- Joined
- 14 February 2005
- Posts
- 15,186
- Reactions
- 17,182
Re: The Greens - The New Radical Socialists
Where I strongly disagree is that the decision to save that river was used to prevent the construction of not only that dam but of practically any other large dam on any other river in the state.
There's a need for balance in this and any other debate. Stopping that dam was arguably the correct decision from a conservation perspective. But stopping the construction of other dams which had absolutely nothing to do with that river is hard to accept as a reasonable position, especially not given the consequences for other environmental issues (ie fossil fuel use) and the wellbeing of humans (particularly those at the lower end of the socio-economic scale).
I have a lot of respect for Bob in some ways, but he is unfortunately a master of appearing reasonable whilst actually implementing a somewhat extreme agenda.
No flooding of the lower third of the Franklin? Fair enough. No dams anywhere on any other rivers, including those already dammed upstream? That's extreme to say the least but it's what actually occurred and this was intentional at the time.
Somewhat strangely, I actually agree on that point. It is a magnificent river that's for sure.I have paddled the Franklin River quite a few times. Whatever you think of Bob Browns politics the Franklin is an awesome legacy he leaves behind and I’m eternally grateful. I have met him a few times when returning from a bush walk that starts and finishes at the Liffey property he has now donated to the Bush Heritage Fund. I found him a thoroughly decent bloke. Always offers you a cuppa and his is the only property that I have ever seen the sign “Trespassers welcome”.
Where I strongly disagree is that the decision to save that river was used to prevent the construction of not only that dam but of practically any other large dam on any other river in the state.
There's a need for balance in this and any other debate. Stopping that dam was arguably the correct decision from a conservation perspective. But stopping the construction of other dams which had absolutely nothing to do with that river is hard to accept as a reasonable position, especially not given the consequences for other environmental issues (ie fossil fuel use) and the wellbeing of humans (particularly those at the lower end of the socio-economic scale).
I have a lot of respect for Bob in some ways, but he is unfortunately a master of appearing reasonable whilst actually implementing a somewhat extreme agenda.
No flooding of the lower third of the Franklin? Fair enough. No dams anywhere on any other rivers, including those already dammed upstream? That's extreme to say the least but it's what actually occurred and this was intentional at the time.