Tasmanian Election - Funding for Track Upgrades

[Overlandman]

http://www.themercury.com.au/news/tasma ... 6845095408

A $6 MILLION investment in bushwalking tracks is the Liberal Party’s latest promise for the tourism industry.

Liberal leader Will Hodgman and MP Matthew Groom today announced a $2 million investment to improve the South Coast track and $4 million to finish the Three Capes project.

Speaking in Melealuca, Mr Hodgman said the investment was integral to achieving the goal of boosting annual visitor numbers to 1.5 million by 2020.

About 1300 people visit the area each year, including day trippers and trekkers who complete the 90km multi-day walk to Cockle Creek.

But tourism operators said the track was earning a bad reputation internationally after slipping into disrepair.

Sections of the track have washed away and tourists have reported the trek is much harder than it should be.

Award-winning Maria Island bush walk operator Ian Johnstone completed the walk recently, describing it as Australia’s version of the notoriously gruelling Kokoda Track.

[Graham51]

I've just walked the South Coast Track and it seemed there was enough material sitting down there to do a few kilometres of track and some of it has been there for a long time judging by the faded colour. Clearly a lot of money has been spent on materials and flying it in but the money must have run out for wages. Step one might be an audit of what is there.

[icefest]

I didn't think the SCT was too bad. I can see that there might be a couple of places where some track work will improve the environment though.

[stepbystep]

Appealing to the pale green vote. So transparent.

Oh look at this shiny thing, meanwhile lets revoke 75,000ha of the WHA and rip up the RFA...pleease...

[clarence]

What do the Greens propose as the alternative- say no to everything, including ideas for sensible and sustainable development in Tasmania.

All Labor have to say about the idea is that the proposed funding will only do part of the job, so it is a waste of money.

We've had Green-Labor dominated coalitions at federal and state level for the last three to four years. This was the Greens' best opportunity ever to engage all their progressive and alternative strategies to get the Tasmanian economy moving. So where is the Tasmanian economy at: bankrupt and buggered. Labor and the Greens are just red-faced because they didn't think of it themselves given four years to do so.

This is one of the biggest announcements to get real "eco-tourism" happening in the state, and it took the liberals to think of it- ironic I reckon.

I had voted Greens all my life until I saw how dismally they performed when given the chance both state and federally. I'm now happy to consider myself a swinger.

Clarence

[icefest]

It really does not matter anyway, large parts of the SCT will be underwater by the end of the century with Liberals in charge anyway.

From the state of global politics, the current Mauna Loa measurements, and the current collapse of Pine Island glacier; I'll be surprised if the sea come up by less than 1m.

From the point of view of a younger person, it's frustrating to hear everyone complaining about the current economy when they should be worried about what they're leaving behind for the others.
Sorry about the rant :/

[stepbystep]

Hook, line and sinker!

Did you read the release? $2 mil for SCT up to 2020, that's 6 years...the rest to 3CT. Revolutionary stuff!
The conspiracy theorist in me would couple this with their last announcement of encouraging development in the WHA...uurrggh. Another good policy eh Clarence?

Lock the topic Matt.........

[clarence]

Lock the topic? Don't want any debate on the issue?

I've said my bit.

I'm going to buy a fishing rod.

Clarence

[stepbystep]

Lock the topic? Don't want any debate on the issue?

No, because debate doesn't actually occur. Your 'bit' you have stated is deeply flawed, but given you've said your bit I guess debate is not actually something you want?

The libs both federal and state have been on a concerted campaign of wrecking the government. Dare I say opposing everything. Despite that in Tasmania the Labor/Green govt has bought all the parties together to finally broker a truce in the forest wars. What does Hodgman/Abbot want to do with that extremely hard work? Wreck it. I can guarantee, should the RFA and WHA extensions get ripped up and removed we'll be back at square one and the activist movement is readying themselves. I doubt you'll acknowledge this...

We have a parks service in limbo, waiting to see what will happen unable to allocate budgets correctly with FT staff coming across, WHA management issues, you name it. Why the uncertainty? Hmmmm...

Don't get me wrong I'd love to see improvements to the SCT, more money the better but there is a bigger picture and I don't want or need to see wilderness areas developed. Such an arrogant concept.

Worm's on the hook. Want a bite?

