Why on earth would the Department of Conservation be 'refraining' from submitting on the proposed open cast coal mine in one of our national parks?
It seems entirely ludicrous.
Surely that's one of DoC's central purposes; the protection of our nations treasured parks, but in this case at Denniston on the West Coast of the South Island there's a resounding silence from the Department.
What reason could there be for this refusal to engage in this battle to protect our national park from mining?
This development STINKS to the high heavens!
10 comments:
I sent Kate Wilkinson & Al Morrison indignant emails last week reminding them that they were supposed to be protecting flora & fauna not big business. It's outrageous that DOC should be facilitating mining.
I agree entirely Viv.
A cynic might say that the Government is strangling the Department to such an extent that they are unable to fulfil their core function, and that this is because of their (National's) love affair with the mining industry.
It's probably because DOC have an administerial role in hearings related to this at some point. So they're not allowed to make submissions to themselves, and they're not allowed to make sumbissions in a process where that is a conflict of interest for their role in hearing submissions later. Or something like that. It's not unusual for DOC to be in that position. I agree it is a problem though.
There will also be interesting complexities to the relationship between the National Parks and Conservation Acts and whatever legislation allows mining anyway.
Hi Robert and Co. here's my take on the DOC job cuts (incidentally the only govt dept getting an INCREASE in jobs is the "NZ Petroleum and Minerals Business Unit" (formerly crown minerals). pass it on. http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/comment/5194393/Cuts-to-DOC-will-be-costly
Thanks wildcrafty - I'm not so sure about that. I think it's the role of DoC to submit strongly where threats to the their rohe is concerned. I think they've done that to this point and that this development is a new and sinister one.
Piwakawaka - thanks also for the link. Your 'petroleum and minerals' comment makes us laugh and laugh - in a bitter, must address that issue kind of way.
It's true Robert that they can opinions. I've never been cleart what the rules are that allow them to sometimes and prevent them at others, and whether it's legislation, policy or discretion at the conservancy level. But it's not new. I'll see if I can think of some past examples.
"can have"
Was up the 'coast road' yesterday, and anger rose to almost record levels as I drove through a section of the Paparoa National Park just north of Punakaiki.
Fulton Hogan decided that Rata along the road had to go (along with a massive swath of vegetation) in the name of "vegetation control".
They have bloody well wrecked the whole area.
I told local DoC staff (Buller) and they said they hadn't noticed, so perhaps they haven't noticed the coal mine either.
Have you photos Shunda?
I'd like to do my bit in advertising environmental destruction whenever it is carried out. Good on you for firing-up DOC.
Yep Robert, I took a whole heap of photo's today, I'll send you some.
I am not sure how to proceed but I am going to make sure this crew is reprimanded, they have done similar things to 10's of km's of highway through some of the most precious sites.
I also noticed a large dairy farm is removing every trace of native vegetation on the Barry town flats.
A modern dairy farm just doesn't look 'right' with a few remnant trees it would seem.
Post a Comment