16.jpgIt was put to the Committee that Lake Pedder and its immediate surrounds were an important part of the wilderness area in south west Tasmania, which is a major national asset.
The word "wilderness" is used to describe an area generally unaffected by man and man-made works which provides outstanding opportunities 15
for the enjoyment of primitive and unconfined types of recreation. It was put to us that, with the increasing growth of cities, it is becoming increasingly recognised that a whole range of recreation facilities must be provided. Green belts near cities are one part of these facilities; developed parts of National Parks for family outings are another; wilderness areas offering distinctive benefits are also necessary.
The Committee accepts that provision of wilderness areas is important in highly urbanised communities, such as Australia, and notes that the Government in New South Wales is moving to restore five areas of about 200.000 acres in the Mt Kosciusko National Park to a wilderness state.
In general, unless some positive steps are taken, the supply of wilderness areas tends to decrease constantly as development occurs and the remaining areas become more sought after. Thus as the need for wilderness increases, its availability decreases. It is all too easy for governments and people, faced with constant demands for development, to allow the wilderness to be whittled away a piece at a time until there is little, if anything, left.
This process is well advanced on the mainland of Australia. In evidence to the Committee, Dr Mosley of the Australian Conservation Foundation suggested that Victoria had a wilderness area of some 300,000 acres in the Mallacoota area. Subsequently Dr Mosley updated his studies of this area and discovered that it had, in fact, been subject to considerable development with the building of fire-control and other access roads. Dr Mosley provided the Committee with a map showing areas in south east Australia which are more than three miles from a road and hence potentially definable as wilderness (Fig 4). In this part of the mainland, the largest such area is about ten miles square, some 64.000 acres. This is trivial as a wilderness area.
By contrast, the south west of Tasmania has an area approaching two million acres of potential wilderness, which is widely acclaimed as outstanding. Sir Edmund Hillary, for one, is quoted as calling south west Tasmania "one of the last great wilderness areas in he world."
Numerous witnesses made the point that this part of Tasmania has, for many years, served bushwalkers from the mainland. We received submissions from bushwalking groups in Victoria, South Australia, Canberra, New South Wales and Oueensland to support the claims made.
16.jpg
The Committee accepts that the wilderness area is outstanding and that it is a national asset to meet a need for people living outside Tasmania, as well as Tasmanians.
We next turned our attention to examining what effect the loss of Pedder will have on the wilderness.
Various witnesses described Pedder in terms such as "a natural base camp", "the Mecca of the south west". From our investigations, we understand that there were three base camp areas in the south west -Pedder, Port Davey and the New River Lagoon/Precipitous Bluff area. It is the normal practice of bush walkers to establish in one of these areas and to make excursions in various directions from the base. A diagram (Fig. 5) shows what appear to have been the more general routes for those excursions. It can be clearly seen that the loss of Pedder and its surrounds removed not only a base camp area but also many of the excursion routes from this camp.
On the broader scale, it is relevant to note that the wilderness area has been considerably diminished over the last decade -first by the construction of the access roads to Strathgordon and Scotts Peak, now by the flooding of Pedder. A possible mining development in the vicinity of Precipitous Bluff, the second of the three base camp areas, threatens to further reduce the size of the south west wilderness.
The scientific interest in Lake Pedder appear to have three components.
First, as the lake has been essentially free from human impact it provided a reference point relative to which scientists could assess and evaluate changes in other lakes subject to human interference. The results from such studies are of particular relevance to programs attempting to control the pollution of large bodies of water. Lake Pedder's individual qualities of shallowness and moderate size and its location in a temperate region made it particularly valuable and it was internationally recognised on this basis. It was included in a listing of some 600 inland water bodies round the world which are judged to be worthy of, and proposed for, conservation. The listing was sponsored by the International Biological Programme and the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources.
Secondly, as a lake with somewhat extreme conditions for aquatic life (acidic water, high renewal rates, etc) it existed as a simple and discrete ecosystem. An ecosystem is an area which is essentially self-contained and in which there is a functional relationship between the living and the non-living components. That is, it is an area where the life style of the animals is adapted to suit the plant life and the general physical conditions. Ecosystems which are simple and self-contained are held in high value as study areas by ecologists interested in questions such as the relation between diversity and stability in nature, the effect of ecosystem simplification, and so on. For example, there is a danger that as large areas are given over to the production of one crop, an unstable situation can arise, perhaps with disease spreading rapidly. Information from studies in these areas may have important consequences for mankind because irreversible changes to ecosystems may threaten man's ultimate survival.
Thirdly, as the probable remnant of a much larger former lake, it contained a number of species not known elsewhere. Some twenty species are claimed as having been endemic, that is, found nowhere else. Many of these were unusual or of significant biological interest; none had been intensively studied in the field prior to inundation. The very existence of 20 endemic species indicates that the lake acted as the repository for a unique assemblage of species otherwise now extinct.
It was pointed out to the Committee that the importance of preserving so many unique species should not be undervalued, nor should the importance be thought of as applicable in a scientific sense only; it was stressed that there are many direct advantages to man in preserving the highest degree of natural variation. Dr Bayly, one expert witness, drew our attention to the work of Sir Otto Frankel, a world authority on plant breeding and former Chief of the CSIRO Division of Plant Industry. Sir Otto has had this to say about the increasing rate of destruction of natural variation: "..... now throughout the biosphere (i.e. he living world), we are faced with a mounting loss of variation. This threatens the quality of human life, and he continuing existence of other living beings. I shah argue that variation needs defending if life as we know it is to survive.": Sir Otto has strongly emphasised the importance to plant breeders of the preservation of wild plants as a valuable potential breeding resource and noted that such preservation can only be ensured by the conservation of natural habitats; botanical gardens, he notes, can do no more than provide for a relatively short-term survival of wild species.
We accept the evidence that Lake Pedder was of significant international scientific interest and importance.
Dr Williams, alone of this Committee, is fortunate enough to have seen Lake Pedder. But neither he nor any other member of the Committee has any formal qualifications to judge the beauty of the lake. Throughout the enquiry, we have sought on all matters to obtain authoritative opinions. Many of our witnesses were professionally involved in some field of artistic endeavour painters, photographers, art teachers, a psychologist, and an actress, among others and we are prepared to accept their submissions as authoritative in this field.
An interesting and, perhaps, obvious point from their evidence is that the lake cannot be considered in isolation. All such witnesses spoke of the lake and its environs the lake itself, the immense beach, the button grass, the meandering Serpentine River, the Maria Lakes complex, the backdrop of the Frankland Range, and so on. But the lake itself was undoubtedly the focus.
Without exception, their evidence was definite: the lake and its environs were incomparably beautiful.
Two quotes may convey something of the feelings presented to the Committee:
"....one of the most moving spectacles of nature (Lake Pedder) is being strangled by blind people, unaware, unmoved....."
(Max Angus, Artist)
"....a very beautiful and unique natural feature is being devastated."
(Geoff Parr, Lecturer in Art)
We note also that many witnesses who were primarily concerned with other matters had clearly been moved by the appearance of the lake. Dr Bayly, who gave evidence as a zoologist, also had this to say:
"There seems to be something about the Australian ethos that 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 he beauty they saw and felt I have visited Lake Pedder on three occasions to carry our scientific research, and on each occasion I have been deeply moved by the beauty of the area. To me he most compelling reason why Lake Pedder should be saved from destruction is hat 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....."
A psychologist, Dr Keil, said:
"It is likely that Lake Pedder provided such (spiritual experiences for many people and perhaps it is this kind of experience more than arguments about scientific and/or potential economic loss which, in my view, makes the inundation such a tragic event, comparable with the destruction of a world famous church or temple."
The Committee was enabled to see a film about the lake, together with many slides and photographs, which helped us to gain an understanding of the evidence presented to us.
We are convinced that Lake Pedder was, indeed, a place of outstanding beauty.
Another relevant factor in the case for saving the lake is the increasing community awareness of matters affecting the environment, reflecting an increasing questioning of former ideas that economic development was a prime and unchallengeable goal of mankind.
The changing climate of opinion cuts across party political lines and is reflected in the policy statements of various political parties:
".....But material welfare is not the sole criterion of progress. We need growth and prosperity and job opportunities for our young people and migrants but nor at any price. More and more the community, and especially its youth, is concerned with the kind of life which they and their children can enjoy, and he kind of surroundings in which they can live. Our concern, therefore, is for total welfare nor merely material welfare for human values and the quality of he environment into which a// development must fit...."
(Policy speech, Liberal Party, Victoria, 1973)
"Our natural heritage should not be allowed to be wasted but should be fostered and our natural landscapes be preserved for the sake of social, cultural, educational and scientific purposes as well as for Australia's future tourist potential. "
(Federal Labor Party platform)
"In Australia today we live in an affluent, liberal society where we are seeking standards of excellence in all things. Basic to this is a healthy environment in which we can develop a quality of life to satisfy our needs in all fields of human endeavour. It is essential, therefore, that we preserve the gifts nature has given us and That we keep our environment as free as possible from man-made contamination. It is a fact of recent history hat while the technological revolution of he '60s and the '70s has brought great benefits in material good living, in national progress and in economic well-being, it has also had by-products which are despoiling our land and polluting the air and the water around us."
(Federal Liberal Party pamphlet "Protecting Our Environment" 1972)
"Labor shares he mounting concern about conservation and the environment Tasmania is a unique island. We therefore have a particular responsibility to preserve our heritage."
(Policy speech. Labor Party, Tasmania. 1972)
We accept that there has been a significant change in public and political attitudes to environmental issues since the decision to flood Lake Pedder was made by the Parliament of Tasmania in 1967.
The case for retaining the present scheme without alteration was not argued to any significant degree by witnesses before us since the major protagonists (the Government of Tasmania and the HEC) eventually declined to do so, apparently on the basis that, in their view, all relevant factors relating to the scheme, including alternatives, had previously been adequately considered and the decision to flood the lake had been lawfully derived and achieved. Those witnesses who did speak in favour of the present scheme generally spoke of particular aspects only rather than of the scheme as a whole.
Despite this lack of presentation, we consider that available material allows construction of the case for unaltered retention; it appears to include the following main elements:
1. Cost
Modification of the current scheme will involve additional cost. It has been the view of successive Tasmanian Governments that the additional cost is beyond Tasmania's resources. For example, a letter dated 5 October 1971 from the Premier (Mr Bethune) to the Director of the Australian Conservation Foundation included:
"There may be more than one feasible alternative, there may be more than one way of assessing the economics, but one fact is inescapable and that is that all alternatives are too costly to be acceptable to my Government and this State."
The question of cost is certainly central to the whole issue. On the one hand, it is argued that Tasmania cannot afford the extra cost; on the other hand, it is argued that the extra cost is worth incurring to save an asset which is alleged to have been undervalued.
There are other factors put forward in favour of retaining the current scheme:
2. The idea that the potential is there and therefore should be exploited.
This Committee is certainly not of the opinion that development should be stopped. However, equally we are not of the opinion that potential power sources should be developed regardless of the cost in terms of adverse environmental effects.
In short, we reject any implication that resources should be developed at no matter what cost. We accept that development should proceed if benefit / cost relationships are appropriate. In our view, then, this point comes back to the one of cost, and proper evaluation.
3. The point that hydro power causes less pollution than alternatives, particularly thermal.
This is a valid point in favour of the present scheme. We accept that thermal stations do cause air pollution and that hydro stations are effectively pollution-free in their operation. However, the extent of the additional pollution likely to arise from modifications to the Gordon River Scheme should be evaluated to allow the matter to be seen in proper perspective. There may be extra running of the Bell Bay stations if an alternative were adopted, but this would occur only until the Pieman scheme were operational. In the long term, any shortfall of output from the Gordon will be made good from new hydro schemes rather than thermal schemes, until the economic hydro potential is all developed. Secondly, the amount of shortfall from the alternative which drops the Huon water, thus restoring Lake Pedder, is only about one-sixth of the output of one of the Bell Bay stations.
In the present circumstances this factor appears to be relatively insignificant.
