Ed,

Regarding the recent Independent anti-mining article and photograph, obviously the persons depicted are against mining within the Clarence catchment, on the basis that this watershed is somehow more valuable than others.

Whether that presumption is agreed to by those occupying other catchments is not known, but it’d be not unreasonable to presume that some dissension would be forthcoming, should such opinion be sought.

It’s not clear from what was stated, whether they also reject mining in its entirety, in which case they’d be advocating a return to total reliance on the only other two human resources, i.e. animal and vegetable.

It should be noted that many items in the photograph are the products of mining, as are their means of travel to the venue and the method by which they’ve chosen to publicise their cause.

Ray Smith, Iluka