I have a very special feeling for Lake Pedder ......
Lake Pedder to me is the very heart of the South West. When it is modified, as it is called, into a large deep inland sea it will nor be more beautiful. It will be an artificial man-made pond in the middle of the natural wilderness area. It will affect, in my view, the entire atmosphere, he entire make-up of the South West.
It has been said that the programme is an economical one, that everything has been evaluated, calculated in terms of dollars, but never has a price been put on Lake Pedder in its natural stare. I am sure there are countries in the world which would buy the Lake and its environment for a hundred times the figure that we cannot afford to keep it now. They are spending $65M. to preserve four identical stone figures somewhere in Nubia to save them from the flood so that they are not inundated. They have been made with a chisel and hammer only 3,000 or 4,000 years ago or less than 2,000 years ago...... We are spending $80M.'8 on the Opera House, and I am sure that Lake Pedder, the way it is, in decades and perhaps a century to come, would outlive and outperform any Opera House that we can build.
I might be emotionally involved in this and I might be unreasonable, but what is the possibility hat somebody will never write a symphony that will make us as famous as Sibelius made Finland and Grieg made Norway, and Lake Pedder can do that....
There are other people in Tasmania who think that the Lake will be better and bigger and their view could well be right. I am only presenting my view here. It is the way I see the Lake, rightly or wrongly. It is my Lake, my Pedder. Thank you.
Transcript of a tape recorded by the late Olegas Truchanas. Lithuanian immigrant to Australia; bushwalker, skier. yachtsman. youth leader; one who loved his adopted country perhaps better than its native-born. Truchanas died in a canoeing accident on the Gordon River. 6 January 1972.
Unlikely as it may appear to some that Pedder can still be saved, there will be no chance at all unless. weighed in the balance. the natural Lake brings down the scales on its side "with a thump", as the lawyers say.
But first it is very important to emphasise once again what Australia loses for ever, if Pedder is not saved, it is not just the Lake, but a whole unique and uniquely beautiful environment -Lake, beach associated small lakes, the Upper Serpentine River. sand dunes, rain forest. endemic species and all. When one speaks, then. of Pedder, or Lake Pedder, let it be understood that one is referring to the Lake and that environment.
More than that, it should never be overlooked that Pedder and its environs were of themselves an integral part of Tasmania's "South West".
Let me quote at this stage from the formal submission made by the Lake Pedder Action Committee of Tasmania, in which the following passage appears:19
"3. The Evidence
The real evidence has, of course, been prematurely buried under the waters of the new Serpentine impoundment, and consequently there is a real difficulty in communication between those who know the Lake and those who do not; the experience of Lake Pedder was always its own most convincing argument. It was essentially an emotional experience, and it was this which provided the driving force behind the strong and sustained public opposition. The best attempt to recreate something of the feeling of the place is probably by means of the "audio-visual" productions.
"5. The "South-West"
Tasmania's South West is one of he last great wilderness areas of the world to use Sir Edmund Hillary's phrase; it con rains the most spectacular, varied and extensive terrain in Australia as yet undamaged by man. It is a region where one can spend weeks at a time in exploring and absorbing its varied, complex character and changing moods, and return to it time and again.
For this reason it is becoming increasingly popular with Australians from every quarter, and is widely regarded unofficially as Australia's finest national park.
All this in the face of official discouragement; the South West has never been promoted, and official enquiries have commonly been met with blank amazement, profound ignorance and polite disdain.
Yet as he A.C.F.ZO says, the Sooth West presents the chance probably the only chance we will ever have to create a major national park of world standing.
In fact, the 1965 report on the Australian Tourist Industry by he American consultants Harris, Kerr, Foster & Co. recommended reserving the entire area as a tourist attraction. As it is, the South West has been eroded by the claims of commercial interests to one-tenth of its original extent in the space of ten years, as described : see Appendix B.
4. The Significance of Pedder
The significance is two-fold. To begin with, it is a major national park in its own right, as striking and distinctive in character as Ayers Rock. But more importantly, it forms a sizeable and integral parr of the "South West"; he loss of the Lake Pedder National Park to the Huon Serpentine impoundment has obliterated about one-third of the present South West National Park.
Pedder has long been regarded as the "gateway to the South West" and is probably its key feature. The region cannot be dismembered piecemeal in this way without serious detriment To the whole."
The paragraphs are quoted in an order different from that of the original, but the content is identical.
Tragic as it is to admit it, there was nothing in the evidence of other witnesses to cause one to doubt the substantial accuracy of this submission, which was well supported by the evidence of Dr. J.G. Mosley, of the Australian Conservation Foundation, an acknowledged authority, and many other eminent and well qualified witnesses. How shall we who have not seen it judge the beauty of Pedder? By the impressions of the majority, who did not know it;21 or those few who knowing, did not care? Or should we not judge it by those who saw it, visited there. lived beside it, and learned to love it? "Pedder lives"22 in the minds of those who appreciated its very special values. There is value to the whole community, and not merely to parts of it, in things and places, buildings, monuments. works of art, libraries, radio and television programmes and so on, which serve to cater for a variety of tastes and needs. And so it is with parks and reserves. Not everyone wants bowling alleys; many will eschew the rigours of wilderness areas. Yet each has its place and is of value to the whole community, in a true sense, though enjoyed only by some.
Dr. lan Bayly23 came to give evidence before us primarily as a zoologist, but he had very worthwhile things to say on this matter also:
"There seems to be something about the Australian ethos hat makes beauty something difficult to eulogise without some degree of embarrassment or apology, but I know of no one who has visited Lake Pedder who has not spoken freely of the beauty that they saw and felt. I have visited Lake Pedder on three occasions to carry out scientific research, and on each occasion I have been deeply moved by the beauty of the area. To me, the most compelling reason why Lake Pedder should be saved from destruction is that it was one of the most beautiful and awe-inspiring natural features that I have seen anywhere... To put it in other words, I would regard the destruction of something as beautiful as Lake Pedder as a great tragedy, irrespective of its location. But when that location is in fact a National Park, created our of recognition for that beauty, then such destruction seems to me a detestable crime".
