Not happy with lack of community engagement

I COMMEND Ravensdown for its decision not to proceed with its application to ‘‘adjust monitoring rules’’ for the fertiliser (ODT, 2.9.20). However, as a longterm resident of Ravensbourne, I am less than impressed with its processes to put changes in place.

Groups were apparently consulted. However, the local community was not included despite being the most affected by the activities of the business. It is not an example of ‘‘proactive and open’’ stakeholder engagement when the principal stakeholders were excluded.

The Ravensdown community liaison group is selected without input from the community. It does not speak for me and cannot vote on my behalf when it has no idea of my views.

In future, I would hope to see some open forums and less reaching of agreements behind closed doors.

Jan Parker Ravensbourne

Live stock exports

WHAT an unimaginably terrifying and painful death for the nearly 6000 New Zealand dairy cows who drowned when the Gulf Livestock 1 sank in a typhoon near Japan.

Trapped inside the ship, their frantic attempts to escape would have been hopeless. But tragically, there would never have been a happy ending for these hapless females viewed solely as ‘‘breeding stock’’.

They would have likely spent their lives inside grim sheds and been forced to give birth year after year. Their beloved calves would have been repeatedly taken from them and when they were deemed ‘‘unprofitable’’, they would likely have met a hideously cruel death because animal welfare laws are nonexistent in China.

Live export, whether it be for slaughter or breeding, will inevitably result in massive animal suffering.

Jenny Moxham Monbulk, Victoria, Australia