David Adams: Plan for Tamar Valley's future needed before river is fixed

Whilst a clean up is a good idea in itself the broader challenge for our community is to reflect on and shape the future identity of the Tamar Valley.

Our vision for the Tamar is arguably what will define the parameters of the clean up.

Globally most rivers and their catchments have clear identities and purposes often forged over hundreds or thousands of years.

But the Tamar Valley has multiple historical overlays none of which give clear guidance to the future.

The Tasmanian Aboriginal overlay has been one of living in harmony with the valley as a living place of abundant resources and a home along its shores.

The first significant western overlay was the river as primary access to Launceston followed by the massive gold and mineral bonanza through to the early 1900s based around Beaconsfield.

Here the river was mainly a transport route with the valley sparsely populated.

On the East Tamar, the emergence of Bell Bay as a major industrial centre revitalised George Town and the deep-water port held out many promises.

The next overlay was the rise and rise of the apple and pear industry through to the 1970s when the UK joined the European Common Community and our privileged access ended abruptly.

Again, here the river was primarily a means of transport mainly from Beauty Point.

The valley was primarily small farms with small regional centres such as Exeter.

During the 1990s the Tamar Valley was front and centre in the pulp mill debate.

One of the more positive out-workings of the pulp mill debate was a focus on the Tamar River and the claims that it was "pristine and clean" and a "stunning Tasmanian feature of great beauty".

Whether we all believe this or not, we are now more aware that the Tamar Valley is in fact much more pristine and clean (let's not mention the mud) than its counterpart in Devon England.

And that economic goals need to be balanced with social, cultural and environmental goals.

Somewhat ironically the pulp mill proposal led to a major upgrade of the East Tamar highway when almost all the growth was on the West Tamar side.

Since the 1970s the Tamar Valley has been emerging as a boutique (high-value, high-quality, low-volume, sustainable) area for wine and food.

This development paralleled the emergence of the Tamar Valley as simultaneously a commuter suburb into Launceston and a lifestyle valley alongside the historical transport and economic focus.

There has always been recreational and leisure uses for the estuary.

I fondly remember speed boats as a child at Rosevears, fishing off the Blackwall Jetty and swimming at Gravelly Beach.

Holiday homes were scattered alongside the shores such as at Paper Beach and with the Bass Strait frontage, such as Greens Beach.

The valley as a tourist destination with a suite of offerings also began to emerge alongside the developments in the wine and artisan food industries.

Over the past century, many factors also pushed the estuary into the background.

Launceston focused away from the river as alternative transport become more central - rail, road and air.

The estuary faded from view, helped along by the flood levies.

The upgraded East and West Tamar highways took the estuary further from view.

The mud and rice grass essentially closed off many beaches.

Boatsheds moved from common to sparse.

The emergence of the idea of a pristine Tamar Valley and the boutique lifestyle experience has helped regenerate the debate over the estuary.

This is in part a social vision, a sense of identity and interdependence of our future with the future of the Valley or, more correctly, the future of the catchment within which the Tamar Valley is a key feature.

It has only been in relatively recent times that we have come to realise the centrality of healthy catchment dynamics to our economic, cultural and social lives as well as our environmental future.

Only a few broader visions for the future of the estuary have emerged.

The Tamar Lake proposal promoted by the Tamar Action Group is a good example.

From a range of economic, social and (selective) environmental perspectives it makes a lot of sense.

Jobs, jobs, jobs, infrastructure galore and a very clear future for kanamaluka.

But of course, to others, it just seems like desecration.

The historical overlays have not produced a clear vision.

kanamaluka/Tamar estuary is a part of a bigger jigsaw puzzle of the future identity of the valley its catchment and the purposes for which it should be used.

Any clean up at scale will only take place if we can settle this broader strategic conversation.

Only then will we be able to resolve the "my evidence is better than your evidence" debate and extract ourselves from the mud.

What do you think? Send us a letter to the editor: