High Country Cattle Grazing Ban.

Submitted: Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 16:09
ThreadID: 91576 Views:3465 Replies:19 FollowUps:42
This Thread has been Archived
Well the federal government banned general grazing some years ago and
have today announced they will ban even the Victorian governments trial
grazing project which still has 5 years to run.

I see this as a deep scar on our values, it seems our cultural heritage is being
attacked again.

As far as I can tell, the federal governments real motive seems to be to
prevent the trial from going ahead as it might show that while many thousands
of cattle may have an adverse effect - the trial of only 400 cattle may show a nett benefit.
Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Member - John (Vic) - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 16:17

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 16:17
It was done to placate the Greens as usual.

VKS737 - Mobile 6352 (Selcall 6352)

Lifetime Member
My Profile  Send Message

AnswerID: 476477

Follow Up By: pop2jocem - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 16:29

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 16:29
Spot on John, what a lot of people don't realize is that Mr B and his crew have the numbers in parliament to control goverment policy. He plays the tune and the current government dances or he withdraws his support.

Cheers
Pop
0
FollowupID: 751575

Reply By: Mr Pointyhead - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 16:48

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 16:48
I have seen a number research papers on the impact of grazing on fire. They state that the impact on fire by grazing is either to increase the risk of fire by introducing more flammable grasses that cattle prefer or no impact. Remember that the cattle are only removing some of the grasses that contribute to fire, little of the undergrowth and none of the canopy.

Some of these papers where written after long term studies over many years in the high country and other areas in Australia.

So the current peer reviewed science indicates that grazing does not reduce blazing and may in fact increase it.

So to say that the current introduction of cattle to the high country is required for research is about as valid as the Japanese claiming that their current whaling is for scientific research.

Unfortunately just because something rhymes does not mean it is true.

On the other hand the whole argument about grazing reducing blazing is taking focus and discussion away from what I consider (MHO) the real argument, which is the importance of the cultural heritage associated with high country grazing. This seems to be being overlooked and ignored in the current political fracas for the sake of short term political gain.
AnswerID: 476480

Follow Up By: Member - Boobook - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 17:09

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 17:09
That's interesting. Perhaps you could post the links or document names of these papers. I am not sure where they were about, but to my knowledge, no grasses are introduced to the high country for cattle, during the trials or at any stage.

I have no connections with cattle in the high country but claims seem to fly all over the place. It would be interesting to see what the studies you refer to really say, especially if they are not sepecifically about the high country, and are about areas where grasses are introduced, which on the surface seems totally unrelated.

I am sure they are in the public domain if they have been peer reviewed.

0
FollowupID: 751580

Follow Up By: Shaker - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 18:10

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 18:10
We have cattle & I can assure you that they eat far more than "some grasses".
They eat plenty of undergrowth & shrubs.

The ban is purely a result of the minority government sucking up the Greens.
0
FollowupID: 751588

Follow Up By: Member - Royce- Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 19:14

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 19:14
Yep we have cattle too. They do eat more than just grasses. They destroy anything green and soft enough to eat or trample. It certainly doesn't help the natural environment to have them there.
The vested interest of putting them in the bush, want more grassy open areas to be available. The more cattle, the more grassland is encouraged.


No good for the bush.Heritage? Some families had it cheap grazing that others didn't. Just an inappropriate historical practice.
0
FollowupID: 751592

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 19:26

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 19:26
Hi Pointy

I'm not sure if you intended it but your reply above indicates that there is uncertainty of the effect of grazing "Either negative or neutral effect"

Logically this in itself is reason to conduct the type of trial proposed - unless of course one already knows the outcome and wishes to control the result.

I have no doubt that the area was in better condition after its 170 years of grazing than it is now after 5 years of mostly no grazing.

Still I'm in agreement that its our cultural values that are being destroyed - we obviously don't belong to a group whose heritage is seen to be worth preserving.
Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 751594

Follow Up By: Member - Royce- Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 22:40

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 22:40
So.... regenerated bush is worse than grazed bush? hmm
0
FollowupID: 751639

Follow Up By: Mr Pointyhead - Thursday, Feb 02, 2012 at 10:48

Thursday, Feb 02, 2012 at 10:48
Hi All

Peer reviewed references of papers investigating the effect of alpine grazing on file as requested...

http://www.publish.csiro.au/?paper=BT9940607

http://www.publish.csiro.au/?paper=BT9870413

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2006.01655.x/abstract

If I find any more I will post them as well
0
FollowupID: 751774

Reply By: Member - Russler - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 17:19

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 17:19
Maybe they'd allow native cattle to be grazed up there ...


AnswerID: 476483

Follow Up By: Member - Wayne B (NSW) - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 20:31

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 20:31
That would have to Be Black Angus Cattle
0
FollowupID: 751607

Follow Up By: Member - Royce- Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 22:41

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 22:41
strangely deer seem to be tolerated.
0
FollowupID: 751640

Reply By: Member - Noldi (WA) - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 18:32

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 18:32
from the Age March last year
The planned ‘‘study’’ was also criticised by Melbourne University's School of Land and Environment, whose acting head, associate professor Gerd Bossinger, said in an email: ‘‘much of the work being proposed has already been done’’. This response elicited a threat from the Baillieu government over millions of dollars in research funding.

and the SMH
The Victorian government should be held to account for its reckless and ill-considered reintroduction of cattle into selected areas of the Alpine National Park.

and the Canberra times
There is overwhelming evidence that cattle grazing damages high country habitats

Me, I don't know jack about cattle and the environment but I can smell political Bull a mile away
AnswerID: 476491

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 19:18

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 19:18
Unfortunately there is no independant edvidence that duplicates the Vic government trial , which is in its first year of operation - the political bull therefore seems to be being used to prevent this type of research upfront.

And that is suspicious to me as well Ian & Nola
Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 751593

Follow Up By: Member - Royce- Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 22:42

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 22:42
But... splutter.... the word 'trial' was used to justify the grazing. Surely you don't believe a real scientific trial was underway??
0
FollowupID: 751642

Follow Up By: Member - Boobook - Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 19:49

Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 19:49
Noldi (WA), you are likley to find more bulls**t in the Age than in the entire alpine country after a cattle trial. Even one of my VERY left wing friends has given up on it's Parks association fed crap.

0
FollowupID: 751716

Follow Up By: Member - Noldi (WA) - Thursday, Feb 02, 2012 at 09:23

Thursday, Feb 02, 2012 at 09:23
Sorry Boobook, would be hard to convince me that when all the experts are saying one thing and those with direct vested interest are saying the opposite that the experts are wrong because you label the paper leftist. McCarthyism is not well and alive in this country
0
FollowupID: 751765

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Thursday, Feb 02, 2012 at 10:26

Thursday, Feb 02, 2012 at 10:26
Might depend who you define as experts Noldi.

Those who have worked there and managed it for a lifetime - or those who have recently gotten a research grant and looking for a cause.
Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 751768

Follow Up By: Member - Noldi (WA) - Thursday, Feb 02, 2012 at 10:36

Thursday, Feb 02, 2012 at 10:36
Mmmmm, my relations have farmed in the wimmera for 4 generations.

30 years ago they used to take there break after harvest at the local lake and fish for red fin (?) In the end they started to pull out that many that they made a scaling machine out of a drum, rollers and indscreen wiper motor, its a bit defunct now due to no fish.

The current arguments on the Murray river everyone wants what they think there entitled to and have had for 100 years, but it just can't sustain it.

Also as a general example the way the farmers "managed" the clearing of land and now we have the rising salt problem.

I think its clear who the experts are, and who wants to just make money.
0
FollowupID: 751771

Reply By: pt_nomad - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 18:44

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 18:44
I think the number of flies at Charlies creek has reduced with the reduction of poop cover. I am not really missing the cattle.
AnswerID: 476492

Reply By: Member - Royce- Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 19:09

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 19:09
Ha! Trial? Political promise... votes for cheap grazing.

Cultural heritage? All of gippsland was squatted in the early days. Eventually land grants, purchases, ownership and then crown lands were set aside. Heritage moves aside for better management.
Some families managed to keep sending cattle up to the high country for some cheap grass in summer. Heritage? Hmmm History maybe.


Grazing encourages grass growth as more scrub is trampled. Foreign grasses are spread.



The Federal Government showed some common sense.
AnswerID: 476495

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 19:53

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 19:53
What is heritage to some isn't to others Royce.

Still one way to help clean up the problem is to use Araldite.

Next time we pass an ancient camp site with flint splinters all around , we can pick them up and glue the pieces back together.

I don't know the mess some people leave behind is just awful.
Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 751598

Follow Up By: pop2jocem - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 22:09

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 22:09
Robin,
I hope you are not refering to the graffiti (or art ) some people feel compelled to leave on any available surface when they have a bit of time on their hands.

Cheers
Pop
0
FollowupID: 751634

Follow Up By: Member - Royce- Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 22:44

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 22:44
Good analogy. Trying to recapture a fabled high plains cattlemen life after it is gone, is rather like sticking bits of rock together.. pointless.
0
FollowupID: 751643

Follow Up By: Shaker - Thursday, Feb 02, 2012 at 18:15

Thursday, Feb 02, 2012 at 18:15
People taking horses into the High Country introduce far more "foreign grasses" than cattle ever will!

0
FollowupID: 751821

Reply By: The Explorer - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 20:18

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 20:18
Hi

Could be a safety risk they weren't willing to allow - cows a have a "significant stability issue" - they fail the tilt table test with a miserable result of 23.4° ((Reference - Tipping the Cow))

I certainly wouldn't ride one up there....though as I have the "herd" mentality maybe I wont be able to help myself :)

Cheers
Greg
I sent one final shout after him to stick to the track, to which he replied “All right,” That was the last ever seen of Gibson - E Giles 23 April 1874

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message
Moderator

AnswerID: 476506

Follow Up By: Member - Noldi (WA) - Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 09:52

Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 09:52
Good attack and departure angle though
0
FollowupID: 751670

Reply By: Member - Terra'Mer - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 20:30

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 20:30
I'm going to weigh in on this, seeing as I'm a tree hugging hippy who has trekked most of the NSW and Vic Alps on foot for the last 2 decades, studied the environmental impact of cattle grazing in the Alps at uni and seen the damage and recovery of fire damaged alpine habitats compared to cattle damaged habitats. It has been a passionate issue for me for many years and I have researched all perspectives extensively.

I'll start with what most of you are talking about, fire. It has been proven that cattle grazing does not reduce or prevent fire in alpine habitat

Secondly, it's not part of a heritage we should be entirely proud of. Many of the aboriginal nations who lived in the high country and migrated to higher ground were removed from their country and it is a little known fact that some groups were massacred because they refused to leave. The Ngarigos were murdered when they tried to enter the pub, exploited for work, women and children were raped and molested, the men were eventually driven to war with the high country cattlemen, many were poisoned, died of white disease and then had their children stolen. From reports I have read of events surrounding the removal of the Vic Alps aboriginal nations it was worse down south. An ugly heritage with some very dark secrets.

Third, the damage they do in, even in such small herd numbers, has destroyed the fragile alpine habitats to such an extent some will never recover. It is for this reason it has been banned.

I thought this ban would have been welcomed by those who use the high country for recreation. After all, it is to protect what you love.

Have you seen my marbles?

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

AnswerID: 476510

Follow Up By: Ken - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 21:23

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 21:23
What a strange version of history you are trying to establish ! By the time cattle were introduced to the high country in Vic the area had been well and truly covered by miners searching for gold and other minerals. Aboriginals were well and truly on the decline by this time throughout Victoria. No 'aboriginal nations' lived permanently in the high country for a variety of reasons, not the least being the meagre supply of food. Apart from the annual and highly seasonal Bogong moth hunts what do you think they lived on ?
There is no evidence that I have ever seen or heard of that supports your claim that aboriginal nations were ever removed from these areas.
Perhaps you are confusing what happened in other states where the cattle industry certainly displaced aboriginals but there are vast differences between Victorian cattle grazing carried out for a few months of the year and the huge cattle stations established in other states. Your reference to "An ugly heritage with some very dark secrets." would need to have some factual support to raise it beyond the level of unsubstantiated opinion.
Similarly references to murder, rape and child stealing are an insult to anyone living in whatever area you claim these things happened. As for being murdered for trying to enter a pub where do you think that happened ?

As far as damage goes cattle have an impact in some areas but so do deer, pigs and horses which nobody seems to be interested in controlling. Opponents of alpine grazing love to show cattle damage in specific areas and extend it to all areas of the NP which is a massive distortion of the real situation.
If your trekking had taken you into the Wonnangatta Valley recently you could not fail to see the dangerous fuel loads which result from the removal of cattle.

To me the real benefit of cattle grazing wasn't the eating of grass in reducing fire hazards it was the seasonal burning by cattlemen. This activity was carried out by people who knew the bush and the weather and when & how to burn the understory without causing disastrous damage to both the bush and surrounding property.

Ken
0
FollowupID: 751623

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 21:37

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 21:37
Hi Terra

Look I don't think your comments about aboriginals and there alledged treatment relates well to 400 cattle grazing for 5 months of each year as a trial so lets leave that for another time.

Its good that your a tree huggy hippy , its one of my fundamental beliefs that there must be room for everybody in this world in so far as they don't try and use violence against others.

And this becomes the hub of the issue - each one of us by simply existing affects our enviroment and indirectly affects the high country thru slowly rising temperatures and increasing pollution etc.

Your probably like me in wishing our world only had 1 billion people in it - and if they were vegetarians , well we probably wouldn't be having this exchange.

But this isn't our reality , and holding a view which excludes others creates a divison and those on each side will fight for there positions as they have and the outcome will be less for all.

The best way for groups like VNPA to further there aims is to embrace a genuine but limited presence of all interests and this will foster support and respect in turn - my dream is that we can all win.

Instead groups like VNPA have proved to be a historical disaster for the high country by constantly supporting extreme positions like total cattle bans.

You may have read classic studies like "The Alps at the Crossroads" (1974) which refers to groups trying to ban almost everything in the HC above 4000ft.

The reaction back has kept them off balance, poorly funded , beset with internal pressures and this has translated into contributing to the fire disasters over the last ten years.

We would frankly have been better served if the whole area had been left as state forrest.
Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 751627

Follow Up By: Member - Paul B (WA) - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 21:57

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 21:57
Well done Ken & Robin - great responses.

I'd make two more points:

First the big problem with govt action to "protect" country is that they never do. Govt conservation agencies have been shown the world over to not manage land as well as virtually everyone else. Either they are far too under-resourced to do it well or they are too "public-servicy" with a bureaucratic 9-5 approach. Certainly with regard to fire control whilst they may be very well equipped and trained and have a lot of very good and brave people, the bureaucratic structure mitigates against timely action with decisions not being taken by local commanders on the ground close to the fire-front. Virtually every conservation area or national park is a joke in terms of its protection.

Second, why is the truth invariably the first casualty in any activist campaign, especially involving the environment? I'm just so sick to death of seeing environmental activists spread deliberate lies that are almost impossible to answer in a timely manner and therefore become publicly accepted as fact. I've got to the stage now where I am simply inclined to totally discount any claims made by activists. Everyone else, pretty much has to tell the truth. Even politicians for gods sake! If you want to get chucked out of the ministry or any other political job see how long you last for misleading the parliament. Company directors and managers get locked up for misleading the market and all manner of professionals must adhere to codes of conduct which include being truthful. But, sadly, not activists. And it really shows.

0
FollowupID: 751633

Follow Up By: Member - Terra'Mer - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 22:53

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 22:53
I've obviously hit a raw nerve here with the aboriginal side of the cattle grazing arguement.
Cattle graziers were responsible for driving some aboriginal groups off their country.
Not all high country aboriginal groups migrated. All high country nations migrated but some groups with in these nations stayed on their land all year.
There were a lot of nasty events, even as recent as 50 years ago, crimes against aboriginals in the high country that have been covered up but if you ask the right people who still know their own heritage, connect to their land and keep records you can learn a lot about how ugly this cattle grazing heritage really is. Being murdered for trying to enter the pub by cattle graziers did happen, one victim was buried were he was shot, no stone, no plaque, nothing and a pony club has been built on top of his grave.
The Alps, including the subject of cattle grazing, is something I have studied in depth for many years. I am not standing as an activist nor am I trying to feed anyone lies. I write the truth I have found in my research, both academic and investigative. A lot of the cattle grazing information I sourced came from long days in vaults of archived reports, newspaper clippings, public notices, etc, electronic copies of national and international journals and research papers, the National Library and decendants of high country aboriginal nations.
There are more than 2 sides to this debate.
Have you seen my marbles?

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 751644

Follow Up By: Member - Ups and Downs - Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 09:51

Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 09:51
Terra,

So what were they, Aboriginal groups or Aboriginal Nations.

Seems a bit extravagant to me to describe a motley bunch of small tribes a 'Nation'.

But there again, make a lie enough times and it becomes a fact I suppose.

Paul
0
FollowupID: 751669

Follow Up By: Member - Noldi (WA) - Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 10:02

Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 10:02
Well thats good then, can't be blamed for trying to wipe them out if they were just a motley bunch.
A prievious post wished there were only 1 billion people in the world, I suspect Bennalong wished there were only couple of hundred thousand in australia.
0
FollowupID: 751672

Follow Up By: Ken - Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 16:39

Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 16:39
Terra simply repeating your previous comments does not constitute any sort of proof of your assertions. Neither do veiled references to 'secret' reports and cover ups.
Similarly research you claim to have conducted needs to be subject to a bit of scrutiny. Who are the people that wrote these supposed reports of murder and mayhem, what is the reason these documents you claim to have seen have never been brought to light and action taken ? If there was a grain of evidence or truth do you really think the very active aboriginal rights activists would a) not have found them, or b) not acted on them ? Why are you the keeper of this knowledge, if it as you say how does it only come to light in a discussion about cattle grazing ? Surely if true there are serious human rights issues here.

As for "nasty events up to 50 years ago" that is surely nonsense ! 50 years is well within my memory and I'm sure that of many others. That makes it as recent as 1962. That is long past the demise, for a range of reasons, and the disintegration of your aboriginal nations. It is well within the period where ANY murder and disappearance would have been formally investigated. Secret burials give me a break !
Shot for entering a pub ? At that time aboriginals were not permitted to drink alcohol so why the pub visit ? Shooting anyone is a serious crime mate and whether being legally allowed in the pub or not a shooting would not have gone un-noticed or un-investigated. That sort of nonsense does nothing to further the efforts of.
The rule of law may not have given much protection in the 1890's but to suggest the sort of actions you claim took place as late as the 1960's is absurd.
To my knowledge the last shooting death of an aboriginal by Europeans in relation to land access was in the 1920's or 30's and certainly not in the eastern states.
You are welcome to your views of history however you need to produce a bit more actual data on events before you launch into an attack on high country cattlemen.
If a similar set of unsupported claims were made in relation to members of the aboriginal nation the discussion would soon spread well beyond this small forum.
You will no doubt know of Andrew Bolt's recent court case. He made no claim about crimes being committed, he simply questioned the validity of claims of aboriginal heritage. And yes he was found to be wrong but my point is he made no such claims as you make and yet found himself in court.

Ken
0
FollowupID: 751700

Follow Up By: Teejay - Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 17:54

Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 17:54
Terra,

I'm not sure of which massacres you were referring to but some of the big ones were far from secret. Perpertrators such as Angus McMillan and locations such as Slaughterhouse Creek near Suggan Buggan and Warrigul Creek near Jack Smith Lake are examples of massacres that occurred in Gippsland. Neither in the High Country as such. Some others that are known include: (Thankyou Wikipedia)
1840 - Nuntin- unknown number killed by Angus McMillan's men 1840 - Boney Point - "Angus McMillan and his men took a heavy toll of Aboriginal lives" 1841 - Butchers Creek - 30-35 shot by Angus McMillan's men 1841 - Maffra - unknown number shot by Angus McMillan's men 1842 - Skull Creek - unknown number killed 1842 - Bruthen Creek - "hundreds killed" 1843 - Warrigal Creek - between 60 and 180 shot by Angus McMillan and his men 1844 - Maffra - unknown number killed 1846 - South Gippsland - 14 killed 1846 - Snowy River - 8 killed by Captain Dana and the Aboriginal Police 1846-47 - Central Gippsland - 50 or more shot by armed party hunting for a white woman supposedly held by Aborigines; no such woman was ever found. 1850 - East Gippsland - 15-20 killed 1850 - Murrindal - 16 poisoned 1850 - Brodribb River - 15-20 killed.

On the subject of cattle, I've fished and hiked in the HC for 25 years. Yes the cattle do damage but since they have been gone I think nature has made some good repairs. I noticed a big increase in rabbit numbers on my January hc trip though.

I reckon there could be a compromise with limited cattle numbers and hc plains used on a rotational basis. The Cattlemen would have reduced access to the pasture but their way of life and heritage could still be retained.

I want to be able to enjoy the beauty of the hc for a few more years and it does need to be managed carefully but I reckon the total bans are absolute pandering to the Greens.

Love it up there,

TJ..
0
FollowupID: 751706

Reply By: Duncanm - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 20:36

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 20:36
Very interesting, and I wonder how they will get rid of the 8,000 to 14,000 wild horses?

See the report at this link it is worth a read and it estimates there will be 13,800 wild horses by 2012.Wild Horses Report
AnswerID: 476511

Follow Up By: Member - MUZBRY(Vic) - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 20:46

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 20:46
Gday Duncanm
Are they native wild horses like the native black angus cattle mentioned earlier?
Muzbry
Great place to be Mt Blue Rag 27/12/2012

Lifetime Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 751610

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 21:40

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 21:40
I note the reports refer to them as feral Duncan , this usually means they can be culled , but I guess this is a hard one for some - and so the problem keeps getting bigger.
Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 751628

Reply By: Dasherdes - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 20:41

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 20:41
I guess that when they totally ban cattle in the High Country, there will be no need to have horses up their either so no more Trail riding. Then there will be no need for vehicular access either so we will be restricted to walking only. Long distance walking through the High Country with a back pack is beyond me now so That will exclude me from visiting my most favourite place in Australia.

Thanks for nothing Mr Brown Proxy Prime Minister of Australia
AnswerID: 476514

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 21:48

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 21:48
Quote from page 197 of 1974 National park Alps study.

"The off-road 4wd vehicle has no place in the Alpine national park"

The only way to answer this type of mentality is to shoot back at every chance , depriving them of funds is particularly effective.
Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 751629

Reply By: Wilko (Parkes NSW) - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 20:59

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 20:59
Its another Greens "let ruin it for everyone" idea. They wont be happy till we are all boring people doing nothing with our lives.

Sooner we have an erection er I mean election the better.
Cheers Wilko
AnswerID: 476521

Reply By: Member - Old Girl - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 22:34

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 22:34
I did a quick google search on Black Saturday and Ash Wednesday. Ignition stats. Arson, powerlines and lightening no cows Mentioned. Typical gov looking to be doing something. Have a drought up here the gov displace heaps of people to build a dam in the Mary Valley, lets not forget amalgamation of councils so they can secure water supply.
AnswerID: 476537

Reply By: Member - Terra'Mer - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 23:16

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 23:16
Considering this topic is taking a slant towards fire hazard reduction I just thought I'd bring to your notice the recent development of new fire management plans within some high country national parks to burn out the whole park, all altitudes, all ecosystems. It's not really public knowledge at this stage and the draft plans were so embedded I had trouble finding them but last minute public meetings have taken place. Much bureaucratic spin was flung around, Australia's leading fire expert, whose fire prediction software is used world wide, was not consulted and when they challenged the management plan they were ignored. Forget cows, try stopping this.
Have you seen my marbles?

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

AnswerID: 476543

Follow Up By: Consfearacy - Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 23:50

Tuesday, Jan 31, 2012 at 23:50
There is a move to turn the Apine Nat Park into one large one streching from Queensland, Nsw to Victoria. It probably will be overseen by the Feds. This overuling of the Victorian government is part of asserting power.
0
FollowupID: 751648

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 08:45

Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 08:45
Thats interesting Terra , I wonder how that tally's with recent reports that say the best way to protect people is to remove bush within 40m of houses and pay less attention to burning off ?
Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 751660

Reply By: Member - Bucky - Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 06:08

Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 06:08
Robin
I hunt up there, and as far as I am concerned it's a bloody great Mulga
True it is beautiful, but still a bloody gr8 mulga !

How to handle it, I am not sure, and I think the problem is that no body else does either.

The current Policy's by both the Federal govt, and the State is turning out to be a giant "weeing contest" between Bob Brown and the Vic Govt, as some sort of payback to Julia, for favours done somewhere else in Politics.

There is millions of acres of roughage, and grasses up there going to waste, so why not let in the Cattle and get some benefit.

Of course never forget our herritage up there also, surley that too cannot be eroded by Bob Brown and his strange attitude, towards real men.

Pity he didn't go after the Coal Seam Gas producers that will poison the ground forever.
Cheers
Bucky


AnswerID: 476550

Follow Up By: Mr Pointyhead - Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 08:31

Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 08:31
A bit on the politics of high country grazing trial. Ted Baillieu's brother-in-law Graeme Stoney is a executive officer in the Mountain Cattlemans association. A discussion about his activities is here:

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/baillieu-clans-key-cattleman-20111208-1olha.html
0
FollowupID: 751657

Reply By: The Landy - Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 08:58

Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 08:58
The importance of protecting our cultural heritage should never be understated as it defines who and what we are, and there is no doubt the High Country Cattlemen have featured heavily in our heritage. Poems and songs have been written about them, and the main theme song from the film the Man from Snowy River was played at the opening ceremony of the Sydney 2000 Olympics in a display of national pride as stock horses rode through the stadium...

