- Joined
- Mar 10, 2016
- Messages
- 7,954
- Reaction score
- 16,055
ken2m said:Thanks Rudy, the thing that most concerns me is the number of threatened species in the areas concerned. I think the final determination will be strongly based on the impact on those species. There are however many things that would have an effect on these species, including global warming and loss of natural habitat. But the exclusion or even reduced numbers of people in these areas will potentially make some areas more prone to bushfires, which will could cause mass extinction of most wildlife in these areas. So it will be a large task to balance the positive and negative aspects of the future of this area. Ken.
It's the same old crap argument they tried 20 years ago, threatened this threatened that. At the end of the day these tertiary educated mungbean eating, water kefir drinking tree hungers need to justify their qualifications by any means it seems like :N:. When the bush and public land that we pay for is closed to us the reason for it I feel will be because of the above mentioned people. Who would struggle to exist without their petrol /diesel vehicle /electric car /train /light (even solar panels are derived from raw materials WTF) and the list goes on. Better stop now I've been awake since the early hours and the 3 beers are making my fingers feel upset.