No need to walk anymore

[Swampy460]

I seen on ch9 news tonight that Google are doing "street view" of tracks through the royal national park, the blue mountains and parks around Sydney harbour. Yep a guy walking around with a huge pack on his back with (I think) 13 cameras mounted over his head that gives 360 panoramic views.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/newslo ... 6942997616

Where will it end ????

Swampy

[Hallu]

Think twice about it. You wouldn't wanna deny disabled or poor people who can't see those places the right to see it through a camera. National Parks are public, and for the enjoyment of the people. They're protected, but they're not secret. And the more people see or come to our parks, the better protected they become. To me, this project isn't a bad thing at all. You can argue that Google Street View is a violation of privacy, but not this.

[DarrenM]

Well said Hallu. It wasn't created with lazy people in mind.

[walkon]

I've bumped into a bloke, Andrew, a few times who has a Go Pro on all the time. His brother has palsy or a neurone disease or something and he watches the movie replay. The brother loves it and feels as though he's there. It's the ultimate in reality tv that gives him an insight into normal life.

So if you see Andrew walking around with his Go Pro on, say gday to his brother and include him in the conversation as he loves it.

[GPSGuided]

I am supportive of this venture too, especially if the record is preserved in time. A bit of a living memory of our nature. In any case, I strongly suspect they'll only do the publicised official tracks and there'll still be plenty of side tracks for the willing to explore in peace. Can you imagine, being able to experience the Larapinta or OLT on the computer? It'll be one long pile inducing session in front of the computer screen!

[slparker]

Not to mention the research potential of this. I imagine that this will be come a digital document of 2014 Flora that can be use for decades to track environmental changes, especially involving global warming.

[Nuts]

I'm not sure why you'd not 'think twice' and just as reasonably decide that 'denying disabled or poor people' was an unfortunate consequence rather than a reasonable factor for accepting such precedents. I'm with swampy, "where will it end'? No line drawn?

[GPSGuided]

I'm with swampy, "where will it end'? No line drawn?

It will all end when planet Earth gets consumed by a red giant that was once our almighty sun! Then, there'll be no more worries about environmental sustainability.

[DarrenM]

I'm not sure why you'd not 'think twice' and just as reasonably decide that 'denying disabled or poor people' was an unfortunate consequence rather than a reasonable factor for accepting such precedents. I'm with swampy, "where will it end'? No line drawn?

Pretty poor view of disabled and/or poor people IMO. My wife has been enjoying the outdoors all her life and was diagnosed with MS a couple of years ago. Along with a whole range of horrible *&%$#!, a loss of mobility is a scary thing to deal with. If it helps people facing similar situations then its a good thing. They aren't mapping it for logging purposes.

[Nuts]

Sorry, wasn't meant to be a focus on discriminating against the less able, my uncle was in a chair from 18. The view stems more from concern over management being at the mercy of anyone with a camera.

[DarrenM]

I do understand where you're coming from Nuts. I was conflicted when learning about the same thing happening in cluastral canyon. I guess focusing on management in the Go Pro era is the important part.

[walkerchris77]

Yeah cut nuts a bit of slack. He was just highlighting a news article. Dont think he thinking of ppl less fortunate than others when he posted the article. . Being on a peak seeing it with your own eyes beats any google pixs. And as a google Earth viewer id like to view some places before I visit so I could see if its my cuppa tea.

[walkerchris77]

On the positive it could also be used for search and rescue purposes. Ses etc could study areas before heading out so when they get there is a bit more familiar.

[ErichFromm]

I read about this some time ago and, other comments and benefits aside, felt a little sad about it. One of the great things about Hiking is earning a great view. I realise photos also allow you to see views without being there but this is a little different.

I wonder if there will be future articles in the paper about novice hikers needing rescue because they've looked up the track and not considered the fact it may have changed - become more overgrown, or be vastly different due to seasonal changes....?

[walkerchris77]

Good point erich. Good point . The google earth pixs of my place are about 4 years old

[DarrenM]

There are pics and video of just about every place we visit. It's not a new concept and from a conservation perspective, one of the lowest impact ways for people to see new places. Think learning for kids who may never get the chance of more fortunate areas. Lots of positives with few negatives. It has many benefits, one of them getting more people outdoors.

[walkon]

It has many benefits, one of them getting more people outdoors.

