Gone Fishing. Man Passes Up $5 Billion.
by Warren McLaren, Sydney on 07.26.07
If someone offered you $5 billion (AUD) for a bunch of rocks in the ground, do you reckon you’d say something like; nah, mate, thanks, but no thanks. Which is pretty much what Jeffrey Lee said to French energy company when they wanted to extract 14,000 tonnes of uranium from his ancestoral land, Koongarra, adjacent to Kakadu National Park in Australia’s Northern Territory. Australia is the world’s leading exporter of uranium, but that didn’t faze Jeffrey, who’s the sole remaining Djok clan member and senior custodian of the Koongarra uranium deposit. "I'm not interested in money. I've got a job; I can buy tucker; I can go fishing and hunting. That's all that matters to me."
A park ranger in nearby Kakadu he plans see the site added to that park, which is also listed as a World Heritage site under UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation). "Being part of the park will ensure that the traditional laws, customs, sites, bush tucker, trees, plants and water stay the same as when they were passed on to me by my father and great-grandfather," he said. Via ::The Sydney Morning Herald.
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- New Town in Canadian Wilderness by Philip Johnson
- Energy Star Labels Stripped from Five Fridge Models
- German Solar Company Offers GM €1 Billion
- Greyhound Australia to Begin Carbon Offset Program
Good on ya!
*applause*
I see his point from a heritage point of view, but as far as the global environment I don't know if it is the best approach he could take. Imagine how much good 4.9 billion (That gives him 100 million for his trouble) could do. I would argue it would dwarf any harm done by the extraction of the uranium (assuming the land isn't an endangered habitat).
Just a guess.
This man is my new hero!
Sure that money could go a long way for planting trees or buying energy saving light bulbs for a whole major city. But I imagine part of the reason he doesn't want his land torn up is because thats where his holy sites and burial grounds are.
Digging up half the property sort of goes against most of his beliefs probably. He might have said no for environmental reasons, but I'd have to wager a guess that religious beliefs also played a huge factor.
ug333 - That's a really weird remark. Let's see: the French give him 5 billion and DESTROY the place to feed a nuclear plant, and he scatters the money around, diluting it's effectiveness. Instead, he keeps the land (which is VERY valuable) and preserves it for all time in it's natural state, and I'm willing to bet it's a fairly LARGE chunk of land we're talking about here. Destruction versus preservation. Which is better? Hmmm?
If only the leaders and people with power/influence, around the world, are as uncorruptable and principled like Jeffrey Lee.
FYI, if you aren't familiar with uranium mining, it's an incredibly destructive process. Open pit mining, radioactive dust, and an amazing amount of tailing production -- it isn't like they were just going to go dig a little hole in the ground, pull some rocks out, and leave; the entire area would have been rendered uninhabitable for the forseable future.
Either way, holding onto the land will only make it more valuable. Don't sell too early .
I was not familiar with Uranium mining, so I completely yield on that point. In my head, the agreement could include regulations to limit the impact on the land. A few square miles seems small to me in comparison to the land that would be able to be preserved with that kind of money. Obviously, if it is that wide spread and destructive it is a different story.
ug333 - That's a really weird remark.
I concur with Justin here. I am not sure where you are coming from ug333. This sounds like an infiltration from a lobbyist or a corporation that has no concern for the future of our planet. I am SO THRILLED TO hear that someone is leading by example. Thankyou THANKYOU THANKYOU
YOU ARE AN INSPIRATION TO ALL OF US WHO TEND TO THINK MONEY TALKS.
Destroying land to save land is a slippery slope.
wow.
The world could use more folks like Jeffrey Lee.
What could be done for this man, who did the honorable and right thing, is have a fund set-up in his name where people could donate small amounts of money. He deserves good things to come to him now.
there are about 460000 indigenous australians. of this number about half are not sharing the dream. low incomes low quality of life and criminally low life expectancy. if we take half the population and identify within that figure the number of kids under 18 say 30% or 69000 and we spend say 5000 a year on each of these kids in the area of education and if necessary welfare we will have spent about 4.4 billion. land can be rehabilitated, prematurely dead people can't. if you think rocks and dirt are more important than people you will disagree with me. if you think worshiping the spirit in the sky is more important than kids welfare you will also disagree with me.
M.Richmond, you say that dirt and rocks are not as important as kid's welfare, but what you don't understand is the role played by that "dirt" in the welfare of the kids. The thing which we've found out after 210 years or so is that without respect and regard for the traditional beliefs and societal structures of indigenous communities, no amount of money will increase life expectancy and improve health. As a proud atheist I don't believe in a great spirit in the sky, but I do understand that other people may rely on that belief to sustain their physical and mental wellbeing. Your cold rationalism simply doesn't work, and is immoral to boot.
id go ffor at least 6.5 billion if i was that guy :p