Hospital move
THE Stirling hospital has been the mainstay of services to the public for many, many years.
To imagine losing this for the sake of some common sense and co-operation for those with the power to prevent it, is a travesty.
The arguments for and against unfortunately, yet again, come back to dollars and cents.
To insist that something that is morally wrong can ever be financially right, is once again a punishment for those residents who have relied on the Stirling Hospital for essential services.
To imagine that the hospital will be situated in the ever worsening environment of Mt Barker does not bear thinking about.
To relocate our hospital would not only place a travel impost on the residents who use the Stirling hospital, but also impact the services that are now on offer, as more people faced with problems accessing services at the growing town of Mt Barker seek alternative care.
Let’s discuss the issue raised by hospital chief executive Annette Nelson that the expansion of operating space is required to comply with regulations.
She stated that there was no space to expand. Has anyone considered going up rather that out?
Now let’s talk funding: surely the governments, both State, Federal and local, can recognise that they are put in power by the people, for the people.
And, as such, it is surely incumbent upon them to listen to the people who have elected them, their concerns and wishes and find ways to serve their wishes rather than using regulations as a mask to worship the mighty dollar?
Not everything that is new is better.
Please leave our hospital where it is.
I am certain that many of the wonderful and dedicated staff that are part of our community, not to mention the specialists, will not wish to relocate to Mt Barker.
Alan Turner, Mt George
Rescue effort
I WOULD like to express my gratitude to members of the SES and CFS who attended Camac Reserve to rescue my old dog.
She had fallen down a steep embankment and become tangled in blackberry bushes, disturbing wasp nests and creating a significant hazard to both herself and her rescuers.
The willingness and co-operation shown by the volunteers who attended had the dog up and out of the creek quite quickly.
They attended to the many wasps stuck in her coat with gloved hands and were kind and gentle.
A neighbor, also a volunteer with emergency services, transported us to the vet and after treatment delivered us home.
I am truly indebted to all those involved and am proud to be a part of a small, supportive community.
My dog is recovering, thankfully.
Sue Milne, Balhannah
Old Earth
I AM responding to Graeme Watts’ comments and conclusions regarding how long mankind has been on Earth, the age of the Earth and the creation myth supportive of that (The Courier, May 10).
There is no evidence of a “young Earth” but enormous evidence against.
The entire argument and evidence for a young Earth, is the biblical begats, within an ancient work of fiction, whose authors were primarily either anonymous or pseudonymous.
The opposing evidence is the world around us, through biology, geology, palaeontology, archaeology, astronomy et cetera – yes science. There is plenty of conflict within religion (Christianity), over how to view science over the literal readings of the Bible, in particular Genesis, which in itself is interesting.
As regards “doing the maths” and world population of mankind from the point of the flood myth (one of many), population growth is not by any means constant and the constant doubling of population growth every 150 years, as suggested by young Earth creationists and built into their mathematics, is incorrect. Yes, there may be disagreement on time-lines but the age of the Earth is definitely not 6000 years and Homo sapiens have been around for 200,000 plus years.
Mick Phillips, Stirling
Mining impact
THE International Energy Agency was unequivocal: “there can be no new investments in oil, gas and coal, from now – from this year” because their development “is incompatible with limiting warming to 1.5C.”
However, the Environment Minister has just ignored all the science and approved three new coal mines, rejecting thousands of scientific reports including hundreds by her own department.
Any pluses for the environment in the budget will be wiped out by the damage done by these coal mines and the emissions when the coal is burned.
The environment is not just trees, animals, birds and fish, after all; it is the life-support system of the planet, and without a well-functioning and healthy environment, we humans do not stand much of a chance for a healthy future.
I ask the Minister to spare a thought for our children, our grandchildren and future generations, who will have to cope with the consequences of our actions today, and reconsider her decisions on these coal mines.
Donella Peters
Aldgate
Unfair trade
IT is with bemusement that I noted Mt Barker Mayor David Leach’s comment regarding the Totness Bunnings development (‘Push for more tree canopy’, The Courier, May 10) that the developers “are already (planting) six for every one tree they remove”.
Does the Mayor really believe that planting six seedlings is worth the same as the 300-year-old redgum they intend to cut down?
Even six 50-year-old trees cannot support the same biodiversity as a single old tree, with mature hollows in redgums taking a century or so to form.
Sure, one tree won’t cause the collapse of nature as we know it, but the problem is every planning decision is made in exactly this same way.
At the very least the council’s celebration of the recent win by ‘Old Man Barker’ – another 300-year-old redgum – of the SA Tree of the Year award has been revealed as deeply hypocritical. Decision makers have yet to realise that the nature crisis is just as serious to our future prosperity as the climate crisis.
We’ll look back on these decisions in even 20 years time and wonder how we could have been so blind to the danger.
Michael Cornish, Bridgewater
Community interest
YOUR article ‘Council recordings’ (The Courier, May 3) reported on the debate at the Mt Barker council meeting of May 1.
You noted Councillor Hardingham’s strong opposition to the recording of council meetings. I watched this debate and it seemed to me the councillor was possibly visibly upset.
She certainly expressed concern about being recorded herself.
This seems inconsistent from someone who in 2022 sought public office for a second time and was re-elected for another four years as a Mt Barker councillor. Maybe the council could support the councillor on her issue with being recorded with some media training or similar.
What I didn’t like was the councillors (Hewett and Orr) who expressed their concern for their colleague and said because of Cr Hardingham’s feelings, they could not support the motion.
I always thought councillors were elected to serve in the best interests of the community they represent, rather than vote to personally support a colleague. The vote, as you reported, was a tie and it was only by Mayor David Leach voting with the councillors who supported the motion that got it through.
Members of the community will benefit from the flexibility of being able to watch council debates when convenient to them, thanks to the supportive councillors and Mayor David Leach. This group did vote in the community’s best interest.
Brian Calvert, Mt Barker
Even handed
IN response to “Cat carnage” (The Courier, May 3) I would like to say thank you Bob for all your work on behalf of animals – I just ask that you are even handed.
Love of cats does not “blind us”.
Responsible animal advocates deal even handedly with all animals, whether they are predator or prey, native or introduced, or our favorite or not.
I spend much time advocating for cats, mostly because they are the most vilified of all animals, but many of us are also koala, kangaroo, wallaby and other wildlife rescuers – our group was also responsible for saving the little corella in the Onkaparinga area some years ago when the council wanted to shoot them.
We also lobbied against the release of dingoes into our national parks just last year and the year before, and also in 2022 lobbied against the removal of the entire dingo fence.
Asking for mercy for our laboratory animals is also an ever ongoing fight.
We speak up for all without taking sides.
We do not let emotion get in the way of logic or morality which brings me to this point.
How do you identify the predators you claim were responsible for bird kills as a domestic cat?
I had a cat rescued as a kitten who was able to become a true domestic cat and a former free living adult cat who I believe was from the same mother and I could not tell by looking at them or from their behavior that there was anything to say which was home raised or from a free living background.
I think that your efforts in the Woorabinda Forest Reserves would benefit greatly from an association with C.A.T.S. Cats assistance to Sterilise Inc., to help keep the population ceiling of the free living cats down.
Lisa Daintree, Strathalbyn
Wind farm woes
IN the letter “Bird loss” (The Courier, May 17), Brian Measday wrote an impassioned piece on how sea bird population has been decimated by 70% due to human industrialisation over the last 200 years.
I’m waiting with anticipation for his next instalment explaining his determination to wipe out the remaining 30% with offshore wind farms.
K. Stachovic, Meadows
Petrol costs
CAN anyone explain why Mt Barker has the highest fuel prices?
Last Sunday, petrol was $1.95/L in Mt Barker; it was $1.61/L at Crafers; $1.73/L at Strathalbyn and $1.59/L in Adelaide.
Even Murray Bridge is normally cheaper.
Now I don’t mind supporting the locals but not at a 36c/L difference.
Jack Eskenazi, Mt Barker
Propaganda
IS Brian Measday of Myrtle Bank paying for his regular propaganda spot on your letters page?
Who does he report to?
Where are they based?
And who can forget The Courier’s highly collectible April 5 edition in which it published not one, but two, letters from Mr Measday?
His peers/comrades must have been suitably impressed.
Gavin Stafford, Mt Barker