Western Arthurs Permit System

[tastrax]

Parks hat on ....

I will step up to the plate here as I have had a long association with Parks track management and the various permit system reports/proposals. Many systems have been proposed over the years and they basically fit a few forms (from least restrictive to most restrictive)

Online advice about impacts and let folks decide if they want to go to places
Online advice about impacts and allow folks to "register" so that others can see if the place is full - then let folks decide if they want to go
Registration for area and limits (but no enforcement)
Registration for area and limits (but with enforcement)

Parks hat off...
Now the fee thing is a side issue in many respects - no tracks pay for themselves as its just very costly to build and service remote facilities (including dunnies/sputniks even in places like the Arthurs. People can donate money to Parks now any time they like (but where it is spent cant be directed by the donor.....unless its a mega donation). There could also be specific funds set up in association with Wildcare for specific track related works.

I am not sure this helps the discussion but there is quite a bit of information on fees for service etc out there on the net for those with an interest. Any system will not please everyone.

Personally, I would pay hundreds/thousands to walk the Arthurs if I knew I would not meet another soul at the campsites etc. An opportunity like that is priceless (to me).

[Son of a Beach]

All agreed, SBS.

I seem to have hijacked this thread, and don't have any answers, myself, so I should butt out now.

[stepbystep]

Hi Phil.

a thought I had after being gobsmacked by my first trip to Rhona was a donation box at the start of a walk, I remember thinking about the issue deeply while I was out there, some people could donate $4 because that's all they have in their glove-box, others will slip in a $50, that way it's responsive and not forced or expected.

The other obvious issue in regards to fees etc, is where does the $$$ go, if 90% of fees in whatever form they may take went directly into the area involved people will feel a lot better about things, when things go into 'consolidated revenue' we all get sceptical.

Just sayin'....

[tastrax]

Alas, (expensive) strong boxes at high profile campsites regularly get broken into, smashed etc so remote boxes everywhere would cost a fortune for very minimal return (I reckon). The simplest is a donation and I think if there was a way for folks to say "donate this to the track fund" then they would be happy. In effect its a voluntary "bushwalkers pass" over and above your park fees.

There used to be a page on the PWS website that listed where the fees were spent - http://www.parks.tas.gov.au/index.aspx?base=8622 . I agree that all Park fees collected and spent should be transparent. Park fees are completely seperate to consolidated revenue.

Last edited by tastrax on Tue 11 Oct, 2011 8:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[Nuts]

Perhaps consider the Overland Track, besides a more orderly distribution making the experience more 'pleasant' what has been achieved post permit introduction?

I won't pretend to not have 'any' answers but the question is probably more relevant. The answers reveal that its a far cry from the ideal to reality if anything other than 'making the experience slightly more pleasant' is the goal... The environmental benefits (from what iv'e seen) have largely rolled on as fast (or slow) as they ever did..???

I don't want to (just) appear condescending but thinking a permit system outdoor world will make government agencies admit they are 'over' funded is a dream. Even redirected back at the track it appears to do little besides fund admin??? (should the fees double, triple )

[tastrax]

I dont work on the Overland (I am in the south) but I reckon the following things have flowed to the Overland since the regulation was introduced.

Regular known funding so works can be planned from year to year (on tracks, huts , toilets) rather than as funds become available
Regular scheduled cleanout of dunnies etc
Ability to better schedule flights of materials for trackworks
Programmed track repairs

I also don't pretend to have all the answers either but I think the discussion is great for all to hear. We wont all agree that each action provides benefits but at least we still have great "relatively unspoiled" places to visit.

[stepbystep]

Hi Phil,

Point taken, I understand it's complicated, but I tell ya I would have emptied my wallet, post Rhona and Arthurs - maybe I'd spent too much time alone
People really break into these things.......amazing!

I think The Western Arthur experience should not be equated to the level of the OT, it is exposed walking where the OT really is not, it is far more remote and help is further away - we only need to look at the tragic death(was it late Feb or the first few days of March) where a gentleman died of natural causes at Cygnus, I believe(possibly) because it was not possible to get a chopper in there for a couple days, this wouldn't happen on the OT, where help can arrive by foot if necessary. Also the "walking" really is scrambling a lot of the time post Oberon and we just don't want people going there that aren't prepared....

I think I'm happy to pay a fee, but I'm afraid a commercialisation of the area will result in more and more people giving it a go than perhaps should.....

[tastrax]

Good on you SBS - maybe I need to follow you around with a cash tin!

I made a decision a few years ago to donate $20 every pay to Wildcare (www.wildcaretas.org.au). I don't care what they spend it on as they do great work in many areas - weeds, hut restorations, Overland track wardens etc etc. Its my bit to help out. If Parks had a track fund I would probably do the same because , despite not doing a lot of longer walks these days, I think the tracks need REGULAR $$'s for maintenance. I think personal philanthropy is just starting in Australia and hopefully organizations like parks will provide opportunities for folks to donate (however big or small)

OK, we are now way off the permit thread so I might start a new thread on Philanthropy!

As for commercialisation - for me its about impacts more than who goes there. The fight then becomes how do you split the limited permits between private and commercial and how do you agree on impact levels.

[Nuts]

I dont work on the Overland (I am in the south) but I reckon the following things have flowed to the Overland since the regulation was introduced.

Regular known funding so works can be planned from year to year (on tracks, huts , toilets) rather than as funds become available
Regular scheduled cleanout of dunnies etc
Ability to better schedule flights of materials for trackworks
Programmed track repairs

I also don't pretend to have all the answers either but I think the discussion is great for all to hear. We wont all agree that each action provides benefits but at least we still have great "relatively unspoiled" places to visit.

Sorry mate, that equates to being better organised at achieving little from what iv'e seen.
SBS, its a permit system, while the area is different the outcomes will be similar?
Donations are great, volunteering, wildcare, we do the same (as well as our 'donations' to parks) but yer not ideal to proper long term funding.

[tastrax]

I agree Nuts, long term funding is a better solution so long as we can agree on levels of service/standards. As a guide what do you think are the main deficiencies/benefits with the permit/fees system?

[Nuts]

Hi Phil, I will give some thoughts (fwiw) but iv'e been on and off here all day and i'm a bit fried atm..

[NickD]

I think its comes down to management of the permit system. And where the funding flows to. I think that it can be managed to a situation completely different from the Overland Track. But I understand where the skeptics stand on these things, truly I am one. National Parks and Wildlife probably needs a reform as much as the Western Arthurs need a permit system, but I think action needs to be taken soon.

I heard that for its first few years the Overland Track was actually economically viable whilst the funds were flowing into the actual track, but since then most of it gets thrown into a general mishmash wallet and mostly gets wasted on bureaucracy etc - I don't know how much truth is to this??

[doogs]

Having been a work for the past several hours, and sneaking a peek at this thread at every chance I got, I have had chance to have a think about the practicalities of such a proposal.
I would love to agree with Nik et al about areas such as this being free for Tasmanian dwellers as I moved to here as a lifestyle choice and not to earn big bucks. But I cant, everyone pays the same everywhere else so what makes us so special for living in Tasmania? I dont agree on the permit and cost system either as I see them as impractical and dangerous to the visitor of this region.
The payment and permit sytem for the overland track works because it is a relatively safe walk which has a great hut system throughout its length. This means it is quite easy to travel between each hut in all but the worst conditions during the summer months. Basically it has a great infrastructure for a remote track.
The Western Athurs has very little infrastructure, is remote and cops some of the worst weather in the state. Giving people a set start date(s) would encourage them to head out into dangerous conditions on a remote mountain range with no safe haven of a hut. The cost may also impel them to continue rather than retreating to pay their fees again at a later date. And I am of the opinion that a permit system would also encourage underprepared parties on to the range.
It is a very difficult subject with no easy solution, as we all want to preserve such areas for future generations with as little human interference as possible. But we would all like to visit these majestic places at the same time.
PS. I blame Nik for this discusion because he created such a great website, which has encouraged so many more people to visit this area

[South_Aussie_Hiker]

Being a non-Tasmanian, I'd have no problem with Tasmanians walking for free but mainlanders paying a booking fee - Overland Track included.