[Scottyk]

Appealing to the pale green vote. So transparent.

Oh look at this shiny thing, meanwhile lets revoke 75,000ha of the WHA and rip up the RFA...pleease...

+1
The Liberal party really doesn't give two hoots about the environment but they do care about securing the vote of people who care about the environment.
Getting rid of the RFA will be economic vandalism. No one will want our forest products as we will not get FSC for them
Can any one say biomass plant? i.e. burn wood chips for electricity, that will be announce shortly after the Liberals win. Mark my words.

[doogs]

Appealing to the pale green vote. So transparent.

Oh look at this shiny thing, meanwhile lets revoke 75,000ha of the WHA and rip up the RFA...pleease...

+1
The Liberal party really doesn't give two hoots about the environment but they do care about securing the vote of people who care about the environment.
Getting rid of the RFA will be economic vandalism. No one will want our forest products as we will not get FSC for them
Can any one say biomass plant? i.e. burn wood chips for electricity, that will be announce shortly after the Liberals win. Mark my words.

+1 I watched Australias great leaders terlevised speech from last night on this topic and it made me want to throw up. Bye Bye wilderness...hello development
Here's a very small bit of it.. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-05/t ... al/5299304

[PeterJ]

Well maybe the Liberal camp noticed a drop in support and an increase for Greens. What to do about that and get a few voters back might have figured in this strategy.

[Nuts]

Well, surely one can never have have 'too much' (locked up forest). And don't aussies call locked up forest 'bush'
I find the Spirit subsidies amusing, talking, once again at making the fares more affordable. Will could start by finding out why the seats looked like this when there are 'none available':

Screen Shot 2014-03-04 at 12.41.14 PM.png (640.7 KiB) Viewed 4700 times

Lol!

Anyhow, of course those that will argue strongest will have a better alternative proposal. A new RFA perhaps? or will it be a s*&^%$#a proposal from the henny penny greens?

Amusing!

Worst of all is letting them plaster my street with their big talking head posters. We allow them to promote themselves as superstars, no wonder serving the public only gets a second thought.

[Clusterpod]

Its clear that the Liberal and Labor parties in the state are expecting that a business as usual approach will somehow miraculously solve Tasmania's economic and social problems. Neither are really suggesting anything new. Where is the real vision for the future? A future that includes significant changes to our way of life due to climate change, increasing populations, uncertain food security and rapidly increasing energy costs, saying nothing of increasingly unequal wealth distribution and unaddressed social problems.

Lib/Lab policy is a cargo-cult mentality based on brief successes of the past. DSuccesses that had to be paid back with interest, and are still being paid back.

While neo-conservative ideology drives both major parties in Tasmania, it has resulted in poor economic and social outcomes for much of the rest of the world where they have been adopted as policy.

So excuse me while I snort derisively at Liberal party promises while seeing the disasters that Liberal State governments wreak elsewhere in the nation, and likewise shake my head in disbelief that somehow this time it will be different under Labor.

The influence The Greens have had on Labor's policy in Tasmania is overly exaggerated, but they make a great bugbear.

The suggestion they are "anti-everything" is ludicrous in the extreme and only illustrates a fundamental ignorance about their existing and proposed policy, and indeed ideology.

..and is ironic given the business-as-usual, anti-change policy of the Liberal and Labor parties.

[tigercat]

Good idea to spend $ on SW track, I still won't be voting liberal!

[north-north-west]

I can think of other tracks that could use the money more than the SCT. Still, $2mill over six years isn't that much.

[SteveJ]

I suspect the Libs want the track improvments to be wide enough to take a logging truck, any revoking of the WHA is morally corrupt and undermines the greates asset that Tassie has.

I walked the SCT last week and there was a lot (6 or 7 truckloads) of treated pine 4 x 2's sitting on the ground alongside the track seems silly to dump the timber then leave it to rot (as is happening) The track really needs work in some places as off track braids around mud are causing some erosion problems, thoughtless walkers are doing this, just walk through the mud, that's why you spent a weeks wages on ya *&%$#! overpriced Scarpas isn't it!

[Nuts]

Wouldn't be surprised if the 'increased access' mutterings translate to submissions for private cabins..

[north-north-west]

Wouldn't be surprised if the 'increased access' mutterings translate to submissions for private cabins..

Of course. And then OLT style booking system and track passes and one more great walk will be purely for those who can afford the outlandish fees.

[SteveJ]

Wouldn't be surprised if the 'increased access' mutterings translate to submissions for private cabins..

The Tassie Libs are talking about an 'eco lodge' at New River lagoon

[pazzar]

Wouldn't be surprised if the 'increased access' mutterings translate to submissions for private cabins..

The Tassie Libs are talking about an 'eco lodge' at New River lagoon

Could you provide a statement? I know they want to open up the WHA for tourism development, but I have heard nothing of lodges.

[SteveJ]

http://www.themercury.com.au/news/opini ... 6834719614

http://www.themercury.com.au/news/tasma ... 6849699455

Simon Currant is in bed with the Libs, is not too hard to see where this is heading ...

[pazzar]

Thanks, I don't tend to ready much of the Mockery anymore as it is all just political spin these days.

I would like to see a feasibility study for development at New River. Where would they get potable water from? There is a brackish creek near the camp site. Do they intend to build a desalination plant there too?

Creating jobs is one matter, but getting the people to come is another. Will people really want to visit if we continue to degrade our 'clean and green' image? I'm not saying people wont come, but it is not as simple as 'lets build stuff and people will come'.

[Son of a Beach]

If there was a lodge there, then they would put in water tanks to feed from the roof. No shortage of rainfall there. I don't condone the idea, but I don't think potable water would be a problem for them.

[pazzar]

And generator/solar power?

I have an image of a 'Bay of Fires'esq development. Realistically, do you think tank water would last a long summer season in that kind of development. It would also need to make a decent turnover during peak seasons, as access (presumably by seaplane or boat) will be heavily restricted in the Winter/Spring.

I'm not against all development, but I think we have good nodes outside of national parks already, why not develop more of these (Strathgordon, Maydena, Huonville/Geeveston/Dover)?

[Nuts]

As has been the case in other areas such developments within parks become the cherry in the pie. Bigger players know there is not enough gained from developments at places such as Strathgordon etc. they seek an exclusive right to a protected profit. In some cases a franchise to print money, much like maccas. Once in place the outcry is met by promises of 'no more development', they aren't retracted and these new protected developments become another boon for the selected few..

[Son of a Beach]

Absolutely tank water would last long enough - it's just a matter of how big they build the tanks. There's certainly enough rainfall for it. And like you say they'd have to deal with power and such like too. I'm sure they could build a solar array big enough, and then a battery bank big enough for those few days when the sun doesn't shine in the south west. And then of course a shed full of gas tanks as well, as the solar/batteries would only cover lighting and miscellaneous. Gas would have to be used for cooking and heat.

By the time they've finished, the thing will have to be bigger than an small National Park in its own right. But it can certainly be feasible if the politicians and developers put their heads together and ignore the people.

[north-north-west]

Absolutely tank water would last long enough - it's just a matter of how big they build the tanks. There's certainly enough rainfall for it. And like you say they'd have to deal with power and such like too. I'm sure they could build a solar array big enough, and then a battery bank big enough for those few days when the sun doesn't shine in the south west. And then of course a shed full of gas tanks as well, as the solar/batteries would only cover lighting and miscellaneous. Gas would have to be used for cooking and heat.

By the time they've finished, the thing will have to be bigger than an small National Park in its own right. But it can certainly be feasible if the politicians and developers put their heads together and ignore the people.

And unfortunately there will always be enough people who care more about the cachet of staying there and the ease of visiting what was once a relatively hard to reach location to keep the place open and profitable. Trying to start a boycott campaign would be doomed to failure.

[Nuts]

Yo, you forgot waste disposal SoB, a squadron of poop-o-copters!!??

[Scottyk]

As has been the case in other areas such developments within parks become the cherry in the pie. Bigger players know there is not enough gained from developments at places such as Strathgordon etc. they seek an exclusive right to a protected profit. In some cases a franchise to print money, much like maccas. Once in place the outcry is met by promises of 'no more development', they aren't retracted and these new protected developments become another boon for the selected few..

yep this would be what I am thinking
I vote on ideology rather than policies as policies mean nothing once any party are elected, ideologies tend to last a bit longer and give a better indication of what might happen.