Rain coming

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 87County

.......sounds like a "yes minister" style of bureaucrat thing :(

some say a "ministerial" is the way to go... hit both the minister and the local member...

best of luck _ Laurie

---

My correspondence on the subject with my local member goes back to concerns with access when it might be turned into national park in 1998, directly with the minister to 2001. In regard to this specific crossing my correspondence with the local member goes back to March last year, with the minister to June last year - I am currently waiting on a reply to the letter I wrote to the minister in February this year. In April this year I asked for the help of the Member for Dubbo (my own local member does not seem much use), who is the local member on the other side of the creek, and a month ago I started talking to the NSW ombudsman.

Any more suggestions? I have considered asking a TV station to come and take some pictures, but being west of the sandstone curtain I doubt they would have any interest.

John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JDNSW

Any more suggestions? I have considered asking a TV station to come and take some pictures, but being west of the sandstone curtain I doubt they would have any interest.

---

JD - simple, just mention the nudist thing and they will be there in a flash!!!

Another option - maybe shoot Dave S a PM. He is busy fixing his house up after the storms atm, but he has LOTS of experience dealing with govt departments and legal stuff.

Only way to definitely get their attention is to start work on it yourself. As soon as you do they'll be down to tell you what you're doing wrong.

I'm still fighting a similar fight between Mudgee Council and Dept of Lands over access to my place at Windeyer.

Cheers
Simon

mobilise the AULRO mob John... post some pics on here first :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EchiDna

mobilise the AULRO mob John... post some pics on here first :)

---

There hasn't been a good old fashioned bridge building in a while!!! :D

I will be over your way in early January! Happy to help!

Why not tell the national parks that due to their failure to maintain the road/bridge, you will be building your own using logs from the NP ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EchiDna

mobilise the AULRO mob John... post some pics on here first :)

---

I think this gives an idea of the problem. Not too bad in the dry, but I'd be very wary about it in the wet, as it gets very slippery, and the gutters are about two feet deep - you'd get hung up in them no matter how big your tyres or how many locking diffs you have.

John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JDNSW

I think this gives an idea of the problem. Not too bad in the dry, but I'd be very wary about it in the wet, as it gets very slippery, and the gutters are about two feet deep - you'd get hung up in them no matter how big your tyres or how many locking diffs you have.

John

---

Surely that is a good excuse to buy a Unimog!!!

http://i.pbase.com/o4/26/631126/1/54879721.DSC_0812.jpg

Hi JD,
I must confess that, if the only reason for the road is to provide for your access to your property, then I agree with NPWS.

Sorry,
Peter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bushwanderer

Hi JD,
I must confess that, if the only reason for the road is to provide for your access to your property, then I agree with NPWS.

Sorry,
Peter

---

Obviously, you live in the city.

But apart from the fact that continued access was guaranteed by the then Minister in writing (twice) during the discussions before the area was transferred from Forests NSW to a Community Conservation Area, the crossing is on a key perimeter road that was agreed between NPWS and RFS to be essential to be maintained in a condition where it can be used by the largest firefighting appliances. (It is not the only bit of these key roads that is currently in appalling condition - it is just the only bit I have to use)

While the area was under forestry, I could and did carry out necessary minor repairs, including on this crossing. Since coming under NPWS, not only have they totally neglected maintenance on this and many other key bits of infrastructure in the area, but they have threatened with prosecution anyone else who does any - the major damage to this crossing could have been prevented by fixing the drainage on the road before it rained after the fire, no more than half a day's work with a shovel, ten minutes with a blade. I advised NPWS of the need to do this, and not only did they not do it, but they warned me not to. One of my neighbours was threatened with prosecution when he started filling in some of the real bad potholes in his access road. That was nearly two years ago, and the holes are still there and getting worse.

For anyone in a rural area, there are few worse problems than having NPWS as neighbours, particularly if you have to get access through them, or are downwind from them (as I am). NPWS has a well established reputation for neglect, particularly neglect of fire precautions. As a prime example, in this case, four years after taking control and nearly two years after a disastrous fire, they have yet to publish a draft fire management plan, let alone finalise it.

John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bushwanderer

Hi JD,
I must confess that, if the only reason for the road is to provide for your access to your property, then I agree with NPWS.

Sorry,
Peter

---

I concur with JD, obviously anyone that supports any actions of the the NPWS, must not be in full possession of the facts.
Let alone understand the concept of access in rural or remote locations.

enough said.




john