I wasn't going to bother writing something about this but you have spurred me into it Old GT (in a good way).
For the prying eyes that are watching I can see that you will see some hard line views in this forum. But in all arenas of life you will find extreme views about gay marriage, logging, animal welfare, politics, religion, etc and so it is on this forum. There will be those that are for and against but the majority are probably somewhere in between. And 'somewhere in between' is where I am on this issue.
I have voted no but...probably because I am worried about the people in the "lock everything up" camp that have the extreme views. I would also be just as worried about the extreme 'lets bulldoze the lot, log every tree, find every bit of gold' camp as well but legislation these days has pretty much put a stop to those practices. There will always be some that push the boundaries (a recent thread about dredging for example) but for the main part the people of the prospecting world are reasonable, courteous and law abiding.
The actual matter at hand:
I guess my main point (or question) in this debate is 'what is the point' of the National Park? In state forest presently I cannot cut down a tree, I can cut firewood but only if it is a directly sanctioned firewood collection area within the allowed season, I am limited by CFA fire danger ratings as to when I can have camp fires and encouraged to use provided fire pits, I am required to remain on roads/tracks, I must have a road registered vehicle, I can prospect but only within the confines of a miners right and they are fairly restrictive (e.g hand tools).
As far as I can see the only difference between that and what I can't do in the Bendigo National Park is that in a state forest I can shoot feral animals, take my dog in there and there is probably different legislation as to areas that may 'potentially' be logged by the State Forests Dept (or whatever they are called).
So what will a National Park do? It will stop me taking my dog for a walk and will allow foxes, pigs, deer, goats to breed unabated. Is that a win? Maybe it will stop me from detecting although there are about 6 national/historic parks where this is still allowed and I would hope this would be the case if this proposed national park was to proceed.
The big hallaballoo that was made over the mountain cattle was seen as a massive win for the high country by well meaning city folk who don't really have any idea what they are doing. How many cattle have been kept out?? Maybe 5,000?? There is now estimated to be over 1,000,000 breeding age female sambar deer in Victoria. Add in young females and all the males and potentially you have 2.5 million sambar deer running wild in Victoria. And a good portion of them are in the high country. And the suggestion is that fallow deer are going to be the next item on the 'population explosion' agenda. Have you seen what deer do to young trees, established trees, waterways (with their wallows) and moss areas with their hard hooves? But we stopped those pesky cattle that ate some grass and were only there for about 6 months of the year
I'm not saying the cattle didn't do any damage but why aren't these same people now up in arms about the deer?? Do they think they are native?? It's exasperating!!
I may have got off topic there :/
My point is, that is just one example of why honest, normal people who actually use the bush and have a vested interest in looking after the bush have a hard time voting 'yes' to something like National parks. We can just see that although the intentions may be good there is usually a fair few flaws in the final outcome. And those flaws usually result in those that love the bush, use the bush and care for the bush being the ones locked out.
"It will mean more tourists" is one of the things I have heard from some councils. What a load of deer droppings! Incredibly, the bush is actually there right now and anyone can use it - bush walkers, bird watchers, horse riders, families, old people, detectorists, etc, etc. Is it being used by all those groups? Proclaiming a National Park doesn't make it any more beautiful or appealing does it? It is already there - perhaps advertise that fact and see if it makes a difference to tourist levels first. Did making the Greater Bendigo National Park a national park do anything significant for tourism??? The only people I see out there are those with a detector in their hand or local horse riders.
A state forest is there for all to use and if the un-thinking, un-caring, littering, bush bashing, fire lighting, track wrecking fraction of our community intend on carrying out these activities it won't matter a fig what the name at the gate says. Legislation won't change those that don't give a stuff for others. Crime rates will vouch for that.
So, to the prying eyes that maybe watch this forum, does that give a different perspective? I'm not saying we are all perfect but we never will be. Perhaps the current situation is as perfect as it is going to be for the greatest number of the community as possible?
Food for thought?
