Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

Topic Date User

Club Wolgon 4-May-2007 At 8:26:13 PM climberman

Message

I disagree anthonyk - I think that if the State has an opportunity to exchange, at zero dollar cost, some low ecological value farmland, for some higher ecological value remnant/good regrowth native habitat, on a good size ratio (here around 2:1), it's an opportunity to be taken. Park boundaries are generally determined by cadastre Lots, not ecological values. Cadastre doesn't always meet up with the environment. Here's an opportunity to adjust some boundaries, have someone else (not you and me via our taxes) do the environmental and legal work, and do something that's a park benefit. Classing it as 'selling National Parks' is media wanking.

Frankly, if all across the state poorly conserved vegetation types (generally valley bottom vegetation) is exchanged for cleared farmland, with other environmental riders in place, I reckon that the duck's frikken nuts and a great conservation outcome.

A pure philosophical position of "all Parks are sacred" avoids the issue that many park areas are of low conservation value and were probably assigned as Park by default or duress, rather than by dedicated research as to the best and most worthy areas for conservation. Many Parks contain areas of 'bad' in with the 'good', as that's how the fences were.... We should aim to fiercly protect the best, and if good becomes available sensibly consider at what cost.

macc..... so they got one off the ground and hope for some more. No worries. If unregulated grazing properties can be turned into wanky 'ecoresorts' like this one, no real issue from where I sit. At least they are applying for their development adjacent to the Park, which is not dependent on their undertaking landswap with the Park. Bribes..... big call..... What environmental assessment or development aplications did you do before illegally bolting in a National Park ?

Re Royal/Burning Palms/Garie etc, the Crown is certainly of the opinion that they own the shack lands, not individuals, who are there under licence. Parks pretty much removed all the ones they could up to 1990 odd. As I read the Royal/Garrawarra PoM current cabins will be removed on the death/revocation of the current licencee. Over 200 have gone that way so far. heritage may be the only thing that keeps any. So my guess is they will do a Heritage Assessment (in fact done already), Statement of Heritage Impact, then seek consent to destroy or whatever TF it's called now from the Heritage Office (now Dept Planning), barring any particularly sexy cabins of great heritage value. Some are likely to be available for rent I guess like many ex-reso places in National Park estate throughout NSW. A reading between the lines of Parks' policy is that they don't like em, don't want em won't keep em. Turning them into an Emirates-style luxury resort is as likely as me climbing 34 solo, nude and on acid; possible, but certainly not within the current world view