Access situation

**JDNSW** · 7th May 2009, 04:55 PM

Originally Posted by hook

Funny how you have to go through 4 MP's and they all get back to you on the one day???

This tells me there are 4 department doing the one job,
get rid of three of them and we could save some Taxpayers money

No, one department - just that it takes multiple MPs pushing the same complaint before anything happens. It is worth remembering that if you are having a problem with a government department, they will respond much more rapidly and satisfactorily to a MP than to you. In this case I think the effective pressure was the Member for Dubbo, who is a non-aligned independent, and as such does not have to worry about treading on any toes - and has to be seen to be a good MP by her constituents, unlike the party hacks - my own representative is in one of the safest seats in the state; all he has to worry about is preselection!

John

**Shonky** · 7th May 2009, 05:59 PM

Gawd they are some serious ruts!

You are dead right about getting your MPs on the case John. That is what we elect them for - to represent our interests.

Government departments are generally only interested in keeping their respective ministers happy. Your concerns are not a priority, until your Minister heckles their minister and they are forced to do something to save the boss from embarrassment.

**JDNSW** · 7th May 2009, 06:53 PM

I should point out that this crossing is not just my concern. Although I am the only landholder who uses it for access, it is on one of the key access routes in the National Park, and in fact the reason it is in such poor condition at present is that it had very heavy firefighting traffic in the fire two years ago, which destroyed the hump that stopped water running down the slope.

At a public meeting eighteen months ago as a followup to the fire, National Parks, under pressure from RFS, agreed that the perimeter road, which includes this crossing, must be maintained in a condition that will allow use by all categories of tanker. At present, you might manage it with the very lightest category of tanker in the dry. I would not even attempt it in anything without tracks after five millimetres of rain. Worth noting that the immediate area was not burnt in the fire, and has fifty years of fuel, slightly reduced in patches by half hearted attempts at fuel reduction every fifteen years or so. I know that this is not the only part of the road network that is in shocking condition, including some other parts of the key firefighting access, although a few of these have been repaired and even upgraded.

John

**abaddonxi** · 7th May 2009, 08:22 PM

Them's deep ruts, John.

Did you get the golf sticks out with the umbrella?

Simon

**JDNSW** · 26th May 2009, 08:06 PM

Well, yesterday they actually started work on it. The start of work was an archaeological survey to collect all the artifacts in the area - these comprised numerous stone chips from thousands of years of stone working, most of which were brought to the surface when a dozer was put through the crossing during the fire! I went down to see what they were doing - and actually got stuck. I got halfway up the slope, when I realised that at the top they had liffle pegs and flags all over the ground and had to stop. Then I had to back down, and put a back wheel in the rut, grounding the chassis and getting cross axled.

I had to get winched out by the district manager for national parks - in a Rodeo.

This morning I went down to see what was happening again, and they had a bobcat there, but were still working on the archaeology. Later I heard the bobcat going, but I was busy with my concreting. I will see them going into town tomorrow - I hope I can get through; I'll use another crossing further downstream - this is very rough in the creek bottom, but should be passable in the 110.

John

Thread: Access situation

Thread Tools

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions