Conservation park ‘trimmed’ to suit mining interests

40 comments on “Conservation park ‘trimmed’ to suit mining interests ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Marty G 1

   15 February 2010 at 7:48 am

   A few days in government and their top priority is removing land from protected status so it can be mined.

   You’re dead right, the links between National and mining need to be investigated in more depth.
2. Marty G 2

   15 February 2010 at 7:51 am

   Oh crap. The Sierra Club has written to Key as PM and minister for tourism about the threat to tourism from mining on conservation land. On RNZ, Brownlee is speaking on behalf of the government – not minister for tourism or minister for conservation, but minister for resource exploitation.
3. mickysavage 3

   15 February 2010 at 7:57 am

   The proposition that a conservation area can be mined and yet retain its pristine condition is equivalent to the proposition that someone can be screwed and yet retain their virginity.
   • vto 3.1

     15 February 2010 at 8:22 am

     Well not always mickeysavage. Virtually the entire Coromandel was clear-felled. Now it has grown back to a state of near virginal pristine gleaming. Many people think it has never been touched.

     But nonetheless I agree that Key and kohorts should be stopped at the gate on this.

     In a similar vein I see there is a piece on tv one news tonight on the proposed road through one of NZ’s last forgotten areas that was the subject of a post here a few weeks ago. I went back into that coast a week or so ago – it again blew my wee mind in its astoundingness. A road will ruin it forever. All for the sake of a few tourists. Dumbo Brownlee..
     • NickS 3.1.1

       15 February 2010 at 9:38 am

       Nyet comrade, to the trained eye it’s clearly regenerating forest, that’s missing certain tree species, mainly emergents like rimu, kauri, rata’s etc due to selective logging and the impact of introduced herbivores, which has also altered the understory and canopy community structure.

       And then there’s stuff likes birds, bats, freshwater fish and invertebrates…

       So really, it’s hardly virginal. Heck, it will take at least another century or two of plantings, growth and pest control to even get close to the original forest structure.

       ps; where the hell has the blockquote function gone to?
       • lprent 3.1.1.1

         15 February 2010 at 12:23 pm

         There are a few CSS things that need to be added. Right now I’m a bit exhausted after the weekend, but never fear Francis or I will get on to it.
         • NickS 3.1.1.1.1

           15 February 2010 at 9:25 pm

           Excellent, thanks gov’nor
     • Richard 3.1.2

       15 February 2010 at 11:21 am

       I have been to the Coromandel once. I had heard how beautiful it was. And there were some beautiful spots…..in between lots of ugly spots of pine clearfell, low regen scrub and hideous development (Pauanui et el). Have I missed your point? Were you being sarcastic when you say it has “grown back to a state of near virginal pristine gleaming”?????
   • Lanthanide 3.2

     15 February 2010 at 10:13 am

     Here is the proof that it can be done (of course it isn’t cheap):
     http://www.capp.ca/aboutUs/mediaCentre/CAPPCommentary/Pages/NationalGeographic,March2009Issue.aspx#LJOOUr1wW2EF
4. Pascal's bookie 4

   15 February 2010 at 8:04 am

   This whole thing is similar in principle to what went on the US during the last administration.

   There, the lobbyists wanted to explore for oil and gas in Alaskan reserves. The argument was about ‘energy security’ and morphed into the ‘drill baby drill’ mantra.

   Worth noting that even with GWB at the helm ( with all his oil co links), Cheney in the co-pilot seat (with all his links as well) and a congress controlled by the Tom Delay era GOP (with all the corruption that entailed); they still didn’t actually do it.
   • Bill 4.1

     15 February 2010 at 9:53 am

     But Obama is running with the whole thing. Just takes time…about 5 years?

     A North Slope village united Wednesday with some of the heaviest hitters in the environmental community to challenge a plan by Shell Oil to drill off Northwest Alaska this summer.
     REDOIL and the village are joined by The Wilderness Society, Sierra Club, the National Audubon Society and Defenders of Wildlife, as well as several other environmental groups.
     • Pascal's bookie 4.1.1

       15 February 2010 at 10:15 am

       That sucks, but it looks like the Chukchi Sea aint a part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. S
5. luva 5

   15 February 2010 at 8:17 am

   We are going to have to refine our attack lines aren’t we fringe left.

   Is this a do nothing government…or is this an evil hard right group who are going to destroy this country through neo liberal polcies and tearing up our National Parks.

   Let us have the debate. We are in the economic shit at the moment so why not explore everything we can do. If National Park mining is an option then lets assess the pros and cons of NOT doing it.
   • Marty G 5.1

     15 February 2010 at 8:26 am

     “Is this a do nothing government or is this an evil hard right group who are going to destroy this country through neo liberal polcies and tearing up our National Parks.”

     It’s a government that does nothing to lift living standards and create jobs for Kiwi families because its busy handling out favours to its mates.
     • captain rehab 5.1.1

       15 February 2010 at 8:41 am

       Sometimes doing nothing fits a right-wing agenda perfectly.
     • luva 5.1.2

       15 February 2010 at 8:41 am

       riiiiight…..so ‘do nothing’ is a fluid term.

       Do nothing has now evolved into ‘do only for its mates’ i.e. the people that voted it in and still support it in record numbers in fact growing numbers.

       So do nothing doesnt actually mean ‘do nothing’ at all.

       It is hard to keep up with the fringe left. Say what you like about the Nats at least they were consistent in their attack lines while in opposition
       • Marty G 5.1.2.1

         15 February 2010 at 8:54 am

         “so ‘do nothing’ is a fluid term” of course, it describes a government that doesn’t do anything for the people who need it, that is naturally a fluid term.

         “It is hard to keep up with the fringe left.” do try, old boy
6. Idiot/Savant 6

   15 February 2010 at 8:29 am

   I blogged this one back in June.
   • Smokie 6.1

     15 February 2010 at 8:45 am

     Good show IS. The interesting aspect to me is the date… if the advice Eddie posted was dated the 3rd December, I want to know when it was requested. Groser must have asked for it just about the day he was sworn in… Weren’t Ministers sworn in on about the 24th Nov? Just a week earlier.

     It’s worrisome they’ve started this mining thing right from the start, with no heads up at all.
     • Idiot/Savant 6.1.1

       17 February 2010 at 11:42 am

       if the advice Eddie posted was dated the 3rd December, I want to know when it was requested.

       [Digs out documents]

       3rd of December. Brownle wrote Groser a letter [PDF] requesting a meeting to discuss the conservation park; I have the resulting email exchange between DoC staff. The briefing note [PDF] took just 1 hour and 49 minutes to draft. After the meetign that night, the gazetting of the park was put on hold.
7. tc 7

   15 February 2010 at 8:44 am

   How likely is it that the orebodies are of a scale/quality that would magically make us a rich nation…..you need to bear in mind commodity prices are set globally so unless you have scale it’s unliklely and that’s why it works in OZ…..massive scale.

   Mine’s cost hundreds of million to establish, blast roads through, tailings dams, overburden, processing piles, people/machines in/out…..and the profits would be NZ owned entities or foreign mining companies ?

   What else have these looters slipped through under urgency ? On RNZ this morning the interviewers behaved like naive kids with no probing questions and took a position of ‘why not?’ rather then ‘why?’ ……heel RNZ, now sit and rollover……who’s a good govt funded broadcaster then.
   Mining companies mastered political influence decades ago and continue to refine the model.
8. sk 8

   15 February 2010 at 9:03 am

   More digging needs to be done on John Key’s stake in Jackson Minerals. After all, this was a personal investment not an investment via a blind trust. There are two angles, one is the uranium, the other is the fact he has stakes in miners when the gov’t is opening the conservation estate for mining.

   On the uranium, Jackson Minerals acquired the Argentinian uranium project prior to the merger with Scimitar as far back as July 7. There are earlier references to their intent to expand into uranium in 2006 – and perhaps earlier. Jackson’s Boolaloo project always had a uranium angle (although the WA gov’t bans uranium mining). That may have been the attraction of the stock back then.

