ÎçÒ¹¸£Àû1000¼¯ºÏ

Kakadu National Park looks likely to escape a threatened gold rush following
the release last week of a report on the impact of a proposed mine in the
park. The government will decide early next month whether to allow mining
for gold, platinum and palladium at Coronation Hill. The issue has been
viewed as a show of strength between mining and environmental interests
(see ‘Gold rush threatens Australia’s green dreams’, New Scientist, 27 April).

The report from the Resource Assessment Commission (RAC), an inquiry
appointed by the government, declared that the mine would have limited economic
benefit and that it would be against the wishes of the Aboriginal people
who live in the area. The belief in Bula, a sacred figure that Aborigines
say will bring disaster to the area if disturbed, was not something that
had been invented after mineral exploration had begun, the commission said.

The report warns that a decision in favour of mining could be seen as
another case of Australian governments putting money ahead of Aboriginal
concerns. The commission played down the environmental consequences of a
mine. The impact on known biological resources around Coronation Hill would
be small if a single mine was properly managed and monitored. But mining
at Coronation Hill would be seen by some as ‘inconsistent with national
and international concepts of national parks’.

The Prime Minister, Bob Hawke, in a remark widely interpreted as softening
up the mining industry for a ‘no vote’, last week told the Australian Mining
Industry Council not to view Coronation Hill as a litmus test for mining
in Australia. Mining companies claim that investors will be driven overseas
if the decision goes against mining. Environmentalists accuse the companies
of using scare tactics.

John Quinn, managing director of Newcrest Mining, the company that wants
to mine the area, says that the RAC’s investigation was a waste of time
and that the commission should be abolished.