Bushwalk Australia

Hi All

Following on from another thread I have been corresponding with Tasmap over a few issues. Sadly it took the intervention of the Minister to get a response but at least one came this time. There are many issues such as the cost and format of the electronic maps, conflicting grid reference standards between maps, paper quality, and missing detail to zero in on the big ones.

The last point is what I want to concentrate on with this thread. Last weekend a wander to Daisy Lakes revealed that Parks and Wildlife had closed the old forestry road and installed a walkers registration booth as well as marking the track all the way up to Long Tarns. This is a reasonable indication that this a recognised track exists. Um? looking at the 1:25,000 map for Pillans you would not know it Ok, it rained and rain and rained making the crossing below the falls impassable. The wet conditions also meant deep wading had drenched the walking clothes. In a situation like that a map with all tracks that can act as an escape route it getting up in the priority of things that would be nice. Sure, we had tents and enough dry clothes not to be in danger of hypothermia but still not pleasant to be left in a situation where likely escape options existed but are not marked on the 1:25,000 map.

Tasmap know of the track and others in the area but, yes wait for it, Parks and Wildlife had instructed Tasmap not to mark them on the map Hang on, did I say there was a walker registration booth and steel droppers with reflective markers It appears that Parks and Wildlife management does not care about walker safety and sees their safety role beginning and ending with putting up signs. Maybe they should put up a sign that represents an information vacuum or maybe one drawn from the KGB logo to demonstrate that information is deliberately been withheld that will endanger walker safety. If you think this is a Parks bashing exercise, then yes it is, as what I have experienced makes no sense and confirms my suspicion that Parks and Wildlife only cares about the super highways and not the Tasmanians that its pricing policies have forced out of their traditional areas. Parks has no role in censorship, and no better example of this exist than what I experienced on the weekend to prove that Parks' management is inept and demonstrates a disregard for Tasmanian's safety. I find it very hard that Parks if dragged before a court could give any sound defence apart from the standard, and increasingly hollow sounding, lack of funding one. Having the tracks mark on the map cost nothing, in fact the censorship of them cost money as I bet hours were wasted in endless committee meetings deciding what information not to supply the great unwashed masses of Tasmanains that pay their salaries.

Parks and Wildlife I hope will have the fortitude to explain their actions before I purse this matter further.

Regards

a while back I was working up at Cradle and got chatting with the head ranger.
I gathered there was a general unease at the way our government viewed the work of P&W together with the way P&W was funded.

As a public servant for 25 years I learnt a bit about how the government works. (not in Parks or Environment)
I rubbed shoulders with some of the top brass in several places.

I would suggest the problems are most likely to do with the governments attitude and corresponding values and the conditions they place on how and where the money is to be spent and not necessarily the parties that make up the respective agency.

An example of this was at Cradle. I was strolling about and came to a lovely little sign pointing to a particular viewing area. The viewing platform was fine but you had to wade through mud to get to it. It looked plain ridiculous.
And yet down below was a 'million dollar' walkway traversing Dove Lake. It was then I posed the questions to the ranger.

maybe you should ask the minister what priority they (the gov't) give to these things and say you want a fair dinkum answer - not some *&%$#! and bull story that is meant to tickle the ears and fool no one.

Ent ,
I totally agree with your sentiment however "Parks" did not close the old Forestry road, that washout was there years ago and the little foot bridge across it makes life easier,also the improvements to the track up to Long Tarns is a credit to the "trackies" who did the work.
This is unlikely to become a major walking attraction (thankfully) however in view of what was experienced at the Rinadeena creek after heavy rain I believe a simple foot bridge (a la Wurragarra on the Arm River track) should be installed across the span of those couple of boulders that are well above the water level to ensure safe exit.
c

G'day taswegian,
I personally think that entrenched senior bureaucratic attitude could be the major problem with "Parks" and the Public Service in general rather than the Government of the day,the book Frog Call by Greg French touches on this and indeed enlightened me to it however having said that how do we prioritize our tax dollars ?? spend for the fittest or look after those who need it most hands up those who wants to pay more TAX
c

Hi Corvus

Agree that the track is a credit to the local rangers and the car park is in a sensible position, but just for the life of me I cannot work out why PWS bureaucratic central knocked it off Tasmap's 1:25,000 series maps. I cannot help but get the feeling that this is first step to shut the track. Jackson Creek track is an example how a once well maintained track disappeared off the maps and then maintenance stopped.

