Tracks, Huts, etc Omitted from Tasmanian Maps [merged]

[Azza]

I think you're assuming that the information is available in the first place?

I know parks has their special GIS database of Tracks. Also worth considering that a lot of tracks out there have nothing to do with PWS and have been cut and taped by 3rd parties.
So in a lot of cases its more than likely these tracks are not known by Tasmaps and aren't going to be unless parks advises them.
Forestry roads change all the time, tracks become overgrown. Its a huge effort to keep up to date and I'm guessing if its not shown then its much easier to manage.

At the end of the day we're really lucky to have a 1:25000 map series covering almost the entire state, in contrast New Zealand only has 1:50000

In reality, publishing info about access to sensitive areas that are NOT tracked will only aid people insane enough to walk off-track in Tassie anyway.)

Olle!!! I think seeking advice on routes is all well and fine. Publishing "this is the way" will mean its not going to be off track walking for much longer.

[Son of a Beach]

I'd also like to know what rights we have to the map data under Freedom of Information act? A casual (IINAL) look seems that it only has reasonable protections for information that is private or of a business nature, and so it could be reasonable to expect claims to be considered?

I reckon you're right, but my guess is that if you made an application under FOI, you'd receive a pile of paperwork with a variety of data, including specific locations, all in text form, and none of it in graphical or map form.

If you do, please compile a map, and publish it for us all!

(Note that the remainder of the discussion about posts regarding details of sensitive off-track locations has been split off to this new topic.)

[Ent]

Hi Nuts

Not sure how a person walking into a new area is going to know all the routes if they are not on a map? As for the safety aspect, you indicate that is an important consideration of a Parks Officer and a reason for removing tracks and then dismiss such an arguement for a tracks, huts, needing to be on a map for safety reason suggesting that the wise walker does their research. So Joe if I muck up an find myself trapped by a rising river then I take the third tree on the right and follow the ..... Please, please, let them tracks be on maps.

Parks is bureacracy and as such at times will show megalomania in its decisions and want to influence other departments and control everything to the point of impossibility. Parks has no role in censoring maps. For many years maps and the data they contained were seen as a public resource not a source of potential evil. It is sad that we are been slowly but surely boxed out of our own state by fees and now censorship of maps. Ghee lets dig up the builders of the original alpine huts and hang their remains like Oliver Cornwell to aplease the creators of the Nanny Superstate For years and years locals roamed the areas and limited problems existed but now we can not be trusted. What has happened, and what will happen. Experience the wilderness only from guided tours

Brett

[ollster]

Parks has no role in censoring maps.

THIS. I *&%$#! well paid for it to be collected, and so I *&%$#! well have a right to the information. C'mon P&WS, cough up the details.

[Macca81]

spot on brett!

[Nuts]

I imagine that management funding is probably more an issue than safety (or even environmental concerns) Brett. Your point about new walkers is a good'n. Perhaps they should just at first be given a map of Tassie with the Overland Track on it, then one with the OT and South Coast and so on. Safety is really a moot point. I'd imagine that publishing extra tracks is as much a hazard for newbies as a help? Ollster clearly wants some more detailed maps, how will he ever know still if he has All of the known tracks marked?

Seems pretty clear that, in paying people to manage parks, there will always be someone unhappy. Not my view but maybe equally valid to see all tracks removed until the service has the capacity to manage them properly then added once more.

The example i mentioned would need re-routing and I would imagine perhaps $4/500K to be brought up to a safe standard. A standard not expected by anyone but grabbed at by lawyers sticky hands. (eg the reason the Lake Track was closed for so long. Lots of moaning along the way but then it was eventually fixed, credit where its due..)

[Ent]

I understand that if Parks, any company, or body invites people into an area they have a duty of care so accept that the Park sponsered maps can be rather lacking in all the options but as mentioned the 1:25,000 maps should contain all the information that they can. More than once people have been forced back to older versions of the 1:25,000 maps to pin point a map or track. Is that the detailed research process mentioned? It is almost perverse that maps over twenty years old contain better information than the new ones.

Maps and safety is a glass half full or half empty issue and bit of a myth from what I have seen as far as encouraging newbies to head into areas past their current level of experience. As North West Coaster more than once I have given lift to people heading for the OLT and my standard questions are, do you have a map, tent, compass, sleeping bag and know how to use them. Amazing the number that miss on the first three. Ok, the OLT is well marked on the ground with huts and enough traffic to ensure all but the extremely unfortunate will make it in most conditions. But now they are heading to the Walls. Ok Dixons Kingdom is well marked but they are now heading for the links between the Walls and Cradle without a map and compass. Their guide is often a not to scale sketch in a book along with brief descriptions. I did Europe using the Lost Gallah Guide and it amazing how many people use that for their main navigation aid and in selecting bushwalking destinations. So in cases like that what appears on a 1:25,000 map is meaningless because they do not have one. So for their safety we remove tracks and huts from such maps

Nuts, if you believe in censorship (that is a sign of a nanny state IMHO) then my numerous words will not alter that but I will affect the way I vote, and the people I vote for, and ultimately the people that they employ. I want minister with the courage to blast a petty bureacrat. Parks need to be information providers, not censors, and I am slowly building my rage against fees, restrictions and now censorship in my home state driven by greed, power hungry bureacrats and people with vested interests to make it as hard as possible for me to purse a thing I love. The crash in the end of this rant is me falling off my soap box due to the effects of vertigo from the hights that it has reached due to the depth that our bureacrats will stoop to.