Written evidence submitted to us by the LPAC Victoria and other evidence given to us in Hobart indicated the existence of a vast army of people who would like to see Pedder saved; over two hundred organisations, for example, had written indicating support for LPAC policy. A list of these organisations was supplied to us. Many such organisations and others presented submissions and despatched letters to this Committee of Enquiry pleading for the restoration of Pedder.
The altruism and idealism, the loving care, which went into the book, Lake Pedder and the written and oral submissions of the Lake Pedder Action Committees of Tasmania and Victoria24 are not by any means irrelevant in judging an issue such as this. These things are not a matter of mere "rational argument", in the ordinary sense, for they necessarily depend so much on personal tastes and judgements, even intuitions and instinctive reactions of many kinds. The state of a man's mind is as much a fact as the state of his digestion. And the needs of his spirit, though more difficult to plumb and to penetrate, are as deep and real as the needs of his body.
There was a special magic about Pedder; that much is clear. How else may one explain the passion, the almost mystical fervour, with which these people have fought for its retention, and have kept on fighting long past the point when most would have thought the battle lost forever? How else explain the way in which they have spoken and written of it, painted it, photographed it in all its moods and seasons?
I have quoted above the words of that remarkable man, the late Olegas Truchanas, himself an employee of the HEC. We were deeply moved by the audio-visual presentation of his colour slides and the evidence of his widow, who supported him in all his work.
Mr. Max Angus, who had painted at Pedder many times, said of it in evidence before us:
"To stand on the beach at Pedder was to touch one with a sense of awe hat this mighty place, large enough to support the area of Metropolitan Sydney or Melbourne,25 on its sands should be nearly 1,000 feet above sea level tideless, pure, majestic. The colour was unbelievable; the reflected light from more than one million square yards of pink sand was incredible, creating a feeling of light and space hat can never come from water and mountains alone."
And so it went on: the thousand aspects and impressions of Pedder, from the numerous slides we saw, and the witnesses from all walks of life who trooped in to tell us their stories and make their pleas for the saving of Pedder.
"One of he most incredibly beautiful places in Australia."
What an appalling tragedy if we let it go; what an historic failure of this generation in its concern for those that follow! But if we manage to save it -
What a triumph for leadership, and vision, what an occasion for rejoicing, and forgiveness of all that has passed!
There is no doubt that the new impoundment which has drowned, at least temporarily, the original Lake Pedder and its environs, is very beautiful. This is not a case, fortunately, of man-made ugliness where once there was beauty. Beauty has many faces. Yet who would wish to place the head even of the most beautiful woman on the shoulders of a young girl? Or who would wish to see a canvas of Rembrandt overpainted, even by a Picasso?
Having viewed the new impoundment, which the Commission proposes to call Lake Pedder, I, in common with the other members of the Committee, readily acknowledge that it has, as claimed by the Commission, great scenic appeal -a great wide expanse of water set amidst mountains of majestic beauty. It cannot be other than very beautiful.
The Commission claims that "a large body of informed opinion believes that the new Lake Pedder will be an even greater attraction than the present lake..... The beauty of the scene will nor be marred many hold hat it will be even finer with the Frankland Ranges mirrored in the much enlarged Lake surface." Perhaps the HEC has been a little carried away in this hyperbole. Not even the Commission would readily argue, we think, that all things considered, the artificial lake is to be preferred. This is implicit in the earnest efforts they made to work out an economical means of saving it. "A considerable amount of effort" (they say) "was devoted to the examination of ways and means of avoiding the flooding of Lake Pedder ..... The Commission reached the conclusion that these alternatives would be substantially more expensive, and would not result in the retention of Lake Pedder in anything like its natural state". (My emphasis). It is unnecessary for the moment to discuss the accuracy of the latter assertion; for the moment it is only important to stress that the retention of Lake Pedder in its natural state was the acknowledged ideal of the HEC, as the quoted words show. During the protracted correspondence between Sir Garfield Barwick and successive Premiers of Tasmania26 there is not one word to suggest that the loss of the natural lake would be anything other than a real national loss, which (as we have seen) the successive Premiers. Mr Bethune and Mr Reece, sought to justify on economic grounds, and on economic grounds alone.
To say, as the HEC does, that Lake Pedder is being "enlarged" is to miss the whole point. Lake Pedder is the Lake and environs as they were; this is what the impoundment can never be.
Other small and beautiful natural lakes there are in Tasmania, it is true, but Pedder was acknowledged to be, as we have said, unique, and uniquely beautiful. Bigger is not necessarily better, nor is it so in this case. Lake Pedder's smallness and intimacy, the sense that Pedder and its environs were as nature made them over many thousands of years, the product of many and various strands of cause and effect over slow time - Pedder peculiar, Pedder various, Pedder complex, Pedder beautiful - these are the many reasons to prefer it to the mighty man-made pond. Truchanas the man saw this more clearly, it seems, than his masters.
Of small lakes there are many, but none as Pedder.
What is so sad to contemplate is our tendency to over-simplify and thereby oftentimes to debase and degrade our environment. This is clearly unfortunate from the scientific point of view, in the case of natural areas. It is also an aesthetic loss both in urban and natural environments: the historic houses and little streets, rich in associations, swallowed up by expressways and high-rise buildings; the river that is lost in a dam; the swamp that is drained, with the consequent loss of all the life that it sustained; the permanent extinction of species through destruction of habitat; the immersion of something as precious and unique as Pedder in an artificial impoundment; the clearing, the so-called clear-felling of forest, including some of our last remaining rain-forest areas, for export as woodchips, or to make way for beach mining, involving the consequent destruction of unique ecological systems with their hundreds of species of trees, birds, animals, insects, plants and wildflowers..... And so one could go on.
Some of these things may, on balance, be justified in the name of progress and development, or plain economic advantage unadorned by fine phraseology. But we, all of us, bear a heavy responsibility, indeed one might almost say a heavy burden of guilt, if we do it carelessly, greedily, or irresponsibly, without sufficient thought of the cost to our fellowmen and generations yet unborn. Are we not sacrificing too much of their heritage, which consists so much in the wonder and variety of creation, for our own short-term profit? It is sad to see history repeating itself in this country, so much of it still relatively untouched, and so very beautiful. The arid deserts of the Sahara are a silent reminder of the needless waste wrought by man.
Some valuable evidence along these lines was given by Mr Bruce C. Jones, a Lecturer in the Geology Department at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology. Mr Jones appreciated Lake Pedder as a scientist, but also as a bushwalker who had visited there from his boyhood.
From his evidence we gained some insight into the interaction of myriad forces which, over thousands of years, had produced that unique environment; through his eyes we saw, albeit imperfectly, how much history is written on that antique but living landscape. He described for us also, from an aerial photograph which he produced, some of the interest, the variety and complexity, diversity and contrasts, of Pedder and environs: Lake Pedder itself, but also Lake Maria and other smaller lakes nearby. with connecting rivulets; the beaches, not only the beaches of Pedder, but the beaches of those smaller lakes also; rivers, lakes and swamplands draining into Pedder, and the Serpentine emerging from it; the Serpentine -a demonstration, in itself, of Nature's genius; the varieties of vegetation, ranging from the heath of the ranges, through button grass and scrub, to trees some 35 to 40 feet high on the dunes, and up to 80 feet or so in the rain-forest area; the physiographic complexity of the area -the shallow lake, the broad plain, the hills and mountains rising on either side in all their grandeur, the reflections from the protected waters in the large and smaller lakes, and the little rivulets.
And in place of all this: the level man-made lake, hiding and covering it all, extinguishing it for ever. One surely need not be a scientist or bushwalker, a painter or conservationist. to feel, at least intuitively, the very real loss involved in this immersion of so much that was given to us in trust at Lake Pedder; the evidence of the scientists and bushwalkers, painters and conservationists certainly helped us to appreciate some of the reasons why we are so right in feeling this. Unless done for the best of reasons, after mature deliberation, and consulting with the best opinions from a wide variety of arts and sciences, is it not a species of insult to the world into which we are born to rate it so cheaply, to cover so much of it permanently with water in order to advance our own temporary purposes?
The pity of it is that Lake Pedder was so little known and appreciated, except for the lucky few, before its destruction was officially decided upon. If Pedder had become as well and widely known to Australians as the Great Barrier Reef, Sydney Harbour or Ayers Rock, to any or all of which it was apparently quite comparable in value, (so far as it is possible to compare things each so very different and unique) -if it had become familiar to all Australians as a place which many had visited, and with which most others were familiar through films, slides, written descriptions, picture postcards, and so on then it is unthinkable that the decision should have gone the way it did. It we do not decide, even now, to save it. are we not "the base Indian" who threw away a pearl "greater than all his tribe", not realising its value!
Dr Mosley, of the Australian Conservation Foundation, and an authority on wilderness areas in particular. described Pedder to us as, amongst many other things, a "natural base camp area, where one could spend a number of days without any feeling of monotony". Another witness, a bushwalker, described it as the "key to the South West"; yet another, as "the Mecca of bushwalkers". These phrases reflect a number of the things about Pedder which may not be obvious at first glance. A simplistic view might be: why worry about Pedder when there is still so much wilderness area to be enjoyed? The answers are many. For one thing, Lake Pedder was apparently a kind of focus, the heart or jewel of the South West, the "holy grail", the place of magic and beauty, to which the walker was beckoned, and from which he could depart to explore further afield, refreshed in body and spirit.
From his camp on the beach the walker could explore the endless variety of the Lake itself, Lake Maria and the rivulets of Maria Creek, and of the course the Serpentine and other surrounding areas. Bathing and wading in the Lake would provide a diversion. In more energetic mood he could undertake to climb to the summit of one of the nearest peaks in the Franklands, to Buckle's Bonnett, or the top of Mount Solitary. Further afield were Coronet Peak and Mount Anne. Lake Pedder also provided a natural gateway to Junction Creek, and thence south west to Port Davey, or south east to the Huon settlements or the Western Arthurs. Or the walker could proceed from Pedder across the Franklands to the West Coast.
The new impoundment, by contrast, so far from being a gateway, has become, by reason of its size and geographical location, a veritable barrier to these excursions. in the opinion of witnesses the new access to the Franklands, from the other end, over the Serpentine Darn, is a poor recompense for the loss of the old. Beside the shores of the old Lake they could have spent several days at a time in pleasant pursuits, without any feeling of monotony, no such joys are easily imagined on the mostly steep sides of the impoundment. Its attractions as a base camp area would be largely dissipated. The melancholy and resentment associated with the loss of the old Lake would no doubt long exacerbate a feeling of deprivation which would be natural enough, anyhow; it would be impossible for them ever again to feel, beside the new impoundment, that here indeed was "the jewel of the South West" the reward for journey's end. Instead of Pedder, (with all that implies), and the Franklands, the recreational activity, if Pedder is not restored, will be limited to the Franklands and an artificial reservoir which must be skirted, and which can provide in itself little in the way of recreational activity, for the reasons we have mentioned.
Nor would the new impoundment be easily or safely traversed by the average walker. It is thought that the large size of the new impoundment, the dangerous and erratic wind and wave action associated with inland waters, the unpredictable weather conditions of the general area, and the present lack of suitably safe landing areas, amongst other factors, may render the present impoundment a danger to any but the largest craft.
One of the many written submissions of bushwalkers came from Mrs May Smith, who had made a careful comparison between the recreational facilities to be enjoyed at Lake Pedder and the new "enlarged Lake Pedder" respectively. According to this submission, the "Attractions of the original Lake Pedder", as she termed them, could be listed as follows:
"Swimming in warm shallow water, very safe for tiny tots, (because of the long, gently doping beach). Safe canoeing in shallow water. Enormous flat beach for playing games. Hard sand. Camping. Sun bathing. Mountain climbing. Interesting "Pedder penny" beaches. Miniature gardens.
And the best range for photography anywhere to be found in Australia."
