The chief executive of the National Parks Association of New South Wales, Andrew Cox, was reported in today’s The Sydney Morning Herald saying that he would “die in a ditch” protecting national parks from commercialisation by the tourism industry.
Back of Bourke, May 2005. Photograph taken by Jennifer Marohasy
—————
Other posts in this series:
part 1 http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/000797.html Percy Bysshe Shelley 1820, Theodore Roosevelt 1903, Donald McKinley 1963, William Tucker 1982, Phil Cheney 2003.
part 2 http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/003015.html Martin Thomas, 2003.
part 3 http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/003044.html Travis, May 2008.
part 4 http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/003104.html John Brinckerhoff Jackson, 1994.
part 5 http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/003112.html Wes George, 2008.
part 6 http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/003120.html Cohenite, 2008.
part 7 http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/003124.html Roy Spencer, 2008.
part 8 http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/003127.html Libby, 2008
part 9 http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/003129.html Spangled Drongo, 2008
part 10 http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/003131.html Walter Starck, 2008
part 11 http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/003133.html Neil Hewett, 2008
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
For what palpable purpose?
If no one can visit a wildnerness area, why have it? It’s about as logical as proposing that Uranus be deemed a wilderness planet.
Barking mad.
Jennifer, that beautiful, dry, coolabah channel looks like good wild pig country. They should all be full at the moment.
Louis, it’s a very emotional subject. Qld. Nat parks are advocating all sorts of tourist activities. From mountain biking to horse riding.
Some of this is in the more degraded amalgamated state forests which is probably OK but the “pristine” NPs should be kept for walkers only I reckon.
The view that nature is superior to humanity and must be protected from humanity is, in some people, a moral conviction that is religious in form and intensity; it is to that extent beyond reason and has, as its psychological endpoint, a degree of committment which is incapable of compromise and therefore violent; since compromise is at the heart of democratic socities one result is this;
http://www.aynrand.org/site/MessageViewer?em_id=39963.0&dlv_id=36741
All its manifestations are misanthropic;
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22945744-25717,00.html
And as our utterly devoted forester shows, the ultimate form of misanthropic violence is martyrhood.
The Tasmanian National Parks Association (TNPA) is also strongly opposed commercial develop in National Parks. They have been opposed for years to the Pumphouse Point development within the Cradle Mountain Lake St Clair National Park and the World Heritage Area.
The reason claimed for opposing such development within a National Park, is that it will degrade the natural values of the area. The reason areas are included within National Park boundaries and the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area as well, is because of natural values.
As well the overall management objective as stated in the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area Management Plan 1999 (page 30) is “to identify, protect, conserve, present and where appropriate, rehabilitate, the World Heritage and other cultural and natural values of the WHA”.
Quoted from page 178 of the TWWHAMP under New Facilities “If adequate facilities or services exist or can be developed outside the WHA that meet visitor needs, such facilities and services will not be provided as concessions within the WHA”.
The development would not pass Ecotourism Accreditation as:
• It does impact adversely on the ecosystem
• It is not sited outside the National Park
• It does impact adversely on the ecosystem
The public want national parks, but do not want to pay for their upkeep. Schools, roads and hospitals seem to take funding priority with the voters and thus the pollies. That leaves only private donations (to support State property?) or business participation, like tourism. Andrew Cox might well have to die in a ditch.
The commercialisation of National Parks is well entrenched, through bureaucracy – one facet of which includes National Parks Associations. Tourism enjoys an exclusive partnership also, through the allocation of commercial activity permits.
In TNQ, ∼$13.5million is recurrently allocated to provide commercial access to tourism permit holders for a paltry ∼$325thousand annual return. That is, tourism is being subsidised to commercialise NP to the tune of more than 97cents in the dollar.
Neil
While the subsidies are probably not at the same scale as for the car industry, it makes tourism affordable and provides jobs.
PETA campaigners refusing to procreate? Now there is a good news story. If only the entire green movement would follow this lead we would be getting somewhere.
Cox die in a ditch? Now that would be an act of selfless sacrifice to benefit all mankind. The sooner the better, don’t you think?
Degrade the values of Lake St Clair NP? I thought they said it was already completely ruined by the Dams.
The urban community might like to think they retain ownership of the parks but the reality is that they are now under the control of a cult that pursues active policies of exclusion towards all but their own.
That is why rural fire service volunteers are no longer volunteering, especially for duty to protect a doomsday cults stolen assets. Why should they risk their lives to protect something that has been made more dangerous than it need be, by people much less competent than they should be, that they no longer have any stake in?
Marcus,
Why should Australia promote a non-contributing form of tourism?
In 1992, at the Rio Earth Summit, the World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC), representing the largest industry in the world and the biggest provider of jobs, offered ‘ecotourism’ as its commitment towards a more sustainable future.
Ecotourism was defined, internationally, as responsible travel to natural areas that conserves the environment and sustains the well-being of local people.
In Australia, however, tourism is subsidised almost exclusively upon declared reserves, where the taxpayer foots the conservation bill and local people are economically eclipsed by regional permit holders and public administrators.
I believe that Australia should allocate resources to develop vibrant and sustainable tourism economies where they are most needed and remove the exclusionary influences and unfair trading practices the presently drive tourism economies in a contradictory direction.
Neil
I probably did not make myself clear, I don’t approve of any subsidy at all, unless in exceptional circumstances, which would be more of a help than subsidy anyway.
I just pointed out that if we subsidise one section of the economy, why not an other?
Marcus: “I just pointed out that if we subsidise one section of the economy, why not an other?”
Car manufacturing industry is heavily unionised. The reason is the strength of the lobby.
I think some modest price hikes for permits is not going to send anyone broke. Certainly I felt on a recent trip to explore various parks in the NSW Northern Rivers a 20% rise in fees would have been barely felt.
The money spent at local businesses on the other hand while not greatly different from what I would have spent had I stayed at home is quite significant.
Jan:
IF a conservation land-use responsibility is either imposed onto a community or practised as a cultural responsibility AND government prohibits development approval to supply complementary services, eg. food and accommodation, or an entitlement to develop such services is precluded culturally or by economic disadvantage THEN subsidisation to a neighbouring public reserve, even to the extent of a 20% increase in user-fees, opposes the engagement of a tourism economy where it is most needed.
If the tables were turned, tourism economies would reimburse conservation off-reserve.
If a level playing field was established, either declared reserves would have to charge user-fees to recover the full cost of supplying the service, as non-government landholders are required OR subsidies would be allocated regardless of tenure so that all providers were reimbursed the full cost of supplying the service.
All National Parks should be cleared, concreted, and, if you like, painted green. The concrete might give off a bit of CO2, but they would make excellent water catchments, solving both the water and bushfire problems. All National Park staff could then be ‘redeployed’, so saving public money. It’s all a matter of political balance.
Those urbanites who seek the wilderness experience could find it in virtual reality, which is probably what most of them do now, through TV nature documentaries. If they all stop having babies, then, in a few decades, they will be but a shrivelled remnant, with no political clout.
Vote for me … my party, the Green and Solid Party (GASP) has concrete plans. As our party colour suggests, we will be encouraging Muslims to join, to swell our numbers in the coming decades.
As an answer to disastrous climate change, we will encourage Australians to adopt a lifestyle similar to that of the desert Bedouin, wandering in the wilderness.
Watch out Kevin, we’re coming … GASP
To answer Ian’s observation
“Degrade the values of Lake St Clair NP? I thought they said it was already completely ruined by the Dams”
There is a good picture of the wilderness at
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/05/06/2236801.htm?site=hobart
Well we’ve all seen the development in national parks such as Kosciuszko NP, i.e. ski resorts, snowy hydro, wilderness tours, etc. It appears that the NCC, NPA and other NGO’s with an interest in how this park is managed still regard it as “Pristine”, “Significant” and as having “High Conservation Vale” etc.
What is little known is that a person cannot go anywhere within the park and not either see or come face to face with a man made object every two kilometres, be it a road, dam, track, or tower of some kind. If one of Australia’s most famous and well loved parks can still be regarded as having the wealth of conservation values that are bestowed upon it by green NGO’s then I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for Andrew Cox to top himself. Mind you I would gladly operate the dozer that fills in said ditch whilst AC is occupying it.
GASP; the muslim connection is good; their green credentials are impeccable;
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2008/230408Qaeda.htm
Neil, unfrequented “wilderness” will have to be subsidised by popular “wilderness” but responsible ecotourism is the answer.
This unfrequented “wilderness” usually gets the rough end of the pineapple wrt govt maint and supervision.
“Wilderness” generally is a non-squeaky door and continually loses out to the major portfolios.
Hello Jennifer,
I do enjoy this blog however this particular thread is highlighting that your contributers are getting pretty wacky and weird. Perhaps some quality control or at least a bex and a good lie down is required for some.
Henry
I myself would prefer to be thought of as wacky (sic) rather than weird; I presume you have an inclination towards redundancy.
” Logline:Based on a true story of top student and athlete Christopher McCandless, an Emory graduate, who abandons his possessions, gave his entire $24,000 savings account to charity and hitchhiked to Alaska to live in the wilderness where he met his untimely fate.
Synopsis:
Based on a true story of one young man’s tragic ‘return to nature’. After graduating from Emory University in 1992, top student and athlete Christopher McCandless abandoned his possessions, gave his entire $24,000 savings account to charity and hitchhiked to Alaska to live in the wilderness. Along the way, Christopher encounters a series of characters that shape his life ”
Christopher finally dies from starvation. Many native Alskan criticized this young man for not being prepared to live in the wilderness, meanwhile it seems to have been a very popular movie in Alaska, on the theme young man leaves civilsation to live in the wilderness and on its way becomes a man….
(Excerpt from http://www.andycollins.com/lake-street-serenade.htm
>In 1955, at the age of 24, Michael Fomenko, the son of Princess Machabelli, a member of the pre- revolutionary Russian aristocracy, left Sydney and headed to the far north to realise his dream of living in the jungle. Killing crocodiles and wild pigs with only a machete, living with remote Cape York aborigines, paddling his dugout canoe from the Daintree River to the Torres Strait and countless other adventures, Michael is legendary for his amazing exploits in the deep jungles of the empty north and is Australia’s own real life Tarzan. Now in his seventies, Michael is still out there running to the beat of a different drum.
(See also: http://books.google.com.au/books?id=HHkmlXxEqiAC&pg=PA86&lpg=PA86&dq=michael%2Bfomenko&source=web&ots=xmkMTC9tZG&sig=XuS9li5Q5coH4xiM5Yp99X3K2vc&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=3&ct=result#PPA54,M1.
Thanks for that Neil, always wondered what happened to Michael Fomenko. He was my hero back in the ’50s.
You come across similar types at sea and in the bush who are happy to wear the most hostile wilderness like a glove. Not all as extreme as MF though.
It’s generally a young man’s game.
Whether the sea or the bush it be,
The heart of a man prevails.
Henry Lawson
In this case it’s probably more “the spirit”.