poteroo
14th Jan 2005, 05:20
CALM Final Policy on Identification and Management of Wilderness Areas Policy Statement #62.
In 2003, CALM (WA) announced it's Draft Policy on Management of to be declared 'wilderness' areas. There was a 2 month comment period allowed.
Pilots attended a public meeting in Manjimup WA on 9/8/2003 to discuss aviation related items, including overfly heights AGL, and access to existing strips,with CALM staff - just ahead of the submission closure date.
39 written submissions were received, 16 private,16 community,7 government.
Contained in these were 21 seperate aviation related comments regards . Of these, 19 were rejected by CALM for a variety of reasons. 2 items were considered relevant, and changes were made to the draft policy:
(1) CALM accepted that 5000 AGL was impractical, but are asking CASA/ASA for 2000 ft 'limits'
(2) CALM have agreed to assess all existing strips and pads in respect of their safety value
There is, however, one sneaky piece of legal drafting contained in Section 5.6 of the Policy Statement........
Aircraft pilots and/or, commercial operators will be requested to abide by flight duidelines that may be developed for specific wilderness areas
This is very open ended for a policy statement, and it's of concern that, at the conclusion of the main 5.6 statement that they wish to
encourage flying at over 2000 ft for fixed wings and 1500 ft for helicopters
a catch-all phrase is included. It's my opinion that should CALM wish to encourage minimum heights over their wilderness, then they should make it consistent over all of their domain.
Now we are lead to beleieve that the intention of these aviation restrictions is to provide for the quiet enjoyment of the bush by the foot powered general public. All very well, except that included in this Policy Statement is the so called 'Malimup Communique of 1998', in which CALM has agreed in a treaty format with SW indigenous groups -that their unimpeded access to the proposed Walpole Wilderness Area shall include:
* the right to use vehicles &
* the right to use firearms
So, in conclusion, the quiet enjoyment of the wilderness area will not be broken by those nasty little aircraft, but a good roo shoot off the back of a Landcruiser is fine!
Is this, or is this not, the finest bit of PC you've ever heard?
Happy days,
In 2003, CALM (WA) announced it's Draft Policy on Management of to be declared 'wilderness' areas. There was a 2 month comment period allowed.
Pilots attended a public meeting in Manjimup WA on 9/8/2003 to discuss aviation related items, including overfly heights AGL, and access to existing strips,with CALM staff - just ahead of the submission closure date.
39 written submissions were received, 16 private,16 community,7 government.
Contained in these were 21 seperate aviation related comments regards . Of these, 19 were rejected by CALM for a variety of reasons. 2 items were considered relevant, and changes were made to the draft policy:
(1) CALM accepted that 5000 AGL was impractical, but are asking CASA/ASA for 2000 ft 'limits'
(2) CALM have agreed to assess all existing strips and pads in respect of their safety value
There is, however, one sneaky piece of legal drafting contained in Section 5.6 of the Policy Statement........
Aircraft pilots and/or, commercial operators will be requested to abide by flight duidelines that may be developed for specific wilderness areas
This is very open ended for a policy statement, and it's of concern that, at the conclusion of the main 5.6 statement that they wish to
encourage flying at over 2000 ft for fixed wings and 1500 ft for helicopters
a catch-all phrase is included. It's my opinion that should CALM wish to encourage minimum heights over their wilderness, then they should make it consistent over all of their domain.
Now we are lead to beleieve that the intention of these aviation restrictions is to provide for the quiet enjoyment of the bush by the foot powered general public. All very well, except that included in this Policy Statement is the so called 'Malimup Communique of 1998', in which CALM has agreed in a treaty format with SW indigenous groups -that their unimpeded access to the proposed Walpole Wilderness Area shall include:
* the right to use vehicles &
* the right to use firearms
So, in conclusion, the quiet enjoyment of the wilderness area will not be broken by those nasty little aircraft, but a good roo shoot off the back of a Landcruiser is fine!
Is this, or is this not, the finest bit of PC you've ever heard?
Happy days,