A wander into the high loop at Russell Falls and Freycinet shows huge sums can be expended to make “tracks” into five star foot paths. It worries me that map censorship by PWS could be an attempt to shut tracks or at least shows a degree of incompetence that needs to be addressed to ensure map users have the best information to make choices. Why maintain a track and then have it removed from maps, bureaucratic stupidly/arrogance or is there some sinister motive?

PWS needs to get out of the censorship business as they are making a hash of it and endangering Tasmanian lives and no sign will avoid that fact.

Cheers

Its happening all over, not just Tas.

I was looking at a 1974 map of Lake Eyre recently and compared it with my recent version. Chalk and cheese.

I don't know what is motivating the removal of mapping detail but I agree its a great disservice to the community.

That's without pointing the finger at some local track closures in our area - not only are they disappearing from the map, they are being actively removed from the landscape.

Very hard to get a result pushing back at the bureaucracy - I prefer to get even by carrying a GPS, recording tracks and mapping them on openstreetmap.org. If enough people do this, by the time the 'official' maps become useless, the community maps will be fantastic.

G'day Ent,
I dont think this track was ever noted on maps of the area and wont be till they are upgraded /updated ,hell first time I did it it was only a track to the "hut ruin" then take your pick at least now there are marker poles and a defined rout /track up to the plateau .
c

I've found the same thing up here in NSW, - Tracks, trails even, that still exist and marked on my old maps but omitted from the new maps. Like someone wants them to disappear...

thinkin out loud: If only some of the private map producers would read these posts and others like it and put out a decent accurate set of tassie maps (and other areas) instead of just cut n pasting sub-standard existing maps and detail......

As corvus said, the Rinadeena Falls and Long Tarns track was never marked on my old version of the 25k map, but as Ent points out, it is very strange that they would go to the extent of adding clear track markers all the way to Long Tarns and then not have the track appear on the map. It does seem a bit inconsistent.

I'd have to check the PWS track classification system again to see if this does fit into any of their classifications (ie, well marked when actually there, but not publicised in any other way).

It does appear that Tasmap maps are going to become irrelevant if "open" maps become more reliable and contain more information. But is that also going to become dangerous if people add incorrect information to them?

Son of a Beach wrote:are going to become irrelevant if "open" maps become more reliable and contain more information. But is that also going to become dangerous if people add incorrect information to them?

Community mapping. It will be most accurate when many people are working on the map. Its also easy to change, unlike a map that goes through an edition process - changes have to wait for the next edition. With openstreetmap you can make your corrections and have the map on your GPS within a week.

Tasmania needs mappers, but at least the Overland Track is on the map now

OSM maps are seriously lacking in general topographic features though. Currently they've got a long way to go to be useful for anything much beyond roads.

if we end up with a product that is missing well marked tracks then i think that the classification system (treated as if it is carved in stone?) might need changing/reviewing... if it is a matter of checking the tracks condition then throw the soft toys into shops and get the rangers back out there where they belong - in the bush and check the areas that haven't been checked for a while before printing goes ahead. there seems to be some communication blocks/issues in the mapping process at the moment producing poorer quality maps than could be produced.... maybe a red track could mean "unknown condition" or "not supporeted or maintained" track if need be.... be interesting to know WHO actually has the say in these matters - someone has to press the delete button... still, 200 years ago there were no maps, so if you plan on no track then its all a bonus i guess? maybe we could rename it "tAsifmaps" with the slogan "you just gotta believe"
check the areas on google and in wonderfull forums like this etc. when you plan your walks first.... no one else has as much incentive look after you as you have after all!

Son of a Beach wrote:OSM maps are seriously lacking in general topographic features though. Currently they've got a long way to go to be useful for anything much beyond roads.

Really?, what features do you have in mind?

There are limitations to OSM maps, but I don't believe we have gotten anywhere near them in Australia. They are designed for users to add mapping features and detail - if there is a feature you can't map because the tools don't support the feature, it can be and has been added to the toolset repeatedly in the past.

OSM is a classic case of open source - people are scratching an itch that hasn't been fulfilled by commercial products.

One problem I would have with open source is the vailidty of the information.
How is it collected? How is it inserted? What datum are they on? Do they understand Datums? The list could go on.

I'm not wanting to sound negative but we bemoan the lack of info, but wrong info (misplaced info) can be a disaster waiting to happen.
I know Tasmap are fussy about the verification of their data.

I'd suggest this be taken up with those in the know. I would imagine there is a way through this issue.

photohiker wrote:

Son of a Beach wrote:OSM maps are seriously lacking in general topographic features though. Currently they've got a long way to go to be useful for anything much beyond roads.

