Bushwalk Australia

Hi there.

I'm walking the Overland again in Feb 2012, and was just doing some reading on the parks website.

I find it interesting that some of the hut capacities seem vastly different to what I would imagine based on what I can remember from last time/photos of the huts. Does any one here know what sort of system is used for determining the hut sleeping capacity (ie someone who works for Parks, is there a numerical way this is calculated?)

A few examples:
1. It just seemed strange to me that Pelion was listed as 36 people, but Chapman says 60. I'd have said at least 60, probably 72
2. Bert Nichols - the new hut is listed as holding 24??? I'd have said at least 48, it's not in my Chapman book
3. Lake Vera - parks say 20, but it is at least as big as Waterfall Valley (probably a bit bigger) and parks say 24 at Waterfall Valley, so why not the same or more?
4. Tahune - Parks say 16, but I'd say 20 comfortably.

The only other thing I can think of is that the physical sleeping area available isn't the only thing which is used to determine capacity. Maybe there are other regulations (for example like ventilation of the sleeping areas) which are more restrictive and prohibit Parks from advertising the sleeping capacity purely based on bunk surface area.

Any ideas? Tastrax?

At a guess I'd say its something to do with overcrowding on the track (you have to book a pass for this track right?).
In addition, no doubt there are strict rules/regulations in place on how many people can safely stay in a hut without having a negative impact on the escape routes in the event of fire or an emergency.

Overcrowding would definitely have a negative impact on the experience for most people..

Rather be in a tent, especially in nice weather.

flyfisher wrote:Rather be in a tent, especially in nice weather.

+1

Me too,
I suspect its more standard bunk numbers? Definitely fit many more in all of them 'somehow' I can't recall the exact number but iv'e seen 50 odd in WFV hut all floor, table, seat space is fair game if needed.

Tahune was not fit for habitation with those mould spores (imo)

Im heading off to the Overland track starting 17th Dec. The more I read about Hut capacities the more it sounds like the Hay street Mall here in WA.
Both my son and I have a tent and we had planned on staying outside anyway, but does this mean that there is even a chance that Tent spots are at a premium.
This statement below ( from http://ourhikingblog.com.au/2007/07/day ... ut-to.html) sort of concerns me.


(Inside Pelion Hut. There were only 10 of us there. We had been there with 120+ people in and around the hut. Not fun).

There is a nother statement on another page about 60 people in a hut.

Is it really like this. I expected that there would be a few people around but......... this?
Is it going to be difficult to even find a tent spot?

Hi Nuts.

Last time I was in Tahune it was fine - someone had washed the walls and roof down (with vinegar I presume) and the ol' hut was looking great

I find the huts so much more convenient, especially in the wet. Only real issue for me with huts is hygiene (which can be managed if you are really careful and diligent) and noise, which I don't find too bad most of the time.

My question about the hut sleeping capacities was because they can't be based on the area of bunk space in metres squared. There must be other factors at play - for example, at Pelion - there is ample bunk space for at least 60, but Parks advertise 36. I'm guessing there is another factor which limits the official capacity. Could be
a) number of emergency exits
b) fire extinguishers/procedures
c) ventilation
d) something else.

I'd be interested in how they work it out.

Hi Abmacus.

We certainly didn't have problems like that when doing the Overland in early Feb 2009. It was busy, but not crazy. Probably 60 or more at Pelion is the exception, not the rule!

I suspect it has a lot to do with school holidays... ie get a good patch of warm weather in early to mid January, could be fairly busy with a lot of people coming down the Arm River track.

If tent space is also limited, you could wait until around last light and then use the large group sites if they aren't taken. I don't think Parks would mind this if no other space is available.

Same policy applies at Tahune where limited space is available... you can camp on the helipad between sunset and sunrise if no other space is available.

South_Aussie_Hiker wrote:. you can camp on the helipad between sunset and sunrise if no other space is available.

Is this true?? My understanding was you should not camp on the helipads ANYTIME. Emergencies occur at the most inconvinient times, sometimes even at night...

Its not that bad since the permit system started but Pelion can get busy with people in for overnighters or on their way to other areas of the park. Mostly the other Overland huts are more controlled (which starts with WFV). There are no timber platforms at WFV or (many) at Pelion but heaps of campsites nearby, especially if its raining Dont camp on the helipads on the OLT, a chopper may land on you on any given day..

I think Parks or someone has increased the amount of room a person needs to sleep in the huts. Thus a lot of what were double bunks are now classified as single hence the reduction in capacity.

I think Parks or someone has increased the amount of room a person needs to sleep in the huts. Thus a lot of what were double bunks are now classified as single hence the reduction in capacity.

Okay, that might go some way to explaining the mystery. I wonder why they've changed it.

Is this true?? My understanding was you should not camp on the helipads ANYTIME. Emergencies occur at the most inconvinient times, sometimes even at night...

That's what the official Parks sign next to the Helipad said. I'll try and find a photo. But yes, you most definitely would not want to make a habit of it or try it ANYWHERE else where it isn't approved. It did also say not to erect any permanent shelters (I read that as with pegs driven into the ground) and to be prepared to move all of your stuff off there immediately, at any time of the night.

Huh, there you go! Didn't know that..

Beware 'Official' signs, obey at own peril
Aside: There was an old timedy sign warning not to camp under the big leaning Euc at Pelion, ahrm.. anyhow:.. it musn't have been official enough so was removed ... If i remember, i'll get a pic of the tree..

Was definitely "official", Nuts

From memory, was printed on sheet metal in typed print, with the Parks logo and official colours - bolted onto 3x3 posts which were embedded into the ground.

Either was official, or someone went to a HELL of a lot of trouble to put up a fake sign

ha ha, thats what I was getting at.. if its an official sign, put even more thought into what your about to do lol lol

Nuts wrote:Huh, there you go! Didn't know that..

Beware 'Official' signs, obey at own peril
Aside: There was an old timedy sign warning not to camp under the big leaning Euc at Pelion, ahrm.. anyhow:.. it musn't have been official enough so was removed ... If i remember, i'll get a pic of the tree..

I well remember that sign and the tents that were pitched under said tree
corvus

It came down corv, i looked around the perimeter for legs

I think there are -or at least there where platforms at WFV. above the falls btn the old and new huts. I'm sure I slept out on them one very cold night.

Yes, that's right. Up the bank behind the old hut. These are platforms for the commercial groups who pay for their use, leaving the huts (in bad weather as well as good) for private walkers. There has been some discretion left with the local hut warden and track rangers to let private walkers use these platforms when they get advice that no tour group is coming.

Imagine then the scene when communication breaks down and a tired, hungry, cold group (up to 14 of them) turns up, perhaps even after dark and most likely in foul weather. Whoever is leading them has no choice other than have or help you move* and then live with the angst as you all progress together down the track for the rest of the week.

* May sound harsh but could be the third or fourth consecutive time for them...

Beware official advice (and signs), (as in 'be aware' , not 'ignore')