Peter - I agree entirely with what you say.
I think people travelling far and wide in search of birds is generally great
for locals. Additionally, by far the majority of people are of the "leave no
trace" ethos as regards nature. However, it's a sad fact that not everyone
has that policy, and as disappointing as it is for birders with a twitching
tendency (and I myself was starting to make travel plans), having some
santuary for wildlife where not even the most hardened birdwatchers can get
in is probably not such a bad thing.
On 13 August 2010 17:34, Peter Shute <> wrote:
> I'm no expert on this, so my answer might be naive. There is a long history
> of abuse of trust by white people against aboriginal people. They have
> fought long and hard to have the rights that they do have over their
> traditional country. In Victoria, such rights barely exist.
>
> To allow that many people to wander around is inviting someone to stumble
> on a sacred site, etc. The area is huge, but searches will most likely be
> concentrated in the more hospitable areas, which I'm guessing might be where
> these sites are concentrated.
>
> And don't forget that the reason given for the refusal wasn't just the
> numbers, it was because people have already started to enter without
> permits. If they decided to allow in 20 people at a time, how are they going
> to enforce it if people are going in without permits anyway?
>
> It's really annoying that people can't get in to see these birds, but if
> allowing them all in (and who knows how many would eventually come - I'm
> shocked that there are already 80) might jeopardise their future ability to
> excercise their right to deny entry (to miners, for example), then who
> cares? The birds have been seen and documented, and while it would be good
> to have the area searched more thoroughly, it's just a twitch now. It's a
> very good thing that everyone has been warned well in advance they won't
> have access.
>
> That's just my opinion. I'd appreciate if anyone more knowledgable about
> these things could comment further.
>
> Peter Shute
>
> wrote on Friday, 13 August 2010 4:29 PM:
>
> > Hi All
> > I have been reading this thread with interest. Being
> > originally from Ireland I have no experience in access
> > permits required for what appears to me to be a public access
> > area. I know the land is 'granted' to the local inhabitants
> > and if it was the size of a suburban block I would completely
> > understand - I don't want strangers wandering around in my back yard
> > either. But we're not talking about a quarter acre or even a 10acre
> > block here are we? with cattle? or crops? We're talking about
> > a hunting ground of vast proportions with no facilities -
> > it's not even a reasonable comparison. It seems to me to be a
> > ridiculous situation. Is this not a land for all Australians?
> > I can appreciate that the locals don't want people wandering
> > anywhere all over the place possibly disturbing the game or
> > interfering with their sacred sites, but visitors would stick
> > to the few established tracks across what seems to be a
> > wilderness, wouldn't they? The amount of time anyone from
> > 'outside' would spend there would be severly limited anyway
> > and, with agreement, visiting vehicles could avoid
> > settlements to reduce any impact on the inhabitants.
> > Personally I see this as an outrageous outcome - that 80 or
> > so birders can be denied access to a huge area of virtually
> > uninhabitated countryside when a once in a lifetime
> > opportunity is presented. There is no intention to damage the
> > environment - far from it, injure, capture or destroy
> > wildlife - the very opposite, or inhabit, stay or live in the
> > area for more than a couple of days.
> > The only outcome from my perspective, I'm afraid, is a
> > further loss of respect or interest in understanding the
> > aboriginal beliefs and claims.
> > I'm sure there are those of you who will claim to understand
> > their fears, appreciate their needs and recognise their
> > beliefs. Sorry - this is an all Australian land (incidentally
> > I am an Australian citizen too) and my hard earned taxes go
> > towards supporting communities like this.
> > While I do recognise their need for isolation and the
> > opportunity to lead a way of life they feel they are entitled
> > to, barring access to other travellers under the conditions
> > decribed is just plain wrong. In fact being able to deny
> > access to anyone to what should be at least a public thoroughfare is
> > wrong. Incidentally what if you were 'lucky' enough to score the
> > first type of permit - the drive-only-don't-stop permit - and
> > you needed to go to the toilet? I'm not being funny, in
> > reality its a stupid proposition - just think about it for a
> > minute....
> >
> > By the way I had no plans to go, being unable to afford it
> > because my taxes are so high.....
> >
> > Colin
> > Brisbane
> > --
> > Colin Reid
> >
> > So many birds, so little time......
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> send the message:
> unsubscribe
> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> to:
>
> http://birding-aus.org
>
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
http://birding-aus.org
===============================
|