By contrast, the "Attractions of enlarged Lake Pedder", included boating, water-skiing and fishing, but, as Mrs Smith said, all of these could be found in due course at Lake Gordon, and the enjoyment of these pursuits was limited to favourable weather conditions, to which one might add, apparently, "and he use of large boats only". (This also appears to be the view of the HEC). Other pursuits listed by Mrs Smith were:
"Limited scope photography. Doubtful swimming -water deep, therefore does not warm up. Mountain climbing when you get across the lake transport needed for this as it is too large to walk around."
This evidence, from one who knew the area well, is cogent and well in line with evidence from many other quarters.
It might be noted, incidentally, that the HEC makes much of the reflections on the impoundment. Judging by the photographs supplied to us, the reflections of the mountains to be seen at times on the new lake are very beautiful. But here again, bigger is not necessarily better. What the reflections have gained in size they have lost in foreground, and the detail and complexity of what is reflected. It appears probable, furthermore, that (as claimed in the LPAC submission, App. p.10) the reflections are more easily "rubbed out" on the impoundment, which is much less sheltered from the wind than the large and small lakes of Pedder.
One matter on which the HEC particularly relies is the new road, driven from Maydena to Strathgordon by the HEC for the purposes of the development. It is on the face of things a non sequitur to argue that one of the benefits of the new lake is a new road, but the HEC argues that its "$5 million cost was justified solely by projected power development in the area"
But the fact is that the road had been built with money provided as a special grant by the Australian Government without any commitment to go ahead with the power scheme, long before the latter was authorised by Parliament. And the power scheme was nor the sole reason which had been advanced for the building of it. in a submission prepared, apparently in 1963, by the Hydro-Electric Commission itself. for presentation to the Australian Government, in support of the plea for the necessary funds, the HEC said of the proposed road:
"The proposed access road will in the first place facilitate ground investigations in a region hitherto surveyed only from the air. it will provide a supply route from the State's main centre of population and principal port when construction of new power development is in progress, it will permanently open up a hitherto inaccessible area of notable scenic value and great potentiality as a national tourist attraction, and the possibility of new mineral discoveries and further development of forest resources should nor be overlooked."
It is rather disingenuous, in the circumstances. still to argue that the road was a by-product of the power scheme, and would not have come without it. Historically, this is simply not correct.
On balance, one must say that every comparison between the environment created by the natural Lake and the new impoundment respectively, is very much to the advantage of the former. There can be no real comparison between the two.
Very fortunately there is a last opportunity now, (at the time of producing this Interim Report, in the winter of 1973), to save the Lake, or to grant it a reprieve, for a moratorium period, at the least.
It is highly likely on the evidence, that although some physical damage will have occurred to the Lake and its environs, most of this will not have been permanent, and almost complete physical recovery may be predicted with considerable confidence over a period of at most a few years.
The beach is not likely to have been significantly affected or disturbed, as yet. There has been some collapse of the dune system, but it can be expected according to the evidence 27 that the same conditions which first created the dunes will in due course recreate them.
The dimensions of Lake Pedder and the smaller lakes, and the course of the river and rivulets will be much the same.
It is devoutly to be wished that, if it is decided to save the Lake, then at least the upper reaches of the Serpentine will be saved also. The HEC, in its pamphlet "Why Lake Pedder is Being Enlarged", makes the point that any alternative scheme involving the use of the Serpentine waters will require pumping arrangements which "would result in the storage level varying over a height of about 15 feet. This rise and fall would take place over the very flat portion of the Serpentine Valley downstream from Lake Pedder and consequently large areas of unsightly flats (about 1·4 square miles) would be exposed in the summer months, and would be very obvious from the Gordon River Road and from the hills and ranges around the valley."
The Committee was not persuaded by the evidence that the variation in storage level need necessarily be as great as the Commission claims. Be this as it may, there are two further points which need to be made. The first, to place the matter in proper perspective, is that the Serpentine impoundment could and should be lowered to the point where it is out of sight from the Lake Pedder area both to salvage the upper reaches of the Serpentine, (in itself a river of great value and beauty), and to hide the mud flats from view, from that area at least. For the rest, conservationists and bushwalkers would appear to be unanimous that if the sight of mud flats from other areas is the price they have to pay for saving Lake Pedder it is a price well worth the paying. It is interesting to recall that already at the time when Lake Pedder was proclaimed a National Park, in 1955, Sir Allan Knight, representing the HEC, visualised a scheme for the Serpentine, not involving Lake Pedder, and asked that the boundaries be fixed with this possibility in mind. Obviously the thought of Serpentine mud flats was not then regarded as any objection to the preservation of Pedder by its gazettal as the centrepiece of the new National Park.
Some damage has probably been done to the plant and animal life by the present flooding. According to authoritative scientific advice, it is likely, however, that should the Lake be restored to its normal summer level by the end of this year, 1973, little permanent damage will have occurred.
The succinct statement by the LPAC Tasmania on this matter of recovery from the floodwaters, (formulated with the care, moderation and precision which is typical, we may say, of their whole submission to us), was as follows.
"1. Draining the Floodwaters
At present, (18.3.731 the low-lying areas around Pedder have been flooded. Altogether, about 10% of the total planned volume of 15.500 square mile-feet has been filled, and to drain off the surplus waters through the Serpentine valve would take about a month.' [*Estrimate only: More reliable calculations could require the cooperation of the HEC.]
2. Recovery from Inundation
The sand-bed is the most important parr, which of course remains basically intact ender the waters.
The dune and beach system, though somewhat damaged, is still fairly intact and could be restored. The dunes tend to restabilise naturally, and a single winter's storms would scour away most of the layer of silt being deposited.
The majority of plants on the lowland, being well adapted to periodic immersion, would regenerate by normal re-growth. Of the larger trees, some would survive and others would regenerate from seed.
Endemic species: The shore-dwelling plants are accustomed to periodic submergence, whilst the effect of prolonged flooding on the animals is more difficult to predict Certainly the premature introduction of brown trout to the area by the Inland Fisheries Commission will increase the risk of extinction to certain species, and he sooner the water level is lowered the better the chances of survival.
However, in our view, the major issue is neither the fate nor the status of the endemic species, important though they are. It is the wilderness and recreation aspects of the area as a national park.
To put the matter in better perspective, the degree of damage may be roughly compared with that from a bushfire sweeping through the area. And although he appearance may well be marred to some extent for perhaps several years as a result of the flood, we regard the argument that it is therefore not worth saving as being essentially a short-sighted and selfish one. We should be thinking of the generations to come. (A detailed account is given in Dr P.S. Lake's submission.)"
This prognosis from the LPAC was borne out by the expert evidence adduced before us. particularly that of Dr P.S. Lake. Professor W.D. Jackson. Dr lan Bayly, and Mr Bruce C. Jones: see further details in the Interim Report.
Of course, it is no use pretending that some things will not have changed. quite apart from the mud flats of the Serpentine impoundment.
Most importantly. there is the new road. To many it is an unsightly gash cut through the wilderness. But time will heal the wound; the landscape will come to accept it, in time. and it is of course in many ways, to many categories of people, including bushwalkers, a boon. The road now brings the walker to a point only six miles walking distance from Lake Pedder -near enough. but not too near, (for most of those who love Pedder would dread, we think with good reason, the thought of a road brought any nearer). Pedder is, and should be, a reward for those prepared to make this effort. For those who cannot there are always the light aeroplanes landing on the beach itself in summer months.
It is not for us to express a view on the idea of an extension of the road to the west coast. Suffice it to say that lovers of wilderness, such as Dr Mosley, are strongly opposed to the idea. This will be a matter for very deep consideration, having regard to all relevant factors, should the time come for decision. Meantime. a full. free and open discussion of all plans, and the reasons behind them, is much to be desired, and should be promoted, lest any decision be the subject of further acrimonious disputes between men and women who should be able to hear and appreciate other points of view. and to cooperate together in the best interests of Tasmania and, for that matter. Australia generally, which has a vital interest in all her States, and particularly any part of any one of them having a true national importance. (See further as to this, later.)
Pedder can be saved. And Pedder could and would, according to the best opinions, be or become very much as it always was. The magic feel of Pedder would return, only partially diminished, if at all, for those who love it now and many hundreds of thousands of people. young and old, who would learn to love it in the future.
This is a goal worth striving for, despite all that has gone before.
I have already stated, at an earlier stage in these reasons, that Lake Pedder and a surrounding area were gazetted in 1 955 as a scenic reserve under the name "Lake Pedder National Park" pursuant to the provisions of the Tasmanian Scenery Preservation Act. 1915.
It is desirable, at this stage, to deal in more depth with the history of Lake Pedder as a National Park and also to make some more general observations on the concepts of National Parks and "wilderness areas"
It will place the matter in better perspective, perhaps, if one deals with these latter subjects first.
As technology advances, and more and more of the world's surface becomes "developed"; as life becomes more complicated and more and more of its people become grouped together in great conurbations, with their attendant pollution, noise, and strain; as man is propelled into the future at an ever-increasing rate, with the attendant "future shock"; so he comes to crave. more and more, the peace, the calm, the challenge, the spiritual renewal, the re-creation, which is to be found in wide primitive areas relatively unaffected by man, or man-made things and works the so-called "wilderness areas''
In a submission put forward by the Australian Mountaineering Council wilderness was defined as "large undeveloped wild areas, extending beyond roads and developments for permanent occupancy, where man can experience solitude, quiet beauty, majestic scenery, a sense of adventure and feeling of remoteness from modern civilisation." The submission went on to say that Tasmania's South West and in particular the Lake Pedder region of S.W. Tasmania "qualifies as an exceptional wilderness tract More significantly, it is one of he few remaining wilderness tracts still remaining in Australia, and in the opinion of this Council it is he most outstanding. The thought that the country can never go wild again is positively appalling, it has resulted in this action: hat all over the world forested and scenic areas have been set apart for he recreation purposes of mankind, where he can rid himself of the shackles of ordered existence. Hence the great national parks. But more significant than this is the demand for really 'primitive areas' -great portions of huge national parks wherein no roads may be constructed, no buildings erected, and no fences or other 'improvements' are allowed. To lose themselves for a while in such roadless, primitive areas, to 'go bush' in the mountains, is he great endeavour of countless thousands of human beings. More and more people want back again the forested and mountainous wilderness which has been lost. The movement is not merely a passing phase. The more complicated existence becomes, he more necessary it is to have this wonderful palliative handy to preserve he natural balance of minds, strengthen ordinary, comradely human nature, and to preserve for the human race hat connection with things natural and wholesome which is now more than ever necessary because of our remarkably artificial urban environment."
Unfortunately the supply of these wilderness areas is very limited and constantly decreasing, despite man's increasing need. It is all too easy for Governments and people, faced with constant demands for development or exploitation, to allow them to be whittled away, a piece at a time, until there is little, if anything, left. Reviewed piecemeal each decision seems inevitable, or right enough, but the end result may be the loss of a priceless asset, perhaps much more to be valued than the fruits, often very temporary, of the various uses to which the land has been put.
It is urgently necessary, therefore, for all Governments, particularly in countries fortunate enough still to retain such areas, to look ahead, and decide on their preservation in appropriate cases by a deliberate and irrevocable act of dedication, lest a series of piecemeal decisions should eventually destroy them.
Such areas may serve a variety of purposes, depending on their nature. A primary purpose will be to serve the spiritual and recreational needs of man. Careful thought needs to be given to the nature of the purposes to be served and how those purposes can best be accomplished in the particular area in question. In some areas it will be possible to provide road access. In other cases it may be advisable not to do so, in order to maintain the wilderness character. Wilderness affords to many people a kind of enjoyment for which there is no substitute. Some sacrifices may need to be made in order to pre serve sufficient areas in a wild state for the increasing number of people who are craving that kind of escape from the pressures of modern Iiving and the characteristic sights, sounds and smells of modern civilisation.
There is another important matter also, and that is the matter of the scientific function and value of National Parks.
