I'm not Australian so don't have an in depth feel for how seriously Australia takes conservation of its habitats and indigenous species. When I see the intention to mine in National Parks and State Forests (assuming they are indigenous) then in most developed and in a significant number of developing countries, temperatures would inevitably rise.
But... but... I wonder why issues were not raised when mining and exploration licences were first sought. Why do these regulatory bodies wait until what appears to be the last moment to spike the whole thing? The regulators appear to have waited until trial shipments have already left the shores before acting.
If I have read the situation correctly, then in my opinion its going to make marketing Australian resources very difficult if regulators are able to spike projects at what appears to me when they feel like it. I would have thought that an application for exploration and mining licences implied the intention to do just that. Mine! To me this implies that unless their mining technique is so unusually bad, then there is no reason to stop the process once exploration and mining licences have been granted.
I'm by no means anti-conservation - quite the contrary. But, I would have thought that regulators have to conform to regulations themselves.
My opinions may be based on an insufficient understanding of what is going on, so please feel free to attack this posting with any insight you may have.
BAU Price at posting:
37.0¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
