One must wonder in what sense we can really speak of evolution anymore. In any case, either nature is still evolving, in which case we should not worry because what does not survive, for whatever reason, is simply unfit.
– James V. Schall –
518 trees in Pondok Indah are in danger to be sacrificed for the construction of Busway Corridor IX. Another 183 trees have been sacrificed in Cillitan – Tanjung Priuk for the sake of Busway Corridor X construction. The other busway corridor is on the waiting list for the sake of humanity.
I once had this argument of whether the trees in PI should be cut down for the sake of our easy access to Senayan City. Indeed, once we had this corridor X, I will just have to travel for less than one hour to reach Ratu Plaza and walk happily to JWC. The matter almost solved today (Thursday, September 20, 2007) when Pondok Indah residents offered government to build the corridor through Pondok Pinang and Ciputat. There is no objection from Pondok Pinang and Ciputat residents, so I’ll bet, with a little good tactic, government will have to surrender.
I’m not going to talk about the impact of this corridor IX to the traffic jam. I’m thinking about those 518 trees, what Pondok Indah residents said, and what government said
Pondok Indah residents said : these trees are 30 years already, you are leading us to flood, you are ruining your nature environment. We are on behalf of the nature. We are protecting the nature.
Government said : we are building this for the sake of our society in Ciputat who experience traffic jam every day. This corridor has no use for them. They, who are rich people, don’t use it. Poor people need it. That’s why we are building it. We are on behalf of the humans society.
That is quite illogical opinion I read in newspaper and Internet.
1.Pondok Indah residents opinion : 30 years palm trees don’t really protect us from flood. Palm trees are also unable to absorb quite CO2. Palm trees are intended for this so called “aesthetic” trees for the sake of word “Indah” in Pondok Indah. Having them cut down would not have any effect on flood <because the flood didn’t pass Pondok Indah>. I have sensed the strangeness and weakness of this opinion, and later on I believed government did too. They promise the residents that they would replace those trees with another trees that would absorb more CO2 such as Tanjung and Trembesi trees. For the “aesthetic” purpose, they will plant those palms who can still survive. Residents insisted on their arguments and proposed AMDAL.
2.Government opinion : they never have any observation and survey towards poor people regarding these things. Poor people would want it? Poor people need it? Government are assuming that these were true. For sometimes, poor people “government concerned” (which is Pondok Pinang and Ciputat residents) don’t care about this corridor. My friends and I are living in Ciputat district. I’m living in a housing complex. We are ranging from middle to poor financial status. So far, I didn’t hear any complaints or supports from my neighbors and friends. I only hear these sentence “Oh, those poor trees”, “I’m excited to see the demonstration!”, or “I saw those trees wrapped in white fabric”.
[FYI, we are really discussing it on my friends birthday. They don’t really care about it. My housing complex neighbors have quite close connection each other. So any new issue would spread in a week. So far, the issue being hot here is the Indonesian Karate referee who was hit by Malaysian polices – who live 100 meters from my house – and issue regarding border of housing complex. And the composition of middle and poor people here are 50 – 50. So I assumed that it is okay to use this on behalf of my opinion]
Amazingly, I found that during those argument days between PI residents and government, there are always lies slipped between them. They are offering any arguments to win the fight, yet they are lying each other. I wonder whether they realize that every word they have spoken will affect the nature. Once again, i think… they forgot the trees.
Those 518 trees… The clinching argument here is “once gone, gone forever.” the question is: is there any law that said that no species must ever be allowed to disappear? Before humans exist, myriads of species have disappeared. So now, at what cost do we save them? If we save them, are we preventing some further modification?
I saw these pattern of conflict everywhere in countries. I have just read National Geography and found out the same thing regarding a city and soiled national park in every country. Either government protecting the nature or residents protecting the nature, these patterns form human concept of thinking.
WE ARE IN CHARGE OF THIS EARTH. The absolute arrogance of humans being. Believing God who ordered us, we change this earth into our own huge private zoo. We determine how many palm trees are allowed to survive. We determine that humans should survive first which conditioned us to preserve trees.
I’m feeling like I’m trapped in “penguins, walrus, and clamshells” fable (Although the fable didn’t mention anything about clamshells extinction). This fable is telling us about the change of nature when two of those three characters can actually think for their own benefit. The result is the flock of population. That is what happened in our Pondok Indah and surroundings. We have flock of population here and cannot do anything about it, yet we are not stopping those human population to come over for forbidding them to live will break the human right charter law (for the worst).
This is a contradictory matter will last forever until the end of the world.
1.Humans have to live
2.Nature have to survive
Which one to be prioritize? The simply unfit plants and animals will depend on how good your lies and tactics on your arguments.
– FIN –