[Advocacy] Shooting wlecomed to NSW National Parks...But not MTBs

[dcrofty]

Gotta hand it to the Hunters, very well organised and with lots of political clout as evidenced by this decision. Time to write me some letters.

 

[deadbudgy]

Even NPWS themselves are against the hunting proposal. They have too many user groups and not enough staff or money to manage them as it is without fuching Fatty O'Barrell adding another one to the list.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/br...hunting-in-parks/story-e6frf7jx-1226378826428[/QUOTE
Boo Hoo , poor NPWS . Your a twit !

Why? Just pointing out that if Barry actually cared about reducing feral animal numbers he would increase funding for NPWS not give licenses to bogans with guns, and NPWS feel this way too. Not everything is about you and your bike dude.

 

[motrain]

National parks against bikes is FALSE

hi all my mums a national parks ranger in nsw and latley they are focusing on getting more people into the parks and yes bikes included they are even tryin to create bike only trails but its all still in the begining stages at the moment they have trails open to bikes in most parks already just go to your local office and ask they have brochures with maps distances and grades of rides all over nsw so dont think there against us its just there trying to cater for a wide range of people and activitys if we all get out there and show we are keen and respect other park users it will push them to consider more trails as demand rises. i did 2 park rides last month both of witch were promoted buy national parks as bike horse trails and i also hear there putting together a comity to look into the prospects and sustainability of more trails ........ we just have to show them there is a demand for them.

 

[3viltoast3r]

hi all my mums a national parks ranger in nsw and latley they are focusing on getting more people into the parks and yes bikes included they are even tryin to create bike only trails but its all still in the begining stages at the moment they have trails open to bikes in most parks already just go to your local office and ask they have brochures with maps distances and grades of rides all over nsw so dont think there against us its just there trying to cater for a wide range of people and activitys if we all get out there and show we are keen and respect other park users it will push them to consider more trails as demand rises. i did 2 park rides last month both of witch were promoted buy national parks as bike horse trails and i also hear there putting together a comity to look into the prospects and sustainability of more trails ........ we just have to show them there is a demand for them.

I couldn't read all that, Although I will congratulate you on your use of a grand total of one full stop.

 

[SideFX]

Why? Just pointing out that if Barry actually cared about reducing feral animal numbers he would increase funding for NPWS not give licenses to bogans with guns, and NPWS feel this way too. Not everything is about you and your bike dude.

Mate you miss the point , NPWS don't want anyone in the parks . NPWS are just another arm of the government as they are public servants . They are denying you some basic freedoms in this country . Australia has a shit load of bush and the general public < tax payers > who fund this department are denied access to parks .Who are they to say we cant use these areas as we please ? . On O`Farrell allowing hunters into parks . Ill break it down for you , all government departments are completely useless and a drain on us all . Our hard earned money that gets taxed pay there wages . Allowing recreational shoots is by far the cheapest and most efficient way of solving feral animal problems .Why shouldn't people be able to go and hunt these pests that are destroying animal and plant life in OUR ! Parks ! in a far more alarming way than any MTB , horse ride , moto ridder ect ever would . Why employ more useless people that get nothing done ? . Just remember NSW has had over 12 year of hard Labour in Government the state is broke . We need people like Barry O`Farrell to get us out of the shit and be liberal as people with less government meddling in our live .
Its not all about me or my bike it about Freedom ! DUDE ! .

 

[sammydog]

Mate you miss the point , NPWS don't want anyone in the parks . NPWS are just another arm of the government as they are public servants . They are denying you some basic freedoms in this country . Australia has a shit load of bush and the general public < tax payers > who fund this department are denied access to parks .Who are they to say we cant use these areas as we please ? . On O`Farrell allowing hunters into parks . Ill break it down for you , all government departments are completely useless and a drain on us all . Our hard earned money that gets taxed pay there wages . Allowing recreational shoots is by far the cheapest and most efficient way of solving feral animal problems .Why shouldn't people be able to go and hunt these pests that are destroying animal and plant life in OUR ! Parks ! in a far more alarming way than any MTB , horse ride , moto ridder ect ever would . Why employ more useless people that get nothing done ? . Just remember NSW has had over 12 year of hard Labour in Government the state is broke . We need people like Barry O`Farrell to get us out of the shit and be liberal as people with less government meddling in our live .
Its not all about me or my bike it about Freedom ! DUDE ! .

I don't agree with you at all on that one, taking aside glenrock where we have had some massive wins, I have recently been talking to (at the NPWS request) another region where huge things are being planned on the mtb front. The only thing holding it back is funding at this point. And we are talking trail development o a scale not seen in NSW.

NPWS are looking at us as a legitimate user group, the issue for us in many areas at the moment it the local NPWS staff don't have the funding or resources to deal with us. Even in Glenrock where we got trails into the POM, getting funding to do stuff is a nightmare.

That aside, people shouldn't be blaming the NPWS for shooters getting into the parks, they didn't ask for it, this was a political deal done by the elected government to allow the selling of something public assets. What the shooters have, that we don't have, is people holding political positions. Until we actually have the numbers where it matters, we con't have that level of clout. Blame everyone who voted for this outcome, not the NPWS.

 

[SideFX]

I don't agree with you at all on that one, taking aside glenrock where we have had some massive wins, I have recently been talking to (at the NPWS request) another region where huge things are being planned on the mtb front. The only thing holding it back is funding at this point. And we are talking trail development o a scale not seen in NSW.

NPWS are looking at us as a legitimate user group, the issue for us in many areas at the moment it the local NPWS staff don't have the funding or resources to deal with us. Even in Glenrock where we got trails into the POM, getting funding to do stuff is a nightmare.

That aside, people shouldn't be blaming the NPWS for shooters getting into the parks, they didn't ask for it, this was a political deal done by the elected government to allow the selling of something public assets. What the shooters have, that we don't have, is people holding political positions. Until we actually have the numbers where it matters, we con't have that level of clout. Blame everyone who voted for this outcome, not the NPWS.

NPWS dont have time to deal with us ? . They see us a legitimacy user group ? . What are you on about ? . The parks are our`s for us the people ! Sammydog i understand that you have done allot for the MTB community and yes i do respect all that you have done and are doing . But why is there so much red tap and restrictions for simply riding a bike in the bush . Why do we allow these people to have so much say in our lives ?

 

[CresoDH]

so many different opions no wonder its such a stuff up, no one has a diffinative anwser

 

[sammydog]

NPWS dont have time to deal with us ? . They see us a legitimacy user group ? . What are you on about ? . The parks are our`s for us the people ! Sammydog i understand that you have done allot for the MTB community and yes i do respect all that you have done and are doing . But why is there so much red tap and restrictions for simply riding a bike in the bush . Why do we allow these people to have so much say in our lives ?

Red Tape and restrictions, yes there are a lot, where do they come from, as with most things govt agencies deal with, they come from the legislation that an agency is empowered to regulate.

NPWS, RTA, Local Govt, while here to serve the public are primarily created to undertake a regulatory role whereby they administer the functions of various legislation.

Who creates the legislation, not the agency, but the govt. Who funds the agencies to enable them to undertake the regulatory roles, the govt. So yes the parks are their for the people, but the parks and NPWs are bound by various legislation and policies. The NPWS does not create the legislation, they have very little if any input into legislation, the elected govt does.

Now I am not in any way pointing the finger at the current liberal setup or the previous labour govt. In my opinion both have been expecting all agencies to do more with less. The result, policies like the new mtb strategy struggle to be implemented.

There is the same issue in Local Govt, people scream that they should be providing trail access, I agree, but with an ever dwindling funding stream we will see local govt increasingly strip back services to things they are regulated to provide, i.e. garbage, roads, planning.

