Mining in Department of Conservation owned land

Forums › Off topic › Mining in Department of Conservation owned land

EricB

2 posts

Wannabe Geek

#41492 17-Sep-2009 10:15

Hi,
I am EricB from Tauranga Boys College Inquiry Learning Class and I am doing a project on Should mining be forbidden in Department of Conservation owned land.

I was hoping if you could help my research by posting yes or no to the question Should mining be forbidden in Department of Conservation owned land? If you wish, you could post comments on this topic, so that I know what you think about this issue.

Thanks for your time,
EricB

tonyhughes

Hawkes Bay
8476 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#256408 17-Sep-2009 10:30

No.

Well designed mining projects can be completed with minimal environmental impact. If the goals of DoC, and the integrity of the environment are not threatened (either through no/low impact, and/or a 100% plus financial contribution of post-mining restoration, in agreement with both the Ministry for the Environment, DoC, iwi, and relevant community and environmental groups), then it's important to realise the positive impact on employment and business that the activity may generate.

I would like to see this sort of activity restricted to companies that contribute extra money back to DoC projects, and whose earnings are predominantly owned by NZers, or large proportions of earnings are funnelled back into this economy.

You need to think harder about what you are asking. Getting a "Yes" or a "No" without any other information about who is giving the answer, and why, is probably pretty worthless information for a topic like this (especially if you are only gaining a small sample).

MyHeritage

Shop MyHeritage and uncover your origins and find new relatives with a simple DNA test. (affiliate link).

EricB

2 posts

Wannabe Geek

#256414 17-Sep-2009 10:43

Well yes, I did mean that I want an opinion as well, anyway, that's a great answer,
Thanks

friendlymonkey

179 posts

Master Geek

#256420 17-Sep-2009 10:55

Yes, mining should be forbidden in department of conservation land.

The land has been set aside for the purpose of conservation. If we want to mine the land, whats the point of calling it a national park?
Mining is so last year...why is this government not looking into the future and investing in research and production of clean alternative fuels.

wellygary

7384 posts

Uber Geek

#256423 17-Sep-2009 10:59

No, (and mining is currently allowed) - see pike river http://www.beehive.govt.nz/node/19189

Provided that it is managed with minimal environmental impact, and can be shown to be a significant addition to the overall value of New Zealand.

GeekGuy

566 posts

Ultimate Geek

#256424 17-Sep-2009 11:00

same as what friendlymonkey said.

wellygary

7384 posts

Uber Geek

#256429 17-Sep-2009 11:16

friendlymonkey: Yes, mining should be forbidden in department of conservation land.

The land has been set aside for the purpose of conservation. If we want to mine the land, whats the point of calling it a national park?

Not all conservatrion land is National Park,
Significant areas of land owned by DOC are currently used as farmland, grazed with stock, or are used for production pine plantations.

The view that all conservation land is locked away from any uses is not true.

( NZs largest farm at molesworth is on land leased from the Department of conservation by Landcorp)

I would agree that mining in a National Park should be generally declined, (Although Currently the Pike river mine, will remove coal from under Paparoa National Park, but the shaft entry point is in adjacent conservation land, there is no visable alteration to the National Park, is that OK?

BurningBeard

1030 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#256431 17-Sep-2009 11:18

If the mining causes minimal impact and all applicable parties are consulted and in agreement as to how to go about it, I see no cause for alarm.

My very metal Doctor Who theme

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#256433 17-Sep-2009 11:30

I'm with Tony Hughes on this.

I don't want to see beautiful landscapes destroyed but it's very clear that NZ has very significant untapped reservices on minerals that are worth very significant amounts of money.

NZ can no longer survive on primary exports alone - diversification is necessary and Australia is proof of the strengths of minerals. Both pros and cons have to be weighted up however.

This question isn't one that can be answered with a binary answer. It's a lot more complex than simply answering yes or no.

bjhoogs

183 posts

Master Geek

#256448 17-Sep-2009 11:58

sbiddle:
This question isn't one that can be answered with a binary answer. It's a lot more complex than simply answering yes or no.

I disagree. The Question was: 'Should mining be forbidden in Department of Conservation owned land?'

Which is much easier to answer than, and very different from: 'Should DOC owned land be mined?'

To answer the question:

No. As a taxpayer I am paying DOC to manage the land in the interests of conservation, not to lock up the land in the fear that any change will destroy it.

I am not going to pretend to know more than the experts (DOC) about what should or should not be done in the interests of conservation. They need to manage the land based on the best information they have available to them.

wellygary

7384 posts

Uber Geek

#256450 17-Sep-2009 12:08

bjhoogs:
sbiddle:
This question isn't one that can be answered with a binary answer. It's a lot more complex than simply answering yes or no.

I am not going to pretend to know more than the experts (DOC) about what should or should not be done in the interests of conservation. They need to manage the land based on the best information they have available to them.

They currently allow mining....

Byrned

453 posts

Ultimate Geek

#256456 17-Sep-2009 12:28

Fully agree with Tony's comment, and nothing else to add

bjhoogs

183 posts

Master Geek

#256457 17-Sep-2009 12:29

wellygary: They currently allow mining....

On a case by case basis. To say they allow mining is overly simplistic and misleading. They also don't allow mining. It is not a matter of allowing or not allowing it, but looking at the big picture (and all the little minute details) to decide where and when it is appropriate, and when it is not in the best interests of their primary goal of conservation.

johnr

19282 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#256460 17-Sep-2009 12:37

With Tony on this one

SepticSceptic

2051 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#256552 17-Sep-2009 15:48

No

Ditto the tonyhughes comments. Strongly NZ-focussed - this is our land and heritage. If you want to pick bits out of it, the earned $$ must strongly favour NZ, and not be shipped offshore.
Perhaps there is an opportunity for local investors to subscribe to some sort of carrier company, and invest in a real export generating organisation, rather than the usual house of cards that is our real estate.

My thoughts are no longer my own and is probably representative of our media-controlled government

nate

6469 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#256787 18-Sep-2009 11:09

What is this, the "we love tonyhughes" thread?!

I also agree with him. Reluctantly.