Much has already been written on the scientific value of Lake Pedder, its endemic species (that is, unique to the Pedder area), and so on, in the book Lake Pedder, in the Pedder Papers, and elsewhere, and of course it is dealt with in our joint Interim Report. I shall therefore relate what I have to say on this matter to the scientific value of Pedder as part of a National Park, an aspect which has not been particularly emphasised in the joint Report. Dr lan Bayly gave extremely helpful and important evidence on this aspect, to which we can scarcely do justice in a brief summary. The transcript of that evidence, like that of all other witnesses who gave evidence in open session, will be available for perusal by persons interested. Dr Bayly emphasised "two functions of National Parks which seem not to have been adequately appreciated ............ and I am referring to the concept of National Parks as reference areas, and as areas for the preservation of biological and genetic diversity."
As to the first matter, Dr Bayly emphasised that unless we are left with some relatively untouched reference areas as a kind of "base line" it is "very difficult, if nor impossible, to see the precise nature of the changes (brought by man and also the rate at which they are proceeding".
And as to the second matter, Dr Bayly said that "another important function of National Parks is to preserve diversity, and this may be used in two senses, firstly, the preservation of different plant and animal species, and secondly, the preservation of genetic diversity within a species. " The witness went on to explain the importance to man of preserving this diversity, and the possible adverse consequences of "narrowing the generic base" and thus "restricting the gene pool" -something which, in the words of Sir Otto Frankel, a world authority, may turn out to be "an irreparable loss to future generations ..... Cherish variation (Sir Otto had said), for without it life will perish".
Comparable evidence from another point of view was given by Mr Bruce C. Jones,29 who spoke to us as a geologist and lover of the Pedder area. Mr Jones expressed the view that the Lake Pedder area was rightly declared a National Park not only for its aesthetic value. but also because of what he called "an intuitive appreciation of the effect produced by the sum total of its physical attributes." In Mr Jones' view, "a small number of independent geological and climatic factors had combined in a specific and highly unusual arrangement in space in a particular sequence to create the terrain centred on Pedder."
Like the complement of its flora and fauna, any landscape, Mr Jones says, has its intrinsic value in terms of scientific interest, namely:--its process of evolution in geological time (its inherent and distinctive properties and potential); -its comparative rarity (analogous to biological endemism). -its reference quality (analogous to the biological gene pool); -its natural limitations and non-renewable resources.
In Mr Jones' view Lake Pedder and the surrounding area, because of its unique history and configuration, is eminently suitable for preservation as a National Park.
It would be impossible, in the writer's view, to exaggerate the importance and value to our Enquiry of the evidence of these two witnesses on these matters, supported as they were by other scientific evidence, and the views of Dr W. D. Williams of this Committee, which his fellow Committee members do not ignore.
This evidence makes a strong case on scientific grounds for the preservation of Lake Pedder and environs, as nearly as possible in their natural state, as part of a National Park, which strongly reinforces the argument made or! other grounds.
Thus it is argued that Lake Pedder not only was a National Park, so declared, but that it was, and is, for a variety of reasons, eminently suitable so to be declared and preserved. Indeed there are many to argue that not only Lake Pedder and the surrounding area, but the whole of Tasmania's South-West, is eminently suitable so to be declared, and preserved inviolate.
It is time to look back now and to ascertain more closely how and in what circumstances Lake Pedder was declared a National Park, for this will assist us in gauging the strength of the argument that Lake Pedder should not have been flooded for that reason, (which many think to be the strongest argument of all against the inundation).
The Scenery Preservation Act, 1915, set up a Scenery Preservation Board which at the time relevant to this Inquiry came to consist of the Secretary of Lands as Chairman, and senior officers of each of them, the Public Works Department, the Tasmanian Tourist and Immigration Department, the Forestry Department, the Police Department and a senior officer of the Hydro-Electric Commission (in actual fact, Sir Allan Knight), and three other appointed members.
The Act authorised the Board to recommend which land should be "permanently reserved" (my emphasis) as scenic or historic reserves, and provided that where the land so recommended to be reserved was Crown Land the Governor might by proclamation declare the same to be a reserve under the Act. The Act did not use the phrase "national park" but a decision was made in 1946 so to name all major scenic reserves. (and Lake Pedder was subsequently so named). Undoubtedly this would have served to strengthen in the public mind the impression of permanence in such cases.
However by an amendment introduced in 1934 the Act was amended to provide that a reservation might be revoked upon a resolution of both Houses of Parliament. but only where the reserve is "no longer suitable for scenic purposes". But the general intention of permanent reservation was preserved. The phrase "permanently reserved" remained in S.6, and S. 15 still remained also, to make it an offence for any person to "interfere with such land, or damage any historic or scenic features thereof". Quite obviously the intentional inundation of land included in a National Park (which in law would include a lake within its boundaries), would have been an of fence against the Act unless of course, expressly authorised by Parliament. (which necessarily retained the legal power to do so, whatever the Scenery Preservation Act might say, and whatever arguments might arise as to the propriety of so doing).
In 1954 the Hobart Walking Club suggested that Lake Pedder should be set aside as a National Park under the Scenery Preservation Act. Significantly, the area suggested by the Club would have taken in a long stretch of the Serpentine, to a point close to its junction with the Gordon River, as well as Lake Pedder. We were supplied with copies of the relevant minutes of the Scenery Preservation Board meetings and of certain relevant correspondence.
It appears that the request made by the Hobart Walking Club was first discussed at a meeting of the Board held on the 19th February, 1954. The Minutes as supplied to us might best be allowed to speak for themselves:--
Scenery Preservation Board
Lake Pedder, National Park
Minutes, February 19th, 1954.
Lake Pedder, Proposed Reserve: The Hobart Walking Club wrote (10/2/54) requesting that an area about Lake Pedder, defined by lines joining Mt. Solitary, Mt. Giblin and Mt. Sprent, be proclaimed a scenic reserve.
After discussion, it was left to the Secretary to endeavour to arrange for Mr Lloyd Jones to screen some of his coloured slides of the proposed area at a meeting of the Board.
Minutes, March 19th, 1954.
