Printable View
No. Leave it unsealed.
From what I understand, $200m would be better off spent on maintaining existing sealed roads. I understand the national highway (no.1) still has some sub standard areas in Queensland. They do in SA.
In SA, rather than fixing the roads, they're putting up new speed signs dropping the limit.
Or you could use the $200m to subsidise gay wedding cakes. Apparently, that will be the biggest contributor to the GDP next year.
Lots of better things to spend the $200 million on.
Less tar equals less people, and less people equals less environmental impact and subsequent restrictions, and less environmental impact and restrictions equals more adventure.
For the people that are naturally obsessed with human expansion, whether driven by insecurity or not, and those manipulated by politicians appealing to big business sponsors, go and grow on another planet(s). Lots of excitement to be had. Unlimited growth opportunities!!
It is uncaring to take away from future generations the opportunity to have a sense of discovery and wonder at nature untamed.
Cape York is a walk in the park compared to what it was 30_40 years ago So the development began a long time ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by rammypluge
Untamed environment versus continuing poverty - which to choose?
Actually it's not untamed at all.
Then lets stop the slide before humans occupy and alter every inch of the planet like a plague. More people equals a lesser share for everyone.Quote:
Originally Posted by trout1105
If there are only a small number of people living on the cape, then they should accept it the way it is. If they want to live in a place with easier services or more people or more job opportunities, then move to somewhere that has that.
There is so much choice in australia. There are tiny towns, in between towns, small cities and massive cities. Take your pick.
Considering the environmental impacts humans are having on the planet, considering the concerns and risks being raised, it makes no sense to develop undeveloped areas.
The situation is overdue to be looking at the next frontier, being other planets, and to be focusing on gaining control and sustainability of this one. More growth creates more risk for this planet. There is now less safety in numbers.
If people are there in poverty, they should move. To suggest we continue to damage a less developed area for the sake of a few people, it doesnt make any sense. If people cant find a way in a given area, then get out.Quote:
Originally Posted by DiscoMick
The world was smart enough to heavily restrict people from living in Antartica. Imagine if we didnt have those restrictions. There would be the inevitable creep of human occupation and environmental damage. Everywhere we start to live we start to alter.
If people want to live on the cape in a traditional way, living off the land in temporary humpies, then thats their choice. If there is a drive to continually develop the lesser developed and undeveloped parts of australia, it mostly has to stop, for the sake of future generations.
Its so common, for example, for people to visit a beautiful forest and think to themselves 'I would love to live here in this peaceful undeveloped forest'. I will just build a basic house and it will mostly be as it was. Then they find out they need a firebreak, and the trees they loved get chopped down. Then grass grows and they buy a ride on mower, then the peace is lost. Then they realise there arent many jobs, so they support land clearing for agriculture, and the expansion of the timber industry. Etc etc. Its time for people to wake up.
There are places in australia where populations have already receded. Its not the end of the world. Its not failure. Its sometimes not even mourned. People see a future elsewhere and dont look back.
I havent been to the cape yet but to me it sounds like a much better place to retreat human settlement from rather than expand.
There is the Ord River Scheme to the west. I believe there is good reason to shift some agriculture from declining unsustainable areas to this area. I am not anti development. I just think we need to consider a spectrum of factors, not just short termism.
Normanton/Karumba, bitumen access to Cloncurry, Mt Isa, Cairns, Townsville, Brisbane and the rest of the country.Quote:
Originally Posted by DiscoMick
The indigenous population are still living in abject poverty while the elite European business owners are doing very well, thank-you very much.
Sealing the road up the Cape will not offer any benefit to the indigenous residents.
There are many roads in Queensland that would justify spending $200mil before The Developement road, both the Bruce and Landsborough flood annually. What's the point of building a new highway that lacks all weather access?
So DM, you're in favour of spending $200,000,000.00, (count the zeros) to help the rich get richer?
The rampant presumption that growth capitalism is the answer is frightening - despite so many negatives including: climate change, oil wars, housing unaffordability, rising mental illness/depression, etc.
Building more roads in order to homogenise a continent of shopping malls is simply not the answer.
Recognising and valuing diversity and community is - in people, place, ways of life and cultures.
I can can tell you now, when the **** hits the fan, I would rather be in a small community of people looking out for each other, up the top of Cape York with no freeways and all than comes with them - than in a marauding city where supermarkets carry at max 3 days worth of food and material greed is the religion.
there aren't very many of Australia's 12,000 towns that don't have a bitumen centre , not one person complains about that.
It was an eventuality that perhaps 25yrs ago old townspeople didn't want to happen.
Now there are bitumen strips laid in many areas a few km long that allow the roads between the towns to be more accessible.....and no one complains.
Now its a simple matter of joining the dots.....all weather roads.....and no one will complain.
With modern road building techniques the bitumen roads are very durable and eventually cost less to maintain than dirt roads.
People will still buy and use 4wd's...look at the yanks.
Look at the Aldinga scrub. Not much of that left now. It's mostly been replaced with housing.Quote:
Originally Posted by rammypluge