I think from memory (was a few years ago so might have changed) that Kakadu is the same - NT residents are not required to pay the park fee.

I don't see it as unreasonable.

There's no point charging anyone to come and visit South Australia, there's not much to see!

[stepbystep]

......The payment and permit sytem for the overland track works because it is a relatively safe walk which has a great hut system throughout its length. This means it is quite easy to travel between each hut in all but the worst conditions during the summer months. Basically it has a great infrastructure for a remote track.
The Western Athurs has very little infrastructure, is remote and cops some of the worst weather in the state. Giving people a set start date(s) would encourage them to head out into dangerous conditions on a remote mountain range with no safe haven of a hut. The cost may also impel them to continue rather than retreating to pay their fees again at a later date. And I am of the opinion that a permit system would also encourage underprepared parties on to the range.
It is a very difficult subject with no easy solution, as we all want to preserve such areas for future generations with as little human interference as possible. But we would all like to visit these majestic places at the same time.

Yep, well said doogs, this was what I alluded to in my last post but you have said it better, do we really want more infrastructure in there is the question???
If there was huts in there *shudder* there are very dangerous sections of track for those not ready for them or if weather is extreme between the huts, recipe for disaster I think.

Re. funding transparency, has PWS ever thought of Pozzible style funding drives?
For example if the descent off Capricorn was to be 'fixed' in an appropriate way(stonework) PWS get it's quote, sets up a pozzible type of fund, advertises in forums such as this, those of us who want to donate can, when the bucket is full the work gets done. I've seen this working really well in the independent film sector, people are more willing to donate when the process is transparent.

Probably simplistic and wishful thinking, but that's how I roll

[tastrax]

I like the idea of the funding drive for X amount of $$ to do trackwork (say $20,000 blocks of work). Maybe when the required sum of money is raised the donors get to vote on which works gets done (from a predefined list).

[Nuts]

well... there you go see, simple Sums up what i would have contributed really..

[wander]

We have fees and permits in SA. It would be a nightmare to administer an SA local price and a "you're not from round here" price. And the moment this sort of system is introduced people will start to agitate for a system where their SA permit will get them access to NSW and Vic parks and so on diluting the income. In fact the more I think about this sort of thing the more grumpy it makes me that people want special access because they live down the road. It is a completely illogical argument. We are all equal across Oz and all have equal access is the simplest thing.

As for the permits the only reason I advocate them is to have some (and i agree it will be limited to the honest people) control the number and flow of people on the trail to reduce crowding and total numbers through the Range. Is there another way of doing this? The OS experience (NZ and Europe) suggests not. True the most cost effective way of doing this does rely on people respecting and fitting in with a system and not just going anyway. There is no way we are going to have guards at the gate to make sure people comply. But if 90% of people follow a system then tents sites will not be crowded, toilet fill rates can be expected to be more regular, people will be able to wander along the Range at times to miss other groups for most of the day.

The Western Arthurs has gone past the free for all during the peak wandering period some years ago. If the current free for all stays in place expect more crowding, more traffic and associated damage to the environment. Already it is clear that some areas are dirty from poor toileting habits when the toilets were full, based on personal observation during December 2010.

Traffic has clearly increased after the publication of Chapman, the emergence of magazines such as Wild, the implementation of track works and the internet.

I 1st wandered over the Range maybe 20 years ago and there was this exact discussion then.

It maybe more productive to keep the 2 questions separate;

A)Do we control access with permits& fees? Or some other system.

B) How do we raise funds to pay for maintenance, repairs and upgrades to infrastructure (track works, tent platforms and the like) and services (empty of toilets and so on).

