Natural Heritage icons and amenity of smaller scale than ‘the mountain’ prevail throughout Tasmania’s settled areas. Even people local to these Natural aspects easily overlook the pressures on them - even whilst enjoying them. This is partly because of a concept that Natural Heritage is far-away wilderness. It is partly that the pressures are largely future. And partly the settler’s tradition of private ownerships.

1. Our island population conserves local Natural Heritage in Mount Wellington. So does the
local vested interest . This is uncommon in Western cities.
Natural Heritage icons and amenity of smaller scale than ‘the mountain’ prevail throughout Tasmania’s
settled areas. Even people local to these Natural aspects easily overlook the pressures on them - even
whilst enjoying them. This is partly because of a concept that Natural Heritage is far-away wilderness.
It is partly that the pressures are largely future. And partly the settler’s tradition of private ownerships.
South Arm and Carlton Bluff are examples. Usurped 200 years ago, cleared and let go. Then allowed
to return to endemic life, unless the urban patchwork eats them up. These are settlement assets in
wonderful condition. They are integral with fast growing population and should be accessible to all
Tasmanians and visitors. Either under foot are by nourishing encompassing scenery.
Under accelerating pressures, and only partly protected by anticipatory planning, most such public
natural assets are unsound and depleting. This is largely because they can be optimised as private
assets - sold to urban patchwork. This is usually incremental – a barely noticeable creeping patchwork.
Even if few, the permissible houses with the wide range of potential trappings and owner indulgences
is potentially enough to blind the natural value. Most won’t realise their loss. It’s incremental.
The obvious response is typically hamstrung. The disciplined realisation of these issues is evident so
much in Tasmania. The presence of the Natural in City amenity. And in the Island’s settlement
amenity and the Island’s enhanced conservation as a valued place in Australia.
For settled country areas, consciousness of the concern is diluted. Much attitude is based on the
abundance of natural amenity in the country. In this abundance however is a value hierarchy that is
barely documented. Mount Wellington has survived as a priority asset. Most locales have
unacknowledged priority natural assets. Very many say South Arm is one of these. But they are
correct only insofar as the Hope that this is eventually recognised in law. Even if the lands in question
are ever gifted by the owner or bought by the community.
Such conflict will become increasingly prevalent in the sub-realms of Tasmania. Development and
Extraction finds less room in the face of Natural Heritage and lifestyle values. Forestry and Wilderness
is an example.
At South Arm the rights and gains of private ownership weigh against the probability of loss of a
defacto public asset. An asset truly integral to Hobart and the estuary. And valuable to the long term
Socio-Economic Potentials and Sustainabilities of very many people. A degree of private livelihood
versus a degree of public livelihood.

2. Response is needed for specific protection of settlement integrated priority natural assets. Much is
destined to be lost. The Arm as a Natural Heritage amenity may fall to otherwise desirable urban
patchwork digest, however limited.
The environment here is a cause of emotional conflict typical in the world. It is evident that Natural
Heritage is seriously waning in these conflicts. It is on the defense, for lack of timely evaluation, tough
critical law and public investment.
In Tasmania, a resolution that conserves local-to-settlement Natural Heritage, adequate for first class
lifestyle for a projected population, would bring industry and residential contentment - and probably
prosperity. Herein lies the vested interest of Tasmanians for agreed Natural Heritage and the mandate
for businesslike responses. The same businesslike approach is mandatory in industry and domestic
developments. The conflicts are over values and quantities but are conflicts only for lack of unified
organisation.
There is sufficient evidence that appropriate long-sighted detailed local evaluations and planning are a
serious demand. A demand to prevent disruption of private livelihood investments - and prevent
misguided private livelihood investments. The plans should cover the State. Natural Heritage has a
prominent value in its local environments as well as regionally for all aspects of citizen and settlement
condition.