The question is how do we preserve this heritage whilst recognising there is a view held by others that the protection of this area is a much higher cause than cultural identity, and is the preservation of the cultural heritage associated with the area dependent on continued grazing?

Are the two mutually exclusive?


AnswerID: 476555

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 19:58

Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 19:58
In answer to your question Landy , I do not believe the two are mutually exclusive.

It really doesn't help when we seem to go to opposite sides of the ring and come out fighting - one may win but usually everybody gets beaten up.

Some how we have to turn this around and make the cake bigger.

To me the federal government seems afraid that the trial might work and wish to make sure it doesn't get a fair go , perhaps a clearer message up front from the Vic government limiting the extent of grazing even if sucessful may help.


Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 751718

Reply By: get outmore - Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 16:54

Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 16:54
the pastoral industry has been respondable for just about every plant extinction to have occured in australia

exactly what part of that do those on here find incompatable with conservation values ???

agriculture has decimated so much of australias natural history (forget this crap about mining or CSG neither has or ever will do a quarter of 1 % of the damage of agriculture

and yet when samll sections - very small get set aside the red necks whinge and whine

- why dont we just stuff the whole lot up? who needs a natural australia to enjoy?

not many here by the looks
AnswerID: 476590

Follow Up By: Member - John and Val - Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 21:36

Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 21:36
About 60-70 plants are considered to have become extinct.

"In 1984, Leigh, Boden and Briggs (see Further Information) described the main recognised threats to Australian plants and the number of species effected by each threat. These are:

Grazing
Agriculture
Forestry
Roadworks
Mining and Quarrying
Urbanization and Industrial Development
Horticultural Collecting
Fire (including lack of fire)
Competition
Herbicides
Low Numbers

In addition to these, a range of other threats include recreation, rubbish dumping, railway maintenance, water storage, insect attack, erosion. A number of species are effected by more than one threat."

The above came from an ANPS info sheet - full article can be viewed here

Cheers,

Val.
J and V
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted."
- Albert Einstein

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 751736

Reply By: Darryn J - Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 17:41

Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 17:41
Hi Robin,
Good points however I'll add a correction and some more points. The Victorian ALP government led by Steve Bracks & John Thwaites banned Alpine Grazing in 2005 after a long battle and a sham consultation/review process. This ban was a long held aim of the Vic ALP since John Cain was elected in 1981, indeed the book "The Alps at the crossroads" you refer to seems to have been adopted as the ALP plan in the late 1970's. If you read it successive ALP governments in Victoria have managed to implement most of the books recommendation's. The first attack came in 1984 which saw cattlemen and supporters ride on Parliament in Melbourne, various pollies riding around the high country with cattlemen etc. Various concessions resulted from both sides but one of the key ones which has been consistently twisted is that many of the leases could not be transferred out of the family that held them at the time. This effectively meant no one else could get a lease.

The big issue for all of us here is access. Once the government successfully exclude one user group then they will try again with the next group who they don't agree with. The Vic ALP has been very green as I said since the late 1970's and also restructured the various government agencies that look after public land in the state so much so that they are ineffective and biased. The Victorian National Parks Association(VNPA) is a green lobby group with very close ties to the Vic ALP who it could be said are saying what the Vic ALP really thinks and wants.

I notice comments about deer and brumbies causing damage and nothing being done about it. These issues are the result of mismanagement and lack of action by mainly ALP governments but also Coalition governments as well due to the bias and green ideas in the various agencies concerned. Most of these issues relate to the restrictions placed on land use in National Parks and the expansion of National Parks that give these animals sanctuary. There are no doubt many who are against hunting or culling but the only tool that will be used is poison and the affect on native animals will be enormous if that happens. And if you think shooting is cruel then you wouldn't want to know what happens to an animal poisoned by 1080.

The Grandstanding by the Federal Government is only spite because the Victorian Coalition Government defied them. Its a sad state of affairs when the Federal Govt can override the states like this.

The one basic point to remember here is that all the issues brought up around the grazing issue are the result of nearly 30 years of mismanagement.

