Spot on mate
Petition to stop the proposed ban on sluicing in Victoria
- Thread starter Nugget
- Start date
Help Support Prospecting Australia:
Barra_Mad
Jonathan
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2014
- Messages
- 72
- Reaction score
- 17
Yeah reading down the page Jenny says" why doesn't your organization make a bid to have the sluice recognized as separate categorized because at the moment they all fall under one umbrella" This could be worth doing or just the greens way of wasting our time so they can get there bill through. I wonder if Q&A can get her in front of the camera so she can tell more lies on national TV. a audience full of prospectors will get the real truth out.
Barra_Mad said:
I am the first to criticise some of them for being ret@rded criminally bent cockup merchants but most of them have good intentions
In their job they get hammered with bazillions of enquiries , requests , letters , emails and information from all sorts of people
they have to give time and communicate with every element in society from well intentioned well informed citizens through to nutters complaining about the aliens in their water pipes.
putting myself in their shoes , i reckon they would have to be pretty thick skinned
putting them'selves in my shoes ..... lol i think i have won them over with good information and a balanced viewpoint.
Zuke_Lynzy said:
Yeah lets do it Zuke, I only drink strait vodka... but if ur coming my way, that wont be a problem at my local pub, but I have a 10 double limit,(2/3 bottle) because otherwise, the police usually end up taking me home
Goldtarget
(AKA OldGT)
G0lddigg@ said:
Ah well I got a longer run couple of days before biting again today over deer hunting. I respect her right to delete and block but if you can't take a healthy dose of criticism and logic well I can see why she hadn't been elected yet. Its that sort of cocooning that skews their views, and rather than responding its delete. Can't stand the heat.
Goldtarget
(AKA OldGT)
Mr Boring said:
I promise you this if this gets up I'll be digging enough to keep two states happy. And i won't be alone.
I put this to you the members of this fine forum for debate and hopefully an agreed endorsement by the membership.
"We swear by the southern cross to stand truly by each other, and fight to defend our rights and our liberties."
Here is a proposed Draft Response to VEAC's website article entitled "Help keep gold prospecting out of national parks" which includes their argument for their current negative stance towards recreational fossickers entitled THE DANGERS OF DIGGING UP OUR PARKS currently displayed on their website.
This response is also directly relevant to many of the other articles on that website that misinform the public on the activities of prospectors and recreational fossickers in an attempt to further VEAC's own causes at the expense of others (the easy targets).
The response has been written to provide the public with an objective and informed view of the activities of prospectors and recreational fossickers practicing their time honoured traditional craft / hobby in both Victorian State and National Forests where the law allows this to take place.
More broadly I see this as directly relevant to the current changes to legislation being proposed regarding the use of sluices and the review of crown lands. I see this as a means of educating and informing the public on these issues in a measured, objective and non provocative manner.
Here are the allegations from that web article and a proposed measured and carefully considered response to each:
1. Fossicking (metal detecting, digging holes and panning for gold) causes unnecessary damage to streamsides, and can threaten rare species such as ground orchids.
Response:
We disagree with this statement for the following reasons:
a) Fossicking does no damage to stream sides (banks) as the gold pay streak is not located in the banks but on natural gravel bars that build up on the inside bends of streams as a result of eddy currents in the streams (eventually choking off and diverting the course of streams) and the centre of the stream. It makes no practical sense for informed recreational fossickers to be undermining or investigating stream sides where the gold is not located;
b) A number of international studies have shown that soil disturbance caused by recreational fossicking is beneficial to the establishment of seedlings in forests as the seeds can establish themselves in the soft tilled soil rather than on the natural hard ground. Other international studies have also shown that the tailings (returned fossicking materials i.e. Tilled soil and gravel) left behind as a result of recreational fossicking make an ideal breeding ground for many fish species.
