PDA

View Full Version : Park to Lose its Brumbies



Linda
10-12-00, 02:02 PM
This is a article from my local paper.

A COMMUNITY advisory committee has given its full support to the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) in removing feral horses from the Guy Fawkes River National Park.
The committee, appointed by the Minister for the Environment, has urged the NPWS to complete the tasks as soon as possible by the most appropriate means.

Has anyone else heard about this or do they know what it means to the horses? I would say that it does not look like a very rosy future for them and hopefully it isn't to unpleasant and sadistic.

Phil
11-12-00, 07:56 AM
What use, may I ask is a "community advisory committe, appointed by the Minister? It's a committe of "yes men" designed to give the appearance of community support to the Minister's personal agenda. I hate politicians. There is an honest one in the country. We need a new system of government more urgently than we need to get rid of the brumbies. F... 'em all!

Carola
11-12-00, 08:43 AM
I hope those who "advise" will be present when the slaughtering happens and I hope they will see it in their minds for the rest of their life.

Here is what I got from the CEO of the RSPCA the other day:
...............................................
"
Dear Ms Adolf
I acknowledge receipt of your email of 28 November in relation to the cull of brumbies in the Guy Fawkes National Park.

Let me assure you that the RSPCA is currently investigating this matter and it will be pursued like any other of the thousands of investigations that we receive every year.

Also the RSPCA was not notified of any intended cull.

I expect this enquiry will take weeks to complete and any result will not be compromised by any outside influences. The Society is not aligned with any other organisation and will conduct a thorough and appropriate enquiry into this matter.

For All Creatures Great and Small

STEVEN COLEMAN
CHIEF INSPECTOR"
............................................
Steven Coleman's e-mail address is:
rspcaceo@ozemail.com.au

doc
11-12-00, 10:36 PM
Hear, hear Phil, although I suspect you meant there is "not" an honest one in the country. The best way to get your own way as a politician is to appoint the committee yourself. All will agree with you and one will run the helicopter company, one will be the fuel supplier, one will be the bullet supplier and importantly, one will be a member of a respected animal protection/liberation group (who incidentally happens to also be a member of your political party and that is far more important). Eureka...committee gives the answer you want!!

retired
12-12-00, 12:46 AM
They interviewed The NSW Parks guy on Channel 2 and he said after the last debacle that they would not be culled in the same way as Guy Fawkes. His name was Dave something and he is in charge of the Kosiouscko National Park. They then interviewed the girl doing the count Michelle ?. I had the names written down and do you think that I can find the paper I wrote them on? Phil was right - very young. She is photograohing the horses as well as countiong them so hopefully that does not mean that they will be counted more than once. They are whinging over the damage to the rare Alpine grasses and then showed a trail that was obviously on a place lower than the snowline would be anyway. It was only about 10" wide anyway so I can't see the fuss.

Bill S.
12-12-00, 12:50 AM
I'm confused. Is the Guy Fawkes National Park the one where the cull has already happened? If so, what's the point of appointing a Community Committee to endorse eliminating the horses after the job has been so badly performed? I would have thought the minister was so embarrassed about his department's incompetence that he wouldn't want the issue revisited any time soon.

If its another National Park, with another population of brumbies, it sounds, as Phil says, like a ham fisted attempt to gather "community support" for yet another stuff-up. Is the Guy Fawkes park in NSW or somewhere else?

retired
12-12-00, 01:22 AM
The cull had already happened in Guy Fawkes. They wish to reduce the numbers in Kosiouscko and they have said that they will not do it in the same manner as they did in Guy Fawkes.
The interview on 2 said that they did not wish to cause the same furore as they had in Guy Fawkes. Maybe there is some chance when the same minister has to put his rubber stamp on this. This area extends in to Victoria doesn't it Phil?
Guy Fawkes is much further up in to NSW's and the number crunching that they are doing here affects the areas feautured in Elyene Mitchells Silver Brumby series of books. If you want to draw support from the uninformed public then remind them that 'Thowra' and his descendants may disappear forever.

Phil
12-12-00, 02:42 AM
There is surely some sanity somewhere but I don't know where to find it amongst politicians. The plain fact is that conservationists are greedy. They don't want part of the alpine region in Australia locked up, nor do they want the majority of it. They want all of it. As I've already said so many times before the brumbies are limited to small areas of the mountains and as those areas are not expanding, it's obvious that the numbers are not increasing. Let's look at how vast the alpine area actually is - you can see it on your maps - and then look at the areas where the brumbies are found. The alps stretch from Mt Baw Baw in mid Gippsland right away to the border of New South Wales where they join the Snowy Mountains and continue north to the Brindabella's near Canberra.
That's a huge area. Now let's try to find some brumbies. From Baw Baw you could follow the Alpine Walking Track across the Divide until you reached the Snowy Plains north of Licola. Then you'd head to Mt Howitt, pass over the Cross Cut Saw to Mt Speculation and Mt Buggery. Then you'd cross the Barry Mountains and come out near Mt Blue Rag. You'd pass Mt St Bernard and continue the walk to Mt Hotham. From Hotham you'd pass over Mt Loch and descend down to the Cobungra River. Then you'd take Dibbins Spur and climb a long way upon to the Bogongs. As you walked towards the basalt hill they call Mt Jim, you might be lucky to see half a dozen brumbies grazing there or spot them away to the east near the headwaters of the Bundarrah River. Continuing your walk you'd head across the Bogongs to Cope Hut and by then you'd be out of brumby country. You might cross Mt Nelse, descend to the Big River and climb again to the Long Spur and come out at Mt Wills. From there you'd pass through the back of the Dartmouth Dam and eventually come to Tokes on the Gibbo River which you'd cross and keep heading for Mt Pinnibar. Over that and eventually you get to Tom Groggin Station on the Murray. In that area and away to the east you'd find a few more brumbies in areas like the Limestone in Victoria and the southern reaches of Kosciusko National Park, around the Cascades near Dead Horse Gap, across to Ingeegoodbie and the Tin Mines Creek and The Pilot. So you'd cross most of the alps and in a couple of small pockets you'd find brumbies.
That alone shows what nonsense the NSWPS is talking. Now, on to the girl retired is speaking of. She is working from a helicopter and could photograph the same horse numerous times and yet not be able to tell the difference. A spot of mud on head or face can completely change the appearance of a horse and it's hard to distnguish in a photo, no matter how powerful the lens may be. In any case we already know she has the numbers wrong. Is she seriously to be believed against people who are constantly present in that country, working there, riding out after brumbies and getting to know each mob and most of the horses in them? This is nothing more than a green conspiracy to inflate the numbers of wild horses and garner public support for a massive cull aimed at extermination. I heard a whisper a few weeks ago that Parks Victoria was attempting to recruit riders to run large numbers of horses into trapyards somewhere out the back of Benambra. They won't have much success among the locals but I guess there will always be some "heroes" who like to boast about their participation in an act of cruelty. Anyway, the word I got was that if they built the yards, they could be cut down faster than they could be built. Culling brumbies could be a harder task than Parks Victoria or the NSWPS ever imagined. Nevertheless, they will attempt it and it's up to people like us to do what we can to stop it. There is no valid ecological reason to cull brumbies in the alpine area. Their only justification is that horses are introduced. That's it. All their other arguments like compaction of the soil etc have been proved wrong time and time again.

wondering
12-12-00, 05:19 AM
Just wondering how a committe can represenmt the community if it's members are appointed by the Minister. Wouldn't that be a ministerial committee as opposed to a community committee.

Lynette
12-12-00, 07:01 AM
The Minister appoints the committee from members of the community that he knows will come down in his favour. Don't any of you watch Yes Minister on the ABC?

Green groups have no conception of reality.

Remember the furore over that ship that ran aground on the Great Barrier Reef and how concerned the greenies were about the potential destruction of the reef. Well crunch these figures, if your calculator can handle them - mine went into melt down. The Great Barrier Reef covers 225,000 square kilometres. The area damaged by the ship was 15 metres by 70 metres (roughly) that's 1050 square metres. There are how many square metres in a square kilometre? 1,000 m x 1,000 m = 1,000,000 square metres. Remember, there are 225,000 of these 1,000,000 square metres - that equals 225,000,000,000 square metres. How much was damaged - 1050 square metres. This is when my calculator went into meltdown - trying to workout the infinitely small percentage of the reef that was damaged by the ship.

That's where the greenies' problems are - they can only see the 1050 square metres that the ship was sitting on - they can't see the 224,999,998,050 square metre balance.

Same with the brumbies - the can only see the small area they are inhabiting - they can't see the thousands of hectares that are and always will be brumby free.

Unfortunately, the green groups have the political clout to influence ministers because of their hysterical rantings which get all the media attention. No one listens to the calm voice of reason amongst all that.

Phil
12-12-00, 08:27 AM
How true Lynette. And the Alpine National park in Victoria to some measure includes alot of land that never should have been included. Why? Because someone in the Victorian National Parks Association fell in love with the word contiguous and looked at a map and imagined a wonderful unbroken National Park that took in all the alpine country in Victoria and New South Wales. So what happened was that would-be premier John Cain and political greenie, Joan Kirner, entered into a marriage of convenience with the VNPA and the Australian Conservation Foundation and promised them their park in return for their support. It was nearly declared in 1985 when a critical by-election that would have given the Cain government control of the Upper House was tied. The re-election was fought on the Alpine National Park issue with the Australian Democrats and greenies campaigning in its favour. That forced the Mountain Cattlemen to come down to Melbourne and campaign against it and guess what - the vote went from being tied to 10,000 in favour of the opposition. So much for community for the park. Nevertheless, four years later in 1989, amid much opposition from a wide variety of community groups, it was declared and essentially all it did was link the existing alpine parks together including Baw Baw, Wonnangatta-Moroka, Bogong and Cobberas Tingaringy. And it was all for the sake of making it look good on a map to fulfil a green dream. In some places the park is only half a mile wide, would you believe? And it was drawn-up from maps, not from any knowledge of its environmental virtues. At the time of its declaration we all knew the brumbies would be threatened and that the old lies and dishonest practices would be used to justify the campaign against them. But, as well know, money talks and the greens have got plenty. The only thing we have in our favour is that the media isn't so easy to manipulate to the green viewpoint on this issue because many otherwise sympathetic journo's and editors happen to love horses. But we'll just have to wait and see what happens and if worst comes to worst try and create our own barrier reef where the brumbies run and keep the greens out.

Lynette
13-12-00, 04:50 AM
Another case of the government not getting to the truth before they publish something. Up here in Queensland we have just had a Vegetation Management Act implemented. The basis for declaring some vegetation endangered, of concern or not of concern is based on Landsat imagery and depicted on Regional Ecosystem maps.

There is a large 200 ha parcel not far from where I am sitting which is shown on the Regional Ecosystem map as being "of concern". In the mid 1960's the native vegetation was cleared off this block and an exotic pine tree plantation established. In the mid 1990's the pine trees were harvested. In 1997 when the Landsat imagery was taken which was used to create the maps, the land was fully cleared. So what dumb bunny interpreted a totally cleared 200 ha parcel as being covered with "of concern" native vegetation? Supposedly an expert botanist at the Queensland Herbarium.

Just shows you how easily it is for the so-called "experts" to get it wrong. Makes you wonder what else is wrong on the maps (plenty, believe you me, and that's just one map). The whole legislation is based on inaccurate information and people's livelihoods are being affected by this bogus information.

Phil
13-12-00, 05:23 AM
Right again Lynette and yet how do we get the message across? I've had 16 years of non-stop war with the green movement, including three expensive years in the Supreme Court, and I'm getting weary of it. You win one battle and they come back again regurgitating the same old disproven lies to a new generation. We all have to earn a living but most radical greens seem to survive on either taxpayer funded study grants or band together in collectives and share their dole while they spend their time as activists to the detriment of the rest of the community.