Three Capes Walk Proposal

[Hallu]

Yeah Tasman NP isn't very well signposted, but then again only Freycinet and Cradle are in Tasmania. You need good maps. Last time I've been to Fortescue Bay (it was late February of last year) yeah the camping and the beach were pretty busy (Tassie busy, not NZ busy).

[wayno]

the gps told us to take an old turnoff thats overgrown and rough as...

[whynotwalk]

Yep - Cape Hauy gets pretty busy, esp since the upgrade. I contacted a PWS numbers person who sent me this: "There have been approx 5 000 walkers on the track in the (first) 6 months" (ie since it was upgraded).

Of course it's also on the very popular 60 Great Short Walks brochure/app. That plus a national park visitor guide and a map of Tassie - all available free, even to Kiwis - are very handy when you're travelling here

cheers

Peter (not yet a big GPS user!)

[Hallu]

Yeah I plan to do it on Easter, I better pick a rainy day or get up early...

[wayno]

so, this is the milford track, it's 700m straight down,
its taken from the middle of the ridge line in the second photo... this is right next to the track,, up to a hundred people a day can walk there and a lot go to the edge.... note, the absence of a handrail.... and DOC are pretty paranoid about safety these days making all their bridges to a high spec , but sometimes they realise its better not to contaminate the place with man made structures when you have such a killer view to take in....
if you cant keep yourself safe in the outdoors in situations like this one, perhaps you shouldnt be there

[Overlandman]

Update from ABC News

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-08/t ... ection=tas

Three Capes Walk on track but short of funds.

The National Parks Minister Brian Wightman says the 65 kilometre walk will eventually attract keen hikers, as well as less experienced walkers.
He says the success of the Cape Hauy walk shows there is growing interest in Tasmania's stunning southern coastline.
"We know that this will bring lots of people to Tasmania, but will also provide an experience for Tasmanians to be able to enjoy as well.
"I've been fortunate enough to have seen many views and iconic places right around the world, but this is absolutely outstanding," he said.
The Three Capes Track is being built in stages.
Helicopters are flying in and out up to 60 times in a day.
Workers spend blocks of 10 days on site, spreading gravel, clearing bushland and building duckboards across the flat, marshy plains.
The National Parks and Wildlife Service's Stuart Lennox says it is one of the largest bush-walking projects under construction anywhere in the world.
"We're building the track predominantly using rock and gravel because we think it's a better surface, it will be easier to maintain.
"It's going to last a lot longer. We're building this for a 75 year life," he said.
A four-day walk taking in two capes, Cape Pillar and Cape Hauy, is on track to open in two years' time.
The longer, six-day hike to the third, Cape Raoul, has not been funded.
It will not be open any time soon, because Brian Wightman says the State Government cannot afford to fund it without Commonwealth support.
"It's not just a project that we can fund on our own," he said.
"Obviously we've had difficult budgetary circumstances, but I think this is a great spend."

Work so far has cost $25 million, the amount initially budgeted to cover the entire walk.

Extending the track to the third cape will now cost an extra $15 million at least.

[wayno]

in NZ the average amount of track one person can build in a day is 8 metres..., but tif they are going to keep putting in elaborate high speck rock steps all over the place like cape hauy then, the distance will be less.
also in NZ they ended up letting mini diggers and bobcats onto the higher spec tracks to build them a lot faster
they had a massive slip wipe out a couple of k's of the kepler track one year and in desperation let a bobcat onto the track to fix it and since then their policy has been to allow them where practicable. cant recall what their work rate is, but as you can imagine its significantly greater than a person... the cape hauy track is wide enough for something like a bobcat to operate on.

[tastrax]

Mini excavators have been used at Cape Hauy (Three Capes) and on the Frenchmans Cap Track. Great devices in the hands of a good operator.

[johnw]

I received an email last week from Tas PWS. I've yet to read it properly and respond but from memory the gist was that they are seeking input into a survey relating to the Three Capes Track, based on my experience as a fee paying walker on the Overland Track back in 2007/8. Just curious - did anyone else receive one of these?

[eggs]

Yes - I got one - yet to do it.

[Hallu]

There's no point in that walk if it doesn't include Cape Raoul. Cape Pillar and Hauy are already accessible with well built track, so if the final project doesn't include the third cape I can't see why they're doing it.

[Strider]

There's no point in that walk if it doesn't include Cape Raoul. Cape Pillar and Hauy are already accessible with well built track, so if the final project doesn't include the third cape I can't see why they're doing it.

Raoul is also accessible on good track.

[Hallu]

Yeah I know, so if you're not gonna link the three, it's pointless.

[stepbystep]

Yeah I know, so if you're not gonna link the three, it's pointless.

The point is there will be a high quality track graded to take walkers that would never otherwise walk in Tasmania. There is also a hell of a lot of new track laid going through different country(I've already walked it) and the huts will provide an option that doesn't currently exist in Tasmania.....I can see a lot of possibilities if you look outside the square on this project.

They'll get the funding to link it up eventually.
I just hope the Cape Raoul section gets modified to take in Crescent Bay, it would be very beneficial to their business case to have an overnight 'node' en route near a beach.

[Nuts]

Iv'e only seen pics of the new track. It's good to see opting for stonework, a real 'trackies track'. 70yrs?, it should last a lot longer than that (perhaps that's the timber/infrastructure life term?) Good stuff, it would be good to see it complete.

Must have been very difficult to cost stonework track. Regardless, whoever is responsible for such a ridiculous blow-out should be held to account.. it's going to need more federal funding or be at an expense to other projects for a long time surely?

[headwerkn]

I know this is an old thread, but it does make me chuckle a bit to hear about this project still being developed and debated after almost a decade of promises and furore.

For a good portion of the last decade, I worked for an IT, web and application development group within the government department now called DPIPWE (its acronym changed about every 18 months due to the machinations of government, a horrible waste of literally millions of dollars every freaking time it happened). As such I did a lot of work for and with PWS, most notably 2 iterations of their website (including the current one) and first incarnation of the Overland Track Booking system (which taxpayers will be glad to note paid for itself within the first season of use. Curiously enough, they're still using most of my GUI code too. Obviously not too many complaints... ).

Anyways... if memory serves me correct, we were heading towards the big, much anticipated release of the OLT Booking System and its associated website in mid-2005, and I get a request from someone from PWS to quickly whip up a duplicate site for a proposed "Three Capes Track" which, I was told, would follow in a similar vein to the OLT and its (then) recent changes to both commercialise and protect it.

I was quite intrigued in the project; while my own bushwalking adventures had at the time been recently curbed by a new girlfriend who sadly wasn't the hiking type, my first true multi day hiking experience was none other than Cape Pillar, completed some 10 years earlier as a teen with my best mate under the guise of making a documentary video. We undertook the walk during very average weather in Easter, were woefully underprepared, taking all the wrong clothes, not enough food and a dodgy Trangia that took 45 mins to boil 2 cups of water. Ended up making camp at Lunchtime Creek due to falling light. The wind at Petition Ponds the next day were so fierce they straight ripped our family's 21 year old camp kettle off my backpack and sent flying towards, well, New Zealand probably. It was crazy and we were probably lucky not to get hypothermia after a 2 hour trek straight down a creek - in jeans - to see if we could reach the coast, but we survived with a two VHS-C tapes full of complete nonsense and a headful of great memories that are still with me. But I digress...

The second website was completed in much haste ready for launch and then.... nothing. And more nothing. And then suddenly the whole thing was on hold until further notice, not to be visited again until the PWS site revamp in 2008/2009, by which time the project had finally been announced to equal parts interest, disdain and questions over where all the money would be coming from.

Like it said, it is hard not to giggle at how slowly the cogs of democracy turn when there aren't angry voters to appease immediately before an election.

FWIW I have no qualms with tracks being improved or extended to improve access and prevent damage to sensitive areas, but I am a bit worried that having been buoyed with the (fairly massive) success of the Overland Track project, they're probably keen to repeat it in other areas.

I understand and originally approved of the need to do what was needed on the OLT to prevent it being destroyed by its own popularity, but ironically now that I'm back to regular bushwalking again (new girlfriend who's isn't afraid of the outdoors) that particular track is of very little interest to me... partially because hiking with large numbers of people has little appeal, partially because staying in communal cabins has absolutely zero appeal, and partially because the current $200 per person fee is about $100 too much, at least for our budget anyway.

I think everyone understands that the issues and problems surrounding the OLT came to be slowly but surely after decades of increased use, and the end solution - while not everyone's cup of tea - probably was the best way forward. As much as I despise the notion of staying in a communal hut or tent platform every night of a trek, I can appreciate it is environmentally preferable to accommodating hundreds of stealth camps along the length of the route all throughout summer. Also, the track's inherent and long established notoriety means that it will continue to attract an abundance of lightly-experienced and first-time hikers for whom such facilities are likely to keep them safe(r) and more comfortable.

However, just because it is working well there, doesn't necessarily mean the concept can - or should - be transferred to other walks. Firstly, I don't really think huts are necessary for even novice hikers for the south-east coast of Tassie. In the alpine areas, sure, they're an important safety facility for even well equipped and experienced hands to ride out heavy blizzards. I've never stayed in one throughout all our treks in the Western Lakes (including the odd blizzard) but I'm glad there's a few about, just in case Mother Nature decides to give us the bum end of the weather and a tent isn't enough.

To me, huts on the Three Capes Walk isn't about managing camp site damage or safety, but about allowing people who don't actually want to do multi-day hikes to do so anyway in a higher level of comfort while charging them richly for the privilege. Glamping I believe is the term. Forgive my cynicism but surely such visitors could be more appropriately and less expensively catered for by providing a range of reasonable-grade daywalks and access points to the major sights, and connecting buses/public transport to and from accommodation centres?

Secondly, the whole boat connection thing sounded dubious years-ago and it still does today. Too much complication, too much cost. Make usable multi-day circuits of both sides of peninsula, and use a bus, etc. to help connect walkers from one to the other.

Lastly, there is the whole cost aspect and my opinion on this goes well beyond any one particular track, but rather PWS (and tourism operators in general) pricing Tasmanians out of their own parks while chasing the higher-end of the tourism market (which apparently is the only one that's done well over the past few years). Fleecing well-financed mainlanders and overseas visitors is all well and good, but it is a bit rich to fleece locals just as enthusiastically then bemoan how fewer Tasmanians are holidaying in their own backyard because going interstate or overseas instead isn't much more expensive. I realise the whole "Locals should be able to access National Parks more cheaply than tourists" argument has been around as long as Parks entrance fees themselves, but staring at another hundred-and-something dollar Parks Pass renewal due for payment, you can appreciate why so many Tasmanians avoid our parks entirely.

Anyway, it will be interesting to see how it all works when it finally gets completed. Hopefully those who appreciate simple, humble, self contained bushwalking won't be driven out by excessive charges or throngs of guided, coddled tourists.

Cheers, Ben.

[wayno]

maybe the same strategists are involved across the tasman, in NZ DOC are focusing on the more popular areas upgrading and dumbing down the tracks, upgrading or consolidating huts to attract more people and in some cases charge more, guess it leaves the rest of the back country a bit freer for the rest of the tramping population.
the caples track has been turned from a pretty rough steep slippery track to a benched, metalled footpath.
i've watched the routeburn gain in popularity as it books out further and further in advance. hut fees jumped from 35 to $55 a night in one year... although in other areas park plans don't keep pace with increasing no's who believe they can find a place in huts that are becoming increasingly over crowded, NZ's reputation for its huts is starting to be its undoing.... in some places there are a finite no of bookings available but in neighbouring tracks, no bookings are required and an overflow of people flood the huts in the warmer months.. people who can't get onto their first choice tracks find other tracks without knowing much about their new destination which may require a lot more bush skills and better gear to negotiate than their original target...

[headwerkn]

I can tell you with first hand knowledge that the NZ experiences, particularly with the Milford Track, formed a major part of (and justification of) the OLT Management Plan and subsequent booking system/redevelopment. That, of course, is hardly a big secret, though.

I can also tell you encouraging regular locals away from the OLT and onto other less visited/pressured tracks was both anticipated and intended. That experienced Tassie walkers would be off-put by both the cost and the increased development of the track - all the duckboards, etc. making it easier to walk - was not seen necessarily as a bad thing.

They of course knew full well the various state bushwalking clubs weren't going to be thrilled with the new restrictions - though that hardly took a genius to figure out - and would shift their focus elsewhere and/or walk it in the off-season... which incidentally a friend of my did, south-north, right in the middle of winter, to stick it up 'em I could be convinced to do it myself one day... not sure about my better half though.

All that said, it isn't hard to see their point of view. The track was being loved to death (a favoured tagline at the time) by thousands of walkers, huge amounts of money were needed to contain and minimise the damage done both the track itself and the various camping areas. Numbers needed to be reduced, and let's face it, charging interstate and international visitors happy to pony up the dough is vastly easier to trying to drag coin from stoic locals bemoaning how everything was better "before". To be fair, it was probably most economically and environmentally sustainable option available.

