Dangers of sharing harder routes with others

[Hallu]

800 000 visitors a year isn't much, if you compare it to Ireland, which is the same size, they get 8 million visitors a year. Of course, if you compare it to the total of 5.9 million visitors to Australia (1.2 of them being Kiwis), it's 14 % so it's not bad, I actually thought it would be less given how Europeans, Americans and Asians know nothing about Tasmania. An interesting study would be this : if you launch a worldwide campaign about Tasmania, manage to double the amount of tourists, and somehow make it so the Forestry industry becomes useless on the island and disappears, would it be better for the island's environment (no more logging and big trucks) or worse (too many tourists, roads, hotels) ? I honestly don't know. Anyway this may deviate the topic from its course so I stop here.

[tigercat]

I like both Chapman's and the Abel books and find them very helpful. Guide bks are one among many sources of info one can use before a trip. As bushwalkers we obviously need to deal with unexpected situations if conditions have changed since the bks were written.

[Taurë-rana]

Haven't read all of these comments, too tired and too long! But re removing tracks from maps, yes, the newer TasMaps have lost LOTS of tracks, and re Parks letting tracks close by not maintaining them or encouraging their use, that happens quite a bit too. And there was something else...
Oh yes, description of tracks as hard, dangerous etc - we found that 4WD tracks in some states (Qld springs to mind) that are called dangerous and difficult would be laughed at by Victorians and Tasmanians. So there can be an issue with perception. And the big, big thing here in my mind is the weather. Mind you, there have been more tourists killed from heat and dehydration doing the Loop Walk at Kalbarri National Park in WA than there have bushwalking in Tassie. Once again perception is the problem - it's not all that far and it's beside a river. The fact that temperatures can get sky high doesn't seem to register with people.

[russell2pi]

It does seem that bushwalking at "premiere" locations has become a bit of a trendy bucket-list activity. The past 10 years or so I haven't been to popular areas much at all - but when I do there seems to be far more people than there used to be, loaded up with far more overpriced, pointless gear. I took the old man over the Razorback over New Years. I thought I had the season wrong for a minute - I saw more ski poles and Kathmandu water bottles on that walk than on all previous walks in that area put together.

As for guide books - their main use to me is to know where and when I can get water. A website database for such information would be a great improvement ... waterpoints.org.au anyone ?? As a beginner walker years ago, the number of Tyrone Thomas' "faint tracks" that were actually nonexistent put me off a bit!! Better to just assume you're going trackless and plan your route with a good map.

[Walk_fat boy_walk]

The bulk of the tax I pay is probably GST and is Federal tax any how.

Correction the GST is a tax collected by the Federal Government on behalf of the states and theoretically should be fully distributed to the states so a state tax as from it states fund their services such as health and education.

Where to start... nevermind.

I haven't seen the Hobbit, and I can't tell and orc from a goblin. But I've figured out the difference between and ent and a troll.

[wayno]

speaking of over equipped people, what gets me is when i see people on a well formed, signposted track in a bushy area thats impossible to stray from and people are using a gps...
kathmandu must be doing well, last great walk i was on, i was looking at a long row of raincoats hanging up in one of the huts, they were almost all kathmandu...

[ILUVSWTAS]

I haven't seen the Hobbit, and I can't tell and orc from a goblin. But I've figured out the difference between and ent and a troll.

hahahahahaha oh lol lol lol

And for the record, Orc's are pure evil where as Goblins are just wicked.

[Hallu]

I don't see how you can blame people for being over equipped... I would never blame somebody for going on a track they don't know with walking poles and gaiters... That's actually a good thing, it means people take bushwalking seriously.

As for the "bucket list", I myself never do it with guidebooks, mostly because too many of the walks are either one way, include walking on sealed roads or in towns (this is especially true with the Victoria/Melbourne Chapman books). On the other hand, I like to look at maps and go and check every obscure nature reserve that nobody talks about. Sometimes you can find it in the great guide & atlas books by Hema, that's how I found out about the beautiful Dip Falls/Big Tree area north of the Tarkine.

[wayno]

yeah over equipped isnt nearly as bad as under equpped. i wonder, these people are obviously ill informed but what leads one person to be over equipped and another to be under equipped.... assumption? ignorance? mis information?

[wander]

How about full (and I mean very complete, ready for the opera) make up and pearls on Day 2 of the Port Davey?

[matagi]

How about full (and I mean very complete, ready for the opera) make up and pearls on Day 2 of the Port Davey?

I'd call that gobsmackingly impressive!

[north-north-west]

How about full (and I mean very complete, ready for the opera) make up and pearls on Day 2 of the Port Davey?

I'm sure you looked lovely.

[Nuts]

The pearls might grab at chest hair??

But I've figured out the difference between and ent and a troll.

Ok... so you don't think ent is a troll?? (not that I particularly care either way but it always helps (even if just the moderators))

[ILUVSWTAS]

The pearls might grab at chest hair??

But I've figured out the difference between and ent and a troll.

Ok... so you don't think ent is a troll?? (not that I particularly care either way but it always helps (even if just the moderators))

Scary thing is I actually think he believes half the rubbish he posts.

[Walk_fat boy_walk]

The pearls might grab at chest hair??

But I've figured out the difference between and ent and a troll.

Ok... so you don't think ent is a troll?? (not that I particularly care either way but it always helps (even if just the moderators))

Scary thing is I actually think he believes half the rubbish he posts.

Yes I think that's the point of difference. Trolls don't necessarily believe what they post... they're just fishing for outrage. Different intent, same outcome.

[Nuts]

Yes I think that's the point of difference. Trolls don't necessarily believe what they post... they're just fishing for outrage. Different intent, same outcome.

Well, no, not really, I assume ent intended to add to the conversation, others determined the outcome...
As often happens he has covered a lot of ground that some see as unrelated. Doing so pushes forum rules.. though to me personal attacks are far more distracting to what (i find) is potentially an interesting topic.

There's nothing new in this so why not just skip certain posts and add to the topic.

---------------

Hallu, the problem with a lot of places is that even 30 people a year Is a 'horde' (conservation wise).
I suspect 'chapmans hordes' refers more to those who wouldn't likely be in an area without the influence/some sort of trip notes in hand (apart from a map). Ironically also, adding to OSM could be mentioned. Maybe even mud maps from mates, a photo on a forum, it all adds a collective influence that will never diminish.

[Ent]

Interesting the points of view if you can get past the personal attack styles of a few.

If you primary concern is protection of the environment then you will acknowledge that bushwalking has at one level a negative impact. Sure it creates a body of people that might be able to publicize and thus protect an area so a positive side as well.

As mention there is a tipping point where an area cannot recover without intervention once walkers exceed a certain number. Parks has access to studies that quantify that number based on area and some areas the number is remarkably small.

Expenditure of money on infrastructure may be able to reduce damage but infrastructure costs money. And for those not living in economic noddy land know it must come from somewhere.

Park fees are one source. The collection models and fee structures have impact on people. I argue that under the current model the locals are shouldering a higher percentage and maybe an alternative fee structures could be considered. Simple fact is Parks has not been fully funded from park fees so non bushwalking Tasmanians have funded bushwalkers through lower health services, lower wages for teachers, etc.

As an accountant I am aware how protective certain people are of money so expected attacks but the points raised do not go away through name calling.

As for tourist income well I do talk to people out there. Your average punter slogging up Marions Lookout appears to be on a seven day circuit and spends up big in Tasmania. Your guided walkers probably contribute the most dollars per day. Your guidebook group lob in first morning flight, heads to the walk and once finished catches either a flight that night or more likely first one out next morning after a shower and sleep. Say for seven days the sum total spent is transport, gas and coffee at the airport. Hardly a significant contribution per day.

It is not a case of hating or disliking the guidebook group just that increasing number of routes get published and not much thought is given to dealing with the increased traffic. Horde is used as a horde does not necessarily consider the damage that it does. The vast majority of the horde I meet are nice people just collectively they are pushing areas beyond the area's ability to recover. And I consider that a danger.

