Brownlee: Bulldoze road through Fiordland

90 comments on “Brownlee: Bulldoze road through Fiordland ”

• Comments are now closed

1. IrishBill 1

   14 January 2010 at 11:06 am

   Oh for f*ck’s sake.
2. Quay 2

   14 January 2010 at 11:09 am

   From Crusher Collins to Bulldozer Brownlee.
3. BLiP 3

   14 January 2010 at 11:14 am

   Great spot for a 100% Pure McDonalds.
   • felix 3.1

     14 January 2010 at 12:27 pm

     Thanks National Ltd ™ etc.
     • burt 3.1.1

       14 January 2010 at 3:42 pm

       felix

       Watch some of the clips from the http://www.hollyford.com

       “A crossing of Fiordlands longest swing bridge is a great way to burn off a cooked or continental breakfast.”

       oh year, that’s wilderness – It’s already Fiordland ltd. ™
       • NickS 3.1.1.1

         14 January 2010 at 3:51 pm

         Thing is, gravel tracks and swing bridges have far less environmental impact in comparison to a two lane, asphalt road and accompanying extensive earth works for bridge supports. Partly due to the fact that tree-cover remains intact.

         Heck, swing bridges are rather common DoC tracks, and provide access when rivers are high, or where cutting an access track into and out of a water-way is problematic
         • felix 3.1.1.1.1

           14 January 2010 at 4:19 pm

           No Nick you don’t understand. In burt’s world a grain of sand is exactly the same as a beach and a blade of grass as a forest.
           • NickS 3.1.1.1.1.1

             14 January 2010 at 4:46 pm

             Heh.

             That’s a much nicer why of putting it than what I was thinking 😛

             Oh yeah, running with burt’s use of wilderness and “real” tramping, under burt’s thinking it’s thus rather wrong to use tracks with track markers, or ones which have been cut, or any track with bridges. And forget using DoC huts etc, let alone any provided toilets, instead one should go into teh bush with naught but a map, compass and a pack, because anything more is fake.

             Irrespective of personal finances, (good gear isn’t cheap), fitness*, experience and bushcraft skills.

             *Yes, I’m on the fat side and I use yuppie-sticks (shin-splint prevention), on the other hand though I don’t blink an eye-lid at 5-10hr walks on the hills, even on a couple of hours of sleep.
           • burt 3.1.1.1.1.2

             14 January 2010 at 5:06 pm

             So it has been developed just enough for you then, phew here was me thinking that once it was developed at all it was only a question of how much – but now I know that even though it’s already wide enough for a quad bike it’s just right now today and as it always should be forever.
             • felix …

               14 January 2010 at 5:35 pm

               I thought the point I was alluding to was a very simple one, burt; that in my opinion the less it’s “developed” the better.
4. roger nome 4

   14 January 2010 at 11:14 am

   has this spongy bohemeth even walked the hollyford track before deciding that he’s going to put a bulldozer through it? if this goes ahead it’s going to put a huge dent in National’s popularity. but to be honest, i’d rather see this beautiful area kept the way it is than that.
   • rainman 4.1

     14 January 2010 at 1:13 pm

     One would have to assume not!
5. Armchair Critic 5

   14 January 2010 at 11:14 am

   Let’s hope the B/C is not higher than 0.6, and Steve Joyce does not designate it as a Road of National Significance.
6. RedLogix 6

   14 January 2010 at 11:16 am

   Frack.

   I will go feral over this.
   • Michael Foxglove 6.1

     14 January 2010 at 11:25 am

     Me too RedLogix. And I think there will be many many others.
7. Tigger 7

   14 January 2010 at 11:17 am

   Key is ‘relaxed’ until he gets more focus group research on how he should react.
   • Crash Cart 7.1

     14 January 2010 at 1:37 pm

     I heard that Brownlee sold it to him on the premise that it will be a “relaxing drive through what use to be the most beautiful part of NZ”.
8. roger nome 8

   14 January 2010 at 11:27 am

   this would be a way huger deal than happy valley. the profile of fiordland is much larger, and there’s a lot of rich people that live out that way. when the protest movement involves vast numbers of “middle NZ” that’s when you know it’s politically significant.
9. Bill 9

   14 January 2010 at 11:46 am

   Ever had a good look at the tourists coming through NZ? I mean the monied ones, not the back packers. A lot of them are old, not too fit. They want escalators where slopes and steps used to suffice. And the customer is always right and in tourism, is to be catered to, both figuratively and literally.