   So Mr Key is dissembling when he says he was not aware of the merger with Scimitar so did know of the uranium investments. The uranium angle was in play prior to that, and as a shareholder, he had to be aware of that. Indeed, uranium was probably the only reason for owning shares in Jackson Minerals/Gold
   • sk 8.1

     15 February 2010 at 9:35 am

     that should be July 2007 for the Argentinian uranium investment, when Mr Key still had plenty of time to track his investments
     • gitmo 8.1.1

       15 February 2010 at 9:56 am

       What’s the big deal about uranium being mined ?

       I’ve got shares in a few of the mining companies in Aus – a couple of which may mine uranium I believe.

       Oh and unless I see some very good data to show the economic benefits and zero to miniscule environmental impacts I’m in the no camp to mining in the existing NZ conservation estate.
       • felix 8.1.1.1

         15 February 2010 at 10:07 am

         Good on you gitmo.

         p.s. I think the issue with investing in uranium arises when you’re the PM of a country with a world famous nuclear-free stance.
         • gitmo 8.1.1.1.1

           15 February 2010 at 11:26 am

           Oh I see ….. and meh, there must be better things to have a go at him about than this.
           • sk 8.1.1.1.1.1

             15 February 2010 at 11:53 am

             its relevant for the dissembling. Claiming he had no idea about the uranium, when 5 mins of research shows that Jackson Minerals was always about the uranium. That Jackson owned uranium assets in Argentina, prior to the merger, whereas the spokesman from his office is implying that those assets were a function of the merger (the bit about not receiving the paperwork). Why can’t he come out and say as you do Gitmo, that he liked a bit of uranium in his portfolio?
   • Idiot/Savant 8.2

     15 February 2010 at 11:31 am

     Actually, I think it will be amusing to find out how much money Key considers “trivial”. Ten thousand dollars? Fifty?
     • Draco T Bastard 8.2.1

       15 February 2010 at 12:42 pm

       IIRC, from his comments on his NZ Rail shares I’d say that he considers ~$50k to be trivial.
9. Southie 9

   15 February 2010 at 9:32 am

   Hands off our land, National!
10. gobsmacked 10

    15 February 2010 at 11:47 am

    If you guys have time, listen to Brownlee on RNZ’s Morning Report today.

    Right at the end of the interview (he’s on after the Sierra Club spokesman), Brownlee says that mines are tourist attractions..

    I am, really, not making this up.
    • Zaphod Beeblebrox 10.1

      15 February 2010 at 11:51 am

      Do you know- lots of people will travel half way round the planet to look at trucks driving into a hole in the ground. Who needs world heritage??
11. jonakiwi 11

    15 February 2010 at 1:00 pm

    Re conservation area mining: Gerry Brownlee to be remembered for his version of Think Big, shall we call it ‘Big Dig’.
    Whilst they spin on about low foot print surgical mining, they leave out the inconvenient truth about tailings dumps and acid mine drainage from tailings ponds.
    Sulphide waste oxidises to acid which in turn mobilises heavy metals, allowing them to escape into the water catchments.
    Acid mine drainage is a waste product that is treatable but usually allowed to pollute water ways because treatment costs would make mining unprofitable.
    • Zaphod Beeblebrox 11.1

      15 February 2010 at 3:01 pm

      Nice present for the next 5000 generations of kiwis. Can Brownlee quantify the costs of 50,000 years of maintainence of the tailings dam?
12. precious 12

    17 February 2010 at 12:26 pm

    some great posts here, but all that energy needs to be channeled into the public consultation process which will start soon. Coromandel Watchdog has a great website, http://www.watchdog.org.nz with excellent resources, and where you can sign on to be kept in the loop about submissions etc

Links to post

1. phonebook: posted on 15 February 2010 at 12:36 am
2. John Key wants to make a bank out of New Zealand « Aotearoa: a wider perspective: posted on 15 February 2010 at 11:29 am
3. RecyclePhoneBooks: posted on 15 February 2010 at 1:36 pm
4. Brownlee lying over mining on conversation land « The Standard: posted on 17 February 2010 at 2:55 pm
5. Curious Bee: posted on 9 May 2010 at 11:43 pm

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS