Proposal to put a track into Lake Geeves....

[Nuts]

I think that many citizens of tasmania, Australia and the world would disagree that a NZ type experience of SW Tassy is a bad thing.

I think you'd be surprised, Iv'e heard kiwi's remark that lack of development was a or 'the' one worthwhile point of difference. The rest of the world, and otherwise well traveled, aside from a ticklist list ticked, seem overwhelmingly in awe of the sheer 'under-development', the vast 'unaltered' wildness (there was a time when it was as much 'strange animals' but we seem to have managed to reach out to some of the most unique ) anyhow.. for everything added something is lost. An inconvenient truth for 'eco-developers' with far flung dreams no doubt.


Personally, when not posting on BWA, i spend my days facilitating others participation, already at a price point to be exclusive. When I think of elitism it doesn't bring to mind the few passionate bushwalkers, I think of developers, and their cohorts, and sponging off popular notions. Disadvantaged by 'wet boots'

I'd welcome a referendum, hopefully with an option to acknowledge a worth bigger than 'use', put the ballot box somewhere wild (so that it could hardly be missed..) I'd accept that my knees may exclude me from voting.

[farefam]

It may be true that many would like a comfortable NZ style experience in the SW (just as many would prefer to see everything from the comfort of a leather seat in their 4WD, such as in the Tarkine). But that comfort level is what almost completely strips the bushwalking/tramping experience of any genuine sense of adventure and reduces it to mere appreciation of the scenery (much as I really enjoy scenery). NZ may have far more spectacular scenery than Tasmania, but I feel that Tassie is more rewarding in the sense of having a real adventure and as a genuine wilderness experience. Even though I've greatly enjoyed my walks in NZ, there's nothing elitist about appreciating that special, rare, more intense difference of wilderness walking in Tasmania. And I see no problem at all in having more tourist nodes and commercial experiences on the edges of the WHA or alongside the existing roads; just keep the infrastructure out of the core wilderness so as not to spoil it.

[Walk_fat boy_walk]

Contributors to this forum are sounding like an elitist niche.

If your project your arguments to the logical conclusion you yourselves would never go into the SW.

i don't quite get the argument... it's okay to go to Federation peak now because you only alter the wilderness a little bit but you want to deny others access because they will alter it a little bit more... or make your experience a little bit less wildernessy?

Every time you take a step in SW tassy, do a poo or a wee you are diluting the wilderness for wilderness' sake and also the experience for other people - make no mistake about that. if you want to argue that you want to exclude other people than it has to be a very good argument as to why you should be entitled to go into the wilderness but not others.

I get why (and i agree with many of the comments), but if you want to form a lobby group and prevent further track making in the SW i think that this is not the best argument to use. I think that many citizens of tasmania, Australia and the world would disagree that a NZ type experience of SW Tassy is a bad thing. If it is a bad thing than please tell me why the status quo is a good thing? What makes our current use of the SW acceptable?

before you rant at me as to what i've written - it's not me you have to convince.

.... And by the way, no one is excluded from this area now, a parks pass and a map is all you need

SLP's not saying that isn't the case, just asking the question of "who are we to determine where the threshold is?" Devil's advocate views need to be unpicked before mounting an argument, because a third person might read this thread this as a bunch of self-interested hobbyists drawing an envelope around everything they do and saying anything outside that is wrong. I for one don't support development of new "dry feet" tracks in the area but would want to be able to justify my own activities before being critical of anything over and above that. On the flipside, a more "pure" greenie might, for example, argue that all (incl. existing) tracks in the SW are unacceptably detrimental and should be rehabilitated?? I'd definitely argue against that!

[GPSGuided]

But that comfort level is what almost completely strips the bushwalking/tramping experience of any genuine sense of adventure and reduces it to mere appreciation of the scenery...

It's all relative isn't it? What one considers to be a real bushwalking experience could be another's no-go zone. Hence the conflict and disagreements on this and related subjects. If it's a democracy, then it'll be a compromise. Get the sense most don't want democracy to rule here but just stop any development proposals.

[Nuts]

C'mon, we meet your elitism with hedonism and similarly any notion of democratic process with a consideration of cronyism.

[Mountain Rocket]

The only merit I see in this idea is the notion that Farmhouse should get some much needed attention. That track is a total mess and is only getting worse.
As Azza pointed out parks are already doing this to the SCT and Frenchmans...

That said this proposal is obviously about raking in some cash, surprise surprise. If I were a betting man I would bet it won't go anywhere.

[Nuts]

Squeaky green maintenance would start with the most remote parts of a track first, not necessarily aligned with muddy boots or the desires for or of commercial interests (in place or to come).

[Dolerite Walker]

The fellow making the proposal is also a real estate agent....

[aloftas]

Squeaky green maintenance would start with the most remote parts of a track first, not necessarily aligned with muddy boots or the desires for or of commercial interests (in place or to come).

all silliness aside for a second.

This is why I propose modular prefab recycled eco yada traks, with a lil bit of spring and elasticity, like us folks.
Its not as silly as it sounds, one could even impart a degree of buoyancy to the things as wee mini bridges which would interlock, make em out of recycled mobiles...and the like.

Is it as silly as it sounds, or is it a feasible solution to costs per gravel choppered in

Whisky Tango Foxtrot

Signing out

[tastrax]

This is why I propose modular prefab recycled eco yada traks, with a lil bit of spring and elasticity, like us folks.
Its not as silly as it sounds, one could even impart a degree of buoyancy to the things as wee mini bridges which would interlock, make em out of recycled mobiles...and the like.

Double planking is the closest to this sort of technique. Initially it was just laid with the sleepers underneath and there was a fair degree of give in the whole structure. Unfortunately that movement also often caused it to sink into the surrounding environment. Its now mainly supported with stakes driven into the soil to stop some of that movement. There were some trials of prefabbing but in the end it was just as quick to lay it in the field from stockpiled material.

[Nuts]

There has been some recent use of composite mesh panel (eg. http://www.envirowalkgrating.com/PRODUCTS.htm ) and, as I understand, more to come. Still some weight in the product but an improvement in several aspects over treated pine... not that either should be rolled out merely to make easier $ quicker though.

[tastrax]

Plenty of that in use but not a lot on long distance tracks, mainly in high use tourist areas (Like at Melaleuca, some on Three Capes I think). Most also needs some sort of frame underneath so still plenty of treated pine along with the mesh. One thing that has not been trialled much in Tasmania is TrailPad - used a bit in QLD I gather. I reckon it would work well in areas like dunes but no so sure in buttongrass unless you import some gravel or fill

http://www.gough.com.au/trailpad/default.php

[aloftas]

I'm just looking at it from a few different prisms I guess, problem with pine is it is slippery and gets chalky as it ages, I think that mesh nuts mentioned has merit and the trail pad looks interesting, just a wee bit tiny to me, but almost infinite in its variations given its shape, I was guesing a few moulded pads may help with flotation in the wetter peatier areas. I could see the track metrics broken into pieces about say 12 feet long which either curve left, curve right, and allow for the grace of a curving track rather than arbitrary straight lines.
At least the bugle screw has assisted the structural integrity of the treated pine, but its pretty bland and unattractive.

:edit: unattractive spelling.

[nq111]

My first reaction to this is 'Yuk' and 'It'll be rooned!'. But got to say, overall I philosophically agree with slparker.

In the end, we have got to be careful of knee-jerk NIMBY type reactions. It is not fair ultimately and it doesn't help the case of those with genuine concerns for some of these proposals.

[aloftas]

I just bought 2 pairs of spring assisted knee supports, so yes, a little impulse reflex is good, but, putiing ideologies aside fro a mo, we can see the unyielding encumbrances of human impact on the environment and vice versa. As strongly as I can put it, the old ethos was, "open to all, assisted by all, leave no trace and apply bushcrafmanship at every turn, with layers of contingencies, rather than assumptive sops which lead to time delays and the invariable conswequences.

Weindorfer said it Truchanas said it....

We need to apply a solution to track degradadion, sewerage, and ambivalence, factored in over the variables of inclement weather and sparains from walking through ent forests and garanitites the size of medicine balls.

Either, gravel must be bought in, or heaven forbid, a bit of manual labour be used.

They have mini excavators one can preamble through gateways.

So.

The worlds eys are on Tassie.
Can we maintain our Heritage status, by innovation, productivity, enthusiasm, and dare I say it for the kabbalists among us; "nous"

[Nuts]

Some long runs being made around Pelion and used on a few other bits recently:

Pelion Pass .png (290.31 KiB) Viewed 16846 times

But forming new tracks is another kettle of fish. Assessment and Planning are needed. Projecting thought beyond $ is still needed. 90% will be a dry boot upgrade to the EA traverse, one of the most potentially dangerous track 'walks' in the state. A responsible first move may be to propose chain or handrail for the ascent and consider the implications of that, if any?

[north-north-west]

Contributors to this forum are sounding like an elitist niche.

If your project your arguments to the logical conclusion you yourselves would never go into the SW.

i don't quite get the argument... it's okay to go to Federation peak now because you only alter the wilderness a little bit but you want to deny others access because they will alter it a little bit more... or make your experience a little bit less wildernessy?

Every time you take a step in SW tassy, do a poo or a wee you are diluting the wilderness for wilderness' sake and also the experience for other people - make no mistake about that. if you want to argue that you want to exclude other people than it has to be a very good argument as to why you should be entitled to go into the wilderness but not others.

I get why (and i agree with many of the comments), but if you want to form a lobby group and prevent further track making in the SW i think that this is not the best argument to use. I think that many citizens of tasmania, Australia and the world would disagree that a NZ type experience of SW Tassy is a bad thing. If it is a bad thing than please tell me why the status quo is a good thing? What makes our current use of the SW acceptable?

before you rant at me as to what i've written - it's not me you have to convince.

We have to set limits somewhere on what alterations to a landscape are acceptable, or we will end up with a world of nothing but dead flat concrete.

[Mountain Rocket]

Seems the Liberal govt wants this to happen, giving it $70k for a 'demand study' [whatever that is]

$70,000 for a demand study into the 'Geeves Effect', a wilderness precinct development proposal for the area adjacent to Tasmania World Heritage Area at Lake Geeves

From http://www.erichutchinson.com.au/news/t ... h-tourism/

Also spotted this article http://www.tasmaniantimes.com.au/index. ... ack-more-i that says:

As far as poorly sited tracks go - the entire route from the upper Farmhouse Creek area through the Cracroft Valley to the base of Federation Peak is one of the poorest aligned and wettest tracks in the entire WHA.
There has been no trackwork done in the region for decades, so any proposal would be a mammoth and financially-guzzling undertaking that would give little satisfactory economic return ... in comparison to an alternative highly scenic walk, for example around the Picton Lakes - Mt Picton / Range area.
Of course the proposed Lake Geeves track would never be aimed merely as a casual walk ... hut development proposals would inevitably follow.
This walking track proposal is impractical, loopy and invasive beyond belief.
Another poorly thought-out pie in sky!

[north-north-west]

Also spotted this article http://www.tasmaniantimes.com.au/index. ... ack-more-i that says:

... in comparison to an alternative highly scenic walk, for example around the Picton Lakes - Mt Picton / Range area.

That is actually a very good idea. A brilliant three day walk without the massive negative environmental impact and financial cost of trying to dryfoot Farmhouse to Fedders.

[stepbystep]

So ridiculous.

The Huon Valley has any number of cheaper and also very awesome alternatives. Think, Adamsons, Hartz, Weld, Snowies, Pictons...the whole thing is ill thought out and massively destructive. The infrastructure would need to be 3 Capes-esque, huts, bridges, boardwalks and handrails(to the summit of Fedders).

Colbeck is obviously an idiot, no other words can possibly suffice....and yet he won't even give comment on the Trans Tarkine Track...the mind boggles...these people have zero understanding.

