than in other locations.”

The environment department’s decision brief said the environment minister supported the proposal without extending trestles, disposing of dredge spoil on-shore and dumping 3m cubic metres of spoil in the waters.

The Greens senator Larissa Waters said the documents proved the decision to allow offshore dumping was going to damage the reef. “It shows there was massive political pressure to approve it,” she said.

“The first thing is the commission of audit – everything is on the table so GBRMPA either are, or should be, conscious of their funding.”

Waters said the minister approving the dredging and offshore dumping meant the authority’s hands were tied when it came to approving the permit. “It’s pretty hard for any organisation, no matter how independent, to effectively nullify the minister’s approval,” she said.

Greenpeace Australia Pacific is calling on the environment minister, Greg Hunt, to revoke the approvals and ban dumping of dredge spoil in reef waters.

Greenpeace campaigner Louise Matthiesson said: “These new documents raise very serious concerns about the federal government’s stewardship of the reef.

“It is clear that Minister Hunt and his department were willing to put other interests ahead of the health of this world heritage jewel and Minister Hunt must explain why.”

Related Articles:

No comments: