Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2018 Week 3 Hansard (22 March) . .
(7) (a) TCCS commenced trials in 2013-14 and several different methods have been used in each subsequent year.
(b) TCCS Urban Treescapes' recurrent budget.
(c) Trials to date have cost approximately $5,000 each year.
(d) Trials have been conducted on elm trees in Glebe Park, below Scrivener Dam, Brisbane Avenue, Macarthur Avenue, Moreshead Drive, Benjamin Way and Eastern Valley Way. The National Capital Authority also trialled chemical treatment in the Parliamentary Triangle in 2015-16.
(e) Urban Treescapes technical staff. A specialist contractor from Melbourne applied diatomaceous earth to wet foliage (a technique trialled in Queensland and Melbourne) in 2016-17.
(f) Urban Treescapes technical staff.
(g) Key findings include: some Elm species are not affected; stressed trees are more severely affected; chemical treatment is less effective during a dry spring; there are fewer ELB after a warm and wet winter; to date no effective biological control has been identified; the insecticide Imidacloprid can result in effective control if applied in early spring at a cost of $50 to $80 per tree, the effect lasts only 1-2 years and is said to impact negatively on bees which could have long term effects on pollination; TCCS manage more than 10,000 elm trees on public land and there may be just as many on private property, so chemical control is not feasible.
(h) The ELB management trials are ongoing as TCCS are still monitoring the impact of previous treatments at the treatment sites. The monitoring of results have been based on observations only and at this stage there is no intention to prepare a formal report.
(8) The National Capital Authority.
(Question No 894)
Ms Lee asked the Minister for Planning and Land Management, upon notice, on 16 February 2018:
(1) In relation to the proposed Capital Recycling Solutions (CRS) material recovery facility in Fyshwick, will the Minister table the briefing documents he, or his delegate, received for the decision in relation to application 201700053 and approval of Notifiable Instrument NI2018-27.
(2) Were the Draft Separation Distance Guidelines for Air Emissions not included in the Draft Environment Impact Statement; if not, given they have been made a requirement for other, similar proposals, why were they not required for the CRS proposal.
Mr Gentleman: The answer to the member's question is as follows:
(1) No decision has been made on application 201700053. A scoping document application only commences the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process. The
Next page . .
Previous page. . . .
Speeches . . . .
Contents . . . .
Sittings . . . .