The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > National parks: protected from what? > Comments

National parks: protected from what? : Comments

By David Leyonhjelm, published 17/11/2014

While salving the electorate's environmental conscience with new parks, governments have failed to provide the necessary funds to properly manage them.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. All
Perhaps they are then protected from feral deer, you know those lovable bambis, that nearly ate (destroyed) NZ's native forests, (when there's nothing else left, ring bark the mature trees) and now threaten the same here!
Or perhaps it's feral pigs, goats, camels, dogs, hares, rabbits and donkeys!?
Or perhaps just feral weeds, like the runaway rubber plant vine!?
Covers whole forests for up to 2-3 years, then like all biennials, dies off, leaving nothing but a huge dead and bone dry fire hazard.
While it's hard to fathom the minds of vote seeking pollies, it's far harder to fathom the minds of those who advise them.
Until you see a Czechoslovakian film; titled insane, which depicts a scene, where the inmates have taken over and run the asylum!?
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Monday, 17 November 2014 11:59:00 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
More fundamentally, one might also ask: Why protect National Parks at all? This is not a silly question.

Some national parks were proclaimed because they were places of special beauty or environmental value. I can see a good case for protecting such land. During the 1970s and 1980s, however, many left-leaning State Governments converted a lot of vacant crown land or state forest into national parks in order to gain the greenie vote. Did such lands deserve protection? Generally not.

By the mid 20th century most vacant crown land owed its status to the fact that it was infertile and unsuited for agriculture. This logically lowered its need for protection so that there was no special need to protect it from needs such as mining. Declaring so much vacant crown land as national park was a mistake!
Posted by Bren, Monday, 17 November 2014 3:33:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I agree with the author, governments of all stripes have much to answer for there.
As to "protect from what?", I'd say the greatest need is to protect our NP's from the government itself!
Oz is a harsh land and the public service, overseen by corrupt and inept politicians answering to a feckless and ignorant electorate, is the worst possible "gardener" to deal with the harsh regimes necessary to successfully maintain it.
More input from Indigenous Aussies and greater community involvement would be a good first step to resolving this, IMO.
Posted by G'dayBruce, Wednesday, 19 November 2014 8:25:48 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy