(no subject)
Mar. 23rd, 2010 07:19 amWhat I can point out, though, is that New Zealand is very small and unusually biodiverse and geologically very different from conservancy to conservancy. We have a very high level of species found nowhere else, and a lot of them are naturally uncommon or range-restricted - there are only a few of them, or they exist on a patch of land that, forget a postcard on Eden Park, is more like a pinprick on Eden Park. Perhaps the Government would like to suggest by this metaphor that they will only mine places that are just like everywhere else in New Zealand, but there are two problems with that: first, that will be really damn difficult. But secondly, that's not how they're going to choose where to mine at all - they don't really have any control over that: They can only mine where minerals are. If they find gold under the unique sub-alpine locations in the South Island where the Hutton's Shearwater tītī** nests, well... bye bye Hutton's Shearwater (who are already considered endangered, kids.)
Someone on the radio next, whose name I really didn't catch, said that the Māori Party hadn't yet expressed their opinion and added that he wasn't sure Treaty issues were involved. Let's be clear here: Treaty issues are involved. Māori are the kaitiaki of the land in their rōhe, only so much damage has been done to so much of New Zealand that really the last places that can be expressed is in national parks. I really hope the Māori Party come out strongly against this issue.
*A rugby stadium
**There are around three birds referred to as tītī in te reo Māori or I wouldn't use the Pākehā name, but you really need to or it's confusing.