Lake Pedder, Proposed Reserve: A number of coloured slides showing the country round Lake Pedder and the lake itself were screened by Mr Lloyd Jones, who stated he was very interested In ensuring Protection for the vegetation round the lake now being destroyed by indiscriminate firing.
The question of the area to be reserved was the subject of discussion. Mr Knight stated that the Hydro-Electric Commission might build a dam near the junction of the Gordon and Serpentine Rivers. This would probably flood a good part of the valley of the Serpentine, which was chiefly buttongrass, but the Commission could be criticised for having flooded a scenic reserve. Care should thus be exercised in fixing the boundaries of the proposed reserve. In creating scenic reserves in future an effort should be made to reconcile the needs of forestry development and power resources.
Moved by Mr Knight, seconded by Mr Payne, that a report be submitted by a sub-committee, consisting of Mr Thwaites and the Secretary. regarding the proposed boundaries of the reserve.
Carried.
Minutes, May 3rd, 1954
Proposed Reserve, Lake Pedder: Mr Thwaites submitted a sketch showing proposed boundaries of a reserve to embrace Lake Pedder and part of the Frankland Range. Beginning at the eastern end of Mt. Solitary, the boundary would run north-westerly to Buckey's Bluff, thence westerly to Mt. Giblin, then south to Double Peak, thence south-easterly to Mt. Giblin, then back to the point of commencement. The reserve would embrace a small section of the Serpentine Valley and the best part of the Frankland Range. as well as Mt. Solitary. On Buckey's Bluff the rare yellow Hewardia occurred.
At the Chairman's suggestion, it was agreed, on the motion of Mr. Smithies, seconded by Mr Thomas, to submit copies of the sketch of the proposed reserve to the Forestry Commission, Hydro-Electric Commission and Mines Department for comment.
Minutes. June 25th, 1954.
Lake Pedder, Proposed Reserve: The Chairman submitted new plans that had been prepared, and these would be referred to the Forestry, Hydro Electric and Mines Departments for their comments.
Minutes, July 30th, 1954
Lake Pedder, Proposed Reserve: Two reports still awaited.
Minutes, August 27th, 1954.
Lake Pedder Reserve: Letters read from the Mines, Forestry and Hydro-Electric Departments, none of which offered objections. Resolved that the Reserve be proclaimed under the Scenery Preservation Act.
Minutes, January 14th, 1955.
Lake Pedder Reserve: Mr Smithies moved, Mr Thwaites seconded, that the new reserve at Lake Pedder be named the "Lake Pedder National Park" and the Nomenclature Board be asked to approve of this.
Carried.
Pursuant to those resolutions an area of some 59,000 acres, including Lake Pedder, Lake Maria and a substantial length of the Serpentine was proclaimed as a scenic reserve on the 8th March, 1955.
In the final result the north-western boundary suggested by the Hobart Walking Club was re-positioned, apparently in deference to Mr Knight's suggestion that care should be exercised in fixing the boundaries, having regard to the Hydro-Electric Commission's possible future plans, and that an effort should be made in creating scenic reserves to reconcile the needs of the different land use interests.
Care was exercised, so it seems, in answer to this plea, for the boundaries as finally determined left "only a small section of the Serpentine Valley" within the Park. Unfortunately this exercise in "taking care" was to be of no lasting value, as we shall see.
In reply to a letter asking for its comments on the latest sketch plans, the HEC replied by letter dated the 13th July, 1954 as follows-
"We are in receipt of your letter of 8th July, 1954, and have given this our attention.
There are two possible hydro developments in this area -each involving a dam on the Serpentine River. At this time levels are unknown and the whole is only classed as a possible development it could, however, bring the water of the reservoir within the boundaries of the proposed reserve.
The Commission does not consider this development to be likely within the next 20 years and therefore raises no objection to the proclamation of the reserve as proposed in your letter of 8th July."
What is notable is that the HEC contemplated that waters of the possible reservoir might still come within the boundaries of the proposed reserve, even given the final boundaries, but equally clearly (from the minutes and the letter) did not contemplate either the flooding of Lake Pedder, or the damming of the Huon. Most significantly, also, there is the passage in the Minutes quoting Mr Knight as saying that the possible dam near the junction of the Gordon and Serpentine Rivers "would probably flood a good part of the valley of the Serpentine, (my emphasis), which was chiefly buttongrass." It is scarcely conceivable that Mr Knight would not have said more if he had had any idea, at that time, of a possible flooding of Lake Pedder, or the damming of the Huon, which traverses the eastern portion of the Park as proclaimed in 1955. The HEC letter, cited above, also confirms this view. In actual fact the Serpentine storage which was subsequently considered by the HEC as an alternative to the flooding of Pedder extended only into the western part of the Park, well downstream from Lake Pedder.
It has also been pointed out that a useful comparison is afforded by the fate of a proposal to create a scenic reserve on the Arthur River which was considered by the Board contemporaneously with its consideration of the Pedder proposal. In that case the proposal was dropped because of HEC and Forestry Commission opposition. It is scarcely conceivable that the same fate would not have befallen the Pedder proposal if there had been any thought then that a substantial conflict might occur. It seems fairly clear, in the light of these considerations, that the flooding of Pedder was an afterthought resulting from later planning, which was translated into reality with little or no regard for the earlier "permanent reservation" of Lake Pedder and its environs, because of their scenic value, which had been effected with full HEC approval, after careful consideration, some seventeen years earlier.
"I think it gives people a great sense of uneasiness if national parks are used for large scale mining or hydro-electric schemes. One needs the feeling that one can return to a place and that one's children and grandchildren can (do so also), I believe." So said Mrs Tarrant, Honours graduate in English and History, housewife, author of a recent book on conservation, one of a long procession of splendid witnesses, from many of whom one would have wished to quote far more extensively on this and so many other matters concerning Lake Pedder.
