By ERWIN CHLANDA
Mayor Matt Paterson told the Alice Springs News on July 16 that the Town Council did not have a position on declaring buffel grass a weed, which occurred on July 5.
What he did not tell the News was that he himself had a position, namely that the declaration should not be made; that he had told Environment Minister Kate Worden as much, and that he had acted without informing the other elected council members.
This came to light when the News raised the buffel issue with councillor and environmentalist Kim Hopper who in the November 2023 council meeting successfully moved a motion – seconded by Mayor Paterson – to ask the NT government for advice on how to deal with the management of buffel.
When asked for clarification Cr Hopper pointed out to the News a letter dated February 19 from Mayor Paterson to Minister Worden in which he said, in part, he was “concerned about the potential economic burden that declaring buffel grass a weed … could place on land owners and occupiers.
“Depending on what classification and zoning the Weed Action Committee (WAC) determines, the cost of implementing its recommendations could result in significant financial impost, and negatively impact rate paying businesses and households in Central Australia.
“As an example of cost, Council has estimated the mowing and maintenance of the grass area of the Todd and Charles river[s] three times annually would require 44 additional staff at a cost of $3,900,000 per annum – this does not include plant and machinery cost.”
The council has been adamant that it wants to be the custodian of the Todd and Charles rivers.
Mayor Paterson wrote to the Minister: “While dependent on the final advice from the WAC, Council would anticipate the cost for complete weed management for the entire municipality would be much greater.”
Mayor Paterson proposed cost-sharing, exploring alternative management approaches and financial assistance to landowners and local government.
Cr Hopper says: “The Mayor sent this without consulting elected members.
“We didn’t see the minister’s request that’s referenced in the letter. I requested the letter be sent to the elected members and we received it by email. But by then the Mayor had already sent his letter to the Minister without giving us an opportunity for input.”
PHOTO: Dry buffel grass in the Todd River surrounding a tree at risk in the event of a wildfire.
UPDATE July 26:
Mayor Paterson texted the News: “The assumption that ‘I went alone’ is completely untrue and frankly insulting.”
He provided this except from council meeting minutes in support of his claim:
As this does not mention buffel nor declaration of a weed, the subject of our report, we invited him to explain in what way this minute supported his assertion that our report was “categorically” wrong.
Mayor Paterson did not reply.
The Alice Springs News quoted from the Mayor’s letter to the Minister accurately and fairly, on a subject of major public interest.
The News stands by its story.
Would I be wrong in thinking the mayor has an occasional tendency to act unilaterally without reference to his council colleagues?
One doesn’t want to make a habit of it.
What does Matt think buffel grass is?
Matt is concerned about the cost of mowing Buffel.
It loves to be mowed or slashed.
Mowing increases its growth just as pruning does for many plants.
His plan would result in a Buffel “lawn” down the Todd River.
There is no practical way to control it, so the hope is that the weed declaration will eventually lead to the development of biological control.
That would cost the Council nothing.
I think we could all consider alternative management approaches as Mayor Paterson suggests.
Most of the effort needed to mitigate the impact of buffel grass in the municipality is already being spent.
A lot of that effort has been mis-spent but that is already changing. Even recent Council mowing has gone around areas of native ground covers. This is a major shift in the right direction.
Breaking the constant cycle of mowing is the first step as mowing is expensive, especially after wet periods, and is almost as bad as constant fires in terms of biodiversity loss.
A walk along the river past a landcare site or down your street past a verge where native ground covers have been nurtured will show that.
Work is already going on in the rivers to remove buffel around trees, shrubs, and ground covers to create low flammability zones that protect existing native vegetation and promote regeneration of more.
Council is a trustee of parts of the rivers. As such they could move towards this example and in conjunction with the department of Lands, Planning, and Infrastructure use the same approach behind houses and businesses. We spend a lot of money already on protecting infrastructure from buffel fires. We should spend it better.
There is a fire already today behind Tmara Mara and Batterbee area. In most of those areas the ground slopes up away from properties. It’s a bit ridiculous that those properties are threatened by a grass fire in the middle of winter.
I’m pretty sure people on town margins and rural blocks who have controlled their buffel don’t have an anxiety attack when they see smoke in their direction.
If we’re going to get scared and angry then let’s feel that about a weed that threatens us and not a law that is trying to map a way forward.