I suppose my concern is where does this form of thinking and rationalisation of high quality, self-funding (read: lots of facilities, high entry fees) stop? I doubt anyone will have the stomach (or funds) for another 'new track' project like the Three Capes Walk, if and when it ever gets completed, but there's no lack of other areas that are seeing ever increasing visitation - aka "being loved to death" - which could easily see a push to improve facilities and pay its own way at the same time.

Freycinet would be a likely target, IMO. I'd also suspect that the various side tracks around the OLT may see increasingly tighter restrictions.

If PWS really wants to spread the load around its various parks and tracks, they'd do well to sort out a decent shuttle bus system. Seems to be a very common complaint by visitors. Clearly the private sector can't or aren't willing to offer regular and affordable services in all but the most visited areas (ie. Overland Track) and even then the prices can be very expensive.

Cheers, Ben.

[Nuts]

Welcome Ben. Maybe an easy go-too plan for the walls and frenchmans eventually as well? Move em out and bring the money in

Anyhow, Iv'e been wondering recently how hard/expensive it would be to duplicate the OLT booking programming for voluntary use on other tracks that are increasingly (or as a result) hammered? ie. hosted by parks but without necessarily starting with the fees and regulation, as an immediate proactive measure?
(too late for the ____ capes walk but useful on others?)

[wayno]

in nz DOC have one website and system for all bookings for DOC huts or campsites nationwide

[headwerkn]

It wouldn't be difficult at all to create another iteration of the OBTSE for another walk or site. Considering the amount of investment made into it (probably well over half-a-million by now) they'd be stupid to reinvent the wheel. There was talk of using it for managing the booking process for campsites at Frecyinet during the peak season, not sure if it ever came to be though... my involvement with state government finished in late 2009.

Which walks do you think are reaching the point of needing to manage per-day numbers? I'd be concerned that any unpaid system would difficult to justify the man-hours required to police the starting point. In which case, they'd bring in a fee.

If it is a voluntary "honesty" type system, however, how likely is it that anyone would pay attention?

[Nuts]

Well, with some sort of I.D access they could encourage the commercial guys to plug in their walks for a start. The dates are know some time in advance, i'm sure they are interested in avoiding crowds as much as any.

As for the general public, a similar ID to access the system? i'm not sure. I'd imagine they would very much like to know how many others will be out there as well. While logged in I cant see any reason not to get involved by dropping one's dates in?

Could cause some tension with those that haven't bothered (everyone buys a pass so everyone could be at least informed of such a system)? As long as it's pointed out that bookings are a guideline.. it may even prove reliable? If not no harm done..

There has been mention for something to advise numbers in the Arthurs. Perhaps Walls, Frenchmans as it gets busier.

Well done with those automated systems btw, use it regularly and never had a drama.

[wayno]

NZ gets a lot of overseas bushwalkers, but we've got a lot of more developed tracks with huts... more every year... seems a lot of them dont realise about booking,,,, only the milford gets seriously booked out of the whole season months in advance... the rest of the tracks requiring booking become a free for all, people turn up to aspiring and fiordland wanting to do the main tracks that get booked out and then just overflow onto surrounding tracks when they cant get a booking on the ones they want, the whole area is getting loved to death and theres not enough huts to cope with people expecting to be accommodated in huts because of nz's reputation for having so many huts... Build it and they will come... and keep on coming..... our popularity is overloading areas of tracks.... seems theres large no's of people specifically wanting to stay in huts... possibly because it's what they are used to where they come from or they just dont want to or arent expereinced in camping....
there are the luxury style walks as well. but they don't fill up.
it may be that no matter what you build in Tasmania, you can't win.... you build a reputation for high quality tracks and they could all get swamped faster than you can build them....

[headwerkn]

Certainly managing the numbers commercial operators bring onto tracks wouldn't be a bad idea - assuming it's not already done? I did some work for a guiding company a couple of years back, there's a bunch of them now so I suppose it isn't out of the question for 2-4 outfits to all bring along a 6-8 strong group onto a given track at the same, especially when good weather is forecast in the summer.

Tassie's ability to grow tourism numbers - and as such, interstate/overseas walker numbers - is rather limited currently, both by access into the state (plane or Spirit) and finding accommodation during the peak season. Unless something major is done to increase flights, accommodation options and smaller issues like road capacity, public transport and so on, any increases in walker numbers would be from an increased proportion of the current visitorship deciding to do bushwalks as part of their stay here.

As for huts... well, I guess I'm quite biased in my view... I like my own tent and plenty of privacy. Are huts considered desirable by most 'serious' hikers, or just seen as an 'enabler' for soft types?

