Hello all - from things I have heard of late the landcare people have taken over the running of the Long Paddock therefore it seems fairly obvious that they don't want the stock on the road. Apparently the prices might be going up so that will be another cost that farmers will have to face. This will be a very negative move as I am sure you can all appreciate the amount of weeds that will grow and also the very big threat of fires - this has been proven over and over that when the fuel isn't managed properly the fires are horrific. The Long Paddock is a lifeline to some farmers that need this in the time of drought but here we go again minority groups rule again!!!
What else would one expect from the greenie crowd. Just look at the way national parks are managed, "a bush fire waiting to happen".
Burning off at the right time of the year would stop most big bush fires. In years gone by,crown land that was used to graze cattle and is now national parks was burnt at the end of winter. The fires kept the fuel levels down.
-- Edited by Phillipn on Monday 5th of January 2015 08:31:17 AM
On our last trip through western QLD and up to Darwin we met up with several groups of people moving cattle along the long paddock, they were desperately trying to keep their animals alive so they could survive the drought, they were friendly and interesting
People to talk to, they are hard working people that I have a high level of respect for.
We really need to keep the greenies in the cities where they can harass the volunteer firies as the carry out hazard reductions we are used to dealing with them.
__________________
Life was meant to be enjoyed Australia was meant to be explored
Happily doing both to the Max.
Life is like a camera, focus on what's important & you will capture it every Time
My brother was in charge of a group doing burn offs immediately after Black Saturday in Vic.
A greenie appeared from nowhere and chained himself to a large gum tree.
My brother's response was: "you stay right there, mate, so we know where you are. We're not interested in burning that tree. OK fellas, start burning that undergrowth".
When he turned back around the greenie had disappeared!!
you seem to be expecting common sense approach by greenies.
that ain't gonna happen.
as for the long paddock, I think they will find they have a fight on their hands.
wait and see I think.
frank
Frank, you are 100% correct. Greenies do not have an ounce of common sense, nor do the shinny a#### pen pushers who administer the parks and the long paddocks.
There is a thing called commonsense which at times the greens do not show. Why are the fires that we see today burning a lot hotter than years ago - the fuel has to be kept under control - this has been proven. The outdoors can be looked after and be enjoyed but I can say that to drive along our roads and see the various weeds etc wouldn't be very pleasant. As I said before these routes are a lifeline to some farmers trying to keep their livelihood alive.
What ranger, what state or territory or council district? Is there a regulatory or legislative reference or is this just "something s/he heard"?
There is not a single "Landcare" organisation it is rather a collective grouping of state and regional organisations committed to improve land use and environmental sustainability (www.agriculture.gov.au/natural-resources/landcare)
To be honest I don't understand why a group that claims a desire to enjoy life in the great outdoors enjoying Australia's great diversity is so vehemently opposed to groups such as the greens who are committed to preserving the diversity of the great Australian outdoors.
Dave
The greenies need the farmers to produce food to feed them and to pay tax for their dole payments.
From a caravanning and camping perspective it would be prudent to get a leg in somehow to protect what we value. I imagine there will be all sorts of public and private lobbyists, and the usual argy-bargy between layers of government.
Where management of the 'resource' is proposed, or continuing sale/lease of the land, there will inevitably be restrictions. It would be very easy for our needs to be forgotten. We could be like the little boy who fell out of the plane. For instance, what government department, qango, NGO or other lobbyist is going to be all in favour of free camping and free choice?
I don't have any oar in the water on this outside of what I have said already.
From a caravanning and camping perspective it would be prudent to get a leg in somehow to protect what we value. I imagine there will be all sorts of public and private lobbyists, and the usual argy-bargy between layers of government.
Where management of the 'resource' is proposed, or continuing sale/lease of the land, there will inevitably be restrictions. It would be very easy for our needs to be forgotten. We could be like the little boy who fell out of the plane. For instance, what government department, qango, NGO or other lobbyist is going to be all in favour of free camping and free choice?
I don't have any oar in the water on this outside of what I have said already.
The report looks interesting. Thanks for posting it. I'll download it so can read it at leisure.
When we talk about the "long paddock" I think of the stock route from Echuca to Wilcannia. I think the Hay shire were promoting it, hoping to attract nomads to the towns along that route.