   Anyway, since the object of tourism is to part the tourist from their cash and as the Southland Times reports…”Given the Government and Prime Minister’s view on access to conservation land, there was never a better opportunity to gain political support, she (Westland District Council Mayor Maureen Pugh) said”

   but this is my favourite

   “Mr Hagaman said building the road would create the eighth wonder of the world…”

   A strip of fucking tarmac. Eighth wonder of the world. The imagination of some people is way beyond me.
   • Tigger 9.1

     14 January 2010 at 12:11 pm

     That is classic! Talk about killing the golden goose.
   • roger nome 9.2

     14 January 2010 at 12:31 pm

     have you ever walke the hollyford track bill? lots of oldies do it, it’s not that hard.

     p.s. i’ve decided to stop using capitals at the start of sentances. there’s no logical reason, it’s just an arcane waist of time imo. join me in the revolution!
     • felix 9.2.1

       14 January 2010 at 1:03 pm

       You’ve stopped using them at the start of proper nouns too. How far down this slippery slope do you intend going?
     • DavidW 9.2.2

       14 January 2010 at 1:35 pm

       waist of time ?? Yeah I get tight on the clock too but that is playing a little too fast and loose with a beautiful language.
       • snoozer 9.2.2.1

         14 January 2010 at 5:01 pm

         haven’t heard it called beautiful before.

         flexible, adaptive, easy to learn the basics – impossible to learn all the difficult bits, a true modern language with scant regard for its own rules, a linguistic expression of the best and worst of the anglo meta-culture. It’s all those things but beautiful, sadly no.
     • ConorJoe 9.2.3

       14 January 2010 at 3:17 pm

       ‘sentances’ Mr Nome? Give up on spelling as well ay?
       • Galeandra 9.2.3.1

         14 January 2010 at 11:41 pm

         Eh, Conor Joe? Give up on spelling as well ay
         • ConorJoe 9.2.3.1.1

           15 January 2010 at 10:15 am

           Ah, a minefield (mindfield?)
           captcha – translate
     • lprent 9.2.4

       14 January 2010 at 4:19 pm

       Just so long as you don’t decide to start SHOUTING, I couldn’t care less.

       However you should really do something about the spelling.
     • Bill 9.2.5

       14 January 2010 at 10:19 pm

       Ever walked back up the path from the [ insert tourist attraction] to the bus? Lots of tourist oldies do it. And lots of not so oldie tourists just simply cant. They get carted.
10. richard 10

    14 January 2010 at 12:22 pm

    Hagaman should concentrate on tidying up some of his craphole hotels and staff accommodation in places like Franz Josef. Talk about a blot on the landscape!
    People have been bleating on about building this road this for years, but I have never heard one tourist ask for it. They seem to like NZ the way it is, and see the West Coast and Fiordland as the true wilderness of NZ – the very thing they have come to see.
    • Bill 10.1

      14 January 2010 at 10:20 pm

      A union free zone?
11. Bored 11

    14 January 2010 at 12:29 pm

    Cant he just reduce it to a cycleway? I believe there is budget for this and it will create lots of jobs. And Jonkey says it is real…now imagine that the dead end on the Waikato stretch joined the Hollyford…….
    • Bored 11.1

      14 January 2010 at 12:30 pm

      B*****r, I forgot, cycleways are unfriendly to large mineral moving machinery and mining equipment.
    • burt 11.2

      14 January 2010 at 11:57 pm

      Add in a cycleway, hell yes,. There should be hundreds of kilometers of sweet single track in there as well as the mupped 4WD size gravel roads required so everyone can have a go. Varying length sections of medium to difficult grade single track linked up with swanky bars with outdoor spa pools serving excellent food. Back packers with comfortable affordable rooms and bike mechanics on site for overnight repairs. Keep the bikers and the walkers apart and all is good, just don’t add a road – that’s too much.
      • felix 11.2.1

        15 January 2010 at 1:49 am

        Translation:
        If you don’t want this road through Fiordland you’re a hypocrite because burt knows that what you really want is swanky bars with outdoor spa pools all over Fiordland.
      • Bored 11.2.2

        15 January 2010 at 11:02 am

        Hi Burt, I hate biking in rain and sandflies….quite happy to terminate the cycleway at Tuatapere. Methinks the roads will do for cycleways s soon as oil prices rocket.
        More seriously road = mining, Thats the danger. I like the area pristine and trackless best.
      • burt 11.2.3

        15 January 2010 at 5:04 pm

        felix

        Translation 2: Only NickS is allowed to say how it should be and how it is now is perfect and how it should be forever.

        This has however proven my point, NickS says it is great with gravel tracks and guides and with no need to carry your own gear around. (IE: developed a long way from the wilderness experience) but when I say I would like it developed for biking – Oh no… that will never do.

        I started saying;” In my opinion it’s already ruined from a wilderness perspective, now we are just arguing over who decides what more we do with it. “

        So If NickS can have his 2m wide gravel walking tracks why can’t I have bike tracks and bars ?
12. randal 12

    14 January 2010 at 12:30 pm

    according to all reliable evidence neanderthals dissappeared 60,000 years ago.
    it appears that one strain of that species has survived. admixed with a generous helping of philistinism.
13. randal 13

    14 January 2010 at 12:31 pm

    have they sold the rights to the hot dog stand yet?
14. Draco T Bastard (mobile) 14

    14 January 2010 at 12:55 pm

    National: Destroying NZ’s 100% Pure Brand one conservation estate at a time.
15. Pascal's bookie 15

    14 January 2010 at 1:25 pm

    No Nactional apologists in this thread yet.

    This week the regulars have been able to craft apologia for whalers, war crimes, breaking suppression orders put in place to protect kids, and dodgy arrests.

    Funny.
    • fizzleplug 15.1

      14 January 2010 at 1:32 pm

      Ask, and ye shall receive.

      Oh wait, not an apologist, just someone with a mainly differing point of view (although not in this case – I enjoy the wilds). Of course, if anyone thinks this will eventuate, you need to have your head examined a little for paranoia and delusion. After all, when was the last time this government followed through on anything???
      • Jim McDonald 15.1.1

        14 January 2010 at 5:58 pm

        just wondering if this is another one of this Government’s favourite classic trademark distractions and fillers they regularly toss up to fill the media and provide some semblance of working (!?)
      • Murray 15.1.2

        15 January 2010 at 9:23 am

        fizzleplug: you should know by now that paranoia and delusion are the norm for the labour left
        • Pascal's bookie 15.1.2.1

          15 January 2010 at 9:32 am

          Did you know that the ETS is part of a secret global Commun1st plan for One World Government? It’s true. Store water and buy guns. Become a Sovereign Citizen today and protect our children’s freedom. BEFORE IT”S TOO LATE.
16. Nick 16

    14 January 2010 at 1:26 pm

    The fact the National Government may destroy such a beautiful spot brings a tear to my eye.

    *Provides a tissue*.
    • Michael Foxglove 16.1

      14 January 2010 at 1:37 pm

      😉 thanks Nick. Something to wipe away the tears… now if I could only focus my anger.
      • snoozer 16.1.1

        14 January 2010 at 1:56 pm

        Look, you’re punching the cat right now.

        http://www.tv.com/the-simpsons/i-am-furious-yellow/episode/129706/trivia.html
17. Benjamin B. 17

    14 January 2010 at 1:26 pm

    Is it just me or does this scream ‘mining’ between the lines?
    • Tigger 17.1

      14 January 2010 at 2:28 pm

      Well roads do make it easier to get big mining equipment and personnel to all those goodies lying under the pristine landscape. And if you’re roading the area why not dig a little deeper before laying the asphalt…
    • burt 17.2

      14 January 2010 at 2:36 pm

      Wind farms & hydro dams. That’s what the roads are for.
18. NickS 18

    14 January 2010 at 1:37 pm

    Evidently Gerry’s also forgotten what else building roads through undisturbed wilderness is good for, namely acting as plant pest high-ways, and introducing edge-effects which can alter forest micro-climates for kilometres either side. Causing disturbances which can allow for invasive plant and insect species to establish, but also alter local insect ecologies….

