Environmental Vandalism and Insights into Human Behaviour

A post four days ago highlighting how "rehabilitation" of exploration tracks is extremely counterproductive recorded 19,958 impressions, 106 likes, 26 comments and 1 share.

A followup post the next day recorded 1,168 impressions, 7 likes, no comments and no shares.

The first post precipitated passionate commentary- a lot of outrage, on how crazy the rules dictated by DMIRS on tracks and drill spoil are. Interestingly, neither the post, nor the comments had a lot to say about potential solutions. It was mostly saying "This is shit!!"

Based on two particular insights in the comments, the followup post proposed a three step plan that marked a big change in tactics from a failed attempt to reverse DMIRS policy in 2011. I would really like to know why that post did not precipitate a single comment. Even if the solution is misguided, perhaps some commentary could held shape something more realistic. All I have are my purely subjective speculations on why the second post fell so far short of the first.

Pauline Hanson has demonstrated that there is a great deal of mileage in identifying problems, but has nearly nothing to say about solutions, nothing sensible anyway. Generating outrage is childsplay compared to the difficult work of solving difficult problems. That's the best I've got by way of explanation. Outrage is easier for both the generator and the outraged.

Thousands upon thousands of geologists have walked past desecrated piles of drill spoil and badly damaged tracks. Having twice found this too much to bear without trying to do something, it puzzles me why many, many other geologists aren't similarly motivated to see change; not just by voicing outrage, but by harnessing that emotion and acting.

Don't get me wrong. I am extremely grateful for the support that the initial post received particularly some very useful insights. None of the highly intelligent people, with strong social consciencess, who commented are anything like Pauline Hanson supporters. Their feedback is what inspired me to have another go at this problem. Twelve years later, with a much better understanding of how cults work, I think a second crack is well worth it. But does the reluctance to take the step from the first post to the second explain why, almost without exception, we as an industry have rolled over and meekly accepted that "That's how it is."? DMIRS wins. We find it very easy to say how angry we are, but much harder to try and do something positive with that anger.

As outlined in the second post, I recognise that I am not a natural leader, not when it really matters anyway. Like the ability to close a deal, leadership is a magnetism that some people have, whereas others have different talents to offer. For me, I like to think that one of those talents is as a "productive agitator"; a troll with a positive agenda if you like.

We need two things from my industry friends and colleagues.

First we need lots of photos of damaged tracks and desecrated drill spoil. It's not hard. Your junior geos can have these photos "on your desk" by close of business tomorrow. Send them to me.

The second part is trickier. A talented leader needs to marshall people with good connections, good communication skills and who can all work to a common goal. That will be capturing the support of pastoralists and traditional owners to send a very clear message that the asthetic improvement that DMIRS is striving for is having exactly the opposite effect.

For those of you who saw the first, but missed the second, post, here is a link.

https://www.dhirubhai.net/posts/carl-brauhart-3002347_environmental-vandalism-part-two-thanks-activity-7124930383116210176-fS0g?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop