Tarkine Drive: A drive into politics, alliances and blurring the edges of logic.
10Nov. 09
The Tasmanian Government recently allocated $23 million dollars toward the development and construction of a tourist drive between Wynyard and Arthur River that would skirt across the northern region of the area known as the Tarkine Wilderness.
The majority of the 132 km project already exists as unsealed yet accessible road that passes through land managed by Forestry Tasmania. The existing sections would be sealed and there will only be 5.4 km of new road constructed.
For the people of the north-west, the road is expected to bring great economic benefit through increased tourism, but there are concerns that the wildlife of the area could be significantly affected, mainly due to the increased road kill that may be expected. Specifically, most conservation groups seem to be concerned about the spread of the Devil Facial Tumour Disease (DFTD).
Here is where the misinformation comes in! Now, I am all for conserving our natural resources and protecting endangered species, but there are several aspects of the argument from the Tarkine National Coalition (http://www.tarkine.org/) that particularly concern me.
“The proposed road is clearly destructive from an environmental point of view — as, in its current form, it would involve bulldozing over twenty kilometres of new road into remote, virgin rainforest.”
Er.. actually that would be 5.4 km of new road through wilderness that is anything but “virginal” and not “rainforest”. Perhaps Tim Flannery shouldn’t have used the term “virginal forest” to describe the Tarkine several years ago, when it is not. The Tarkine area has a long history of aboriginal settlement, followed by Europeans, who systematically mined and logged the region extensively. I was completely unaware of this, and I was rather shocked when I looked at the map provided in the book “A Peopled Frontier” by Nic Haygarth, which goes into great detail about land use in the region. Having ventured into the region many times, I didn’t realise how widespread mining was in the region as I took a photograph of a rusty old boiler that was part of a sawmill near Dip Falls.
“It will also compromise the last wild refuge of disease free Tasmanian devils — a move described by scientists as condemning the Devil to exctintion in the wild. Even the government’s own report aknowledges that the road will likely introduce the facial tumor disease into this isolated healthy population.”
And this quote from Dr Colette Harmsen, from The Australian, earlier this year:
“As devils use roads to explore new territory, and travel up to 20km a night in search of food, it would hasten the spread of the disease into so far disease-free western areas.”
This whole “Tarkine Drive will spread DFTD” argument had me scratching my head, until I came to the conclusion, based on the available evidence, that devils don’t use dirt roads. What they are saying is DFTD will spread when the road is sealed.
Remember, only 5.4 km of new road is to be constructed, which by my calculations means that about 127 km already exists! Additionally, arguments about the two new bridges that are to be constructed are countered by the fact that devils swim anyway. Don’t get me wrong, I want to save those devils too, but I see no convincing argument that this “new” road” will spread the disease.
Keep in mind that there are no settlements along this road at all – just wilderness, so the “traffic” would surely be close to zero during the night. Since devils are nocturnal, I don’t see how a large proportion of them will end up as road kill.
Also, the entire run of the road is within an area where DFTD has not been reported.
Finally I would like to say that the Tarkine National Coalition should put some effort into proof-reading their website. After a minute I found 4 spelling errors (including the two in the quote above). Yes, I might be anal, but I am a member of the Facebook group “I judge you when you use poor grammar” so it’s my prerogative.
Tags: Environment, Tasmania
November 10th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
Environmental activist groups are peeing on their own shoes a large amount of the time. Their goals are admirable and well-intentioned but they go about achieving these goals in totally the wrong manner. They take extreme routes and exaggerate, sloganeering and shouting, when careful analysis and education could achieve far more. They get hooked on dogma and decide that is the only way to go, when in reality it doesn’t work. Genuine political pressure and campaigning would achieve real results but this seems to be missed by them Greenpeace is a classic example of such an environmental group, full of throwing water bombs at ships and protesting against ‘Frankenfoods’.
Great piece
November 11th, 2009 at 8:55 am
Daryl,
Good to see your article about the Tarkine Drive.
I am wondering if you are really intersted in the whole story about Tarkine Drive? If so you may wish to write about the other edge of opposisition to the road, being on economic and tourism planning grounds. See the Liberal rejection of the road, Cradle Coast Authority, Tarkine Buisness Council. They have all rejected the road on the grounds that it will not be value for money.
This would complete your story.
Currently your peice appears to be a one sided attack on conservationsists.
Where do you stand?
November 11th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
Till,
Your assertion that my piece is an attack on conservationists is completely incorrect. As I pointed out I am all for conservation as long as it is for a logical purpose. The point of my article was not discussion as to where I stand, rather pointing out the illogical arguments that are being used to stop the project going ahead.
If anyone wants to argue to stop the project, be my guest, but don’t piggyback your grievances onto a completely unrelated topic.
DFTD does not exist is the area that the road that will be built, therefore it cannot be used as an argument to stop the project.