In the bag?
It is being said in news articles about the Coles’ “bagflip” that we can’t trust the big corporations to do the right thing for our health and that of the environment, but please remember those damned plastic bags and other pollutants don’t get into the environment on their own - some irresponsible human put them there.
Taking this debate to another level, what do you reckon would be reaction if Coles and others simply stopped stocking products from more than say 10,000 km away, or with unrecyclable/excess packaging, or containing unhealthy levels of sugar, or produced by under-paid workers, or genetically modified, etc?
Our choice-making would be much simpler in every aisle, but even if these measures might help reduce obesity levels and other problems, they wouldn’t work very well, would they?
In the meantime, while we are all hoping someone else is working to find better solutions, nobody is preventing shoppers from declining the option of taking free or priced plastic bags at the checkouts … and nobody is forcing those who do use them, to ultimately dispose of them irresponsibly.
Jeff de Jager
Dogs on beaches
Government is bureaucratic by nature, which means most important decisions are taken by employed officials, rather than elected representatives.
That is the case with the proposed amendments to the Eurobodalla Animal Management Plan. At the consultations it was clear the bureaucrats had adopted the traffic light system: a green sign would mean dogs could roam free 24 hours per day. Amber would mean they were banned from 9am to 5pm from November until the end of April, but could have access between 5pm and 9am during those months and from May to March. Red would mean dogs were banned entirely.
This system was promoted by consultants, retained at great expense, and accepted because it is easy to manage. That it takes no account of the amenity of an area area is irrelevant. Why would Rosedale be treated the same as Batehaven, Denhams Beach or Surf beach? Rosedale is deserted for 10-and-a-half months of the year, apart from the few permanent residents.
The bureaucrats recommended banning dogs from half of Rosedale’s combined beaches year round and effectively banning them for six months of the year for the remaining half - despite the opposition of 83 per cent of Rosedale respondents. In Rosedale, amber signs are all that are needed and should only apply for the summer holidays and Easter. Red signs are draconian and unnecessary. I’m sure the same applies to Guerrilla and Mystery bays.
The council charges some of the highest rates in the State for areas such as Rosedale, because of the amenity it offers, yet does its best to reduce that amenity.
Councillors: you are elected to preserve our amenity. If you fall at the feet of the bureaucrats you do so at your own political peril. Let us enjoy our home with our dogs.
Dogs, people don't mix
I am a concerned resident living opposite North Broulee Beach.
The council is proposing a large section between Train Street and Bayside Street be a dog off-leash area. (On) almost all other beaches, dogs are prohibited. We have witnessed some dogs intimidate and harrass young children, families and people of all ages at this beach.
It doesn't make sense having dogs run freely where people swim and play. I don't know what the council is thinking when only recently two young children lost their lives having been mauled. Dogs need to be controlled in public areas. Go to the ESC website and submit your objections.