I would love to see further work and development of …

Comment on ‘Chain gang’ or holiday gaol time: a crucial question for our parks by Steve Brown.

I would love to see further work and development of the Larapinta Trail as it is an can be of much greater benefit as a tourist attraction.
In conjunction with its development however, we also need to see development of much greater vehicle access and camping grounds into the same areas. Walking trails only cater to a very small section of the population, we must make sure we are keeping our sights set on also attracting the biggest portion of the tourist market, those that drive or ride as opposed to those that walk.
The comments by Mr Latz and rangers re buffel grass can only leave you shaking your head. It’s not the buffel that’s the biggest threat to our National Parks. It is bloody poor management! In short “they – the so called experts”, are the threat! Stop the burning!
Fire is most often started by those who are supposedly preventing it That is the direct cause of the loss of trees and the increased domination of buffel in the landscape. Good graded or mowed fire breaks at regular interval, grazing and rapidly extinguishing any fires is the answer.
Good for soil fertility, good for the economy, good for trees, good for the beauty of the country.
Too many uni-educated “ex spurts” with no grasp, no handle on whom and what pays their wages.
Buffel is a pasture plant. It lifts the food productivity of the land by a massive amount.
Even to discuss, let alone carry out the development of a fungi or other method that threatens our pasture grasses could and should be seen as an act of bio terrorism threatening the nation’s wealth and food security.
Some of our bureaucrats need to understand: no grass, no food production, no money, no pay!
Which means no park management, no experts, no rangers and no bloody tourists because starving people don’t walk.
So instead of delivering a continual stream of propaganda based on the personal dislikes of a few individuals it’s time to sit down and map out a management plan for our parks which should include shepherded herds grazing our parks under licence.
Not only will they produce food and protect our parks, but will add an interesting attraction for our tourists [now fed] by developing dude ranch type activities.
It’s time to bush the experts and get some commonsense back on the ground. Take the parks from the ferals and give them back to the people!

Steve Brown Also Commented

‘Chain gang’ or holiday gaol time: a crucial question for our parks
If I were asked to further define the mentality that is both destroying our parks, the rights of our people and our nation wealth, small closed minds of an inept academia, I would simply point to the comments of Ian and Bob where that mentality is so aptly demonstrated.
World heritage, hey, Ian? What do you think that achieves that’s good for us, our town, our economy? And please spare us the propaganda.
World heritage listing would simply further embroil us in bureaucracy and red tape, further exclude ordinary people from enjoying their beautiful surrounds. Surrounds that your lot would isolate and leave open to ever increasing amounts of mismanagement from city born, city educated blow-ins with absolutely no knowledge of country, what makes it tick and more importantly, what makes it live!
My knowledge comes from a lifetime of working on and with the Land extracting a sustainable living from the land and landscape, working alongside friends, family and acquaintances who created, pioneered our community. We didn’t hear about it, we didn’t read about it, we lived on it, with it, grew up on it, we know this land, its plants its animals its beauty its moods, what it will give and what it won’t.
Lifetimes of observation, that’s my knowledge base. I know that it’s difficult to understand when your only knowledge base is the book in your hand but as any good coach or teacher will tell you, nothing is ever really learnt until you do it.
It is a tragedy that over the years parks, the environment in general and, yes, even the astounding newly discovered [by the above] biodiversity have all become the play things, the buzz words of smaller a smaller group of activists and academia who have created an exclusive snobbish club around the subjects, to the general exclusion of all others. This is the group I refer to as Ferals, those that have given parks, conservation, the environment and the biodiversity an increasingly bad name, developing an us and them mentality which in the end will do their stated cause immense harm.
If you want people to love and protect the environment, and our parks, you don’t develop that love by locking them out! You develop it by putting them in, giving them access. This way they get to know the value. Isolate the parks for long enough and eventually people won’t care what happens to them. As for the grazing of parks, that seems just too much for Ian, it is a practice that is carried out in many places around the world simply because it is by far and away the least damaging way to manage pasture, particularly in difficult terrains. You might want to keep in mind that the area known as the West Macs has been heavily stocked for over a hundred years. Whatever damage that was going to do is already done.
When cattle were finally removed from the valleys and ranges, pet food shooters also took out somewhere around ten thousand head of horses and donkeys over and above the numbers of cattle.
This occurred before the nuffel was established. What does all that mean? It means that the amount of grass, food, energy and if left unused “fuel” produced by this area is quite vast.
In order to maintain some sort of control, that prevents continual destructive burning which certainly does threaten the biodiversity, the whole area would sustain quite a large number of cattle or other grazing animals – another wealth earning industry that might actually pay a few ranger wages without doing any damage at all, if properly managed.


Recent Comments by Steve Brown

Gallery: Council did not say boo
It is time we all recognised that Aboriginal people are equal individual Australians and can speak for themselves, having as many and varied opinions on subjects as the rest of us.
Too much consultation, too much discussion is not a healthy thing. It leads to bogged down confusion, exacerbates division and generally leads to nowhere, no result.
That’s why we have a system of a democratically elected government, to make decisions on our behalf.
In the case of the gallery they have selected their site and are sticking to their decision, good on them for that much at least.
Let’s now see if they can actually produce something on the ground. I must say I really do have doubts, however time will tell.
The important thing about living in a democracy is to understand that while you push your argument for all its worth during the discussion, at the end of the process, when the decision is made, win or loose or draw you must put self interest aside accept the result and out of respect and in the interest of your community’s advancement.
Fall in behind the a decision reached by a majority government.
If you don’t like what they have done kick them out at the next election!


Gallery: Council did not say boo
Polls are run in attempt to gain community feeling on a subject, not to make the actual decision.
If we ever reach such a farcical state where that occurs, the country will simply cease to function.
The important thing to take into account from the polls, petitions and rallies is not the results for and against, but the numbers that participated.
Of the small number who did, on every occasion except for the councils latest fascicle attempt, which was clearly hacked, the numbers were well below 2000.
Divided about 50-50, a thousand each out of a town of 28,500 residents!
In planning or decision making those who do not show an interest one way or the other are counted as supportive!
A thousand against equals a tiny 3.5% of the population! Not at all sure we would want to base any decision making on that!
Further, council only exists under the Territory’s Local Government Act.
It is in fact owned wholly and solely by the Territory Government which makes it a matter of protocol in such circumstances that the Territory Government takes the lead and makes the decision.
The council’s role is to advise and lobby on behalf of and in the interests of its own future role but not to stand in the way of a government of which council itself is actually a part!
In light of that fact the council’s decision to be site neutral and simply to work with government to achieve the best possible outcome for our community is absolutely the correct position, just a shame they didn’t explain it to the community!
Oh, and the Territory Government does not have to “resume” that which it already owns to start work on it!
So council would be well advised to ingratiate itself making certain it is part of design committees and project implementation, committees where they will be in the best possible place to influence the final outcome.


Anonymous donation doesn’t fix conflict of interest for council
There were very important representations made to the Prime Minister by community organisations grateful for a very rare opportunity to put their case directly to the top.
I attended a round table with police talking about child abuse, DASA talking about a huge increase in ice abuse in our community.
I was there to talk about the need to look after our street kids and the provision of a 24/7 drop in centre. I know Red Tails and others also contributed.
The Prime Minister talked about putting together a regional plan. That was the level of discussion going on.


Anonymous donation doesn’t fix conflict of interest for council
One of the primary roles a council performs for its community is public relations, meeting greeting guests, trying to give a friendly welcoming all round good impression of the community.
Acting like a sales person if you like, in selling the benefits of our community to the world.
Individuals, businesses, governments of all persuasions from all levels are lobbied.
Considering this role, do we seriously think spending $1400 on greeting the leader of the nation is an issue?
Wouldn’t you think that greeting the distributor of the vast amounts of government funding this community receives would be just plain respectful good manners?
I am utterly appalled ashamed at the actions of four small minded disrespectful councillors who cannot put aside petty personality politics for five minutes to support the greater interest of this community.
It is an indictment of the farcical electoral system which throws up such narcissistic individuals who clearly place no value on the gains of our community, simply intent on creating obnoxious, always contrary mayhem to cover a contemuously lazy and disrespectful approach for the role to which were elected.


Price, Turnbull should pay for town council function: Cr Banks
I cant believe the disrespectful “entitled” commentary around this subject, really?
We are a small town in the centre of Australia, one of thousands of small towns in this country, the Prime Minister of our nation shows enough interest in our community’s struggles to take time out and visit to discuss advancing our region through the establishment of a regional plan, so very much in the interests of every Centralian!
And yet we get a couple of non contributing councillors who couldn’t be bothered fulfilling their own expected role as councillors, but still with their hand out for a similar amount every month, whingeing about a lousy 1400 dollars to facilitate and respectfully greet the leader of our nation!
Of course council should facilitate the Prime Minister and his departments meeting greeting, facilitating important visitors to town is a primary role for councils everywhere.
I’ll bet you a penny to a pound that there are councils of small towns all over this country who would shell out considerably more for the same opportunity, because it is in the interest of their constituents!
And if you don’t understand that then I can only suggest that you don’t belong anywhere near our council!
Further in recent months I have noted a continuous flow of disinformation from certain councillors, claims of bullying, not being invited to events and recently claims that having to officially apologise for non attendance is some kind of bullying isolation of the few.
What utter garbage. The line of code of conduct charges against one councillor came from council staff not other councillors because that councillor is a disrespectful loud mouth whose comments are often very disrespectful of staff.
Whether those code of conducts were upheld is completely irrelevant, what is relevant is the fact that staff felt the need to make them in the first place!
It is their only form of defence when they are impinged, it points, very pointedly I believe, to who the bully in the pack is.
Further, some councillors simply aren’t contributing, not giving the very large commitment the role requires, not bothering to show up for meetings, not having read their notes when they do.
The requirement to register their apologies is so that the public gets to see for themselves who is contributing to the nitty gritty plain boring hard work and who is taking a free ride and using the councillor role to grandstand trying to sell the idea they are actually contributing to our community. I hope local media will also keep a firm eye on this.


Be Sociable, Share!