NSW Highbanking Illegal ..... so what is a Highbanker and Highbanking?

With respect to the 15,000 odd views and less than 1,000 positive responses. Those figures don't surprise me in the least...and I highly doubt any sought of conspiracy theory. The fact is: At any given time on the forum, there is a huge discrepancy between Members and Fence-sitters.Those Fence-sitters comprise anything up to 20 or more times the number of members and they 'Troll' the pages of this forum for information that they can then use to their own selfish advantage.
They play no part at all in contributing to the debate.. no matter what the issue or how vital it may be to the long-term ramifications of our great pastime.
They sit there in splendid anonymity, waiting to pounce at the slightest crumb of information, like some fence dwelling parasite. A growing minority of them belong to the 'rat-bag' class of people who don't give a rats anus how they conduct themselves, who they offend, what laws they break and how their actions adversely affect the membership here. The rest of them are shallow -minded selfish individuals who have not got the ability to read anything written with words of more than three syllables. They 'don't want to get involved'...typical modern day 'nuclear families'... Residents of the country..BUT... with no idea of the essence of what True Australians are all about.
I suppose their presence here may increase ...certain revenues... by way of 'hits' to advertising for someone..but I would close the ability of people to view the forum unless they sought membership.

There's a well known report that states dredging on small scale actually increased the numbers of crustaceans and increased the available food supply to the food chain in a study into dredging conducted in the USA. Conveniently that sort of information is dismissed when conducting an environmental review, along with many other tactics such as flood and storm damage labeled as man made, and reporting of protected species sightings in areas that the species does not occupy. Both tactics were employed by the crazy green groups calling themselves "environmentalists" during the period leading up to the decision of a large box ironbark park submission. To be exact at least 4, and perhaps more than a dozen hairy nose wombats were released into the area and reported as native to the area. Those wombats would have suffered horrible deaths, dying of starvation, dehydration or both. It doesn't take too many brains to figure out how they got there, and that they are not natives to the area. Who has ever heard of a wombat digging holes in ground like concrete, or grazing on eucalyptus leaves and bush shrubs? Noone because they couldn't possibly survive in that area. Yet there it was in the submission, multiple individual animals that would be at risk from timber cutting, vegetation removal, and vehicles in the area. Next they'll be telling me they died of turbidity in the water course.

Hardly surprising then if submissions contrary to the proposed agenda are targeted to never see the light of day when any and all tactics are used. I actually believe there is little sense in trying to negotiate with them. The surest way home is to go directly to the politician responsible.

OldGT said:

There's a well known report that states dredging on small scale actually increased the numbers of crustaceans and increased the available food supply to the food chain in a study into dredging conducted in the USA. Conveniently that sort of information is dismissed when conducting an environmental review, along with many other tactics such as flood and storm damage labeled as man made, and reporting of protected species sightings in areas that the species does not occupy. Both tactics were employed by the crazy green groups calling themselves "environmentalists" during the period leading up to the decision of a large box ironbark park submission. To be exact at least 4, and perhaps more than a dozen hairy nose wombats were released into the area and reported as native to the area. Those wombats would have suffered horrible deaths, dying of starvation, dehydration or both. It doesn't take too many brains to figure out how they got there, and that they are not natives to the area. Who has ever heard of a wombat digging holes in ground like concrete, or grazing on eucalyptus leaves and bush shrubs? Noone because they couldn't possibly survive in that area. Yet there it was in the submission, multiple individual animals that would be at risk from timber cutting, vegetation removal, and vehicles in the area. Next they'll be telling me they died of turbidity in the water course.

Hardly surprising then if submissions contrary to the proposed agenda are targeted to never see the light of day when any and all tactics are used. I actually believe there is little sense in trying to negotiate with them. The surest way home is to go directly to the politician responsible.

Click to expand...

Thats why i want the names of the people pushing this agenda.

I want names , job titles , location , department and contact details , because for all we know there might be people driving the campaign who have financial interests that may turn out to be illegal , or it may be driven by "lobbyists" who are influencing government policy on the instructions of certain types of business entities.... either way , If we are going to win this we must have accurate information.

I agree with you on the main thrust of your post Heads Up!.I think the main target should be focused on Minister Roberts himself. He has the power invested in him to make the sensible and decent change that we need by simply DECLARING THEM IN THE GOVERNMENT GAZETTE!..I use capitals not to shout at anyone but in the hope that it is taken seriously by our representatives who are involved in negotiations.I am currently working on a letter that I intend to forward to him respectively requesting that he take the helm in the matter and see that an entire way of life for thousands of his fellow New South Welshman is being unfairly disrupted. Not to mention the small industry it has created and the many benefits it brings to the country towns who are in increasing numbers opening their public spaces and declaring them 'fossicking areas'.
I am currently researching what 'environmental' authority or academic study was made in support of the claimed 'turbidity' and ecosystem disadvantages that they cite in Article 12 (C). Sought of stumped on that angle so if anybody has such info I would dearly like to see it.

Finally, I hope you and I, Heads Up, have moved on from our tiff regarding my... 'little ripper' Highbanker and that you are no longer...'offended' by anything I have to say in these pages. ...I do so in the belief that we are united under The Southern Cross in a common cause. ]

reefer said:

With respect to the 15,000 odd views and less than 1,000 positive responses. Those figures don't surprise me in the least...and I highly doubt any sought of conspiracy theory. The fact is: At any given time on the forum, there is a huge discrepancy between Members and Fence-sitters.Those Fence-sitters comprise anything up to 20 or more times the number of members and they 'Troll' the pages of this forum for information that they can then use to their own selfish advantage.
They play no part at all in contributing to the debate.. no matter what the issue or how vital it may be to the long-term ramifications of our great pastime.
They sit there in splendid anonymity, waiting to pounce at the slightest crumb of information, like some fence dwelling parasite. A growing minority of them belong to the 'rat-bag' class of people who don't give a rats anus how they conduct themselves, who they offend, what laws they break and how their actions adversely affect the membership here. The rest of them are shallow -minded selfish individuals who have not got the ability to read anything written with words of more than three syllables. They 'don't want to get involved'...typical modern day 'nuclear families'... Residents of the country..BUT... with no idea of the essence of what True Australians are all about.
I suppose their presence here may increase ...certain revenues... by way of 'hits' to advertising for someone..but I would close the ability of people to view the forum unless they sought membership.

Click to expand...

My original posts never suggested any form of 'conspiracy theory'. Nor do I really think that somebody may have performed skullduggery as suggested by Headsup.

I merely observed that despite thousands of views we could not get even a thousand signatures from forum members for a petition seeking improvements to QLD Fossicking.

For me that suggested that many members may have concluded that because they weren't directly affected by QLD Fossicking laws they had no interest in that issue.

The same could apply now where request in many of these threads to support and join NAPFA (regardless of where you live)...will fall on deaf ears because members are either 'not active' or are 'not in NSW'.

In the current context, I suspect (but don't know exact current numbers) that the current survey started by G0ldigg and being promoted by many (that will give NAPFA hard current data on prospectors/fossickers views) will again get many looks but low actual respondents. However others have said that a response rate of 1000 is good. Last time I asked ( a few weeks back) the survey had over 800 respondents.

Reefer's comments on members and their motivations are great food for thought and I am inclined to agree with him that unless people 'join' PA forum..they should not be able to see anything.

On the highbanking issue in NSW, a successful win in changing stupid laws would have a great positive impact for other states where highbanking is illegal or 'grey area'. The reverse is true...no change in the NSW law will just reinforce a similar 'let's ban it' mindset in other states.

If Victoria follows suite from NSW and bans "pump fed highbanking", that will stop their use on the eastern seaboard as QLD also bans use of power operated equipment for fossicking.

To this end I would have thought that the NSW highbanking issue is a very big deal for all PA members (Some of whom travel across Australia to follow their hobby)

Anyway I look forward to hearing an update at some stage from NAPFA on their next steps (and I have joined NAPFA as a show of support)

Mike

Mike!. The wording in my opening lines in response to the disparity of numbers v's responses, was poorly framed and lumped in with a subsequent post I read from another member.
It was a generalization that I regret.Please accept my apology. :8..... with respect Rossco. ]

No worries Rossco...and absolutely no apology required.

I think this discussion is very healthy and I appreciate all your posts as well as those from others. We need to keep the focus on this matter and the greater number of members who become actively interested on this topic the better it will be.

In the end I hope those of us passionate about this issue don't lose our passion and interest.

regards
Mike

I Signed Yesterday and submitted my own questions to the Department. When and if I get a reply I'm going to my local member..."Battle!". :Y:

Russ

So it's been 3 weeks since the enforcement period started.

Has anybody been fined by/warned by/even seen the NSW authorities while out and about?

Na nothing

wow.. i guess thats shows what you miss when you drop off from radar for a while, i didn't even know about any of this till last night when i logged on, what has brought this all on? and what can i do to help? will be joining NAPFA in the next few days, per in numbers and all that, i did try awhile ago but it didn't go through for some reason and i had forgot about it till now

cheers
Jamie

Just curious if one can setup a highbanker on thier own private property in NSW or is the practice at the moment just a plain no go?

Bear

I would suggest that what one does on their own private property should remain private!
In saying that the same regulations/laws/rules for fossicking in NSW apply to ALL land.

As above

looking forward to seeing some headway on this issue

G0lddigg@ said:

looking forward to seeing some headway on this issue

Click to expand...

Aren't we all.

NAPFA said:

It has been great, but not all surprising, to see such an active response from fossickers on this sluicing matter. THANK YOU! :Y:

NAPFA notes that various suggestions are being put forward to protest against this unreasonable policy and to seek to have it fixed. These range from letters and petitions to rallies and media activity.

While individuals are free to undertake their own campaigns, at this stage, our view is to leave it with NAPFA as we are in dialogue with both Planning, Environment, Resources and Energy (PERE) and the Resources Regulator on how to get a fair and reasonable outcome for fossickers.

If you have not done so already, I would urge you to read our May 2017 Sluicing Report

http://www.napfa.net/upload/NAPFA Regulation Changes to DRE 2017 Final .pdf

because it provides a comprehensive review on the current policy, why it needs to change and how it needs to change. It is possible that you wont agree with all of it, but I can assure you we have consulted at length within the fossicking community, and with manufacturers, in arriving at our final position.

We have an important meeting next week with PERE where we hope that resolution of this issue can be fast-tracked. Our immediate goal is to prepare for that meeting.

Depending on what comes out of the meeting, then we may well seek to rally fossickers and sluicers from all corners of NSW and elsewhere in a strategic communications campaign aimed at overturning this unfair and flawed regulation.

If you are not already a NAPFA member, please get on board as a member and support the organisation that is supporting your fossicking interests. Here is a link to our membership page

http://www.napfa.net/Join-the-rebellion.html

Regards

Stephen Dangaard
President
NAPFA

Click to expand...

Some years ago I was operating a small two-stage sluice box in the East Kimberly region of WA.
I had set up in the shade by a dry watercourse. The sluice box was set up in a tub and I was sloshing water through the system using a cut down 2 litre plastic milk container. I had carried water to the spot in jerry cans and was re-circulating the water.
Along came a mining inspector who expressed approval for my operation so I asked him if it would be in order for me to circulate the flow of water using a small bilge pump powered by a little 12 volt battery. He couldn't say offhand but drove away until he found a spot where he had phone comms and rang the Mining Warden at Karatha. He didn't know either so he rang the Chief Mining Warden in Perth. He didn't know either but he said that since we were talking about a very small operation using a little battery he would not object to its use. The mining inspectot returned and gave me the OK to set up the bilge pump which was a great improvement on the milk carton.
That was a oncer however and since I had nothing in writing I did not take it as blanket approval to operate the pump in other locations.
Apparently it was not legal but tolerated because of the remote location and the small scale of the operation.

Billy said:

I've got my flag, my resolve and a well traveled ice box to hold some liquid refreshments

Don't let the bastards win!!!!!

Click to expand...

Now thats an esky

Once gone, never to return....

LW...

Grey Panner said:

Some years ago I was operating a small two-stage sluice box in the East Kimberly region of WA.
I had set up in the shade by a dry watercourse. The sluice box was set up in a tub and I was sloshing water through the system using a cut down 2 litre plastic milk container. I had carried water to the spot in jerry cans and was re-circulating the water.
Along came a mining inspector who expressed approval for my operation so I asked him if it would be in order for me to circulate the flow of water using a small bilge pump powered by a little 12 volt battery. He couldn't say offhand but drove away until he found a spot where he had phone comms and rang the Mining Warden at Karatha. He didn't know either so he rang the Chief Mining Warden in Perth. He didn't know either but he said that since we were talking about a very small operation using a little battery he would not object to its use. The mining inspectot returned and gave me the OK to set up the bilge pump which was a great improvement on the milk carton.
That was a oncer however and since I had nothing in writing I did not take it as blanket approval to operate the pump in other locations.
Apparently it was not legal but tolerated because of the remote location and the small scale of the operation.

Click to expand...

Anthony Anderson, the Karratha mines inspector once told me that a river sluice is illegal in WA. Now it is possible that he was pulling my leg because firstly you need water and in most cases our streams have none