4. There have been implications that, if the Gordon power is not fully developed, the State's economic development will be hindered, with a consequential possibility of unemployment.
In our assessment, adoption of the moratorium proposal or an alternative scheme will not hinder the State's development. The various schemes do involve a loss of energy but, in our assessment, capacity will be available to meet likely demand and extra capacity could be provided, if needed, to meet unforeseen demands.
In the short term, adoption of the moratorium proposal, discussed-later, could provide employment opportunities by allowing additional work on removing timber from the Gordon valley. Adoption of an alternative scheme would also provide employment opportunities on the associated capital works.
5. It has been suggested that the Serpentine/Huon impoundment would provide a recreational resource for boating and fishing.
The claims for boating and fishing have been questioned during the hearings. We understand that Pedder was considered dangerous because of unpredictable weather changes. Indeed, three HEC employees drowned in it. It appears that the larger impoundment would develop larger waves and be at least as dangerous, because there is little shelter. The HEC has acknowledges this point by restricting boating to craft over 20 feet.
The development of a rich fishing resource also appears unlikely, first because Tasmanian fishermen apparently normally fish from small boats which will be limited as described above, and secondly because the opinion of scientists appears agreed that the conditions in the impoundment, particularly the acidic water, will not encourage strong growth of fish. 6. A final point made in favour of the current scheme is that the new impoundment will be comparable in beauty with the old Lake Pedder.
The Committee was shown photographs of reflections on the impoundment, and these were indeed remarkable. We wondered how often these might be seen, given the general reputation of the weather in the area. However, they did appear impressive.
Our artist witnesses, the professionals in aesthetics, were divided in their opinions about the new lake. Some said it would be impressive, others said not. All, however agreed that the old lake was incomparably superior to its man made successor.
".....compared with the original setting it the impoundment will remain second-rate. It will bear he mark of man no matter how careful or considerate the disguise."
(Max Angus, artist)
".....aesthetically, here is nothing for me now in these places (Great Lake Dam) and it will be the same with Lake Pedder."
(Patricia Giles, artist)
Q.
"Are you saying that the untouched lake was capable of giving an intensity of experience which will presumably not be given by the new lake)"
A.
"I think this is most likely to be the case.
(Dr Keil, psychologist)
Summarising, we consider that the case for retaining the current scheme without alteration rests essentially on the question of cost, and the argument boils down to the question:
Is the restoration of Lake Pedder worth the cost involved?
As previously noted, a number of witnesses argued that the decision to flood Lake Pedder had been in error and proposed that the Lake be restored by lowering the level of the Serpentine impoundment and adopting one of the modifications considered and rejected by the HEC.
The evidence put before us demonstrated clearly that the loss of Lake Pedder constituted an adverse consequence of the Middle Gordon Scheme. A strong case was made for a fresh consideration, even at this late stage, of alternatives that might lead to the alleviation of this adverse consequence.
The Committee accepted that the case for restoring the lake appeared worthy of consideration and accordingly explored the feasibility of the various modifications proposed.
Three principal alternatives have been discussed in the public controversy. These are:
Alternative 1:
to drop the level of the Serpentine impoundment below the outlet of Lake Pedder, and the level of the Huon impoundment below that of the Serpentine watershed, bring the Huon water by canal into Lake Pedder and thence down the Serpentine, and pump from the reduced Serpentine impoundment into Lake Gordon (Pig. 6, Canal A)
Alternative 2:
to drop the level of the Serpentine impoundment below the outlet of Lake Pedder, and the level of the Huon impoundment below that of the Serpentine watershed, divert the Huon water around Lake Pedder via a canal or flume, and pump from the reduced Serpentine impoundment into Lake Gordon Fig. 6, Canal B)
Alternative 3:
to drop the level of the Serpentine impoundment below the outlet of Lake Pedder and abandon the Huon storage altogether, pumping from the reduced Serpentine impoundment into Lake Gordon (Fig. 7)
The first of these alternatives has a serious drawback in that the flow of water through Lake Pedder would be greatly increased. The increased flow could lead to a permanent raising of the water level and a reduction in the width of the beach. This effect might be overcome by increasing the capacity of the outlet, which would involve engineering works in the Serpentine valley. Further engineering works would probably be necessary to protect the lake inlet. In the view of this Committee, this scheme is the least attractive alternative.
The second of these alternatives would allow the use of all the waters used in the present scheme. However, it does involve the possibility that the canal works would disfigure the surrounds of the lake to a degree which would be considered unacceptable. The moratorium proposal discussed below would provide an opportunity to undertake a detailed survey and preliminary design and, if appropriate, to construct experimental works in order to assess the aesthetic and economic acceptability of this alternative. The third alternative was generally favoured by witnesses on the grounds that it avoided the necessity for any engineering works in the vicinity of Lake Pedder. It has the disadvantage that it eliminates the contribution of the Huon catchment and reduces the average volume of water available for power generation by approximately 12 per cent. It has been suggested to the Committee that the effective loss of energy would be somewhat less than this percentage because of reduced evaporation losses from the smaller impoundment. We were unable to obtain definitive information on this point, but consider that the difference is not likely to be significant within the order of accuracy of the calculations made in this report.
In the opinion of this Committee, the alternative represents a feasible means for re storing Lake Pedder and warrants more detailed investigation.
A fourth alternative which has received little attention in the public controversy is to abandon the use of the Serpentine and Huon storages altogether. This alternative is environmentally and aesthetically the most satisfactory since it has the potential for restoring Lake Pedder and the Serpentine River to their former condition and avoids any visual disfigurement by engineering works or mudflats. On the other hand, it involves a reduction of 40 per cent in the average volume of water available for power generation. It may deserve consideration on the basis that the environmental and aesthetic advantages gained could offset the costs involved.
It is, perhaps, worth pointing out that none of these alternatives involves any modification to the Gordon River section of the scheme, which yields some 60 per cent of the water available for power generation and includes almost all of the very substantial storage capacity the scheme provides. It should be noted that this very large storage capacity represents perhaps the major advantage of the Scheme from the point of view of its role within the overall Tasmanian hydro electric system.
The costs and benefits associated with the alternatives outlined above cannot be assessed with accuracy on the basis of the limited data available to the Committee. Uncertainties exist in a number of areas. For example, the precise nature of the engineering works necessary to accomplish Alternatives 1 and 2 is not known, so that it is not possible to estimate the cost of capital works or their precise environmental or aesthetic effects. Equally, uncertainty exists as to the extent to which Lake Pedder might re cover from its present inundation should the water level be lowered in the near future. Again, the Committee is not able to obtain detailed information about the present rate of growth of power demand in Tasmania or the extent to which existing facilities are likely to be able to meet this demand should one or other of the alternatives involving a reduced energy output from the Gordon Scheme be adopted. It might be noted that the Committee was denied access to any detailed information about these matters available within the HEC.
For these and other reasons it was suggested to the Committee that there should be a moratorium period during which Lake Pedder wouId be, at least temporarily, restored by lowering the level of the Serpentine/Huon impoundment. The purpose of this moratorium would be to allow time to evaluate further and more precisely the benefits and costs of each proposed alternative scheme and to see how the area would recover. The length of the moratorium period was proposed as five years. It is anticipated that a shorter period perhaps as little as two years, might be sufficient.
In broad terms, adoption of the moratorium proposal would involve lowering the Serpentine impoundment to a level below that of Lake Pedder, and lowering the Huon impoundment to a level below that of the Serpentine/Huon watershed. There are gates on the Serpentine dam which allow a controlled outflow; the controllable outflow on the Huon is less than the average flow of the river, hence draining of this impoundment will involve the provision of some temporary control on the outflow. The possibility of a major flood overtopping the Serpentine/ Huon watershed and causing some flooding of Lake Pedder would have to be accepted.
Implicit in the moratorium proposal is the idea that the Lake might be reflooded in the event that any of the potential adverse consequences are judged to be unacceptable.
There are, therefore, certain points about the moratorium proposal that need further consideration, namely the implications for power supply and demand in Tasmania, and the possible additional generating costs involved. The next section of the Report explores these Issues.
