You are hereForums / By Discipline / Mountain (off road) / By Location / Australia / NSW / NSW Trail Advocacy / Do you want shooters in parks you ride?
Do you want shooters in parks you ride?
Dunno about anyone else, but this news makes my blood boil:
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/ofarrell-over-...
Hunting in state forests has been discussed here before (see 'Conservation' Hunting in NSW State Forests) but if you thought that was a stupid idea, what about letting shooters into National Parks?
A group of cyclists are riding some tracks in XX National Park unaware that on a track 100 metres away is a hunter stalking his prey. This hunter is also unaware that the cyclists are on the other side of the trees. He takes aim.........he misses his prey........and the bullet continues on.........
Look at the picture in the article linked above? And these people claim to be conservationists? WTF!?
They also want shooting included as a school sport, and I think we've all seen what happens when you give troubled adolescents access to lethal weapons and teach them killing is 'sport'.
What do you think? Should bike riders be given more access to National Parks and should MTB (and other bike) skills be taught in school, or should we just forget that and give the kids guns instead? 
- Login to post comments
- Bookmark & share
Of course I have the right to lobby.......but as you said, "It's all about sharing".
refreshinglygood, how is shooting as a sport not valid when shooting as part of a cadet programme is OK? Cadets is not National Service, it's not a compulsory activity. Kids sign up for enjoyment and to develop new skills.
Extrapolating your argument, cycling would be OK for transport but not acceptable as a recreation. And OMG! Mountain Biking? Are you nuts?!! You want to let kids do that??!!??? And have it as a school sport??!??!! And do it in National Parks...Hell no.
@pancakes... those are some nice stats.
Here's an opposing view:
http://www.invasives.org.au/documents/file/repor...
Good propaganda from both sides
who runs the cadet group??
if you want to extrapolate my point you will only take it to your own conclusion. That is not what i am saying at all, can you tell me that riding out in the bush when hunters may be around doesn't bother you??? I spent 5 years in the US not far from Sacremento. MTB was by far one of the biggest sports in the area. regularly riders were going to hospital after being shot. Hunter were stalking an animal, then they see something ripping through the bush.
Riders got shot almost every weekend, it's as simple as that. Thats my point.
we need fewer guns in our community.
Now if your talking about sport pistol shooting then thats a whole other ball game
and sharing your right to lobby Trance. has anyone thought that maybe there are many valid points here????
Touche, Rob.
I note the numbers in that report are from old data and are only around 1% of the numbers taken in 09-10.
Shall we continue with dueling links or agree to disagree?
Hmmm. Guess which thread tops the recent hot
http://nobmob.com/tracker/hot
I have a couple of responses to this thread (which I find very entertaining, even though it's got nothing to do with mountain biking) :
1. Hunting in National Parks. There seems to be two topics here:
a) allowing more hunting in multi-use areas; and
b) hunting in National Parks specifically.
a) Most opposition arguments so far seem to actually be a reaction to this concept. In this case, it's really opposition to allowing more hunting into multi-use areas, not just NPs. For me, it's all about numbers and licensing. I wouldn't be afraid to walk or ride in the bush (State Forest or NP), if I knew there was one licensed, professional hunter who operated between 1600 and 1900 on Wednesdays, and only killed feral animals. What about ten licensed, professional hunters who had access to hunt at any time, and there were several legal native animals they could kill? What about when the hunting seasons opens and you've got unlicensed, amateur hunters in the dozens? These numbers may not happen in this country, but they do overseas. It's all about numbers and regulation in a multi-use area, particularly when the result of a mishap is severe. But exactly what the Shooters Party is asking for, I don't know at this point (however, as you'll see in the next point, I think they would take everything they could get).
b) Unlike the Shooters Party, as stated in their policy on the front page of the paper ("No more National Parks and Marine Parks"), I think National Parks are a good idea. I think having conservation areas where people aren't allowed to do certain things is good, because some people don't understand the impacts they can have on nature, and some people don't care, and I love the native bush that I see in this country. This applies to mountain-biking as well as shooting. There should be no blanket allowances. Even if the policy is approved, allowing either into a National Park should be done on a case-by-case basis, and under regulations. We might find very few NPs suitable for hunting. We might find very few NPs suitable for mountain biking. Controlled, and case-by-case basis.
2. Shooting as a sport. Believe it or not, there is a difference between sport-shooting and killing. Just as it is possible for children to see the distinction between throwing a javelin and spearing an animal, it is possible to see the distinction between target-shooting and hunting.
Of course, we shouldn't leave the javelins lying around after school for kids or yahoos to see what else they can do with them. I think the biggest issue is not shooting as a sport, it's about whether those guns are accessible outside the sporting domain, and who they're accessible to.
If we took an unrealistic scenario where anyone could shoot any type of gun inside a shooting range under controlled circumstances, but it was physically impossible to get access to a gun outside of those conditions, then most arguments against sport-shooting dwindle.
It seems to me that those against sport-shooting are worried about people aquiring an interest in weapons, and the growth of sport-shooting meaning there are more guns in this country. They worry about those guns being accessible outside the range. They also worry about other people with things other than sport on their minds getting access to these weapons. They also worry about accidents. They worry about a "gun culture", where it's a citizen's right to bear arms.
All valid worries, if you ask me. However, these worries really relate to the other Shooters Party policy that I saw on the front page of the paper: relaxation of gun laws. This is a different topic altogether, but it poses one final question:
How strong is the link between sport-shooting and gun laws? Is it possible to have an increased interest in sport-shooting without it inevitably forcing a relaxation of gun laws? Don't know, perhaps not.
BTW: I agree with some people, Rob - when I read your original post I thought you were deliberately trying to stir things up. Either way, it worked.
Trust me - if I wanted to stir things up this would have gone on the front page and not an innocent little side forum
Apologies for those that think it was bait, it really wasn't.
@pancakes: Dueling links? Soft... Let us setting this in the spirit of the thread. Convene at dawn somewhere in a National Park. I will bring both sword and flintlock, but Sir, it looks like you will choose the later for your demise!
Flintlock???? Sword??????
I've made my choice.
http://youtu.be/YVjn7aj9pxI
If that's what the Mini version can do imagine what a plain old regular size one would do...
This has got to be the hotest topic for a while, and brought out all sorts of opinions. I'm going to refer back to my earlier post, which has to do with the "supposed" purpose of allowing hunting in NP, ie feral animal control.
The information in the Game Council report must be a bit suspect unfortunatley - as in reality the Council is run by/for the Shooters Party. For some good, researched facts see:
http://www.invasives.org.au/documents/file/repor...
This really shows that for the cost of many $millions, the Game Council achieves very little effective eradication.
I have no issue with hunting. Its not my sport - but mtb is not the sport of hunters. Each to his own. But lets not fall for the idea that hunting is an effective method of controlling feral animals in NP. As I said before, we should be lobbying for NPWS to be given the resources to control feral animals on their land. NPWS is tremendously under-resourced given their land area and responsibilities.
Let's not cloud this debate with discussion on gun control in general, or about sports shooting in schools. They are not pertinent to the debate on shooting in NPs.
I remember 4WD driving thru the blue mountains a few years ago with the family and miles from anyone and anywhere and coming across a couple of guys with guns walking along the same State Forest bush track - I remember feeling very isolated and glad to get the hell out of there - even though they were simply hunting pests. Guns generate fear when you are confronted by them I guess by all the stories and tragedies you see an hear on TV.
I am 40+ and 30 odd years ago at St Ives Primary school i took my Dads ex war rifle a martini cadet to school for show and tell for Anzac day - every one thought it was a treat - thinking back i cringe - simpler times. In my 20's i remember going to Hornsby KMart where you could buy a Winchester 30X30 and ammo and head to the check out armed and loaded. Some things change for the better...when you look at the USA and their "Guns don't kill but people do" rant I shake my head and glad we have gun control here.
That control is for the most part the right people have them for legitimate use - It's either primary producer or gun club either way odds are they know what they are doing....hopefully.
I have no issues with hunting as long as its a long way away from others - I think i will be ok at Terry hills and Manly Dam and if they declare Fox Free Thursday at the dam then I won't ride that day. I assume there would be a notice period where ever they choose.
My opinion - guns have their place but that place is a long, long way from the nearest human - times have changed.
In the news a while back was the military's zany idea to strike out at Feral camels in the outback - F18 and M60's vs Camels had the protestors out and it got stopped - caused CNN outrage - so odds of anything being shot at your local National park are slim me thinks.
Rob, I'm a lover, not a fighter so you bring your sword and I'll bring my rapier wit.
As for the flintlock. They are the single speeds of the firearms world. I have neither the outrageous moustache or the puffy pantaloons and tights that either would warrant.
Oh and it would have to be private land as you may have heard firearms aren't allowed in National Parks (yet...).
I'm too tired to write any sort of decent response, but as a shooter (.22/.243 sized animals) and a bow + arrow hunter...
Would I hunt in a NP if it were available?
Yes.
Would I advocate for hunting in a NP?
No, there's plenty of places I can currently hunt - I don't see the need for hunting specifically in a NP. If they need pest numbers to be decreased, bring out the biotoxins/genetic modification or professional hunters.
JasonP pretty much wrote what I'm thinking.
It's official! BOF backs down and allows hunting in NPs
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/premiers-park-hunting-...
Hope I'm not out riding one day and mistaken for a feral animal
Wouldn't be the first time
Should have checked the recent posts prior to posting the same thing up.
Feel free to delete mine Rob if only to keep all the debate in one thread.
Dont think anyone would want to wipe you out??
This is why I think we should get rid of State Governments power onto themselves.
in doing something more to reduce feral goats, pigs, dogs, camels (maybe not in NSW), donkeys etc from NP's IF it's properly controlled. And as long as I can easily find out where and when its happening, so I'm not there at the same time, whether that be on bike, on foot or in the 4WD. Most likely a lot of it will be in more westerly NSW NP's, where mtb usage is pretty limited??
an MTB party,which held the balance of power in the upper house of state parliment?
LOL at the Greens! The greens have been playing main game politics with an issue that has little interest to their supporters - and been obstructionist has led to possibly the most anti green piece of legislation that O'farrell could dream up. The Greens party need to grow up and learn to be a little pragmatic instead of bright eyed, bushy tailed emo's ;D
include Kosciuszko and Barrington Tops... a bit closer to home than I thought.
How do we feel about feral animals in our NP are they a problem, should they be controlled and if so what's the best way to achieve this? We currently have Feral Animal Control Management Plans in place that utilise ground shooting as a control measure, the Royal National Park in Sydney is one place where ground shooting of deer is undertaken. So the idea of shooting feral animals in NP is not new, however, I guess as a non-shooter I now have, with the introduction of this new legislation, images of reckless gun totting hunters stalking through my NP without a care for anyone else, let's hope this isn't the case and proper measures are put in place to ensure no one gets hurt.
Even the "lock up the Parks" greenies would have to admit there could be more done to reduce the adverse impact of feral animals on NP's.
The dilemma that they have in this instance is that, even with the most rigorous controls over the proposed access (yet to see the detail), it represents more users, and more diverse users, being allowed into NP's.
Which in some ways is of assistance to arguments for greater mtb access.
Which in turn means that the mtb lobby (to the extent that there is any such formal thing) should probably be a little conflicted about where to land on the issue.
Like most things political, the devil is probably in the detail.....
for the NPWS on their feral animal control systems!
Was listening to the segment on Lateline tonight after reading the above posts about O'Farrell letting the shooters into Nat Parks, then they mention that the Parks will include Kosiosko, Barrington Tops and MOUNT CANOBOLAS - WTF! We have been riding, jogging and hiking the trails around Mt Canobolas (which btw is not a national park but a "state conservation area" surrounded by State Forest) for over 4 years. There are some great "recreational" mtb trails (mostly DH) here as I'm sure many of you will know. Often see people just out on bikes or foot exploring the area.
I'll be calling our local member, Andrew Gee, tomorrow and would urge anyone else in the Orange area to do the same (if you don't live here still call or write a letter to local member please!).
Article mentioning Mt Canobolas: http://tinyurl.com/7dvravv
Indeed, these are not just remote parks or recreation areas out in the boondocks. Shooters will be allowed in some of the most visited parks in NSW.
Listening to Borsack from the shooters party on 702 yesterday was a revelation. He claims that shooters are conservationists and he denies that any hunter has been caught releasing feral pigs in order to ensure hunters have continuing prey, despite some hunters being caught doing just that. He claims that shooters in National Parks will increase visitation numbers dramatically, as apparently nobody visits NP's anymore!
So what if you get mistaken for a feral animal and shot at, at least you can go home and charge your bike lights up with clean efficient “privatized” power….
Anyhow; while our local bike stores are struggling for sales and with another KFC looming on the horizon, guns crime and drive by shootings are at an all time high, these feral animals are running wild destroying our pristine wilderness areas and it seems that no one apart from the O’Farrell government really care enough to do anything about it…?
We now have potential legislation that brings with it an opportunity for a combined Gun and Bike store.. the LBGS? The LBGS could draw a whole new demographic into their shop, questionably cashed up and ready to drop a bundle, pretty soon these bad boys that keep shooting up the neighborhood would be too busy shooting all the feral piggies and training up for the next enduro event to even want to bother with something like a suburban drive by.
Well played O’Farrell!!
Sad to have worked all your career for something, believing in it, knowing the science, and then have an unrelated political decision make that work meaningless.
And as for our friends the National Parks Association: forget about protecting the parks from bicycles - you now have a much bigger problem (which has guns).
according to the radio news this morning, looks like they will try to stop it happening by not co-operating with the Government on implementation.
Yes I think time to start some action if you don't support it.
Start lobbying your local member. If a local Liberal member gets enough comments on this issue then maybe they will start feeling nervous about their position.
Big problem of course is the last election Labour got overly fried so liberals have a mandate.
So maybe write to some ministers and CC your local member.
Robyn Parker who is Minister for The Environment
[email protected] and [email protected]
Katrina Ann HODGKINSON who is Minister for Primary Industries
[email protected], [email protected]
Barry O'Farrell
[email protected], [email protected]
As a friend of mine once put it "They're there for you man!"
and if you are lazy then just do this via the greens site
http://davidshoebridge.org.au/againstchildrenhun...
I reckon 661 will be introducing a new range in their body armour line sometime in the near future.
I'm heading out this arvo to find a shockproof loud speaker of some kind and some hivis riding kit so that shooters know that i am a rider not a big fat boar.
I would feel heaps more unsafe on a late suburban train!-all it sounds to me is that people have some sour grapes that we do not have any political clout!-why don't we look at taking the next step & joining that politics game?
Despite the histeria and misinformation surrounding this decision it's a step forward for ALL users of public lands in NSW. It can only be good news for the mountain biking community.
The NSW Game Council has been administering and overseeing hunting in hundred's of NSW's state forests for 5 or so years without a single firearms related safety incident. The numbers of permits and areas within the forests are tightly regulated.
Currently, if there is an area in a state forest that has contractors working or is popular with other users it's designated an excluded area for hunting. It would be the same with the NPs. It's not carte blanche for hunters to rock up and blaze away.
Regardless, the bigger issue here (and one which is being overshadowed by the hysteria) is the sale of the electricity generators. At least this will free up capital for wider ranging improvements to infrastructure. Let's face it, successive state governments have done little to maintain them in tip top shape so we may as well hand them over to private enterprise. They can't possibly do a worse job.
Im not sure being worried about blood thirsty hunters is hysteria pancakes. I grew up in tam worth. I know first hand the poor unsafe practices of many hunters. It's just plain simple. Increase the number of hunters in national parks, increase the risk of harm to other users. Decrease the number of hunters, decrease the risk. It's not complex.
shooters have to apply to the game council firstly for a permit-after being given one they are then alloted a certain sized area of which they can only shoot in-depending on the feral animals in the park shooters must abide to a certain sized calibre rifle to attain a quick kill-all entry points to these parks will have warning signs to show that shooting is taking place & as we all know with governments & NPWS this will take months if not years to implement.
"Despite the histeria and misinformation surrounding this decision it's a step forward for ALL users of public lands in NSW. It can only be good news for the mountain biking community."
I think i tend to agree - the greenies have been agitating for a long time to protect national parks from humans in any guise (well perhaps except other greenies with boots on).
If you want a child to appreciate some forest, you dont show them a picture, you take them there. Second, the more good experiences a person has with national parks that is positive the more they value the asset, the more they will protect it. Locking people out distances people from an understanding of the natural world.
National parks need to be given a high value, that value is only there by perception, and that perception only grows by experiencing it. If you want to create a person who will defend a park come hell or highwater, give me a cyclist who can ride in it, or a walker with trails, or an office worker who can drive their 4wd in and camp.
Access breeds value, creates protection. The greenies are fundamentally wrong in their pursuit of exclusivity.
a bike is a mode of transport, or a vehicle for fit recreational adventures ( thats what i will call them) a gun is built and designed for one purpose and we all know what that is, the two should never be put in the same areas, what happens when bats, pigs, roos, cats or pigeons become a pest or feral animal do we then allow shooters into playgrounds to get rid of them
which will say "Do not enter this National Park shooting of feral animals is taking place"?-I know if I got to a gate with this sign I would not go riding!
Robbie, What about signs like at the top of yule road?
Hell, mountain biking is dangerous as all buggary, the chances of me being mistaken for a feral pig i 'd suggest is slim, especially compared to the chances of finding myself a quadraplegic due to a mountain biking or road crash. I'm not a fan of the decision, but if it creates a bit of self introspection in a few quarters i'm all for that outcome
Refreshinglygood, in addition to your overly emotive description have a read of marto71's post above. Another fine example of hysteria.
Pharmaboy, you nailed it. :thumbsup:
to answer your question robbie O, warning signs do stuff all, yeah they alert people of the dangers, but thats it, it doesnt stop the possability of bullets going outside of the barricaded area, ive been around guns since i was a kid, so over 30 years experience and for anyone to think a gun being used in an environment where there are other, especially in the more popular parks is just foolish, In the past 15 years i have had no less then 4 friends injured or been made deceased since the new licensing of guns, im all for guns in areas where feral animals are a problem, but i have seen too many fools who I don't know how have got there gun lisence but they have, geez i even work with one of them, who hopes he can go shooting in Glenrock in the future
& do you think they will allow shooting right up to park borders?-there will be exclusion zones in the the parks.I will give an example of how tight the regulations are-Onley State Forest where Awaba Mountain Bike Park is,has allowed hunters in there to kill feral animals BUT only using Bows & Arrows!-why? because it is deemed to be to close to the freeway & the legislation forbid the use of guns-has anyone been shot there from feral hunting over the years?
from my understanding robbie O, there has been one incident that im aware of, but in saying that, a bullet can and will travel a hell of a lot further then an arrow ever will and with a lot more velocity
Thanks for that pancakes.
Emotive comments often come from some direct personal experience. Maybe. Just maybe I have some personal experience that relates to firearm accidents. Maybe I'm not relying on what I read or what people tell me. And Robbieo. Bullets won't stick to the signposted areas. They tend to keep traveling even if there is a sign saying no guns past this point. Guns in public areas are a recipe for disaster. It won't be often but WHEN it does happen the outcomes will be devastating.
.
but the regulations regarding shooting in National Parks will be as tough if not tougher than shooting in State Forests(see my post earlier this morning).
are these similar to the regulations that say drugs are illegal or cars are not allowed to speed, no matter what rules we set to control society, in my experience they will be broken, and that is why i say no way to this