NSW Comprehensive Review of Crown Lands Management.

Hi Everyone,
There may well be more trouble/restrictions headed our way in terms of access to public lands here in NSW.
The Crown Lands Department have a white paper out covering changes to how and who runs public lands as we know it currently, including commons.
There is a provision to send a submission on what various stake-holders think about the possible changes and the effects it may have on their respective uses of said public lands; submissions close on 20 June 2014.
http://www.lpma.nsw.gov.au/crown_lands/comprehensive_review_of_nsw_crown_land_management
The above link will take you to the Crown Lands website, have a careful read as there are aspects that could have serious restrictions placed on access for prospectors.
In particular check-out section 9; it deals with how commons may well be managed in the future, for those of us who prospect at the Stuart Town and Hill End commons; if the current management bodies were disbanded and say the NPWS were to manage Hill End; well, you don't have to be a scholar to work out what would happen given their track record else where.
Perhaps someone on PA skilled in putting this type of material together could draft a submission which could be forwarded on behalf of the PA membership, Nugget might like to comment on this subject, PA's sizable membership should carry some weight.
Cheers, SinHof.

GDay All,
Around dinner time last evening I put up the above post alerting PA members to the changers that the government is looking to make to the management of Crown Lands in NSW.
Reading through the various documents it became clear that should some of these changes be implemented they would have far reaching effects on where NSW prospectors are allowed to go about their hobby.
To date some twenty hours after my post and fifty views Im just amazed that there have been no replies. It appears that our Victorian members are far more proactive when it comes to matters that can influence how and where they are allowed to practice this great hobby.
This second post is not to be perceived as being a shot at the NSW members, rather to highlight the importance of the ramifications that could arise from these changes if and when they come into practice.
It would be interesting if a few members could read through the linked documents and post their take on what some of these changes could mean to NSW prospectors and where they are allowed to operate.
Cheer, SinHof.
PS: Yes, I have signed the Vic petition.

Hey SinHof, don't take it personally mate we all know prospecting as a whole is in deep water at the moment.

I did read your post last night but to be honest I've been quite busy with the petition. It's not that I'm ignoring the issues in my own backyard but more a matter of not knowing how we can prevent it from happening.

I also don't want to bombard members with too much political madness as it'll only cause confusion and angst. Right now it seems we are under attack from many angles and we need all prospectors to stand up to protect our hobby.

Cheers,
Nugget

Still sifting through the reading material here! What is going on? Victoria? NSW? You're all going to end up like it is here in SA ... basically no prospecting areas available anywhere! Private property is even "out of bounds" here, if you read the regulations properly! Even when we plant a tree or dig a septic tank, we're actually breaking the law!
Victoria & NSW ... don't let this happen to you!!!!

Yep, that's a mine field that needs leaglese. I hope the 4wd's and shooters are onto this. It is beyond my ability but while reading it is apparent we may be locked out of many places.

Hi Nugget Aussie Kate and Slowflow,
Nugget, with regards to the Crown Lands submission;If some of the PA members could post some constructive comments on why the prospectors of NSW and other outdoor groups should have the access to Crown Lands and COMMONS that we currently enjoy, I'm sure between us we could build a compelling argument to maintain our current access and put up a strong case to open up some of the country that has been looked up previously.
It looks like the long weekend is going to be a wash-out so it might be a good time to do some reading; the Crown Lands White Paper and start putting together some ideas for a submission; many hands make light work.
Said submission would be indorsed by PA representing 3000 prospectors if that was Ok by you and the moderators, these type of numbers would be pretty hard to ignore given the March 2015 election.
What are your thoughts mate.
Cheers, SinHof.

Sounds alright to me. If someone would like to take the lead on this I would be more than happy to help out where possible. We should also see what NAPFA is doing about this and offer our support.

Let us vic lads know what we can do to help mate, sorry its taken this long to pipe up a response to your post been flat out on other issues.
ONE IN ALL IN

Why shouldn't we have access to it? If the problem is environmental impact , a lot of us clean up after others and have care for native flora and fauna so we could be a help to the greenies.
If it's about the money, most of us have paid for the permits and some wouldn't mind paying for more as long as it's reasonable.

dwt said:

Let us vic lads know what we can do to help mate, sorry its taken this long to pipe up a response to your post been flat out on other issues.
ONE IN ALL IN

Click to expand...

X2 here. There's some fantastic places to go in NSW, and as has been pointed out with any change it can have a dramatic effect on our rights to prospect. I will attempt to read through what you have highlighted, but as DWT has said if we can be of any help just let us know. Its great to see so many people passionate enough to do some good.

sorry i missed it sinhof , i have been focussed on the VIC issue and i didnt read anything else on the forum

I am in angry elephant mode for the last two days and wont rest until i have done all i can on both issues

i will read the NSW stuff through the weekend and try to get my head around all the big words

G'Day, no! Good Evening Everyone,
Many thanks to the Vic forum members for their offer of support and of course to the NSW folk.
Given that we have about two weeks to put together a submission I will work out some bullet points/ subjects that should be covered in our submission and post them ASAP; these will form the bones of the submission and input from forum members can flesh them out.
If no-one puts their hand up I will endeavour to stitch the words together into a cohesive submission.Also I will seek some advice from a colleague who is well versed in dealing with the government departments we are dealing with on this issue.
So; I think we as amateur prospectors have a real chance here to be well and truly visible on the involved NSW government departments radar, so lets all get behind this project and see if we can claw back some lost real-estate and maintain and/or improve what we currently have.
Cheers, SinHof.

It's a real go gettem attitude out there, bloody fantastic.

I have been giving this matter a bit of thought.

Perhaps a small video sent to all MP by email,and laying out what we do,and how the claims made by the Greens,are total false.

The other thing that we should do is try to change the term"Sluicing" perhaps referring it as "Goldwashing" [that will please Goldigg] because the moment they look up "Sluicing" you see giant pumps washing away the earth.

Pointing out we are just easy target,and this is not,something that the parties are talking about.

TheDigger

Reading through the Veac report (unrelated to this submission) there is reference to individual submissions by sole prospectors aswell as Pmav, etc. Do we have the support from someone in the nsw/act area on this, likely to also take on a submission? Individually we can also submit if time runs short but Id love to see a lobby group take the lead here aswell. Perhaps its already on their radar but prompting them and hearing what they are proposing would be helpful. Also if time runs sort we can all type up a submission aswell, part of their obligation is to read and examine all submissions, we all have a voice and lucky to have advance warning.

Goldtarget said:

Reading through the Veac report (unrelated to this submission) there is reference to individual submissions by sole prospectors aswell as Pmav, etc. Do we have the support from someone in the nsw/act area on this, likely to also take on a submission? Individually we can also submit if time runs short but Id love to see a lobby group take the lead here aswell. Perhaps its already on their radar but prompting them and hearing what they are proposing would be helpful. Also if time runs sort we can all type up a submission aswell, part of their obligation is to read and examine all submissions, we all have a voice and lucky to have advance warning.

Click to expand...

videos could achieve alot

showing the different methods , how its done , what we can do to eliminate any damage to the environment , photos of bullets , steel and other junk that we remove with sluices and detectors , video of the kids taking part in prospecting , and having fun while they do it.....

thats a win situation

we need to get on to it early and then hand deliver the videos to all people concerned so we know it wasnt thrown in someones rubbish bin.

then phone them up a few days afterwards to see if they actually viewed it and what their intentions are with it

This applies to both NSW and VIC , so who do we have that has the equipment and video editing knowledge to do so ?

Who wants to be on the team ?

Who do we have thats photogenic , including kids that have been enjoying their prospecting with the parents and who can be included in this , " our defence strategy"

I volunteer to attend filming and directing in NSW

who else do we have please ?

another fact to include , is that nationally it would be a ratio of 50 - 10 pieces of rubbish removed from the environment for every one bit of gold recovered

they should be giving us prizes . :|

Maybe i did not read the right bit, but where does it talk about locking us out of crown land? I saw they are looking at changing legislation that dates back to the 1890's and turn 8 seperate acts that govern crown land management into one act, and allowing local council more authority to manage crown land. This seems a lot different to VIC where they are actually talking about banning sluices.
The changes seemed mostly common sense and about streamlining the processes involved with managing crown lands.

The actual things they are asking for submissions for are:

1.4 Issues for comment
Public comment is invited on all the recommendations and proposals in the White
Paper. In particular, your views are sought on any or all of the following questions,
which are repeated throughout the document in the relevant sections.
Proposed legislation
1. How would developing one new piece of legislation to manage
the Crown land estate benefit the community?
2. Are the objects and provisions proposed for the new legislation
appropriate to support Crown land management in the 21st Century?
Improved management arrangements for Crown reserves
3. Do you have any comments on the proposal to allow local
councils to manage Crown land under local government
legislation rather than under the Crown Lands Act?
4. What are your views about the proposed new
management structure for Crown reserves?
5. Do you have any further suggestions to improve the
governance standards for Crown reserves?Crown Lands Legislation White Paper > p 7
Other streamlining measures
6. Are there any additional activities that should be considered as
lowimpact activities in order to streamline landowners consent?
7. Are there any other ways to streamline arrangements
between the State and local governments?
8. In addition to the suggestions provided, are there any other
ways to ensure that the public is notified of the proposed use or
disposal of Crown land - and their views taken into account that
would be appropriate to include in the new legislation?
Better provisions for tenures and rents
9. Do you support the concept of a consistent, market based approach
to rents, with rebates and waivers for hardship and public benefits
for certain uses of Crown land applied where appropriate?
10. Is five years a reasonable amount of time to give tenure holders who
currently pay below the statutory minimum rent to move to paying
the minimum level of rent as required under the new legislation.
11. To avoid rent arrears issues for incoming tenure-holders, should
the new legislation automatically transfer any rental debt to a
new tenure-holder on settlement, or require any outstanding
arrears to be paid prior to transfer or settlement?
12. What kinds of lease conditions should be considered essential,
for the purposes of providing for civil penalties?
13. Should Crown land be able to be used for all forms
of carbon sequestration activities?
Greater flexibility for Western Lands leases
14. What additional activities do you think should be permitted on
Western Lands leases without the need for approval?
15. Bearing in mind the fragile nature of much land in the Western
Division, in what situations do you think it would be appropriate
to allow Western Lands leases to be converted to freehold?
Stronger enforcement provisions
16. What are your views about the proposal to strengthen
the compliance framework for Crown lands?
17. Do you have any suggestions or comments about proposals for the following:
Auditing
Officer powers
Offences and penalties
Other provisions
Minor legislation
18. Do you support the repeal of the minor legislation listed?
19. Do you see any disadvantages that would need to be addressed?

G'Day Everyone,
Just to clarify a point here for the members that have not had a chance to read through the NSW Crown Lands White Paper; The issue here is not dealing with how we prospect, it concerns where we can legally prospect on public lands at this point in time and the changes to the access that we may or not enjoy if some of these proposed changes go through. For example, if the Commons act of 1989 is revoked or changed to allow them to be sold off to neighboring land holders we could find ourselves being locked out.
Take the 7000 acre Hill End Tambaroora Common, if it was put up for a change of ownership/management it would be a fair bet that in this situation the NSW NPWS would take control given they already manage the Hill End Historic Precinct and that, based on past occurrences would be the end of prospecting as we know it today in that area.
A couple of members have asked if there is a state body in NSW/ACT representing prospectors, as Nugget mentioned in an earlier post anything we do here will add support to what the NSW/ACT Prospectors & Fossickers Association Inc, NAPFA is doing by way of a submission.
More to follow on this important subject,it's time for another coffee; stay tuned.
SinHof.

Do not get me wrong, i think everyone in NSW should keep an eye on this, but i think it is a little early for doom and gloom is all. There could be ramifications but the system is in need of an overhaul.
In regards to the commons, it could get sold to landowners but it does not look like NPWS could get their hands on it. I would hope the more likely option would be to turn it into crown land.

Possible options for the future use of commons include:
converting commons to Crown land and managing them as Crown reserves
converting commons to Crown land, with commoners continuing
to use the land through lease or licence arrangements
disposing of commons to commoners, adjoining landowners or otherwise.

Hi Shivan,
Many thanks for taking the time to read and post the material from the Crown Lands White Paper, you have saved some of us a heap of time.
On the face of it,streamlining acts and regulations and cutting back on red-tape, for the most part should be a good thing as long as said streamlining does not allow important changes to be "fast-tracked through" without due consultation with affected steak-holders; in our case prospectors/fossickers.
In terms of the PA submission; members might like to read the various headings you listed and where they see fit post responses that can be formatted into a submission.
Should anyone have a problem with coming up with responses to sections one through eighteen then nineteen could be used to write the whole submission.
19. Do you see any disadvantages that would need to be addressed?
The answer to this question should be a resounding "ACCESS" the devil here is where The Crown Lands Department through their new streamlined regulations decides to dispose of certain parcels of Crown land that prospectors have had access to for years; to other parties who are not sympathetic to the needs of prospectors.The sale of some Crown Roads surfaced some months back effectively blocking access to some areas of interest to prospectors and fisher folk; just one example of where access issues need to be addressed before the horse bolts, so to speak.
We are not looking to submit a submission of book proportions, rather two or three pages of solid logic outlining our concerns about possibly loosing access and also what the prospecting community brings to the economy of small towns situated in gold field areas, this can run into many millions of dollars based on evidence from goldfields in other states.
Shivan's post and the above comments should be enough to motivate members to have their say on this issue; lets get proactive on this one and show the powers that be in all of this, that we the amateur prospecting fraternity have had enough of continually being locked out of former areas with a gold prospecting history.
Bring it on.
SinHof.