Too many people take a shallow and convenient view of what parks and other agencies do and blame them for "red Tape". Often thats created by the legislation they are empowered to regulate. Blame the people who created the legislation.

 

[aanon]

The government are trying to crack down on illegal gun possession, i see a new job for outlaw motorcycle club nominees.
''Oi Brutus, get down to the forest, any c#nt you see with a gun, smash em and take it, now on ya fu#kin bike''

 

[Craven Moorehead]

SideFX if you think we face a lot of red tape and restrictions now imagine if MTBing was as heavily regulated as hunting.You'd need to have a license and do a safe riding course,you'd have to pass a knowledge and psych test,have a police background check and have the police regularly inspect your bikes which would have to be registered,there'd be a restriction on the type of bikes you'd be allowed to ride and how many you could have,you'd need to be a member of a club or have written permission from a landowner to ride on their land,if you wanted to ride on public land like state forests you'd have to apply for permission and be told when and where you can ride and only on certain tracks and it goes on and on.
My point is any activity in a public place with a degree of risk to the participants,public or the environment needs to be regulated and monitored.If we as MTBers want to avoid over regulation and a poor public perception we need to work with land managers like NPWS and other govt depts and keep an open line of communication and we'll get results like Sammydog has in Newcastle.If we ignorantly abuse them on public forums like this(yes rangers and other govt employees are MTBers too)we'll just be biting the hand that feeds us.

 

[unitec]

Thin edge of the wedge

Red Tape and restrictions, yes there are a lot, where do they come from, as with most things govt agencies deal with, they come from the legislation that an agency is empowered to regulate.

NPWS, RTA, Local Govt, while here to serve the public are primarily created to undertake a regulatory role whereby they administer the functions of various legislation.

Too many people take a shallow and convenient view of what parks and other agencies do and blame them for "red Tape". Often thats created by the legislation they are empowered to regulate. Blame the people who created the legislation.

Mountain bikers should take their share of the blame for this decision as we were part of the push to knock down the barriers to national parks.
National parks have been locked away for a reason & if we are prepared to knock down these barriers we should unsderstand that there are plenty of other groups that will march through the hole we create.
I distain hunting as much as the next guy (& don't care much for 4WD either) but I am sure these groups have put together reasonable arguments just as we have. (I just hope our children forgive us)
Perhaps it's time to re-think if we really need access or if we can find land elsewhere???

 

[pharmaboy]

My understanding is that the vary large majority of legislation is bought forward by the public servants themselves within the depts - politicians dont create the legislation, nor agitate for it, they simply either pass it or reject it.

There is a culture within national parks (as there is in many public service dept's) of ownership, at best stewardship, but hardly ever is it a service culture towards the public.

If you make something valuable, it becomes protected - i think a notable example of this was the opening up of crocodile farming etc - making it a legal trade and allowing farming killed the poaching industry dead and ensured the species well into the future.

Prohibition almost never works, but legislation by its very nature ads to prohibition - they make rules and laws they never seem to remove rules and laws. So when mtb was ignored, there wasnt any laws, but as soon as we became known and agitated for recognition, that introduced laws and rules - the default was that we werent allowed and so now have to be "approved" - as sidefx mentions - they are public servants, or are supposed to be public servants - we are the public not the enemy.

 

[Jaybies_Can_Crash]

Isn't part of the point of national parks to have them protected/stewarded rather than just allowing free public access? If SideFX's apparent low governement approach were to be implemented, there would be no parks, the land would be mined for its resources with clearfelling (like pretty much everywhere that wasn't protected). Even after protection the free-for-all would allow the place to be irreparrably damaged by erosion and other mis-management issues. For every good trail builder, there are many terrible ones, and motos etc that will, without good management, tear the place up.

I feel that there must be a medium between no access (and thus full protection) of the national parks (which the community as a whole have voted to be of significance and worth protecting) and free access (and thus no protection). No park exists without management, and thus the case has to be made as to why the thing that we are trying to protect won't be damaged by the new access group/activity. Obviously I want mtb access and sustainable trails, but I don't feel that complete freedom (read anarchy) is an effective way to run things. Humans are selfish, and what gives our generation the right to use/abuse these places as we see fit, with no regard for those that will come after us? I think that there have been plenty of demonstrations both here and elsewhere that sustainable trails are possible and that national parks should get with the times and sanction the building of trails by those who know how to build them. The excessive red tape related to mtb is probably in a large part due to generational issues and mis-perceptions by people both in the more powerful lobbies such as walking/general environmentalism. Hopefully this will pass as mtb gets more of a profile and these lobbies are infiltrated by mountain bikers, as I would expect over time.

On the original topic, it seems that it's partially the big organised political capacities of entitled minorities, like hunters, that would get something through. If mountain bikers want similar access then we need to get organised. I feel that it's also an admission that we can't afford to have professionals hunt ferals in the parks, but I'd prefer to pay more tax to have that happen than have various recreational shooters in the parks with me while I'm going for a hike...

 

[Shredden]

CBF reading this thread but isn't the whole point of letting shooters in that it is a cheap/free way to control pests, a task which NWPS or whatever it is could never afford by themselves?

Compared to MTB which has, well, not many positive effects on the environment?

 

[pharmaboy]

Isn't part of the point of national parks to have them protected/stewarded rather than just allowing free public access? If SideFX's apparent low governement approach were to be implemented, there would be no parks, the land would be mined for its resources with clearfelling (like pretty much everywhere that wasn't protected). Even after protection the free-for-all would allow the place to be irreparrably damaged by erosion and other mis-management issues. For every good trail builder, there are many terrible ones, and motos etc that will, without good management, tear the place up.

This isnt a binary discussion. If national parks see their job as protecting, then exclusion becomes their aim. I think historically, the reason for existance was enabling not exclusion. But enabling use doesnt automatically mean pumped up 4wds driving straight through the bush.

"Humans are selfish, and what gives our generation the right to use/abuse these places as we see fit, with no regard for those that will come after us?"

gee that seems a very pessimistic view of fellow humans - I reckon people are considerate, love the outdoors and fully understand the concept of saving and protecting - we have or want to have children who we want to have the same opportunities as we did. sometimes, some people need a little educaton on that front, but its a rarity not the rule.

 

[strezd]

Uranium mining in Kakadu national Park then selling it to our so called enemies. Ring any bells.

Look at the bigger picture because until you do you'll all be fighting over these smaller issues trying to decide who has the best band aid.

 

[SideFX]

Red Tape and restrictions, yes there are a lot, where do they come from, as with most things govt agencies deal with, they come from the legislation that an agency is empowered to regulate.

NPWS, RTA, Local Govt, while here to serve the public are primarily created to undertake a regulatory role whereby they administer the functions of various legislation.

Who creates the legislation, not the agency, but the govt. Who funds the agencies to enable them to undertake the regulatory roles, the govt. So yes the parks are their for the people, but the parks and NPWs are bound by various legislation and policies. The NPWS does not create the legislation, they have very little if any input into legislation, the elected govt does.

Now I am not in any way pointing the finger at the current liberal setup or the previous labour govt. In my opinion both have been expecting all agencies to do more with less. The result, policies like the new mtb strategy struggle to be implemented.

There is the same issue in Local Govt, people scream that they should be providing trail access, I agree, but with an ever dwindling funding stream we will see local govt increasingly strip back services to things they are regulated to provide, i.e. garbage, roads, planning.

Too many people take a shallow and convenient view of what parks and other agencies do and blame them for "red Tape". Often thats created by the legislation they are empowered to regulate. Blame the people who created the legislation.