Regards

[Nuts]

So, Lake Sandra.. some good points but wouldn't local managers have had similar thoughts in not putting that on a map (not that conservation really started the topic either and its obviously not a 'hard' walk) (but i suppose is related to where information starts and from where it is passed on)

[andrewbish]

It is not a case of hating or disliking the guidebook group just that increasing number of routes get published and not much thought is given to dealing with the increased traffic. Horde is used as a horde does not necessarily consider the damage that it does. The vast majority of the horde I meet are nice people just collectively they are pushing areas beyond the area's ability to recover. And I consider that a danger.

Regards

Agreed.

What constitutes acceptable track readiness is such a personal thing. I, like perhaps most of the members of this forum, like my wilderness as untouched as possible, while accepting lessened accessibility/comfort as a trade off. We are a small group, representing probably a single digit percentage of the population. There is no doubt a much larger group who also want access to the wilderness, but prefer easier accessibility & comfort over the untouched aspect. These folks prefer the more popular walks - Wilsons Prom, Overland Track, Milford Track, etc, which are highly managed and have a corresponding reduction in the untouched side of the ledger. At the far end of the spectrum in the comfort direction, you have those that would rather drive to the wilderness and stay in multi-star comfort.

Of the various accessibility preferences, I don't know that we can say who has the better approach to the wilderness (though I think the minimal access approach is the most sustainable.) It could be argued that the the back country is for all and therefore the approach which provided the most accessibility the the greatest number is the ideal one.

One thing I note is that funding for the minimalist approach is generally problematic; whereas, funding for high-access approaches, particularly when opened up to private enterprise (eg. tour operators, accommodation), is much more freely available and it can therefore seem the easier path. The trick here would seem to be about reaching a sustainable balance that meets the needs of the different user groups. Has any Aussie state achieved this? What about the kiwis?

[MrWalker]

Expenditure of money on infrastructure may be able to reduce damage but infrastructure costs money. And for those not living in economic noddy land know it must come from somewhere.

I think the general public don't mind government money being spent on wilderness areas, as long as there is the possibility they they (the public) might actually go there one day, even if they never get around to it.

What really annoys a lot of people is the idea that there are real tracks out there that those in the know make use of, but are being kept secret from the public. This makes it appear that the Wilderness is being preserved just for the private benefit of a small bunch of fanatics. This forum helps by making it clear why some tracks are not publicised, but people who really want to get to these places can do so if they make an effort.

[tasadam]

Interesting the points of view if you can get past the personal attack styles of a few.

Agreed. Would people kindly check and comply with the rules, in particular "friendly, polite". What may seem like friendly banter to you when you post, may sit differently if it were being said about you. Even if you do have a tougher skin, it's still against forum rule 1 to be anything but "friendly, polite". Please?

[Walk_fat boy_walk]

Interesting the points of view if you can get past the personal attack styles of a few.

Agreed. Would people kindly check and comply with the rules, in particular "friendly, polite". What may seem like friendly banter to you when you post, may sit differently if it were being said about you. Even if you do have a tougher skin, it's still against forum rule 1 to be anything but "friendly, polite". Please?

Point taken.

It just the "us and them" bushwalker culture (seemingly more prevalent in Tassie, although happpy to be corrected) that irks me, and the idea that anyone, no matter how experienced, has any more right than anyone else to the bush (safety issues notwithstanding). And the idea that Tasmanians should have priority access to the Tassie wilderness over mainlanders is, to me (someone who still considers themselves a Tasmanian), close-minded (if not self-defeating from a tourism perspective).

It seems that we're all in agreement about the preservation of wilderness values - I just think that the idea that there should be some sort of access restrictions imposed on the so-called "Chapman's hordes" (but "it's ok for us regulars") to be a bit elitist. Hypothetically, I think that any such restrictions, if applied (and I'm no position to comment on whether or not they'd be warranted), should be applied to everyone, whether their gear is well worn or straight from the Kathmandu sales, or whether they hail from north or south of the strait.

Certainly meant no offence though

[ryantmalone]

What was this thread about again?

[Hallu]

Yeah, should be renamed "the dangers of TALKING about sharing harder routes with others".