    And all for mineral resources, wait I mean “tourists” that for teh cost of building a road through rather troublesome terrain will probably exceed the income.

    National, failing to understand cost/benefit ratio’s since 2008 by ignoring inconvenient parts of the costs.
19. John Dalley 19

    14 January 2010 at 1:40 pm

    A quick google Red Hill- mining and you get a better understanding of what Gerry fat gut Brownlee is up to. A Dunedin co, Ophir Mining Ltd have been granted a license for the Red Hills area. Years ago they mined “Blue asbestos” (i think) from their. I am not a 100% sure on it’s exact location but it is up some were inland around around the Lake Alabaster area.
    I,m not sure if this is the exact location of the gold mining license but would be a good reason why big Gerry is looking at a road into the Holyford Vally.
    • Peter Wilson 19.1

      15 January 2010 at 9:55 am

      The Red Hills were prospected extensively in the 1960s and 1970s by Kennicott Ltd from the US. They even bulldozed a road down the coast and up the Pyke Valley and built a base in the Upper Pyke Valley. The last of this was removed a few years ago, although there are still a few rusting bulldozers around.

      The asbestos deposit was actually in the Little Red Hills (just south), but it was found to be uneconomic.
20. John Dalley 20

    14 January 2010 at 1:46 pm

    Benjamin B: screams mining!
21. Chris 21

    14 January 2010 at 2:04 pm

    Well. Guess Brown-‘coalismymiddlename’-lee doesn’t care much about tourism, NZ’s overseas image or those nasty creatures that live in the bush, or trees. Not surprising.

    However, Earl Hagaman’s support and instigation of the project needs to be highlighted and thanks to capitalism, you can. Boycott Senic Hotels.

    Write to Scenic Hotels explaining your opposition to the road and that you’ll stay elsewhere, tell all your mates overseas about this nonsensically criminal idea and Scenic Hotel’s involvement in it. Set up a FB group.

    Capitalism is both a curse and a blessing, so work it to your advantage!
    • Idiot/Savant 21.1

      14 January 2010 at 3:02 pm

      Write to Scenic Hotels explaining your opposition to the road and that you’ll stay elsewhere, tell all your mates overseas about this nonsensically criminal idea and Scenic Hotel’s involvement in it. Set up a FB group.

      Sounds like a good idea. I wonder how many torists they’ll get if there are people outside their hotels waving signs calling them on their support for environmental vandalism?
    • burt 21.2

      14 January 2010 at 3:19 pm

      Hey I know, get loads of people in the Hollyford valley with megaphones protesting that the area should be kept as a wilderness area. Start with making the place unbearable for the people on guided walks because they are already supporting capitalism benefiting from the exploitation of natural resources.
      • felix 21.2.1

        14 January 2010 at 4:14 pm

        Yep. It’s exactly the same thing.
22. Brett Dale 22

    14 January 2010 at 2:40 pm

    It wont happen, Brownlee woyuldn’t be that stupid.
    • lprent 22.1

      14 January 2010 at 3:54 pm

      He is pretty bloody stupid…. Hopefully others in the national caucus aren’t.
      • Macro 22.1.1

        14 January 2010 at 7:42 pm

        I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. “Browlee is little more than an environmental hazard.”
        But is this a pitch to divert our attention away from the Coromandal and Karangahake gorge? For which a mining permit has also been approved! http://www.norightturn.blogspot.com/2009/12/digging-up-coromandel.html
        One of the top 101 things to explore in NZ? http://www.aatravel.co.nz/101/MustDo_Karangahake-Gorge.html
        Walked there over xmas along with 100’s of others – NZers and overseas tourists – enjoying the experience. But the gorge road will soon be filled with dump trucks ferrying rock back to Waihi. This crowd of vandals – for they are nothing more – must be crazy to even contemplate this.
23. Chris 23

    14 January 2010 at 2:45 pm

    But then again, he’s not that bright.

    A worrisome combination. Drunk on power and not that bright. Mind, he’s had plenty of role models to follow.
24. marty mars 24

    14 January 2010 at 2:48 pm

    this is what brownlee said the other day

    “The Minister of Conservation and I have, therefore, asked officials to review areas listed on schedule four with a view to adding some conservation areas that should be closed to the possibility of mining access, except underground mining that does not disturb the land surface.”

    pretty big ‘except’ there and if he spins this ‘underground mining that does not disturb the land surface’ bullshit line then he can say “well the road is nothing to do with the mining so who gives a fuck about the land surface disturbance… “
25. burt 25

    14 January 2010 at 2:53 pm

    I’m torn on this issue actually. Mining as well. If every generation decided to draw a line in the sand and protect all undeveloped areas then we would still be living in a band about 1k from the beach in NZ.

    I’ve tramped through a lot of NZ wilderness over many years and I’ve seen many areas developed immeasurably since I first started visiting them. When I was young we said the introduction of graveled tracks would be the ruin of tramping in NZ. We moaned that walking track “Highways” that you could ride a bike down would invade the national & forest parks and “real tramping” areas would get smaller and smaller. As was obvious this has largely occurred and now we market our country on “great walks” and “guided wilderness” where people don’t even carry their own kit from palatial hut to palatial hut.

    Great that it has increased tourism numbers and great that it is a healthy thing to be doing but it’s not wilderness is it.

    I would rather it wasn’t mined, I would rather it wasn’t developed, but I’d also rather it didn’t have large numbers of guided muppets being coddled along on gravel tracks as well. In my opinion it’s already ruined from a wilderness perspective, now we are just arguing over who decides what more we do with it.
    • Clarke 25.1

      14 January 2010 at 4:51 pm

      Well …. I’m not sure I agree with your slightly nihilistic view, burt, but having walked quite a few of the major tracks I can certainly appreciate the sentiment. And you make the point very eloquently.
26. ConorJoe 26

    14 January 2010 at 3:32 pm

    Highways, lay-bys, petrol stations, restrooms, rubbish bins, gravel depots, emergency phones, motels, airstrips, cribs, bars, restaurants, police stations, councils, ratepayers, government bureaucracies and services, just go ahead and build an exclusive resort town there.
    Call it Mitre Peak.
    Is this how Aspen came about?
    Oh, no, they just want to mine there.
    This government. What a perfect way to kick off a year of discontent and disillusionment with their wise and adoring public.
27. Sanctuary 27

    14 January 2010 at 3:38 pm

    Jesus, has someone told Gerry Brownlee that we’ve got Unobtainium in our National Parks?
28. Jim McDonald 28

    14 January 2010 at 5:42 pm

    That’s daft !
29. jcuknz 29

    14 January 2010 at 7:29 pm

    Firstly …”destroy some of our most spectacular scenery and one of the most special places in the country” is a load of rubbish.
    It is economically [ not ecconomically please note, though it is] justified with the reduced travel time and waste of fuel with dozens of buses plus cars travelling the round route from Queenstown to Milford.and back every day.
    If you want trees covering the road, such as frequently on the road to Milford one could organise the road as a pair of single lane highways with sensible passing loops in areas where trees will not grow big enough. Also one could lower the road into the ground so that vehicles are not obvious to the eye, with their sound suppressed when foliage can’t do that.
    .
    It is so nice the selfishness of the younger fit members of our community trying to preserve these wilderness areas against the common sense of ecconomics and economics. Depriving the world of the chance to see these places in the limited time frame most tourists have.
30. Clarke 30

    14 January 2010 at 9:11 pm

    It is economically [ not ecconomically please note, though it is] justified with the reduced travel time and waste of fuel with dozens of buses plus cars travelling the round route from Queenstown to Milford.and back every day.

    Thanks for that incoherent bunch of nonsense, but I call bullshit. Care to provide a link to the NZ Transport Agency study that demonstrates a positive benefit/cost ratio for this proposed monument to Brownlee’s stupidity? No? Could it be that no such study exists?

    It is so nice the selfishness of the younger fit members of our community trying to preserve these wilderness areas against the common sense of ecconomics and economics.

    It’s so nice that the older generation show up for these discussions and demonstrate their complete ignorance of both traditional economics and the environmental impact of their 1960s-era proposals. If an unnecessary road through a UN World Heritage Area is your idea of “common” sense, then you’re welcome to it, grandad.
    • Macro 30.1

      14 January 2010 at 9:28 pm

      “It’s so nice that the older generation show up for these discussions and demonstrate their complete ignorance of both traditional economics and the environmental impact of their 1960s-era proposals. If an unnecessary road through a UN World Heritage Area is your idea of “common’ sense, then you’re welcome to it, grandad.”
      Hey! I’m a grandad!
      Ageism is apparently alive and well, and living on “the standard.”
      So none of your cheek sonny!
      • Clarke 30.1.1

        14 January 2010 at 9:54 pm

        So none of your cheek sonny!

        Awww! But grandad – he started it! (Runs off sniveling ….)
    • jcuknz 30.2

      15 January 2010 at 7:10 am

      I don’t need any NZTA survey to let me appreciate common sense and a personal knowledge of the roads involved. It is stupid to go two sides of a triangle when there is a positble hypotenuse route. Beauty anyway is in the eye of the beholder and a carefully and thoughtfully crafted road, built with consideration for the environment, can be as beautiful as a rose or anything else of beauty. The trouble with these greeny extremists, one step away from being terrorists, is that they think in terms of black and white, yes and no, without sensible compromise. I wonder who were the fools who made it a heritage park before the neccessary road was built? It is nice but selfish for only the fit and healthy can enjoy such places … and the fly fishermen running their business and disturb the place with helicopters … the anti stance smells mildly I think.
      • Clarke 30.2.1

        15 January 2010 at 8:00 am

        I don’t need any NZTA survey to let me appreciate common sense and a personal knowledge of the roads involved.

        Translation: I’m not going to let facts get in the way of my biases, and wish to become a Fox News commentator when I grow up.

        A carefully and thoughtfully crafted road, built with consideration for the environment, can be as beautiful as a rose or anything else of beauty.

        Gets my vote as Troll Of The Week.
31. Jewish Kiwi 31

    15 January 2010 at 7:49 am

    @jcuknz

    “…one step away from being terrorists”

    Can you elaborate on which step that is?

    If you don’t, everyone will assume you have no idea what terrorism is.

    I’m just curious to know, so I can better understand terrorism and its causes.
32. jcuknz 32

    15 January 2010 at 8:58 am

    Die hard extremists are one small step away from being terrorists. A recent NZ example was the destruction of the church billboard in Auckland. People convinced of their cause believe they have the justification to do all sorts of things … like making a noise outside tennis matches, the list is endless. Spreading nails on motorways ….

    Any NZTA survey report is the opinion of someone or a group, just as my opinion, both are valid expressions of opinion based on facts as I/they see it as indeed are yours. If we want to progress our nation one needs to balance the preservation against common sense development.

    It cannot be a yes/no situation but needs to be a sensible compromise.

    It seems to me that most people here simply say no as a matter of principle without really considering the facts. Principles are good until they lead you down a false path. This applies to both the proposed road and surveys of mineral deposits. As I’ve said previously it makes good sense to know what you have tucked away in the piggy bank.