I beg to differ. We are in an age where there never has been as much footage of our planet than ever before and people have never been more sedimentary. They just flick on the screen have a quick look and flick onto the next passing fancy.

I wonder if the urge to explore is stymied by the idiot box. I know when most go out somewhere they don't really see what they are looking at, have they lost the ability or never gained it. Kids don't poke sticks down ant holes, turn over logs to find bugs, go yabbying, climb trees and be in amongst nature anywhere near as much as before. Probably for fear that they will get dirty, bitten, lost or some pedo will get them. The tactile urge to explore isn't developed so most just look at life on a screen.

I'm okay with one brother talking pictures of his life for another. Though the likes of Google pic/track/Bush or whatever they call it is inherently unhealthy for the environment. If it's not cute, cuddly or stunning then it has no value and won't be on a screen somewhere. Google also won't show the minutiae of life in the Bush such as, how everything lives and survives. It won't stop to watch the lizards, birds, bees so it misses the value there.

So in concluding my quick rant. Stuff showing people what I have earned through blood sweat and tears. They only see a picture. Whereas I remember the euphoria of climbing that ridge, the sweat, the shaking legs, scapes, *&%$#! mozzies/leaches bites, waist deep mud, running out of dunny paper yep all the good stuff! Make em earn it and they might appreciate it more I reckon.
Written spoken and surprised by walkon

[DarrenM]

So some are concerned that numbers will increase through exposure and others are concerned that people will sit at home and not bother. There's a good chance it will even out?

I was encouraged to get out and poke things with sticks also, but found lazy people stay lazy and go getters will always have a thirst for giving it a nudge.

I'm curious about what people are actually concerned about? We can all go down the path of "the world is doomed due to technology", or embrace it and encourage others to use the concept for good.

I have a good friend (environmental science teacher) that has made very good use of new technology to teach kids in the classroom and outdoors using tablets, interactive apps cameras and the latest doo hickory that benefits the students like never before. They use the technology to learn and interact outside with the help of passionate teachers who themselves have travelled the world for adventures sake.

The responsibility of the lazy kid sitting at home playing computer games lies with all of us. If you direct somebody to take a virtual walk through that might not otherwise be an outdoors person, then maybe it may spark something in them. It may not but it's a start.

I'm all for getting out and doing it on you're own and receiving whatever gratification you want from the experience, but people always seem to want to keep the experience for themselves under the guise of protecting the environment. Without doubt it is a precious thing that needs to be protected, but I don't think this type of technology is the real concern.

[walkon]

Generally it's a basic instinct to protect what's 'yours', might be trying to not cheapen the experience and other reasons I specified. There's always someone who wants to do a trek, climb, drive.... In a more difficult hard core fashion so how that plays out who knows, might turn some on to other new trendier paths.

Sorry to hear about your wifes' condition. When she sees vision of these places I hope Mrs M can remember what it was like for her. On seeing a shaded gully, feel the cool crisp air on her skin and smell the damp vegetation. For a dry summer pic remember the heat radiating up through her boots and into your skin, the oppressive heart coming from all around, that dry dusty taste that sticks in your nose and throat, sweat running down... If Google can do any or all of that for her then it has worked and I will be happier.

No fear of technology here, just cautious not to let the genie out of the bottle without considering the ramifications, though it probably to late for that anyway

[Hallu]

There are plenty of places in Australia that could benefit from people being able to take a peek at them, see how gorgeous they look, and make them decide to visit it. Because contrary to common belief, I've been to plenty of places I couldn't find a picture of. In Victoria, parks such as Heathcote-Graytown, Barmah, Chiltern/Mount Pilot or Terrick Terrick are very poorly documented. And when you see a photo, it's a picture of a tree or a bird, and it doesn't give you a real "feel" for the place. Nowadays, it's a fact that people on vacation aren't gonna waste time on locations not reviewed or photographed on the net : this means less and less people in such parks as the ones I've mentionned. So documenting them, video-taping them, is a good thing : they're not gonna attract stomping hordes of tourists anyway, but they're gonna catch the eye of passionnate people that will think "hey I didn't know this place, it looks great...".

[DarrenM]

Sorry to hear about your wifes' condition. When she sees vision of these places I hope Mrs M can remember what it was like for her. On seeing a shaded gully, feel the cool crisp air on her skin and smell the damp vegetation. For a dry summer pic remember the heat radiating up through her boots and into your skin, the oppressive heart coming from all around, that dry dusty taste that sticks in your nose and throat, sweat running down... If Google can do any or all of that for her then it has worked and I will be happier.

No fear of technology here, just cautious not to let the genie out of the bottle without considering the ramifications, though it probably to late for that anyway

Thankfully mrs M is lucky at the moment and can still get out and about, just not the way she used to. I guess it's close to home so I do have a different perspective.

It would be interesting to figure out the statistics on exactly who uses this type of system. The less mobile, elderly, disabled etc. only make up a portion. Teachers and the like may only make up a small percentage initially. I suppose the general and able public would be the majority. I don't believe people will expect the sensory experience you mention, much the same way people don't use google earth to discover new lands.

[Allchin09]

The site owner, Matt McClelland, did something similar with the 6FT track (http://fire.wildwalks.com/emuview.htm?i ... eading=145) and I believe he was planning on expanding it to other track.

He said that many older people who can no longer make the walk, have enjoyed 'reliving' the experience through the panoramas.

I guess a difference between his system, and googles is that google already has a very large user base, and their treker program should get a large volume of traffic.

I don't see many real negatives of such a system. If people decide view the beauty of our national parks from in front of a computer screen, then that's their choice. But I think that it does have potential to educate people about what is out there, and it could definitely increase interest in our National Parks, something that is always needed.

[Mechanic-AL]

It's horses for courses I reckon. Just because it's there doesn't mean you HAVE to use it. When I recently planned my first trip down the OLT I was a bit overwhelmed by the amount of Info that was available on the walk and began to feel that it was detracting from the whole adventure. Simple solution.........I stopped Goog-a-ling! Personally I think the whole technology thing has gone too far with regard to bushwalking and for that reason I have never even opened the Techno-Babble section of this forum. Folks will be debating this one until the end of time but I'm just not interested. That's my choice and I can respect how some people may see things from an entirely different perspective. Thats their choice too.

Simple solution. If you don't like it, don't use it! ( ....I don't really think that this is really going to result in a whole heap of Lounge Lizards suddenly going bush either ).

AL

[Wollemi]

And the more people see or come to our parks, the better protected they become.

This sounds like a simplistic argument that 4WD'ers and horse-riders would use.

Are Google paying a fee to the State for any commercial gain?

CCL that any footage is taken - if anything, it would inspire me to visit such locales myself.

[Hallu]

It isn't just a simplistic argument, it worked in the US. At first the parks were rarely visited, and logging, hunting or illegal tourism activities were rampant. And although more people increases erosion, stress on fauna and littering, those are minor effects compared to the popularity the parks gained which prevented any further industrial project in them. That's how many dam projects were rejected in the Grand Canyon for example. An unknown park will only be protected by a strongly environmental-friendly government, which Australia clearly doesn't have. And btw, I'm totally against 4WD and horsing leisure activities in NPs. They should only be used as means to overcome difficult terrain.

[perfectlydark]

Cant see tourists flock8ng in droves because.of the system but maybe some public opiniom might change if some people see the beauty of our parks, and not as a bunch of trees that could be built on and exploited..so if anything its good

[Nuts]

The site owner, Matt McClelland, did something similar with the 6FT track (http://fire.wildwalks.com/emuview.htm?i ... eading=145) and I believe he was planning on expanding it to other track.

And therein lies a precedent for grander plans. In that case, park services brought to you by- Matt McClelland? ( )

[Onestepmore]

I have a Facebook 'friend' who now has to spend the majority of his time in hospital undergoing dialysis. He can no longer go camping or partake in his favourite interest, campfire and cast iron cooking. He can however, enjoy his hobby by checking out posts and videos of acquaintances via social media. I think it definitely has it's place.

[davidmorr]

Do you remember that when MH370 went missing recently, there were people scouring Google Earth images of the Indian Ocean looking for wreckage?

How long will it be before people start scouring these walk images for lost bushwalkers?

[Strider]

Do you remember that when MH370 went missing recently, there were people scouring Google Earth images of the Indian Ocean looking for wreckage?

How long will it be before people start scouring these walk images for lost bushwalkers?

Ever seen the movie Deja Vu?