Backyard Aquaponics
A place to discuss aquaponics

Unfortunately I have a neighbour that is quite happy to eliminate all the trees on his 8 acre property...
Noice! N00B... we live in a place called 'the wilderness' go live on some unspoilt farming land with NO trees on it
ya wally!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
PS he loves an english cottage garden

Novaris ,, 'The city Folk" already give up way more than what is asked from the farmers.
I CANNOT build on 60% of my land !!! That is about standard rules here in the city / suburbs.
Removal of any trees requires me to substitute several native trees.
Seems the rules for farmers are a bit leanient.

Rules need to change as the world changes ,, compensation is not always appropriate or possible.
I mean , zoning laws on my land changed considerably ,, I lost the ability to build on a large percentage ..... would you think it acceptable that the Governemt compensate me ,, say 60% of the land value of $700,000 ???
A claim from all us city Folk would send the Government broke ....., Maybe we should go on a hunger strike until that compensation is given?
The moment a Government begins talking with mentally unstable terrorists or hunger strikers is the moment our whole society falls into chaos.
Peter Spencer seeks to change the rules by threatening self harm ,, One of my strongest beliefs is the sanctity of life ,, This an needs to be sedated and removed from the possibility of harming himself or others. The sooner that is done the better.

It really pisses me off when people deliberately tie unconnected events to what could be a valid arguement... to provoke an emotive response...

The bushfires that devasted Marysville with such sad loss of life... had bugger all to do with National Parks.... or any potential arguement about compensation over use of land...

As to 20% of Victoria being "tied up in National Parks.... I say... thank goodness for the fact that people of vision from previous generations had the foresight to do so... before it was levelled, plundered and exploited for personal profit....

To my knowledge... no significant land area has been added to National Parks in years... and that which has... has been done so to protect wilderness areas...

Now, the arguement as to fire... and/or pest animal management of National Parks... is a seperate arguement... worthy of debate....

The proposal (in this case) for the use of some land for "agroforestry"... is one which I'm sure could be negotiated.... and there are great claims to be made for including and encouraging farmers within any CRS system to do so and obtain carbon credits...

The rest is purely driven by financial gain... not concern for nation building... or environmental protection... IMO...

Where the hell do you live every new city block I see is about 90% built on no land no back yards, and few trees. Or do you mean you can't build on the 60% of the small amount left?


This is typical of a person who has not suffered because of the rule changes I notice you raising hell over the CTS scheme recently you took those proposed rule changes very well - not.


I think this is a completely absurd statement and an insulting comparison.

After exhausting all other avenues - as did Mahatma Gandhi.
On this I agree.

I am not sure that these are the same thing. From my understanding this involves private land. From the Allan Jones interview.

Oh dear ....., here we go
1)I live in Yowie Bay / Miranda ,, Sutherland shire council makes the rules ,, MAXIMUM biulding coverage of property is less than 50%. I'll let you take a look at the rules as it is you that lacks the knowledge.

2) objection to "proposed" rules is part of normal debate. Did you see me threatening a hunger strike??? THAT is abnormal.

3) Mahatma did NOT have acess to the Australian judicial system ,, Can't see the direct comparison ,, actually it is merely another emotional attachment ,, I mean what has Mahatma got to do with land issues in Australia??????

I HAVE suffered from rule changes ,, please see 1) , so better you not try to allienate me because I haven't suffered.

AND if you don't agree with me ,, well , well ,, I'm gonna stop eating ROFLMAO...... AND i will cry / stamp my feet ..... ahhh and and???

Let's be real here... while I applaud Peter Spencers protest... as I do most direct action protests...

It isn't about national parks, fire management, pest control etc etc... or even "agro-forestry"..

It's about financial reward....

He's fighting for compensation for not being allowed to clear his property under NSW native vegetation laws and says 109 million hectares of Australian families' private property has been locked up under the same management laws.

Under the guise of water reform and biodiversity, those laws were in fact the former Howard and present Government's means of reducing our carbon emissions by 22 per cent which enabled Australia to met its Kyoto Treaty obligations


He wants Australian farmers to be compensated for carbon capture... at the moment there aren't provisions within the proposed CRS to do so...

And he has valid arguments that agriculture should be included in any carbon scheme... but.. IMO... as both inputs AND outputs....


But he doesn't want any outputs collected/taxed... he just wants the gain from inputs....

It has nothing to do with the land itself... if it was so viable... it would have been cleared and farmed decades ago....

And frankly... it appears that the "family farm" has been basically run as a "remote" business... rather than a fully attended... professional business... and badly apparantly....



And that the banks are foreclosing due to failure to meet mortgage payments... his own blog states... that he is "retiring" to the property...

A professional, in attendance farmer... tending and managing his farm... would not have had his stock "devasted" by wild dogs... to the point of financial ruin...sorry... but the motivations aren't as transparent as some would have us believe...

He was an absent "phillip street" farmer... who's cottoned onto a possible financial windfall that could bail out his failing "business"...

The summary is ,, Peter Spencer is DEMANDING money from the Governemnt under threat,that he is not entitled to. and doing with the threat of taking his own life. I fully support calling his bluff.
Dead and wrong ( dead wrong)is my suggested outcome .

Yeah interesting... I thought that clearing had been banned long ago in many rural areas and it had nothing to do with carbon capture. I have friends down south here that are not able to clear land but this is all local government stuff, not federal.

Hmm it was the British judicial system, wasn't it? Now I wonder where did we get ours?

If anyone else seizes your property you can call the police, if the government does it your stuffed, I just hope it never happens to any of us.

Rupert think about it would you risk your life over some money? Seriously I believe to him it is much more then the money but I don't know him, it's just my opinion.

And I know its not the same but to me it's just another example of a government taking away individual freedoms, for questionable purposes as for example the current internet filtering plans.

If you trust governments then good luck to you, as I said I don't

TCL, think Endangered Species Act here and the parallel is the same. A federal wildlife specialist could come on your land, see a puddle from last night's rainfall and declare your backyard a wetland. There is already a move afoot to change the definition of a navigable waterway to include any body of standing water.

Bugger... that would be most AP systems

Absurd as it is, if passed it might be possible.

The US really fouled it up passing the Species Act. They took the approach of withholding and takings as the solution. As a consequence a great deal of money is spent in court by the land owners defending their rights to use their own property. The term used is 'shoot, shovel and shut up' when it comes to endangered species on someone's land.

Had the Govt here taken a favorable husbandry approach to wildlife management and actually pay landowners to foster appropriate habitats for species everyone would have been miles ahead. Human nature what it is, effort is willingly expended when one is gaining economically from the arrangement. Similar arrangement has had white deer and turkey populations grow.