    I have no desire to be a Fox commentator when I grow up, I am a grown up and thinking person, obviously with views different to yourself on this subject and I don’t wish to engage in a slanging match … go to Kiwiblog et al to do that.
    • Draco T Bastard (mobile) 32.1

      15 January 2010 at 9:18 am

      Ah, glad you cleared that up. After decades of,wrongly, believing that democracy was a Good Thing it’s a shock to discover that it’s actually TERRORISM.
      • Pascal's bookie 32.1.1

        15 January 2010 at 9:24 am

        the terrorists hate us for our freedoms,
        people hate what they fear,
        we must eliminate their hate.
    • Clarke 32.2

      15 January 2010 at 9:45 am

      If you’re happy to call people who are opposed to running a road through a World Heritage Area “terrorists”, then I guess you’d also be happy if they characterised your position as an “environmental rapist”. After all, if you’re going to use emotive (and inaccurate and highly offensive) language, it should run in both directions.

      If we want to progress our nation one needs to balance the preservation against common sense development.

      You keep coming back to this idea that your position is “common sense”, yet even the most cursory examination of the comments in this thread indicates that your pro-roading stance certainly isn’t “common” – in fact, you seem to be the sole person who thinks Brownlee’s road is a good idea.

      And as for the idea that it’s “sense”, I note that you haven’t produced a single scrap of evidence that this road has any economic justification, probably because no such evidence exists. You’re perfectly entitled to have an opinion about the project, but given that people have opinions that they’ve been abducted by space aliens and that Elvis lives in Vegas, that’s not saying much.
    • logie97 32.3

      15 January 2010 at 10:04 am

      jcuknz – is it extremist to say pause one moment?

      Planet Earth has gone through catastrophic change since the Industrial Revolution but more particularly in the 20th century. Man has altered the world beyond recognition is his demand for its resources.

      New Zealand was largely bush clad and the waters would have teamed with marine-life. It would be fair to say that man lived reasonably at one with nature (basically because he did not have the means to exploit it).

      What has taken billions of years to evolve has in part been changed in less than 200 years.

      One of the “riches” of the earth is gold. Now I know that there are a myriad of uses for the mineral but for most of it to be turned into ingots and stored in bank vaults does not seem to me to be a reasonable justification for destroying tracts of land.

      You and I and Gerry can only expect to be here for three score years and ten.
33. Pascal's bookie 33

    15 January 2010 at 9:18 am

    “I don’t wish to engage in a slanging match”

    Then stop saying people are extremists only and only one small step away from being terrorists if they oppose this particular road.
34. Peter Wilson 34

    15 January 2010 at 9:35 am

    Yeah, this is thoroughly shocking, but also predictable. The Haast – Hollyford road idea gets wheeled out quite frequently (as does the Karamea – Collingwood road idea, which generally gets less coverage because it isn’t Fiordland). It is a crazy proposal in an area long known for crazy proposals and pipe dreams. A lost ruby mine, a sea boot full of gold, and more recently, a monorail, a gondola project, two tunnels, a floating bridge across Lake Wakatipu, and a road up the Greenstone Valley.

    The reality is that this road is hopelessly uneconomic, even by the Nats standards. No private investor would want to invest money in it. The climate is appalling for a road. The Cascade River is New Zealand’s largest unbridged river, and there are several others that would need to be bridged as well. Not to mention frequent washouts.

    There are no settlements in the area, just a few seasonal whitebaiters at Big Bay and Martins Bay – the only traffic will be tourists, and even then, it would be a bloody long drive. I expect that Wanaka would oppose it, as would Queenstown, and both towns have powerful commercial interests. In fact, Queenstown interests have a proposal of their own – to build a tunnel under the Humbolt Mountains from near Glenorchy into the Hollyford Valley. The price tag of this would be far less than building the Haast – Hollyford, but even then, this project is on hold.

    The only possible way it makes sense if it’s tied to mining proposals, and yes, this area is one of those under mining threat. The parts of western Mt Aspiring National Park, which border the road route, have been prospected in the past (look up the Red Hills for instance), and a track was bulldozed into them along the coastline in the 1970s. I have walked this on two occasions.

    Finally, this road traverses or comes close to what is probably the last and greatest “accessible” tramping wilderness in New Zealand (“the home of Arawata Bill’) – one of those incredibly rare places where it is possible to wander around for two weeks or longer without bumping into anyone. It offers some of the toughest and most serious tramping and mountaineering in the country, and therefore, training for those that do these things. It would destroy all that, by making some of the remotest areas in New Zealand readily accessible. There is a value in knowing that largely untouched places still exist, even if you never go there.

    But the real argument and organising principle to use against the road are the thousands of people that have entered the Hollyford Valley. That should be enough alone to stop it, without needing the other arguments.
35. jcuknz 35

    15 January 2010 at 11:00 am

    Could be I’m the only one silly enough to spend time questioning you folk 🙂

    The sensible attitude I think is to admit that there is value in putting the road through and to balance it against the disruption it will cause to the area and to minimise that disruption by concealing it as far as possible. The conservationist attitude should be to limit its development to what is really needed, not permitting the usual ‘add-on’ that spoil the ‘untouched’ nature of the area. I have driven over several roads which took me through the wilderness for quite long distances without any support services available, warning signs to this effect at each end of the road. In two cases the alternative route involved well over a hundred miles of extra travel. As to if the road will pay for itself, if a private company would build it, surely the point of some government innitiatives is to provide neccessary services which don’t add up to immediate returns, or returns that cannot be measured. That can be an argument against what I am saying as equally as for me. A fully holistic survey will come out in favour of the road I’m sure.

    So I think a sensible compromise is possible.
36. Jewish Kiwi 36

    15 January 2010 at 11:10 am

    You still haven’t described the step which takes someone from protesting against a tennis tournament to strapping on explosives and detonating them.

    Either you call everyone you disagree with a terrorist – rendering the term meaningless. Or you actually believe environmentalists will soon be hijacking planes and flying them into buildings.

    Either way, you should discontinue arguing your case, because your arguments will be dismissed before they are read.
    • Bored 36.1

      15 January 2010 at 11:41 am

      Interesting question: who do you call a terrorist? Is he a member of an overwhelmingly powerful group who enforces the will of a dominant political ideology / interest group by way of direct action and fear? Or might he be the member of a militarily weak and economically / politically marginalized group who oppose the former with focused smaller scale direct action to impose his ideological / political / economic interests through random force and fear? My take is that they are symbiotic and neither a desirable outcome, rather representatives of failed discourse.

      When ecologists sit in trees, or people protest against Israeli occupations etc you can pretty much assume that at least one side of the discourse (usually the one with the power) is not listening.
      • Pascal's bookie 36.1.1

        15 January 2010 at 12:02 pm

        Interesting isn’t it?

        There was a nuclear scientist in Iran who found himself blown up a few days ago.

        Terrorism?

        If it was Mossad or the CIA what done it?

        He was closely tied to the reformers currently protesting. Would it be terrorism if the Iranian govt blew him up?
37. jcuknz 37

    16 January 2010 at 8:18 am

    I didn’t intend to call anybody here a terrorist becuase I don’t agree with some of their ideas, but rather to point out how easy it is to take that final step when one is so convinced of the right of one’s views.
    For those who are trying to trip me up over what constitutes terrorism, can the authorities of a country be terrorists, I think the answer is yes. Though part of me hopes this is becuase when that happens it is an individual or group who are going wrong. Are the hawks of an administration.

    I have been on the wrong end of what I would call thuggery by the authorities when I was trying to peacefully and legally protest the visit of an American warship. Something like on a smaller scale to what the Greenpeace idiots were doing recently except the police were quite safe as I steered to avoid them whatever stupid and illegal manouvers they did. A powerboat is supposed to keep clear of a vessel under sail. Since the American ship could come under the heading of ‘Restricted ability to manouver’ I would have kept well clear of her too as a responsible boatie who had made himself aware of the Harbourmaster’s special regulations concerning the visit…But no, those ***** thugs abused their authority.

    I now have a horrible feeling that I have been talking about the wrong road, although I think my arguments apply to both potential connections …. The Queenstown to Milford shortcut and completing the ring road around the south Island by connecting Milford to Haast.. I’m suprised nobody has pointed out my error.

Links to post

1. Nestor notabilis: posted on 14 January 2010 at 2:09 am
2. Bulldozing Paradise « The Standard: posted on 15 January 2010 at 11:40 am

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS