- Joined
- May 8, 2014
- Messages
- 1,866
- Reaction score
- 2,448
I assume these info leaflets carry the usual disclaimers that the documents 'are not without flaw' and those people behind it discount all liability etc. Well maybe we should legally explore targeting those responsible. Am I beyond being sued by a council if I produce a document saying the are the biggest wasters of taxpayers money, most lazy, corrupt and criminally negligent frauds in operation just because I stick a disclaimer in the small print? My point is that by their own admission they are stating that they may be wholly incorrect in their findings.
There is also the possibility of lodging an injunction to these proposed changes in the courts. Has The PMAV considered legal action and what stage is this at? If any knows please PM me directly, confidentially if course. It would seem a good use of membership fees.
Another thing as a prospector I'm not too happy with getting singled out from farmers hunters, 4x4s campers, motorcyclists littered, cyclists etc to get the blame for ANY and ALL of the damage done to the environment. I find it personally VERY defamatory and I feel prospectors and prospecting have been unfairly singled out to be painted in a negative light by those behind these proposals.
Their documentation looks like it was prepared by children in fairness, I could scythe through all of their arguments in very short order. The documentation is not very scientific and needs to be challenged on its merits, of which there are few, if any.
There is also the possibility of lodging an injunction to these proposed changes in the courts. Has The PMAV considered legal action and what stage is this at? If any knows please PM me directly, confidentially if course. It would seem a good use of membership fees.
Another thing as a prospector I'm not too happy with getting singled out from farmers hunters, 4x4s campers, motorcyclists littered, cyclists etc to get the blame for ANY and ALL of the damage done to the environment. I find it personally VERY defamatory and I feel prospectors and prospecting have been unfairly singled out to be painted in a negative light by those behind these proposals.
Their documentation looks like it was prepared by children in fairness, I could scythe through all of their arguments in very short order. The documentation is not very scientific and needs to be challenged on its merits, of which there are few, if any.