[Nuts]

Ok, maybe one thing Phil.. We all know that the toilets are a major cost component. Somewhere like the OLT now with staffing (for maintenance) right through summer I'm left wondering if the time to make these toilets work hasn't come? Some of the powered systems must surely now be feasible? In places without regular staffing it must be nearly viable to pay for regular staff maintenance visit V the chopper costs? (and the added benefit of having them involved in other duties).

(sorry, i cant think of anything safer to talk about than crap )

I'm not really that interested in the funding & quality of experience issues (even though parks Are all about people, if we didn't exist they wouldn't be needed right..)
Safety and 'serious' environmental problems, yes..

[Son of a Beach]

I know that PWS in Tasmania have been looking into using a solar powered AWTS (for sewerage). There have been plans to trial them in the wild, but I'm not sure if that ever happened.

[Penguin]

I am with many that I want to contribute to this topic, having strong views, but those views are rattling inside my head with no cohesion or pattern. The number of posts in such a short time shows peoples passion.

I want to conserve a great place in Tasmania. I have only been once but dearly want to go back again. Choppered out last time due to bush fires, got a bit over half way, we were just beyond moraine E.

I also want as many people to see this area as feasible - so there is a public demand to protect areas like this.

Issues like toilets (number one priority IMO), camping platforms and track erosion are the main issues.

It would be good if we can have the wilderness to ourselves all the time - lock it up for the select few. But there are other walkers who should be able to enjoy the fragile environment as well.

In the current economic climate I cannot see a lot of money rattling around to spend on track infrastructure.

So permits to limit number (ballot?) and fees to spend on tracks. It is hard enough to get the OLT right over summer with the side entry at Pelion, I can see the Western Arthurs would be a nightmare and expensive to oversee a ticket system. The cost of the ticket would basically cover the cost of administering the system, unless the fee was very high.

Keep the discussion going - I vote for a fair, easy to administer, system that limits the numbers to a amount that the environment can sustain. And with good human waste control. Okay, whose got the solution?

P

[ILUVSWTAS]

There is a composting toilet on the Eastern Arthurs, why not put these on the Western Arthurs? That would cancel out the need for sputniks.

Also I dont think the range is becoming THAT much more popular. I have had 10 days in the Arthurs over 2 trips and saw one group over both trips. SBS had 5-6 days in the Arthurs and saw 1 group.... January is always going to be busy, it's when everyone has holidays and the weather is best. Us locals can just go when we see a good forecast....

[Penguin]

There is a composting toilet on the Eastern Arthurs, why not put these on the Western Arthurs? That would cancel out the need for sputniks.

Also I dont think the range is becoming THAT much more popular. I have had 10 days in the Arthurs over 2 trips and saw one group over both trips. SBS had 5-6 days in the Arthurs and saw 1 group.... January is always going to be busy, it's when everyone has holidays and the weather is best. Us locals can just go when we see a good forecast....

Do the composting toilets work in the colder areas - I thought that is why they were replaced on the OLT with the sputniks. Or is that a furphy?

When I was in the Western Arthurs in late February in the year before last, Junction Creek and Lake Oberon were chockers. We camped at the base of moraine A and at Square Lake to avoid the main part of the masses. Maybe there are very busy times and quiet times.

I still get the impression that it is a fragile area in places - that would not take alot to suffer significant damage. And take a long time to recover.

Any ideas what are the best toilets for the SW? Composting, Solar electric, Sputnik or.....

P

[ILUVSWTAS]

Any ideas what are the best toilets for the SW? Composting, Solar electric, Sputnik or.....

P

I dont know Penguin, tis why I asked. Hopefully one of the parks dudes will answer... the one at Hanging lake seems to work ok?? It seems everytime something is raised, it's a lack of $$$ that is always the reason or answer. I know flying the pods out IS expensive, maybe some composting toilets would take some of the sting out..?

[wander]

For a very visible effect of the traffic on the WAs look at the pics of Tilting Chasm in Chapman's 1st edition and find a current picture. Twenty years ago it was well eroded compared to the Chapman pic, in Dec 2010 I was horrified by the extent of the continued erosion.

Similarly with the trail into Oberon from the West. 20 years ago it was a gravelly trail through close shrubbery. in Dec 2010 it was a rock climb due to erosion.

The impacts that we cannot reverse need to be considered in the discussion about access, controlled, uncontrolled and user pays fees.

[Nuts]

Do the composting toilets work in the colder areas - I thought that is why they were replaced on the OLT with the sputniks. Or is that a furphy?

P

No passive solar doesn't work very well in many places (obviously not on the OLT), Apparently powered solar (or wind or water??) is viable, its only a matter of generating the heat/heating the pile (enough). I was once cleaning up at Pelion when a german chap cornered me with questions of why we didn't use such a powered system, he seemed baffled, he was employed in installing just such a system in their parks and scoffing that they would be 'ideal'.. I'm happy to go and take a study tour

[Lizzy]

Well Tasmania is part of Australia and therefore part of "ALL" Australian's backyard in my opinion. Can't think of anywhere else that does not charge you because you come from that state???? You guys get way better value out of your parks passes than us northerners anyway. For example most visitors pay $60 for a car for 8 weeks but probably only are fortunate enough to stay for a week or 2. Whereas an annual pass is only $70 if you are renewing.... Hmmmnnn racking the $$ up from us visitors
Yeah it is nice not to have to pay/book but for areas that need managing it can be worthwhile- like over in NZ. There will always be areas that are more "off-the-beaten-path" that don't have these restrictions....

[corvus]

Well Tasmania is part of Australia and therefore part of "ALL" Australian's backyard in my opinion. Can't think of anywhere else that does not charge you because you come from that state???? You guys get way better value out of your parks passes than us northerners anyway. For example most visitors pay $60 for a car for 8 weeks but probably only are fortunate enough to stay for a week or 2. Whereas an annual pass is only $70 if you are renewing.... Hmmmnnn racking the $$ up from us visitors
Yeah it is nice not to have to pay/book but for areas that need managing it can be worthwhile- like over in NZ. There will always be areas that are more "off-the-beaten-path" that don't have these restrictions....

Lizzy,
Glad you acknowledge that Tasmania is a part of Australia (some seem to forget that) would be nice if we could drive to Victoria rather than need to Sail or Fly or at least only have to spend the equivalent of fuel costs
But then again we would get too many of you Mainlanders down here clogging up our Walking Tracks
corvus

Last edited by corvus on Wed 12 Oct, 2011 8:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[Nuts]

I know that PWS in Tasmania have been looking into using a solar powered AWTS (for sewerage). There have been plans to trial them in the wild, but I'm not sure if that ever happened.

That's interesting, is this the same as yours Nik? Any info?

I guess there would be problems for the Arthurs, it may take a lot of solar cells? Wind would be good , still an eyesore i guess if it's in view. Those nautical wind generators would be robust but then expensive to buy maybe and they may 'walk' (not sure how you'd hide one lol..)

[Son of a Beach]

I know that PWS in Tasmania have been looking into using a solar powered AWTS (for sewerage). There have been plans to trial them in the wild, but I'm not sure if that ever happened.

That's interesting, is this the same as yours Nik? Any info?

I guess there would be problems for the Arthurs, it may take a lot of solar cells? Wind would be good , still an eyesore i guess if it's in view. Those nautical wind generators would be robust but then expensive to buy maybe and they may 'walk' (not sure how you'd hide one lol..)

No, all I know is that a delegation from Tas PWS took a look at a Tasmanian designed mains power AWTS that was temporarily modified to run off a solar cell as a proof of concept. I was led to believe that there were plans to install one in a Tasmanian National Park, but I don't think that's happened as yet.

Apparently they use very little electricity (just need to run a couple of pumps), however the SW offers very little in terms of reliable solar power.