c) Gold panning is the act of classifying and separating heavier materials from lighter ones via the use of a gold pan with or without water being present in the pan. All the original fossicking materials collected in the pan minus the small amount of gold bearing concentrates (usually a few teaspoons full) are returned from whence they came within a matter of minutes via the panning process;
d) Current Fossicking legislation and associated laws and regulations strictly prohibit recreational fossickers from undermining stream banks with severe fines and consequences including confiscation of vehicles and equipment for those who breach these;
e) The vast majority of the so called evidence and misinformation currently being spread of prospectors harming the environment portrayed in the media and by other interest groups is in fact attributable to natural erosion caused by the elements such as flood damage, water and wind erosion, or animal activity such as wild boar rutting, etc.
f) We are not saying there are not those in the recreational fossickers community who do the wrong thing, far from it, there are as in any community but thankfully these, rotten apples who spoil it for the majority, are in the minority. Where identified these individuals are ostracised by the law abiding fossicking community and dealt with either through self regulation or the many laws and regulations currently in place to control and regulate recreational fossickers activities.
2. Our national parks are set aside to protect our natural areas for future generations. They are there for passive recreation, not exploitation.
Response:
a) We completely agree with this statement;
b) Recreational fossicking is a low impact passive form of recreation adopted by many older Australians including retirees and the so called grey nomads;
c) The health benefits of being able to enjoy these great untamed wilderness areas for this minority user group of the national parks and state forests is contributing to reducing hospital waiting queues and reliance on medical insurance and consequently benefiting the wider community as a whole;
d) Recreational fossickers also voluntarily clean the areas they fossick in removing other forest users rubbish (when located) and their own;
e) Recreational fossickers contribute to the environmental cause by removing harmful and toxic lead and mercury from the environment via metal detecting, gold panning and the use of sluices, Highbankers and other hand tools. Amalgams of gold and mercury were left in the environment by the early pioneer prospectors and gold panning and sluicing capture these removing this toxic and hazardous substance from the environment in a safe manner (under the water where the mercury is an inert, but still deadly, substance to humans and animal life).
3. Many of the rivers that flow through these parks are already listed as Heritage Rivers, and Natural Catchments. These additional levels of protection should be respected.
Response:
a) We completely agree with this statement; and
b) Recreational fossickers must currently comply with Fossicking legislation and associated regulations such as the Wild Rivers Act which strictly prohibit recreational fossickers from fossicking in these designated wild rivers and waterways with severe fines and consequences including confiscation of vehicles and equipment for those who breach these.
4. Fossicking is already allowed in a number of Box-Ironbark parks in central Victoria. But there has been no monitoring of their impacts as required by park management plans.
Response:
We disagree with this statement for the following reasons:
a) Forest rangers currently do an outstanding job of ensuring compliance and gathering evidence of non-compliance conducting regular patrols and along with police do request to see recreational fossickers licenses / miners rights and equipment to ensure they are acting within the law; and
b) Forest rangers also employ a number of surveillance techniques to ensure compliance including the use of surveillance cameras in forests to great effect including the recent prosecution of an illegal prospector who was fined and had his vehicle and equipment confiscated as a result of the use of these hidden surveillance cameras.
5. Fossicking and panning damages streamsides, causes erosion, and silts up rivers. In old gold-bearing streams, already worked over many years ago, heavy metals and other pollutants can be released into streams when soil is disturbed.
Response:
We disagree with this statement for the following reasons:
a) This has been addressed already in our responses 1a,1b,1c,1d,1e,1f and 2b, 2d, 2e and 3 b and 4a, 4b.
