underground mine vs rare birds, page-11

Yep, I'm blown away by how many legislators are saying they fully support MTN's mine in Arkaroola after reading that Hansard link! The greens might as well go home with their tail between their legs...

Some nasty, quibbling types, however, might think this was actually a discussion about the merits of an ambit claim of a mining halt in all sanctuaries. Shot through with some politics-as-usual surrounding SA's 'access (pretty well) all areas' mineral policy. Rather than it being, say, a vote in favour of mining in Arkaroola.

Because if that's what it was, it's rather hard to explain why a Liberal member would be working on a Bill (and a petition, we discover!) to specifically ban mining in Arkaroola, in addition to Mark Parnell's specific redraft.

I really don't agree with Holloway that Green opposition in Arkaroola is about Uranium. Heard much protest about 4-mile? Reckon they wouldn't be there if it was a copper or tin mine that was proposed?

What seems hard to argue with is Mark Parnell's "any person of prominence who has ever been up to Arkaroola for a holiday is now coming out, on the record, and saying that this place is too precious to mine."

Can any proponents name any such person who has been there - who does not stand to gain financially themselves - who has come out in favour? If the controversy becomes public again and various public and political figures travel to the area to see what the fuss is about what are they likely to come back saying?

What I find most interesting in this exchange is Holloway's "By and large, the mining industry as a whole does not want to be involved in mining and issues which create public controversy and which create conditions that are to the detriment of the mining industry as a whole."

This would rather explain both the Premier's and SACOME's condemnation.

He goes on to say "So, where there are areas of high conservation value or other aesthetic value that are not within national parks or are not within a classification of park that prohibits mining, we need to assess them. I know that my colleague the Minister for Environment and Conservation is aware of that, and we are trying to develop a system where we can ensure that we do not have these issues arise."

One interpretation of this is 'We stuffed up, and after we've got past this particular problem we're going to ensure we don't make the same mistake again.'

Afeard of having to offer compensation the Govt. may be - but exploration is indefinitely suspended at the government's pleasure, 23/50 holes does not appear to have been enough to declare the project viable without a return to drilling, and the licence expires next year in the run up to the state election.

I agree that all this makes the issue of any permission to return to drilling crucial.

And I reckon you'll find that while 'the greenies' are certainly frustrated at what they see as government intransigence, they're also certainly far from despairing.

As to birds and tunnels - again, tunnels have to be blasted, and require emergency exit and ventilation shafts and access roads for them. Mines impact local aquifers and/or more distant ones. While I assume most of us have a little more sophistication than the 'birds can just fly away' brigade,
there's a whole ecosystem to consider, aesthetic issues, as well as a very popular tourism business.