Letter on Lake Manapouri

Press, Volume CX, Issue 32474, 8 December 1970, Page 18

Letter on Lake Manapouri

Thirty New Zealanders at the University of British Columbia in Canada who have followed the Manapouri debate with close concern have written an open letter to the Prime Minister (Sir Keith Holyoake) expressing their opposition to raising the lake level.

They say that after seeing the desolation and ugly consequences of damming valleys and raising lakes in British Columbia they hope that New Zealand might profit by the experience. Their letter to the Prime Minister states:

“We wish to express our deep concern at the findings of the Royal Commission on Lake Manapouri. When a natural resource in a national park isethreatened with exploitation all public values should be considered. To use ‘cost-benefit’ ratios alone would be to sell the country’s soul for a short-term economic gain. The old ethic which considers economic demand above all else and which forces every battle for a wilderness area to be fought on economic grounds is no longer tenable in a world of limited resources.

“A major consequence of the awakening of an ecological conscience in North America is that industry must now consider environmental side-effects of its activities. It is not a simple choice between economic progress and nature lovers as many ‘developers’ would have us believe. Industry must develop a ndr. social responsibility and accommodate to public demand.

“By its strenuous opposition to power from any alternate source, Comalco is showihg a lack of responsibility to the New Zealand public. In this light promises of restoration to some ‘acceptable standard’ should be treated with scepticism. If the taxpayers of New Zealand are prepared to meet the cost of alternate power Comalco should also make concessions. If both the Government and Comalco refuse to renegotiate then it would seem that Comalco and not the people is determining the use of our land.

“Legislation in the United States has achieved notable victories in land use. Flooding of the Grand Canyon was stopped; the California redwoods were saved; and a prolosed jet airport next to the Florida Everglades was scrapped after sl3m had already been spent. A federal appeals court ruled that a nuclear power plant on the Hudson River had to be built with scenic, historic and recreational values in mind.

“These cases contrast with the Commission of Inquiry’s

seeming deference towards Comalco. The principal finding: ‘The Crown is contractually bound to Comalco to raise the level of Lake Manapouri’ is hard to follow. That much was known some years ago. Could not the commission have accommodated public demands and Comalco by presenting alternatives for future negotiation? While the commission stated that al-, ternative sites might cost over $2 million annually, was consideration given to the revenue that could be generated from imaginative largescale tourist development in that area? Overseas tourists come to New Zealand for our unique scenic splendour, not to visit hydro power stations and defiled lakes.

"The people should have the final say. But will the Government go to the people? In the long term view we must re-evaluate the meaning of ‘progress’ and the value of an unspoilt Lake Manapouri to future New Zealanders. The words of Alfred A. Knoff, written to protest the

flooding of the Grand Can-] yon are appropriate:— “ ‘The parks are set aside for other than dollar uses, to be kept without impairment for the enjoyment of the people. They cannot tolerate exploitation of any resource, for exploitation uses up, makes over, mars, and changes the things that according to wise law must be kept natural.’ ” The signatures. New Zealanders at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, are:—

Mr W. Q. Green, graduate student, department of zoology; Dr J. R. Harger, assistant professor, department of zoology; Mrs J. M. Gummer, systems analyst. Institute of Resource ‘Ecology; Mr J. C. P. Heggie, graduate student, department of physics; Mr T. W. Schnackenberg, graduate student, department of physics; Mr N. J. Eggert graduate student, department of chemistry; Dr R. H. Roydhouse, associate professor, faculty of dentistry; Dr S. R. Brown, professor, department of

I physical education; Mr M. A. Jorgensen, graduate student, {department of mathematics; I Mr B. J. Minchin, department of education; Dr W. R. Cullen, professor, department of chemistry; Mr D. J. Ford, assistant professor, department of economics; Mrs P. Purvin-Good, secretary, department of economics; Mr C. H. Pharo, graduate student, department of geology; Mr P. E. Salt, graduate student, department of civil engineering; Mr C. O’Loughlin, graduate student, department of forestry; Dr M, C. Meikle, assistant professor, department of orthodontics; Dr C. S. C. Lear, department head,’ department of orthodontics; Mr R. A. Ward, audio-visual photographer, faculty of dentistry; Mr R. L. Allen, graduate student, Institute of Resource Ecology; Mr R. Shotton, teaching assistant, Institute of Fisheries; Mrs P. Ward, secretary, department of agriculture; Dr R. W. Burling, professor, Institute of Oceanography; Dr W. Winiata, assistant professor, faculty of commerce; Mr D. Elder, senior administrator, faculty of commerce; Mr J. Beale, secretary, faculty of commerce; Dr R. A. Spencer, assistant professor, department of civil engineering; Mr P. T. Bums, associate professor, faculty of law; Dr C. S. Belshaw, professor, department head, department of anthropology and sociology; Dr M. Hattaway. visiting professor, department of English.