Sounds like a progressive policy - but who and how is "unreasonable"
determined? Likely to lead to lengthy court discussions in the USA.
on 6/28/05 4:38 AM, Syd Curtis at wrote:
> Further to the postings quoted below, back in the 1980s I was Assistant
> Director (Legislation & Policies) in the National Parks & Wildlife Service
> of Queensland; a somewhat frustrating job, for it was created to move me
> away from my previous management role where my natural bias towards actually
> conserving nature was interfering too much with the political wheeling and
> dealing of the Service Director. (I was given what in local public service
> jargon, is know as the "lateral arabesque": And for that same reason, he
> immediately directed that there were to be no written policies!
> Which left me with legislation, and my last major task before retiring in
> 1988, was to redraft the National Parks Regulations. Pertinent to present
> considerations was one regulation which at least still existed in
> Queensland's 1994 Nature Conservation Regulations.
> After the legal experts had edited my draft, it reads:
> Noise control
> 88.(1) A person must not use a generator, compressor or other similar
> motor in a protected area -
> (a) unless its use is permitted under a regulatory notice or permit; or
> (b) in contravention of a regulatory notice or permit.
> (2) A person must not use a radio, tape recorder or other sound or
> amplifier system in a way that may cause unreasonable disturbance to a
> person or native animal* in a protected area.
> I reckoned there was no chance of getting accepted a regulation overtly
> banning the use of playback unless for purposes that assist in the
> conservation of the species. Hence the above approach: if playback
> unreasonably disturbs a bird, it would be illegal and a ranger could
> instruct a person to cease.
> Worth considering?
> Syd Curtis (in Australia)
> * BTW, The Act under which the regulations were made defines "animal" as
> "any member of the animal kingdom (other than human), (whether alive or
> dead), and includes etc., etc. ..."