Micheal's nailed my point exactly I didnt mean for access to be restircted to clubs but more like a bus pass, anyone can have one. Hell bring back the work for the dole scheme and make the buggers sit on their asses on a gate by themsleves for 15 hours a day to collect full price off of people who dont have the passes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael2
Yes i also inherited my browning semi auto 12g from my dad it had a lot of memorys to meQuote:
Originally Posted by DeeJay
and ron no offence but it is the ileagle use of firearms that caused all the bad media attention towards us legal honest people of this country
i for one are a licenced registered owner by law
you are intitled to you opinion but unless you are qualified to coment or experienced dont coment , a lack knowledge is dangerous as we have all found out over the years
Plenty of trails in NSW parks have been permanently closed over the years, especially those in areas declared wilderness.Quote:
Originally Posted by Redback
Martyn
I think one of the advantages of registering and having to pick up the keys to such areas is that people think twice before being dimwits because they can have their access revoked.
I have a fair bit to do with the 4wd nsw-act association and knowledge of negotiations with npws and state forrests.
npws are practically broke, do not have enough rangers in the field. Too many at the main offices in Sydney, which soak up a lot of funds. They have so much area (that is ever expanding because of the greens in out state parliment) to manage, but not enough people or funds.
Many of the rangers in the field are very good and would like to have 4wd people involved - do a little work etc.
The main problem (as far as we are concerned) with npws are those, mainly in the Sydney office who are greenies and are against 4wd's.
The other problem is to do with their charter, particularly the part to do with the condition of tracks. Many tracks are closed because they don't have the money and staff in the field to maintain them.
As far as access to fire trails by rfs, I agree with the comments that they have become inaccessable.
It is very clear that the fire outbreaks, which take weeks/months to extinguish, occur far more in the national parks, than sf. Members of rfs, for years have refered to the npws as national sparks and wildfires.
Jon Jenkins has a bill before parliment that could make a lot of difference. Unfortunately he has been struck with serious health problems, but we are hopeful that this bill will get through. He has worked very hard for us, it is regretable that he won't be able to continue.
The biggest problem is the rabid greens. They are succesful with their agenda because they hold the balance of power in the upper house.
They are managing to get more and more area converted to np and to exclude our access. It suits them that there are not enough funds to manage the parks as they want them untouched and are blind to the consequences, with weeds, ferals, wildfires etc.
One of the latest things they have won, is the green belt from Nelson Bay to the Watagans, which comes into effect mid next year. We have lost a lot of the Mt Sugaloaf area, including the test/training track near Freemans Waterhole. I am not sure what implications this will have on Stockton Beach.
Hear hear
how many times has the issue of access to fire trails been brought up in other forums. The ever increasing green fringe have a lot to answer for.
Locking gates removing access, reducing and not doing controlled burns I have been led to believe are the main reasons for the horrendous fires have been having.
Whats the point in locking up a national park if you can't get into it other than walking? Not everybody is a walker, what about the horse riders locked out of the high country. the list goes on.
It is nice to have a declared wilderness but how the hell are people supposed to see it, i don't know if the greens can explain that!
Whilst controlled access can be a good thing, total access itself is better.
john
I could say the same about you commenting on government, politics, pollies, or a host of other things.Quote:
Originally Posted by rangieman
I merely asked why you'd want a gun. In fact my question, in its entirety was "Why?"
If you look at a subsequent post, I said:
Isn't that the same as what you said in your post?Quote:
You take guns away from sporting shooters because a few people (usually non-shooters) kill others.
I admit I have no interest in owning a gun. I have never said that others shouldn't own them. I have friends who are shooters.
So I can't see why you are making that offensive statement. I can comment as much as I like. The fact that I don't own a gun doesn't preclude me from commenting. That's democracy.
Ron
Actually it's Freedom of Speech... but now I'm just being pedantic :DQuote:
Originally Posted by p38arover
:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Grizzly_Adams
Ron
Quote:
Originally Posted by p38arover
i did say you are able to comment and i didnt knock that:eek: ,
and if you think i was making a offensive statemaent SORRY !
it was not my intenion to offend you and if you took it that way i can not take it back:p
so whats ya prob:angel: