Bay of Fires (Tasmania)
.
.
Location Map:
.
Bay of Fires Overview:
.
Conservation Organisations
.
[1] The Tasmanian Conservation Trust Inc. (TCT), ^http://www.tct.org.au [2] North East Bioregional Network, ^http://www.northeastbioregionalnetwork.org.au/ [3] Environment Tasmania – The Conservation Council, ^http://www.et.org.au.
.
Updates of Habitat Campaigns
.
.
>20120616 ‘Prescribed Burning’ is a greenhouse gas
.
Bay of Fires 201010
.
‘TCT Submission on the Proposed Bay of Fires National Park‘
by The Tasmanian Conservation Trust Inc. (TCT) in ‘The Tasmanian conservationist newsletter (Feb 2010, Number 319), ^http://www.tct.org.au/support/documents/TCTNewsletterVolume319.pdf.
‘In October 2009 the State Government called for submissions on the boundaries for the proposed Bay of Fires National Park. It its submission, the TCT (Tasmanian Conservation Trust Inc.) recommended that it was premature and inappropriate to seek public
input regarding the boundaries for the proposed Bay of Fires National Park as Aboriginal concerns and existing management problems should have been dealt with first. Also, public input was never sought for the proposed boundaries or other potential uses for the area. Media coverage indicated that most people were dissatisfied with the final national park boundaries.
The TCT does not oppose a national park but encourages the State Government to re-start the public consultation process, seeking the views of the Aboriginal community, local residents and users and other interested people in relation to the future uses for public land in the Bay of Fires. Through a more thorough consultation process the TCT believes a broader range of interests can be addressed, including better protection and management of the area.
There are many threats to the natural and cultural values of the Bay of Fires including uncontrolled off-road vehicle use, poorly planned camping areas, coastal shacks, fires, weeds, dogs and tourism developments. Prior to considering a national park the government must work out which ‘traditional practices’ will be banned and which will be allowed. For other national parks, these decisions were not made before their declaration and pre-existing problems have never been satisfactorily dealt with. Prior to proposing boundaries of a national park, the government should commence consultation with recreational users, Break O’Day Council, local and state conservation groups and Aboriginal groups regarding these important management issues.
Specific comments on the boundaries of the proposed Bay of Fires National Park
- The information made available was very brief and not sufficient for the public to make a considered response to such an important matter.
- There are no stated terms of reference for the consultation process.
- The very brief information made available fails to explain why the Ansons Bay Conservation Area and Doctors Peak Forest Reserve were excluded from the proposed national park. This lack of explanation of the rationale is totally unacceptable and serves only to suggest that the proposed boundaries are influenced by vested interests and political agendas rather than being scientifically based.
- The proposed national park would involve two totally disjunct areas, the existing Bay of Fires Conservation Area and the existing Mount Pearson State Reserve. This is quite unusual, presents obvious management problems and sets a bad precedent.
- The coastal part of the existing Bay of Fires Conservation Area running south from Ansons Bay includes some very narrow areas, in some instances extending only to the high tide mark. We wonder how such areas could qualify for national park status?’
.
.
Bay of Fires 201001
.
‘Anger over Bay of Fires threat claim’
.
by ABC News, 20100114, ^http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-01-14/anger-over-bay-of-fires-threat-claim/1208562.
‘Tasmania’s tourist industry is angry over a travel magazine claim that the Bay of Fires region is among the world’s most threatened areas.
Last year, the Bay of Fires was listed by Lonely Planet as one of the world’s must-see destinations. Now the independent travel magazine Wanderlust has listed it, along with England’s Stonehenge, as in danger of being overrun by tourists.
Bay of Fires tourism operator Peter Poulson says he is gobsmacked by the claim.
“Being overrun is just ridiculous and I’m not quite sure where these people get their information from,” he said.
The Tourism Council’s Daniel Hanna says the region gets about 170,000 visitors a year.
“That pales into insignificance when you compare it with sites like Stonehenge where millions and millions of visitors visit over a year,” he said. The article comes amid controversy over the State Government’s plan to turn parts of the region, which contains aboriginal burial sites, into a national park.’
.
.
Further Reading:
.
[1] The Tasmanian Conservation Trust Inc. (TCT), ^http://www.tct.org.au/support/newsletter.htm
[2] Bay of Fires community Consultation,© 2009 Pitt & Sherry, prepared by Wendy Mitchell and Catherine Nicholson, for Tasmanian Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment, ^http://www.dpiw.tas.gov.au/inter.nsf/Attachments/CSTS-8FN6SZ/$FILE/Bay%20of%20Fires%20Community%20Consultation.pdf [Yet another Australian government that dilutes environmental conservation with incompatible exploitation]. [Read More] [3] Bay of Fires National Park Momentum Grows, 200801201, ^http://www.et.org.au/news/2008/bay-fires-national-park-momentum-grows-1122008.
.
