More facts needed for ocean reserve debate
This letter was sent to the Sustainable Development Department and copied to The Royal Gazette:
October 11, 2013
I have read a number of things on this subject recently, including your own flyer, and find that I cannot endorse any of the options proposed. The principle is laudable, but you (and others) are seeking guidance on a highly complex matter from people (such as me) who have absolutely no knowledge of what is really involved and who are therefore being asked to make a momentous decision involving a major part of Bermuda which inevitably will be made on an emotional basis and, like many such decisions we may have made, we come to regret.
While it is being argued that we should not listen to Dr David Saul, who is arguing for restraint on the basis that there is good scientific expectation of significant extractable mineral and other resources to be discovered and retrieved from the ocean floor around us, his detractors argue for an emotional decision without further study on the basis of a theoretical and totally unsubstantiated predicted consequence of masses of people seeking our shores in order to gaze out 200 miles upon our wonderful ocean reserve, which we have purposefully locked up for the exclusive gazing of future generations.
Let's face it, in time they may both prove to be correct, and it is precisely that which I wish to promote. Let us pursue both ideas, with the thought that maybe there is a way whereby we can have our cake and eat it too, without locking it away with insufficient thought and having thrown away the key, never to be retrieved.
I require a lot more FACTS on the subject, preferably scientifically developed ones, before I am willing to cast my vote on it.