At a much later stage, more or less contemporaneously with the decision to flood Lake Pedder and environs, it was decided to enlarge the area of the National Park, under the new name of South-West National Park, much of which was to be flooded by the new impoundment. The enlargement of the Park was to be welcomed in itself, but conservationists could well ask how secure the new Park might be, having regard to the fate of the old. The area was enlarged, it is true, but the natural Lake Pedder, which had given it so much of its meaning -the eye, the jewel, the key, the gate way, the Mecca, the natural base camp, or however one might regard it, this had been sacrificed in the transition. Not only the lake area itself, but almost half the area of the original Lake Pedder National Park was either submerged or, (in the case of Mount Solitary), transformed into an island in the new impoundment.
It might be pointed out, at this stage, that the various arguments for the retention of the Pedder complex in its natural state -the argument on aesthetic grounds, or because of tourist appeal, or recreational value, like the arguments which turn on scientific value, or the status of Pedder as a National Park are not really separate and discrete; each is connected with the other, and is part of a closely interrelated complex of factors which may be use fully considered separately, for convenience, but must ultimately be brought together into a single entity and unity if we are really to understand and appreciate the importance and value of Pedder to Australia and the world. Even outwardly unrelated factors, such as aesthetic and scientific values respectively, may nonetheless be the product, to some extent, of a common cause -the uniqueness and the complexity of Lake Pedder. It is possible that the nature of the aesthetic emotion is closely related in ways we do not yet understand to man's instinctive or intuitive knowledge and appreciation of nature, extending back into a remote past.30 If this is so
we should not be surprised if a unique and complex environment such as Pedder should produce, (as it were coincidentally, but perhaps quite predictably), features of great scientific interest as well as the highest aesthetic appeal.
Other inter-relationships between the various factors involved could be explored, but perhaps it is most helpful in this regard to content ourselves with the observation that in this idea of Lake Pedder and its environs as a National Park we may find the single unifying concept to bring together all the values and the issues which have been debated in the Pedder controversy. For as we have seen the scientific value and aesthetic appeal of Pedder are part of the very reasons why the Pedder complex was declared a National Park, and why it should remain so, as nearly as may be in its natural state. Its tourist appeal and the peace and calm, the challenge and sense of spiritual renewal associated with wilderness areas, are equally part of the reasons for its inviolability as a National Park. Seen in this way the status of Lake Pedder as a National Park is not to be regarded as a mere campaigning slogan: it is not entirely because it was declared as such, but rather that it was so eminently suitable so to be declared and preserved that its inundation is such a tragedy. Yet the declaration itself was important also, for it brings in the powerful argument based on principle: not merely the narrow arguments "once a National Park always a National Park", or "a National Park should remain inviolable", but also the broader consideration to which we adverted earlier, that there will be no chance of preserving areas suitable as National Parks in wilderness areas unless such declarations and dedications are made well in advance, and then firmly respected and adhered to lest shorter-term considerations should whittle them away.
The circumstances of this case highlight the possible need for a system of truly national parks under the control of the Australian Parliament and Government. As it is, the fate of an area of great importance to the nation has been and will be decided in the ultimate analysis by the Parliament and Government of Tasmania alone. Yet the fate of Pedder is important to the people of, say, Oueensland, just as the fate of the Great Barrier Reef or Ayers Rock is important to the people of Tasmania.
Faced with demands on an area for other uses involving the making and saving of money, a single State may consider itself not able or willing to meet the cost involved, (as in this case), of preserving such an asset, whilst the people of Australia as a whole may yet be ready and willing to do so. A somewhat similar issue arising between the Australian and the Oueensland Governments led, a few years ago, to the appointment of a Royal Commission to enquire into the future of the Great Barrier Reef, which was threatened by oil exploration.
Or again, even where an area such as the South-West is set aside by a State as a National Park, the State may not be able to provide adequate funds for its care, control and management. During the whole period since the declaration of the Lake Pedder National Park, in 1955. the State of Tasmania has never found itself able to employ even a single ranger despite the obvious need. Only recently, in the last year, has a beginning been made with the preparation of a proper management plan, upon which one planner is now engaged, but there is still not a single man in the field. This was established in evidence before us by the evidence of Mr Murrell, Director and Mr Frank Bolt, Planning Officer, both of the Tasmanian National Parks and Wildlife Service, which is still in its early days.
The preparation and administration of such a management plan for the Park is an urgent necessity, and there is a real need, as part of such administration, for the employment of a number of rangers. Valuable evidence was given us in this regard both by the gentlemen we have mentioned and by Mr Ron Brown, who as an enthusiastic walker, President of the South-West Committee, and former member of the Tasmanian Legislative Council has played a major part in the dedication of the South-West as a National Park.
Both Mr Brown and Dr Mosley, and several other expert witnesses, spoke in favour of further significant extensions of the boundaries of the South-West National Park. Amongst many other important matters for consideration in relation to the future of the Park will be the pros and cons of a road through to Port Davey, and possible Hydro-Electric Commission plans for the building of further dams to utilise the waters of the rivers of the South-West, such as the Olga, the Franklin, the Denison, the King, the Lower Gordon and the Davey, and the possible impact of these further developments on the present or future South-West National Park.
Sir Garfield Barwick has spoken of the "lack of any national power to protect what are in truth national assets". The history of this matter to date would certainly provide good grounds for the provision of Australian Government funds and a degree of Australian Government involvement, at the least, if these large matters involving the Pedder complex and other areas of national importance are to be properly dealt with in the broadest context, and with adequate funds and the necessary expertise, on behalf of the people of Australia. One would not doubt that there are or will be similar problems in other States, in which Tasmania would have a reciprocal interest.
Whether it is necessary or desirable that there should be some enlargement of the powers of the Australian Parliament in order to effectuate such purposes, or whether the Australian Parliament already possesses the necessary power to acquire and administer such areas as National Parks are questions we shall discuss in Part II of our Report. It suffices to say, for the moment, that it seems unlikely that any such power, if it exists, could or would be exercised in this case in time to save Lake Pedder. If the Lake is to be saved, therefore, or to be granted a reprieve, it can only be by the action of the Government and Parliament of Tasmania, following a possible decision by the Australian Government to meet the cost involved: as to these matters, see the final section of those reasons, under the heading. "How Lake Pedder Shall Be Saved."