[Overlandman]

Update from ABC

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-29/e ... al/7555172

Print Email Facebook Twitter More
Tasmanian environmentalists divided over Lake Geeves track proposal
By Lucy Shannon
Posted 46 minutes ago

Lake Geeves in southern Tasmania
PHOTO: The walk into Lake Geeves is touted as being as big a drawcard as the Overland Track or the Three Capes walk. (Supplied: Jo Ledda)
RELATED STORY: Lake Geeves walk in southern Tasmania could rival iconic tracks, councillor says
MAP: Geeveston 7116
A proposal to improve access to Lake Geeves and Federation Peak in the Wilderness World Heritage Area has exposed division within Tasmanian environmentalists.

A former SAS officer and fifth generation Tasmanian, Ken Studley wants the existing track into Federation Peak upgraded for "dry shoe" walkers and a new track built to the edge of Lake Geeves.

He named the proposal 'The Geeves Effect' citing flow-on tourism development that could occur in the Huon Valley if the track infrastructure was in place.

"This could become the easiest access to the World Heritage Area from a point of entry in Tasmania," Mr Studley said.

In April, Greens leader Cassy O'Connor said the proposal had "real merit".

Her initial positive comments were not received well by some in the conservation movement, and were cited as one of the reasons for the reforming of the world's first Greens party, the United Tasmania Group.

Ms O'Connor said her view of the Lake Geeves proposal had now changed.

"We [the Tasmanian Greens] and I evolved my position on the basis of more detailed information from Mr Studley and conversations with people who walk in there regularly and the Tasmanian National Parks Association, who raised quite detailed concerns," she said.

'A very silly idea': Bob Brown

The Coalition has promised $70,000 for a demand study on the proposal if it wins the election.

Minister for Tourism Richard Colbeck flew over the area on Wednesday.

Map of walk around Federation Peak
PHOTO: The proponent says an extra 2.5-kilometre track would be the only new infrastructure needed in the World Heritage Area. (Supplied)
"Here's the opportunity to develop something quite spectacular, something that is not seen anywhere else in the country, it's Australia's tallest vertical cliffs," he said.

Phillip Le Grove from the Hobart Walking Club said he was excited about the plan but said it would be very difficult to execute.

"If it's new and it's challenging and it's different I think people will be attracted to it but the cost of building it is going to be very high," he said.

"The feasibility [study], I'm sure, will show that the environment is very harsh in the South West.

"The track in there at the moment is very muddy, there's lots of waterways and the conditions are hard, the weather is not kind ... it's not a Three Capes Track."

Former Greens leader Bob Brown dismissed the proposal as a pipedream.

"It's mad, a very silly idea, it won't happen," he said.

Proponent remains undeterred

Mr Studley said he remained optimistic about the value of the project to the Huon Valley.

"To get the Huon Valley as a destination attraction in its own right and get people out of Hobart for longer than a day," he said.

"The community will benefit, it will be community-led, we really aim to have a social licence to be able to do this and bring everyone along with us."

Labor is yet to form a view of the proposal.

Federation Peak is only seen up close by the most hardy bushwalkers with about 100 reaching the summit each year.

There have been several deaths from falling, the most recent in March.

[Scottyk]

The proponent says an extra 2.5-kilometre track would be the only new infrastructure needed in the World Heritage Area. (Supplied)

He is lying here
The proponent wants us (taxpayer) to turn a very rough track into a "dry shoe" walk so he can build a private lodge at the end of it.
So he is basically saying "upgrade the track and then extend it a bit using public finds so I can build a private hut and make money"
If he wants profit then he should be willing to upgrade the track.
Just another example of Tasmanian Crony Capitalism.

[gayet]

item from ABC news site

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-29/environmentalists-divided-over-lake-geeves-track-proposal/7555172

Not much in the way of new information though.

[frenchy_84]

Im surprised to see support from the Hobart Walking Club. As long as the feasibility study is done correctly there wont be much to worry about, the cost of this brain fart with be so high that there is no possibility of a return on investment.

[Mountain Rocket]

Local news last night on ABC ran an item basically setting out the above article + pretty images of the area, lots from the air.
Starting at ~16:10 http://iview.abc.net.au/programs/abc-ne ... 606T155S00

[weetbix456]

This always has been, and still is a joke right??!!

[north-north-west]

I wish.