Really?, what features do you have in mind?

There are limitations to OSM maps, but I don't believe we have gotten anywhere near them in Australia. They are designed for users to add mapping features and detail - if there is a feature you can't map because the tools don't support the feature, it can be and has been added to the toolset repeatedly in the past.

OSM is a classic case of open source - people are scratching an itch that hasn't been fulfilled by commercial products.

Wow, I stand corrected. At least to some degree. Last time I looked at OSM it was nearly useless for anything other than roads and didn't even show contours. That now looks like it could be a reasonable substitute for bushwalking maps for some areas, at least (still don't think I'd trust it in many areas, but it's clearly been progressing well since I last looked)

Taswegian,

The data for Open Street Maps and it's derivatives can be collected by anyone, and it is done by programs dedicated to the task which can be installed for free on phones or other GPS enabled devices. So the software makes sure that a consistent datum, etc is used.

Hi all

He are some points.

1. Tasmap know of the track and were instructed by Parks and Wildlife not to so show it. The mapping information is there in a form approved by Tasmap.
2. Parks and Wildlife Service (PWS) provided a car park along with significant track works and markers compete with log book station.
3. A quick check around work reveals that the track and others in the area well known and used with a strong local historical perspective.
4. PWS is renown for obstructing restoration and rebuilding of huts and tracks in the area with locals forced to bypass the bureaucrats and seek the assistance of the political arm of government to override the mandarins. PWS is renown for finding reasons not to do things and it is becoming rather cliche to claim "secret PWS business" or the old stand by of lack of money. Withholding mapping information costs money.
5. Garmin maps have the spur road leading to the carpark identified but the automatic routing stops much earlier, at the last named road.
6. Garmin maps also show an extensive roads system past the car park so are out of date given the blocked road.
7. Track Master maps has the road components traversable by vehicle marked.
8. Garmin maps have the creek system mis-marked. I am not sure of Garmin maps but at least one commercial map set is drawn from satellite contour mapping so likely does not have the resolution Tasmap records hold.
9. Creeks and river systems in Tasmania can flood quickly and walkers should be given access to all potential escape route else poor decisions can be made.
10. The best way, apart from not leaving home, to avoid a rescue is accurate and complete information of an area. Parks and Wildlife are deliberately withholding this information so by default are contributing to avoidable rescue situations. If find it insulting that they then refer people to their genetic warning signs when a rescue happens rather than handling this a "near miss" and investigating means to avoid future events. A firm that does not do this is breaking the Workplace Standards law but PWS appears unworried by this.
11. The cave tragedy down southern Tasmania was avoidable if the people involved had information of the cave system and safe havens within it. This tragedy extended past the lost of life in the cave to a person that was not drown likely as a result of this information been made known to that person subsequent to the earlier loss of life.
12. Increasing number of walkers are using "mud" maps from various sources due to the official maps been censored. Why should people, either acting singularly or part of a community be forced to use suspects maps when the data is already available in official record, which by the way I as a Tasmanian has paid for to be collected.

It is not hard to lose faith in PWS' managers and ascribe less than honourable motives to their actions or inactions. The simple fact is in Tasmania no vector maps are available for bushwalking. Tasmap charges $1,100 for 1:25,000 electronic maps that are not usable but by all but the most expensive and/or fragile GPS. They then charge again for the 1:100,000 and 1:250,000 series maps. Even if you are prepared to pay the price for the maps and weather resistant GPS the data is deliberately incomplete due only to internal undisclosed bureaucratic reasoning. We are prepared to slam bog doggers but PWS' actions forces people to bush bash unnecessarily. Why was a group forced to expend many hours track finding in deep snow when such information exists within the State records but was deliberately withheld for unknown and likely arbitrary reasons.

The simple question is this, do we accept this, or lobby our political parties to remedy the issue? It is clearly apparent that senior management in Parks and Wildlife believes that the erection of an increasing number and size of warning signs is their get out of free jail free card as opposed to ensuring walkers have the best information available. Under work place standards if an employer withheld information about the work environment from their employees they could be facing industrial manslaughter charges if the worst happened. How is the policy of PWS in track censorship any different, and should not the individuals involved be brought to account the same as employees of of companies are? PWS is playing a dangerous game with Tasmanian lives. I have seen first hand where PWS senior management have been brought into court and found wanting in their internal processes and procedures and hope that it does not take an avoidable tragedy where a trapped group has members die of hypothermia or drown/fall to their death when an acceptable escape route exists but PWS decided to withhold such information.

PWS should be more than staffing offices with toy sellers and warning sign writers governed by senior management that fall to take basic steps to ensure the safety of Tasmanians.

Regards

The basic premise is very simple. The community knows the landscape mostly through local knowledge.

There are 2 ways of contributing features:

1. Upload a GPS Trace of the feature and then trace that track onto the map. The GPS tracks are verified for sanity upon import using various tests such as date and time between points etc. GPS traces generally deal in Lat/Long:

Code: Select all

 <name>ACTIVE LOG093529</name>
  <trkseg>
   <trkpt lat="-34.958679" lon="138.661835">
    <ele>328.733</ele>
    <time>2009-08-20T00:36:12Z</time>
   </trkpt>
   <trkpt lat="-34.958611" lon="138.661646">
    <ele>327.546</ele>
    <time>2009-08-20T00:36:23Z</time>
   </trkpt>


2. The other way is to trace known features from geo-referenced aerial survey data shared by OSM friendly sources. Yahoo imagery has been used quite a lot, and until a recent license kerfufle nearmaps was available in Australia. (Nearmaps doesn't seem to have arrived in Tasmania yet, but they provide high resolution aerial photography on the mainland, and actually use OSM data for streets, trails, and POI's).

The result is that a budding mapper doesn't need to get involved in datums although it would be handy to them if they ever decide to use the results on their GPS.

As far as the accuracy of the data, there are a couple of issues. Firstly, the GPS data is only ever as good as the accuracy of the GPS at the time it recorded the trail and we know that a retail GPSr is not pinpoint accurate. In practice, this has never been a problem in my experience. My GPS trace always seems to lie very close to the OSM track. Popular routes gain hundreds of uploaded GPS traces, and it is interesting to watch the concentration of traces very close together with a few outliers all over the place in the mapping interface. Secondly, there is an element of trust that someone doesn't come along and accidentally or deliberately damage the map. This has happened and will happen in the future. The design of the system is such that once discovered, erroneous edits can be backed out - all of the data is kept in a database, and every user tracing (called a 'Way') can be individually addressed and removed if necessary. This can rise other issues with neighbouring mapping but the community is pretty good at spotting and correcting errors like that.

As far as the mapping interface that users get to see, they can be as simple or as complicated as you like. It can be done in a web browser or stand alone application.

Hope that helps.

I posted this without seeing the reply above, but left it unedited.

Nik there's a saying Garbage in, Garbage out.
I realise I don't know what these applications do in this area, but being familiar with GIS and data sets I know such programs need to have knowledge of the datum the data is. They only deal with numbers.
If its lat/ longs then that should not be an issue.
Unwary people just assume too much when it comes to this area of information.

I just looked at OSM Auatralia and a map near me.
The township "Claude Road' was several km's from where it is. It was shown over the back of Roland/ Claude range.
'Round Mountain'; which is actually 'Round Hill', is also very wrongly placed.
I don't want to be an old dragon but this topic was about bush walkers safety (not directly called such) and the importance of knowing where tracks exist.
This doesn't cut with me but maybe I have just picked a bad area of info? But then that gets back to my point.
maybe I have missed something?

taswegian wrote:I just looked at OSM Auatralia and a map near me.
The township "Claude Road' was several km's from where it is. It was shown over the back of Roland/ Claude range.
'Round Mountain'; which is actually 'Round Hill', is also very wrongly placed.
I don't want to be an old dragon but this topic was about bush walkers safety (not directly called such) and the importance of knowing where tracks exist.
This doesn't cut with me but maybe I have just picked a bad area of info? But then that gets back to my point.
maybe I have missed something?

OSM doesn't generate itself. It relies on interested people correcting and extending the map.

Tasmania has been late to get going with OSM. The challenge is out there, if you want to use it and have good accuracy, map your local area. That's what I and thousands of others do. In my local area, OSM stands head and shoulders above every other trail map resource. No-one has a more up to date or accurate map. If you look at an OSM map you can pretty well see if the area has been actively maintained due to the labelling and number of mapped features. I suspect your area is an orphan needing a good home

Michael can you give me a link to something useful please.
I'd be interested to have a squizz.
regards
Richard

What if we are "old school" don't own , trust or fully understand electronic mapping devices ,the hard copy maps are what I grew up with and learned to love , they really must be up to date and accurate so I for one will be contacting the relevant Minister to ask the question so please don't be shy and do the same thing because if you don't ask you don't get .
c

taswegian wrote:Nik there's a saying Garbage in, Garbage out.

Absolutely. It's like other open information resources, like Wikepedia. Users need to realise that the information doesn't come from authoritative sources, and although it's mostly either correct or nearly correct, there are some completely wrong of vaguely misleading bits of information there.

All I was trying to say in my earlier post was that the user collecting the data and submitting it to OSM using the automated OSM-data-collecting applications does not need to be aware of datums, etc. Their device (eg GPS-enabled phone running OSM collection program) knows what datum it is using for the coordinates, points, routes, etc, that it is recording and sending to OSM.

Of course the OSM user reading maps needs to be aware of what datum their using for their own GPS, etc, and how it differs from the datum that the OSM map and features are displayed in.

Hi Photohiker

Interesting looking at the community mapping options. I do think that given the Tasmania bureaucratic road blocks a community mapping system might be the go, even if it only breaks the power of the control over information. With GPS traces one common problem is the false turns made by previous people. I would imagine though after numerous uploads a clean track would statistically emerge. Does the system do this "cleaning" or is it at the end of the day just a mass of plots? Also, moderation would be good as I am sure to bet that "Smithton" will be changed to drop the "S" if many locals wags got involved. After a while some data should be fixed such as lake/town and mountain names plus height to name a few.

Might give it go, especially if a Shonky Maps 1:250,000 detail level was used then more resolution could be added. Shonky maps only appears to have the Overland track marked. Before I get too enthusiastic can you load the maps onto the Garmin Basemap and then units without a science degree?

Cheers Brett

taswegian wrote:Michael can you give me a link to something useful please.
I'd be interested to have a squizz.
regards
Richard

I can explain a bit about the interface and show how you can trace who did the mapping and how

Once you join OSM, you can start the web editor by clicking the 'Edit' tab, and look at the way in question. Notice that the Yahoo imagery is underlying the data displayed.



At this point, I could move Round Mountain (by selecting it (clicking on it) and dragging it to the correct location.

I have instead selected Claude Road which shows the tags associated with it. By pressing the 'h' key, I have brought up the history and can see when the last edit was and who did it. Even revert it if I were so bold (I'm not. I've been to Sheffield but don't know the area.

Pressing the 'g' key, brings up any public GPS traces, (not shown here) by zooming in, I can see there are about 10 GPS traces along the road identified as Claude Rd.

The user who did this mapping did it in 2009 and it has not been touched since. They are a current and very active OSM mapper, and I could discuss the edits with the user if I thought they were at odds with reality.

Feel free to ask any questions, I'm happy to help anyone get to grips with OSM to the limit of my knowledge. At this level (which is adequate for most things I have done) its all pretty straightforward.

Ent wrote:Before I get too enthusiastic can you load the maps onto the Garmin Basemap and then units without a science degree?

Cheers Brett

You can download Garmin IMG files to load onto a Garmin GPS from various sites. One such site is here

There are also routable OSM/Garmin maps that will give navigation directions, but still early days. I've not tried but I suspect they would be both better and worse than the commercial offerings

i currently print out maps for personal use from 1:25k and 1:100k and add the details i want as layers over the top, elevation graphs, landmarks, bearings etc... the original map sets cost about $230, and the printing is done through the local photo-lab.
works out well for me... just gotta put in the planning, have fun and roll with it as best as possible in the end though

thanks for explanation of OSM.

I think I'd still favour a recognised source of data that can be bought over the counter.
Like Liamy77 its a good way to print your own maps, but I recognise not everyone can do that.
I'll do my own digging and see what can be done that would enable a better 'track map'.
Will see what transpires.

Ahhhhh, a universal problem.
For instance, on Saturday afternoon I drove up to Barry Way, spent the night up at Jacks, then went back down to the base of Running Waters Spur. The CDMA 1:50,000 Suggan Buggan map shows a walking track which climbs this spur, cuts across to the ridge that runs north from the Nine Mile, and follows it to the border where it supposedly stops, despite being no more than 1.5km from the Ingegoodbee Track. I figured that there would probably be a footpad running down the ridge to connect with the 4WD track and, if not, I could always scrubbash my way down there as it's fairly open country. In fact, the walking track - which is, for most of its length, an old vehicle track - continues all the way down the ridge and through Christie O'Rourke's, where it joins the Ingegoodbee Track.
That track has always continued past the border, so why isn't it shown in full? Why isn't the old horsepad that runs up along the Moyangul River shown? Or the track up Beehive Mountain? Or any of the old 4WD tracks that litter this area?

I do tend to agree with Brett here - we're paying for the information so we should get what we pay for, and it's a public safety matter. The more we know about where we're going, the better prepared we are and the less likely to need assistance.