Cheers, Ben.

[Nuts]

Hi Ben, interesting!

No it's not done,there has been some discussion about commercial operators/booking system in The Walls but not to date. I don't like the sound of that anyway, was thinking more about the public knowing where these guys are. Not necessarily just them but school, uni, club groups as well as private walkers. Just some indication, a communication portal so they don't all end up together at the many small campsites.

[headwerkn]

It wouldn't hurt for large groups like schools, commercial operators and clubs making their intentions known somewhere so PWS can keep tabs on big moments of walkers, and so private groups and individuals can plan accordingly.... though I'm not sure if your average hiker would bail on their plans just because there's going to be 10 kids on there, etc. Weekends and time off tends to be pretty inflexible. As does the weather. Maybe with enough advance warning though, people might try to avoid the weekends when the large groups are on.

I suppose the real (or at least one) deciding factor would be how the oft-used camping areas on these tracks cope with a large number of tents during the peak season. I've not really hiked in the area yet (plan to change that real soon) so the following is only an educated stab in the dark, but I'm assuming the cleared spaces people use handle half a dozen tents or so per night far better than 15-20 or more.

Parks would, I sense, have no choice but to act if the areas are being damaged by too many tents struggling for space, spreading out beyond the long-cleared traditional pad and, dare I say, people clearing out new areas and permanently compressing longer grass etc. areas in order to find room. The other scenario is increased stealth camping at random spots all along the track; that's fine if people know what they're doing, but it only takes a percentage of clumsy campers to start damaging areas all along the track.
At this point I'm almost certain PWS would implement measures to 'contain' camping ... tent platforms, huts and restricting numbers.

I'd suggest if anyone's worried about a particular track that's in danger of becoming like the above, it wouldn't be the worst idea in the world to get in touch with PWS now and work out a 'gentle' management plan to spread out walker numbers without resorting to OLT-type restrictions.

[tastrax]

Hi Ben, interesting!

No it's not done,there has been some discussion about commercial operators/booking system in The Walls but not to date. I don't like the sound of that anyway, was thinking more about the public knowing where these guys are. Not necessarily just them but school, uni, club groups as well as private walkers. Just some indication, a communication portal so they don't all end up together at the many small campsites.

I think that the Overland Track commercial (tent based) and large groups do actually contact PWS re availability of the "commercial campsites" to ensure there are no overlaps of groups. Not 100% sure as it was out of my area but the intention was always that larger groups only travelled when space was available on the segregated sites.

[headwerkn]

Commercial operators on the OLT have their own per-day allocation of "spots" and their own separate booking system to manage and pay for it... always a big rush when the upcoming season was "released" in July for the pros to lock in several trips for Dec-Jan etc. Apparently nothing's changed since... the guy I did some web work for reckoned the prime periods were filled by the end of the first day, basically you'd have to pony up several grand to lock in dates (commercial operators pay a lot more for each person they bring onto the track) then hope you'd have them filled with paying customers by the time summer came around.

I can't recall if the operator with their own private huts had their walker numbers included in the overall commercial quota or not, but I think they did, for the obvious reason that they were all still taking up space on the track, even if they weren't taking up space in the public huts.

I know we're getting a mile off-topic now, but does anyone have visitation statistics - or even slightly educated guestimates - for the 'other' major walks? If the OLT was being "loved to death" by ~8000 walkers a year, I'm guessing your WOJs and Frenchman Cap, etc. aren't seeing anywhere near that.

[wayno]

DOc in NZ built an 80 person hut in the coromandel, not sure what the exact intention was, but the result was it was a magnet for numerous large groups,, esp school groups.. has filled out a wanted niche it seems. and probably taken pressure off other huts and campsites....

[Nuts]

I know we're getting a mile off-topic now, but does anyone have visitation statistics - or even slightly educated guestimates - for the 'other' major walks? If the OLT was being "loved to death" by ~8000 walkers a year, I'm guessing your WOJs and Frenchman Cap, etc. aren't seeing anywhere near that.

It is getting a bit off topic, interesting (to me) on its own.
Yes, there is talk of a system to regulate commercial groups in The Walls. It's been mentioned on here. People are also asking and about The WA's. It might not be long before Frenchmans has similar murmurings, especially in mid-summer.

At present it's pot luck, hit a busy day and a couple of groups clash and some private walkers must wonder why they left the city. As well, at present, nobody knows if the next day will be better. That doesn't seem ideal.