They argue that stricter rules ‘shut the gate’ on business and community opportunities and work against developing greater appreciation and targeted management of wilderness areas. This comes from bans on activities ranging from motorcycle riding and feral-pest eradication to natural-resource harvesting.
The reality is that both arguments in context are right and with any contentious debate, finding the often difficult but gentle medium or balance means everything.
We have various tiered levels of parkland protection ranging from bushland reserves to national parks that should match the sensibilities of most. In the end, much of getting the formula right comes down to measured human management.
This demands a magnanimous and informed approach from all parties and, dare we say it, a departure from the stringent confines of bureaucratic process to an embracing of objectivity, common sense and collaboration.
Happens already? Perhaps in some cases. Perhaps not in others. While we’ve seen some management plans work well for years, we’ve also seen examples of over-zealous approaches on various sides of arguments dictating outcomes that please few and generate anxiety.
On the ground, the reality is that we have a long way to go in giving back to the land what we’ve taken.
Bring on greater targeted protection of fragile areas and try to capitalise on what benefits this might bring, morally, socially and environmentally.
But let’s not forget that ‘the bush’ and our vast expanses of Crown and parkland present a variety of opportunities. These, through considered educated management, can embrace ecological and environmental protection while also meeting a variety of other needs and desires.
The entire June 30, 2021 edition of The Weekly Advertiser is available online. READ IT HERE!
The entire June 30,, 2021 edition of AgLife is available online. READ IT HERE!