6. Tools used in prospecting and fossicking can spread harmful soil pathogens like Phytophthora.
Response:
a) We completely agree with this statement; and
b) Phytophthora varieties are a particular environmental concern for a number of interest groups including recreational fossickers, farmers, nurseries, etc. In particular Phytophthora cinnamomi is a microscopic soilborne organism, invisible to the naked eye, which causes root rot of a wide variety of plant species including many native and introduced plants. After infection Phytophthora grows through the root destroying the tissue which is then unable to absorb water and nutrients. Other species of Phytophthora may cause diseases on a wide range of plants but are generally less severe. The biology and control measures are very similar so this response will concentrate only on Phytophthora cinnamomi. Fossickers use a variety of tools in common practice for the collection and processing of soil samples. These tools in order to remain effective must be cleaned regularly or they will no longer be of use to the fossicker by becoming clogged with soil. This cleaning process will help reduce, but not eliminate, the spread of Phytophthora which exist naturally in the environment and has done so for countless eons;
c) Water is also a means of spreading Phytophthora. Small swimming zoospores are released which attach to and infect roots, normally behind the root tip. All spores and structures of Phytophthora are microscopic and cannot be seen with the naked eye. There is no way of visually telling if the pathogen is present in the soil. Recreational fossickers use small water pumps to circulate water taken directly from the environment to aid in reducing clay and further separate and classify fossicking materials. The precautions currently undertaken include:
i) These pumps have filtration systems fitted to remove soil debris and ensure clean water reaches the sluices and thus not clog the equipment;
ii) Water can also be recirculated via the use of water troughs which the pumps are sat in and the sluices water flow directed back into these troughs to reduce runoff (a common means of processing fossicking materials both out in the field and at other locations where water is in scarce supply); and
iii) Water flow can also be directed through gravels and tailing piles to provide natural filtration of the water to reduce the spread of pathogens beyond these.
d) Recreational fossickers must currently comply with Fossicking legislation and associated laws and regulations which places stringent controls over the amount of turbidity they can cause downstream within waterways with severe fines and consequences including confiscation of vehicles and equipment for those who breach these;
e) Recreational fossickers take their environmental responsibilities very seriously. We welcome input from VEAC and other interest groups on how recreational fossickers could better manage their use of equipment and assist reduce the spread of this common enemy, Phytophthora, that affects so many industries and interest groups.
7. Fossicking and gold panning can damage the many important Aboriginal cultural heritage sites in the region.
Response:
We disagree with this statement for the following reasons:
a) Recreational fossickers must currently comply with Fossicking legislation and associated laws and regulations such as the Native Title Act which strictly prohibit recreational fossickers from fossicking in areas of Aboriginal cultural heritage and significance without permission, with severe fines and consequences including confiscation of vehicles and equipment for those who breach these;
8. While prospectors insist they behave responsibly, many don't.
Response:
We disagree with this statement for the following reasons:
a) This has already been addressed in responses 1e and 1f; and
b) We welcome and actively seek input regularly from Forest Rangers in the field, Dept. Of Forestry staff, Dept. of Mines staff, Police and other regulatory and compliance bodies on best practice guidance for recreational fossickers standards of conduct and behaviour including the appropriate equipment for recreational fossicking and it's usage.
9. The parks in the investigation area are in relatively remote areas, and fossickers' activities will be difficult if not impossible to supervise or monitor.
Response:
We disagree with this statement for the following reasons:
a) This has already been addressed in responses 1e, 1f and 8b; and
10. Managing prospectors and fossicking will take park rangers away from other essential activities, at a time when staff numbers are already well below what's needed for park management.
Response:
We disagree with this statement for the following reasons:
a) This has already been addressed in responses 4a and 4b; and
b) Staff numbers and their activities are a matter for the relevant departments to address and we make no presumptions on telling them how to staff or run their departments; and
c) Recreational Fossickers also help the various departments acting as additional unofficial eyes and ears on the ground for the monitoring of illegal dumping of waste and other equally illegal activities occurring in the forests.
11. Many rivers, streams and catchments are important for rural, regional and city water supplies. We should be aiming to improve their condition, not compromise it.
Response:
a) We completely agree with this statement; and
b) This has already been addressed in responses 1b, 1d, 1e and 2a, 2d, 2e and 3b and 6d, 6e
12. There is already plenty of opportunity to fossick for gold in the extensive State Forest areas in eastern Victoria, outside national parks.
Response:
We disagree with this statement for the following reasons:
a) Gold prospecting built this state and all others in Australia with the majority of towns and cities owing their very existence to supporting neighbouring goldfields. These goldfields were in the latter half of the twentieth century locked away in state and national forests and the traditional users of these goldfields the prospectors and recreational fossickers were locked out and their rights slowly eroded and eventually taken away through overzealous regulation. This was as a direct result of the ill informed negative campaigning and false allegations bandied in the media, by certain minority interest groups, targeting law abiding prospectors and recreational fossickers who were simply practicing their craft / hobby in State and National Forests. As a result less and less areas are becoming available to the prospectors and recreational fossickers. Many of whom fear that it is getting to the point where only by obtaining the express written permission from private landholders or taking out full mining leases (a now very expensive and high impact option) will this time honoured tradition that built this nation be allowed to continue; and
b) By restricting access and locking up the land in State and National Forests the many small towns located in and around traditional goldfields who rely on the variety of trade and commerce opportunities generated by visiting prospectors and recreational fossickers aka GeoTourism will suffer. i.e. accommodation, tours, prospecting / fossicking equipment and consumables, supplies such as food, fuel, parking, visitor information centres, etc.
13. Prospecting is poorly regulated now, and causes considerable damage to many streams and waterways. There should be no expansion of prospecting into national parks. Instead, it should be effectively regulated where it already exists in Victoria.
Response:
We disagree with this statement for the following reasons:
a) Prospecting and recreational fossicking are amongst the most highly regulated activities in Australia the legislation includes but is not limited to:
- Mining Act;
- Fossicking Act;
- Wild Rivers Act;
- Forest Act(s) both National and State;
- Native Title Act;
And their amendments;
And in addition to and as part of this All Regulations and Guidelines associated with the above Acts; and
b) Refer responses 1d, 1e, 1f and 3b and 4a, 4b and 6d and 7a and 8b and 10b, 10c and 12a.
"We swear by the southern cross to stand truly by each other, and fight to defend our rights and our liberties."
Here is a proposed Draft Response to VEAC's website article entitled "Help keep gold prospecting out of national parks" which includes their argument for their current negative stance towards recreational fossickers entitled THE DANGERS OF DIGGING UP OUR PARKS currently displayed on their website.
This response is also directly relevant to many of the other articles on that website that misinform the public on the activities of prospectors and recreational fossickers in an attempt to further VEAC's own causes at the expense of others (the easy targets).
The response has been written to provide the public with an objective and informed view of the activities of prospectors and recreational fossickers practicing their time honoured traditional craft / hobby in both Victorian State and National Forests where the law allows this to take place.
More broadly I see this as directly relevant to the current changes to legislation being proposed regarding the use of sluices and the review of crown lands. I see this as a means of educating and informing the public on these issues in a measured, objective and non provocative manner.
Here are the allegations from that web article and a proposed measured and carefully considered response to each:
1. Fossicking (metal detecting, digging holes and panning for gold) causes unnecessary damage to streamsides, and can threaten rare species such as ground orchids.
Response:
We disagree with this statement for the following reasons:
a) Fossicking does no damage to stream sides (banks) as the gold pay streak is not located in the banks but on natural gravel bars that build up on the inside bends of streams as a result of eddy currents in the streams (eventually choking off and diverting the course of streams) and the centre of the stream. It makes no practical sense for informed recreational fossickers to be undermining or investigating stream sides where the gold is not located;
b) A number of international studies have shown that soil disturbance caused by recreational fossicking is beneficial to the establishment of seedlings in forests as the seeds can establish themselves in the soft tilled soil rather than on the natural hard ground. Other international studies have also shown that the tailings (returned fossicking materials i.e. Tilled soil and gravel) left behind as a result of recreational fossicking make an ideal breeding ground for many fish species.
c) Gold panning is the act of classifying and separating heavier materials from lighter ones via the use of a gold pan with or without water being present in the pan. All the original fossicking materials collected in the pan minus the small amount of gold bearing concentrates (usually a few teaspoons full) are returned from whence they came within a matter of minutes via the panning process;
d) Current Fossicking legislation and associated laws and regulations strictly prohibit recreational fossickers from undermining stream banks with severe fines and consequences including confiscation of vehicles and equipment for those who breach these;
e) The vast majority of the so called evidence and misinformation currently being spread of prospectors harming the environment portrayed in the media and by other interest groups is in fact attributable to natural erosion caused by the elements such as flood damage, water and wind erosion, or animal activity such as wild boar rutting, etc.
f) We are not saying there are not those in the recreational fossickers community who do the wrong thing, far from it, there are as in any community but thankfully these, rotten apples who spoil it for the majority, are in the minority. Where identified these individuals are ostracised by the law abiding fossicking community and dealt with either through self regulation or the many laws and regulations currently in place to control and regulate recreational fossickers activities.
2. Our national parks are set aside to protect our natural areas for future generations. They are there for passive recreation, not exploitation.
Response:
a) We completely agree with this statement;
b) Recreational fossicking is a low impact passive form of recreation adopted by many older Australians including retirees and the so called grey nomads;
c) The health benefits of being able to enjoy these great untamed wilderness areas for this minority user group of the national parks and state forests is contributing to reducing hospital waiting queues and reliance on medical insurance and consequently benefiting the wider community as a whole;
d) Recreational fossickers also voluntarily clean the areas they fossick in removing other forest users rubbish (when located) and their own;
e) Recreational fossickers contribute to the environmental cause by removing harmful and toxic lead and mercury from the environment via metal detecting, gold panning and the use of sluices, Highbankers and other hand tools. Amalgams of gold and mercury were left in the environment by the early pioneer prospectors and gold panning and sluicing capture these removing this toxic and hazardous substance from the environment in a safe manner (under the water where the mercury is an inert, but still deadly, substance to humans and animal life).
3. Many of the rivers that flow through these parks are already listed as Heritage Rivers, and Natural Catchments. These additional levels of protection should be respected.
Response:
a) We completely agree with this statement; and
b) Recreational fossickers must currently comply with Fossicking legislation and associated regulations such as the Wild Rivers Act which strictly prohibit recreational fossickers from fossicking in these designated wild rivers and waterways with severe fines and consequences including confiscation of vehicles and equipment for those who breach these.
4. Fossicking is already allowed in a number of Box-Ironbark parks in central Victoria. But there has been no monitoring of their impacts as required by park management plans.
Response:
We disagree with this statement for the following reasons:
a) Forest rangers currently do an outstanding job of ensuring compliance and gathering evidence of non-compliance conducting regular patrols and along with police do request to see recreational fossickers licenses / miners rights and equipment to ensure they are acting within the law; and
b) Forest rangers also employ a number of surveillance techniques to ensure compliance including the use of surveillance cameras in forests to great effect including the recent prosecution of an illegal prospector who was fined and had his vehicle and equipment confiscated as a result of the use of these hidden surveillance cameras.
5. Fossicking and panning damages streamsides, causes erosion, and silts up rivers. In old gold-bearing streams, already worked over many years ago, heavy metals and other pollutants can be released into streams when soil is disturbed.
Response:
We disagree with this statement for the following reasons:
a) This has been addressed already in our responses 1a,1b,1c,1d,1e,1f and 2b, 2d, 2e and 3 b and 4a, 4b.
6. Tools used in prospecting and fossicking can spread harmful soil pathogens like Phytophthora.
Response:
a) We completely agree with this statement; and
b) Phytophthora varieties are a particular environmental concern for a number of interest groups including recreational fossickers, farmers, nurseries, etc. In particular Phytophthora cinnamomi is a microscopic soilborne organism, invisible to the naked eye, which causes root rot of a wide variety of plant species including many native and introduced plants. After infection Phytophthora grows through the root destroying the tissue which is then unable to absorb water and nutrients. Other species of Phytophthora may cause diseases on a wide range of plants but are generally less severe. The biology and control measures are very similar so this response will concentrate only on Phytophthora cinnamomi. Fossickers use a variety of tools in common practice for the collection and processing of soil samples. These tools in order to remain effective must be cleaned regularly or they will no longer be of use to the fossicker by becoming clogged with soil. This cleaning process will help reduce, but not eliminate, the spread of Phytophthora which exist naturally in the environment and has done so for countless eons;
c) Water is also a means of spreading Phytophthora. Small swimming zoospores are released which attach to and infect roots, normally behind the root tip. All spores and structures of Phytophthora are microscopic and cannot be seen with the naked eye. There is no way of visually telling if the pathogen is present in the soil. Recreational fossickers use small water pumps to circulate water taken directly from the environment to aid in reducing clay and further separate and classify fossicking materials. The precautions currently undertaken include:
i) These pumps have filtration systems fitted to remove soil debris and ensure clean water reaches the sluices and thus not clog the equipment;
ii) Water can also be recirculated via the use of water troughs which the pumps are sat in and the sluices water flow directed back into these troughs to reduce runoff (a common means of processing fossicking materials both out in the field and at other locations where water is in scarce supply); and
iii) Water flow can also be directed through gravels and tailing piles to provide natural filtration of the water to reduce the spread of pathogens beyond these.
d) Recreational fossickers must currently comply with Fossicking legislation and associated laws and regulations which places stringent controls over the amount of turbidity they can cause downstream within waterways with severe fines and consequences including confiscation of vehicles and equipment for those who breach these;
e) Recreational fossickers take their environmental responsibilities very seriously. We welcome input from VEAC and other interest groups on how recreational fossickers could better manage their use of equipment and assist reduce the spread of this common enemy, Phytophthora, that affects so many industries and interest groups.
7. Fossicking and gold panning can damage the many important Aboriginal cultural heritage sites in the region.
Response:
We disagree with this statement for the following reasons:
a) Recreational fossickers must currently comply with Fossicking legislation and associated laws and regulations such as the Native Title Act which strictly prohibit recreational fossickers from fossicking in areas of Aboriginal cultural heritage and significance without permission, with severe fines and consequences including confiscation of vehicles and equipment for those who breach these;
8. While prospectors insist they behave responsibly, many don't.
Response:
We disagree with this statement for the following reasons:
a) This has already been addressed in responses 1e and 1f; and
b) We welcome and actively seek input regularly from Forest Rangers in the field, Dept. Of Forestry staff, Dept. of Mines staff, Police and other regulatory and compliance bodies on best practice guidance for recreational fossickers standards of conduct and behaviour including the appropriate equipment for recreational fossicking and it's usage.
9. The parks in the investigation area are in relatively remote areas, and fossickers' activities will be difficult if not impossible to supervise or monitor.
Response:
We disagree with this statement for the following reasons:
a) This has already been addressed in responses 1e, 1f and 8b; and
10. Managing prospectors and fossicking will take park rangers away from other essential activities, at a time when staff numbers are already well below what's needed for park management.
Response:
We disagree with this statement for the following reasons:
a) This has already been addressed in responses 4a and 4b; and
b) Staff numbers and their activities are a matter for the relevant departments to address and we make no presumptions on telling them how to staff or run their departments; and
c) Recreational Fossickers also help the various departments acting as additional unofficial eyes and ears on the ground for the monitoring of illegal dumping of waste and other equally illegal activities occurring in the forests.
11. Many rivers, streams and catchments are important for rural, regional and city water supplies. We should be aiming to improve their condition, not compromise it.
Response:
a) We completely agree with this statement; and
b) This has already been addressed in responses 1b, 1d, 1e and 2a, 2d, 2e and 3b and 6d, 6e
12. There is already plenty of opportunity to fossick for gold in the extensive State Forest areas in eastern Victoria, outside national parks.
Response:
We disagree with this statement for the following reasons:
a) Gold prospecting built this state and all others in Australia with the majority of towns and cities owing their very existence to supporting neighbouring goldfields. These goldfields were in the latter half of the twentieth century locked away in state and national forests and the traditional users of these goldfields the prospectors and recreational fossickers were locked out and their rights slowly eroded and eventually taken away through overzealous regulation. This was as a direct result of the ill informed negative campaigning and false allegations bandied in the media, by certain minority interest groups, targeting law abiding prospectors and recreational fossickers who were simply practicing their craft / hobby in State and National Forests. As a result less and less areas are becoming available to the prospectors and recreational fossickers. Many of whom fear that it is getting to the point where only by obtaining the express written permission from private landholders or taking out full mining leases (a now very expensive and high impact option) will this time honoured tradition that built this nation be allowed to continue; and
b) By restricting access and locking up the land in State and National Forests the many small towns located in and around traditional goldfields who rely on the variety of trade and commerce opportunities generated by visiting prospectors and recreational fossickers aka GeoTourism will suffer. i.e. accommodation, tours, prospecting / fossicking equipment and consumables, supplies such as food, fuel, parking, visitor information centres, etc.
13. Prospecting is poorly regulated now, and causes considerable damage to many streams and waterways. There should be no expansion of prospecting into national parks. Instead, it should be effectively regulated where it already exists in Victoria.
Response:
We disagree with this statement for the following reasons:
a) Prospecting and recreational fossicking are amongst the most highly regulated activities in Australia the legislation includes but is not limited to:
- Mining Act;
- Fossicking Act;
- Wild Rivers Act;
- Forest Act(s) both National and State;
- Native Title Act;
And their amendments;
And in addition to and as part of this All Regulations and Guidelines associated with the above Acts; and
b) Refer responses 1d, 1e, 1f and 3b and 4a, 4b and 6d and 7a and 8b and 10b, 10c and 12a.
Goldtarget
(AKA OldGT)
Hey gcause its actually the VNPA, Victorian National Parks Association, a lobby group for NP use, this is there submission and stance to the report as stakeholders
As opposed to the VEAC that you have assigned it to, and so nobody gets confused are the group it was submitted to for review in determining its findings that were passed onto the Victorian government.
Other than that I think its fantastic. Perhaps steering away from the Phytophthora angle is to be advised, instead go down the noxious weed (blackberries etc) path that we are proactive. If you head down that path of acknowledging then its a slippery slope. All they can tell you is it exists, not where our how it got there. Green leaning gross use this sort of misinformation no fault claims to vilify people who may actually be completely innocent. Will we ban magpies because they put their beak in to feed? Or wombats who want to make a home are they banned? See the line I'm heading down. Better to get on the front foot.
As opposed to the VEAC that you have assigned it to, and so nobody gets confused are the group it was submitted to for review in determining its findings that were passed onto the Victorian government.
Other than that I think its fantastic. Perhaps steering away from the Phytophthora angle is to be advised, instead go down the noxious weed (blackberries etc) path that we are proactive. If you head down that path of acknowledging then its a slippery slope. All they can tell you is it exists, not where our how it got there. Green leaning gross use this sort of misinformation no fault claims to vilify people who may actually be completely innocent. Will we ban magpies because they put their beak in to feed? Or wombats who want to make a home are they banned? See the line I'm heading down. Better to get on the front foot.
Terry said:
thats not the right place to post it
you can click on this link below to sign the petition
http://www.change.org/en-AU/petitio...utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=share_petition
also click on this link too and click the orange writing where it says "Make a comment online now"
http://www.lpma.nsw.gov.au/crown_la...anagement/crown_lands_legislation_white_paper
we have to check that we are talking to the right people when we lodge anything
also.......
we will get better results by talking politely and giving people our information , if we jump on their heads with abuse they will close the door on us.
its far better to make friends than enemies
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2012
- Messages
- 6,020
- Reaction score
- 1,975
You're links need fixing up HeadsUp, try right clicking on the link you're copying and selecting copy link location. Otherwise it only copies part of the link (i.e. the shortened version that's displayed on the forum) which doesn't work when re-pasted.
Apologies all. As Goldtarget has pointed out its actually the VNPA website, Victorian National Parks Association, a lobby group for NP use, this is there submission and stance to the report as stakeholders As opposed to the VEAC that you I assigned it to, and so nobody gets confused are the group it was submitted to for review in determining its findings that were passed onto the Victorian government. Apologies to VEAC.
Bazz said:If you haven't noticed, special interest groups have a tendancy to slam doors shut first and justify later.
Someone shutting me out of what I love doing is closer to my enemy than my friend!!
Watch ya fingers
wise man once say ;
responding with kindness is one of the cruelest punishments one can inflict upon the enemy
it confuses the helll out of em and brings them up to your level
Nugget said:
sorry i left it too long and cant edit it now 8.(
Apologies Nugget I will start a separate thread. I thought we could use this response as the basis for a position paper, providing a united voice, to address a number of issues at once. I will move it. :8Nugget said:
Goldtarget said:
agreed on the above points goldtarget
and thankyou gcause for the massive marathon effort you put into that post
ps . birds would be the culprit in spreading phyto ........ :|
Similar threads
- Sticky
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Northern Michigan United States of America possible magnetic meteorites- Latest: Joshua Brown
-
-
-