Darryn

AnswerID: 476592

Follow Up By: get outmore - Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 18:11

Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 18:11
"'The big issue for all of us here is access. Once the government successfully exclude one user group then they will try again with the next group who they don't agree "

more bollocks and tripe

here in WA I am locked out of many 000s of square kms of country with sighns due to grazing

at ;least in national parks i can access them

I drove over 1000km and apart from the main raod every part of it was locked out and sighned keep out

---------- until i came to the mt augustus NP

I think some people need to get over this perception that nat parks are locked out - they are some of the few places you can actually still go in alot of cases

and yet people whinge when they actually still try and contain some of the natural heratage


like I said pastrolism locks out many 000s of sq km of australia and is responsable for most of australias plant extinctions

------------------- and yet people here still find the time to rubish attempted conservation and access to such a small area???

i ask you where are your prioritys?
0
FollowupID: 751707

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 19:47

Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 19:47
Thanks Darryn

My copy of that ALPs report will never get dusty , it portrays the classic ban everything stereotype , and its fasinating to compare it to what has happened over the almost 40 years.

It clearly demonstrates the mismanagement you refer to , unfortunately often from well meaning people.


Hi Getoutmore

Having a little trouble sorting out your arguements , but I think the cattle issue has demonstrated a great model for us - the type of shared use that has been part of the HC for over 150 years allowed for reasonable access for all.

Perhaps if it was implemented in WA less pastoral land would be locked up.
Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 751715

Follow Up By: The Explorer - Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 20:03

Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 20:03
Yes! Public 4WD access anywhere and cows in all national parks ! How unreal would that be? Very boring looking at native animals and plants. Nothing like a bit of bovine intervention.

Cheers
Greg
I sent one final shout after him to stick to the track, to which he replied “All right,” That was the last ever seen of Gibson - E Giles 23 April 1874

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message
Moderator

0
FollowupID: 751722

Follow Up By: get outmore - Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 20:15

Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 20:15
Yyes your talking about cows in the locked out areas and cows in the access areas

Any one with half a brain knows cows have no place in conservation areas. Like I said but it gos without saying pastrolism has been responsible for most of australias plant extinctions.
0
FollowupID: 751723

Follow Up By: Darryn J - Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 22:25

Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 22:25
Hi get outmore,
I understand your point but the issues in Victoria are very different to WA. There was still right of access to grazing leases and through tracks/roads were not blocked.

If cattle are the cause of all these problems then after 150 + years of grazing there would be nothing left. The fact that there are still areas deemed to be natural shows that the problem isn't as big as made out.

Darryn
0
FollowupID: 751746

Follow Up By: get outmore - Thursday, Feb 02, 2012 at 17:34

Thursday, Feb 02, 2012 at 17:34
sadly such attitudes will ensure difficulty in preserving what little we have left in the very little areas set aside

any one would think were talking about some kind of large area

any sane person would know there is more than enough area set aside for grazing

even if you just set aside 5 seconds for a search let alone research you will easily see how much damage pastoralism has done to australias natural ecosystem and then you migh want to try and preserve or rehbilitate the very small areas left
0
FollowupID: 751817

Reply By: The Explorer - Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 20:30

Wednesday, Feb 01, 2012 at 20:30
Forget about reduced biodiversity through localised extinctions of plants and animals and degraded ecosystems in a NATIONAL PARK - this could be the real defining factor the idiots in the Government departments responsible for this foolhardy decision could be worried about.......it may only be a matter of time...



Cheers
Greg
I sent one final shout after him to stick to the track, to which he replied “All right,” That was the last ever seen of Gibson - E Giles 23 April 1874

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message
Moderator

AnswerID: 476610

Reply By: Nigel Migraine - Thursday, Feb 02, 2012 at 18:37

Thursday, Feb 02, 2012 at 18:37
I suspect cattle and the High Country are probably not a good mix, none of those types of animal (cattle, horse, deer) are native to Oz and I doubt the ecology has developed to accommodate them; however I would also make clear that I certainly do not have the technical knowledge to support that viewpoint; as is the case for most people despite how passionate they may sound.

What really annoys me about the whole argument which is largely championed by The Age newspaper and a number of the "green" groups is that hardly any of those people have ever set foot into the High Country - indeed I'm sure 99% of them have never been further into the bush than a 3km walking trail in the Dandenongs National Park yet they feel free to pontificate upon matters of which they have neither knowledge nor experience.

AnswerID: 476678

Sponsored Links