yes david, the very first email i sent on this issue did refer to
this dipnr website (Department of Infrastructure, Planning and
Natural Resources) so that people could see the regulations and
supporting documents for themselves
i think it is well recognised that both governments and developers do
place constraints on the scientists who work for them......i have
done a big stint in the public service and was frequently instructed
to implement a government policy regardless, and indeed, contrary to
the best scientific evidence.......i would be bold enough to suggest
that it is a fact of life, rather than a conspiracy theory
i have no doubt that scientists within the Department of Environment
and Conservation will or have done a review of the regulation and
associated documents, but they will not be putting it up on a
website, and the public will not be able to use it to inform their
position, because it will be a internal government document.......it
will belong to the Government they work for
and certainly, the Department of Natural Resources is hardly going to
publicly criticise its own draft regulation, even though various
staff within it may have concerns about it
i do indeed wish it were otherwise, we would all benefit from the
many tremendous scientists within government being able to provide
information more openly on public policy issues such as this
i must declare myself slightly bemused by this apparent determination
to cast aspersions on those who should find fault with these
regulations......considering what is at stake here
and yet there has been no rebuttal provided or indeed attempted of
the serious flaws with the regulation that were identified in the
reports and websites referred to initially.......
i would be delighted to have an informed debate about this issue, but
find that i simply cannot respond to suggestions of hearsay and
internal documents that the rest of us are apparently not privy to,
and whose status is completely unknown and possibly irrelevant
carmel
On 10 Dec 2004 at 12:19, wrote:
>
> It's just occurred to me that the websites that have been suggested
> people look at are those of organisations with problems regarding the
> new vegetation reforms.
>
> It might well be worth looking at
> http://www.dipnr.nsw.gov.au/nativeveg/index.shtml
>
> Mind you given an earlier comment "scientists are often either
> employed by the Governments who are approving the dastardly deeds, or
> too busy doing their research work to provide detailed review of
> policy within the timeframes" you had better be careful.
>
> Now, there's a conspiracy theory for you!
>
> Cheers
>
> David Geering
> Regent Honeyeater Recovery Coordinator
> Department of Environment & Conservation
> P.O. Box 2111
> Dubbo NSW 2830
> Ph: 02 6883 5335 or Freecall 1800 621 056
> Fax: 02 6884 9382
>
>
>
> This message is intended for the addressee named and may contain
> confidential information.
>
> If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and
> then delete the message. Views expressed in this message may be those
> of the individual sender, and are not necessarily the views of the
> NSW Department of Environment and Conservation.
--------------------------------------------
Birding-Aus is now on the Web at
www.birding-aus.org
--------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message 'unsubscribe
birding-aus' (no quotes, no Subject line)
to
|
