CHN chart, page-3076

If they do that, they will also need to resume that big farm that is right at the centre of Julimar forest, plus a few others that split the forest into segments and also harmfully bite into it around the edges, as they currently do.

Adjoining properties around each boundary should also be far more strictly regulated about what they can do, when a adjoining a national park. Their valuations should also be reduced accordingly, in the event that they are only partially resumed as government property.

Or else you can't have a national park with private enterprise right at the heart of it. The land would need to be returned to bush first, same as the rest of the forest has been (from previous various commercial enterprises over the past century).

Then perhaps small portions of it could be leased back to the private sector... Perhaps an ecologically safe cafe and parking area would be okay for one of two of their properties on each side, as long as the public toilets are all ecologically safe and naturally composting, and all of the drainage is upgraded to the same standards that are expected of Chalice for mining.

As a farmer myself, I'd hate to see good farms go down that way, without proper compensation to the landholder.

Resumptions for national parks (and partial properties on their boundaries) are notoriously low in their compensation payouts.

It's a shame that they don't GENUINELY care about that scrappy, dry, sickly area of re-growth trees, which look to be half-poisoned-by-toxic-minerals-near-surface anyway... (and which can be replanted to "sink" even more carbon on healthier soil elsewhere on Chalice un-mineralised land)

or else, if they really do care, then why didn't the protestors make their move for a national park over a decade ago, when the decision first went through parliament (and was unanimously supported by BOTH Labour and LNP)..?

And when the land could have been resumed at a much cheaper price for the taxpayer?