:
No , the legislation on bicycle ridding in all NP is that is not allowed on walking tracks and thats it . NPWS are the ones they label bicycles as Vehicles and deal with us accordingly to there management frame work . NPWS set there own agenda and adopt there own park management " frame work" . NPWS park management frame work give them far to much control on what happens to the land , there frame work if you read it gives them the legitimate right do as they please when they please all in the name of the environment or historic value . Its a joke ! . Why do we need this level on control ? . Do we need this level of control ? .
Sammydog do you need this level of control ? . How many track have u seen over the year of riding that are not still in use because neglect ? . Ive been riding for many years now and all the tracks are mostly the same because of rider maintenance .
NPWS frame work and there R.O.S policy is being used agains us and all .

 

[SideFX]

SideFX if you think we face a lot of red tape and restrictions now imagine if MTBing was as heavily regulated as hunting.You'd need to have a license and do a safe riding course,you'd have to pass a knowledge and psych test,have a police background check and have the police regularly inspect your bikes which would have to be registered,there'd be a restriction on the type of bikes you'd be allowed to ride and how many you could have,you'd need to be a member of a club or have written permission from a landowner to ride on their land,if you wanted to ride on public land like state forests you'd have to apply for permission and be told when and where you can ride and only on certain tracks and it goes on and on.
My point is any activity in a public place with a degree of risk to the participants,public or the environment needs to be regulated and monitored.If we as MTBers want to avoid over regulation and a poor public perception we need to work with land managers like NPWS and other govt depts and keep an open line of communication and we'll get results like Sammydog has in Newcastle.If we ignorantly abuse them on public forums like this(yes rangers and other govt employees are MTBers too)we'll just be biting the hand that feeds us.

Why would or should MTB ing be regulated as heavenly as hunting or shooting ? even as a hypothetical . Do you feel that people walking on a foot path should be regulated ? there at risk of falling . There is risk in every thing we do . Why do we need to be regulated ? . Australia had vast amount of bush land , the environment impact of our sport is negligible .

 

[SideFX]

Isn't part of the point of national parks to have them protected/stewarded rather than just allowing free public access? If SideFX's apparent low governement approach were to be implemented, there would be no parks, the land would be mined for its resources with clearfelling (like pretty much everywhere that wasn't protected). Even after protection the free-for-all would allow the place to be irreparrably damaged by erosion and other mis-management issues. For every good trail builder, there are many terrible ones, and motos etc that will, without good management, tear the place up.

I feel that there must be a medium between no access (and thus full protection) of the national parks (which the community as a whole have voted to be of significance and worth protecting) and free access (and thus no protection). No park exists without management, and thus the case has to be made as to why the thing that we are trying to protect won't be damaged by the new access group/activity. Obviously I want mtb access and sustainable trails, but I don't feel that complete freedom (read anarchy) is an effective way to run things. Humans are selfish, and what gives our generation the right to use/abuse these places as we see fit, with no regard for those that will come after us? I think that there have been plenty of demonstrations both here and elsewhere that sustainable trails are possible and that national parks should get with the times and sanction the building of trails by those who know how to build them. The excessive red tape related to mtb is probably in a large part due to generational issues and mis-perceptions by people both in the more powerful lobbies such as walking/general environmentalism. Hopefully this will pass as mtb gets more of a profile and these lobbies are infiltrated by mountain bikers, as I would expect over time.

On the original topic, it seems that it's partially the big organised political capacities of entitled minorities, like hunters, that would get something through. If mountain bikers want similar access then we need to get organised. I feel that it's also an admission that we can't afford to have professionals hunt ferals in the parks, but I'd prefer to pay more tax to have that happen than have various recreational shooters in the parks with me while I'm going for a hike...

Yes low government approach but the right government approach . Mining and riding a bike ? you really cant put them in the same category . With that logic why not say bicycle ridding and atom bomb testing or pineapple farming or grass hopper racing .
On your original topic discussion parks arnt controlling pests there failing and failing terribly . They are controlling us though , they do like to issue fines and they love using public money to have people collect money from you .