Brett

[Nuts]

'Doesnt matter who you vote for, a politician will get in'

I mentioned one example just in the hope of narrowing down the crux of the topic but yes, politics and theory can leave it wide open.

I would disagree that maps (perhaps those published through the well known local galah guides) would not play an almost singular role in influencing many new walkers to get themselves into many more difficult areas.
Dont know if the track from PB down to New river was ever on a map but the examples and consequences could be far more extreme (just outside my knowledge).

Also, to assume that the reasons behind All park management decisions are not driven by practical common sense are just wrong!
Might be Often the case, perhaps sometimes but the assumption kinda makes any rant easy to dismiss... even if the general ideas were making some sense

Tastrax mentioned the process and reasons for removing tracks. I imagine that those reasons (from the service point of view) are Mostly sound and sincere..

[Macca81]

The example i mentioned would need re-routing and I would imagine perhaps $4/500K to be brought up to a safe standard. A standard not expected by anyone but grabbed at by lawyers sticky hands. (eg the reason the Lake Track was closed for so long. Lots of moaning along the way but then it was eventually fixed, credit where its due..)

badly damaged tracks, a little sign at the start saying it is closed for regeneration... most people will accept that, and most people will be pleased that it is at least marked on the map

[Nuts]

yer, and that strategy is also used on some tracks. Seems to work well where the path isnt that of least resistance. In this particular case the sign might as well say 'Dove Lake the quick way, best of luck'

[Nuts]

I Ok Dixons Kingdom is well marked but they are now heading for the links between the Walls and Cradle without a map and compass. Their guide is often a not to scale sketch in a book along with brief descriptions.

Brett

The Track out to Junction Lake is on all the maps ive seen?
The Route from there to the Overland Track never was...?
If this is a suggestion for Adding tracks it gets even more complicated.

[Liamy77]

Really ultimately it is TASMAP putting the maps together so they should be sourcing the info from wherever they can to put all the detail they can into their maps... It is up to P&W to restrict / manage as needed.
so perhaps i might ask someone in tasmap why some tracks are left off if they are still passable, and can be confirmed as such by walkers (if the rangers or "public servants" aren't in a position to do so??? would someone like to give me an example to put to them? (PM me) Let you know what they say.... (the cynic in me wanted to say "what Sir Humphrey Appleby brush-off I get") but I prefer to ramain "doubtfully optimistic" shall we say

[Nuts]

The vast majority of Tasmanian walking track data (within PWS managed land) that appears on google earth, tasmaps etc comes from us. It then forms part of DPIPWE data that is also supplied to Geoscience Australia.

[Ent]

'Doesnt matter who you vote for, a politician will get in'

I mentioned one example just in the hope of narrowing down the crux of the topic but yes, politics and theory can leave it wide open.

I would disagree that maps (perhaps those published through the well known local galah guides) would not play an almost singular role in influencing many new walkers to get themselves into many more difficult areas.
Dont know if the track from PB down to New river was ever on a map but the examples and consequences could be far more extreme (just outside my knowledge).

Also, to assume that the reasons behind All park management decisions are not driven by practical common sense are just wrong!
Might be Often the case, perhaps sometimes but the assumption kinda makes any rant easy to dismiss... even if the general ideas were making some sense

Tastrax mentioned the process and reasons for removing tracks. I imagine that those reasons (from the service point of view) are mostly sound and sincere..

Um? On the Gallah guide I know personally of a few cases where this was the sole guide and also saw the egging on that goes on amoungst elements of the internet backpacking society to push the boundaries of commonsense. Never been to the Arthurs but from this site I understand it to be an area where careful preparation is a very good thing, not to be done by someone who has never bushwalked before What is missed from the discussion is maps cost money and back packers do not have much so it is one cost saving measure they make.

Hold on, Parks is not the evil empire in my opinion but like any large bureacracy there exists people that hold to certain views and use their power to circumvent due process. I spent way too many meetings caused by a small section of road been mis marked A bit of background digging indicated such an "error" was not an "error". I have seen a bureacrat in distant Canberra get excited over something and then in correspondences have the proposed thing about fifty kilometres from were it was I still can not get my head around that the road to Authurs River could not be sign posted at 80 kilometres per hour due to National road standards despite countless requests by the locals but when sealed it was then mandate by some bureacrat in Canberra to be sign posted at that speed Excuse me if I am more than a little jaded by State and Federal departments and do not see them as perfection. There is no underlying assumption that all Parks decisions are insane, with most likely been sensible once the facts are pased on and understood, but censorship of information is a bad thing as it allows bad decision making to go unquestioned by being unnoticed.

As for processes. The above things had "processes" involved so process by itself does not mean it is the correct outcome and I have been around too long to fall for the bureacratic trick "that due process was established and people consulted". As one person that will remain nameless said, consulting does not mean you need to listern and a process can not be designed to get but one outcome

The right to vote is the only thing that distinguishes our system from a totalism state and you would be surprised what can be undone and set right even with potliticans, suggest you give it a try

Cheers Brett

[Nuts]

Ok, but i have a feeling that the politician i advocate wont be on any ballot paper

(im just keeping myself entertained here till the legs work again..)

[Ent]

Hi Nuts

Now what have you done to yourself this time? Hope all recovers well.

Cheers Brett

[Liamy77]

I will always follow a track if there is one to follow.... I believe this limits our impact on the bush.

However, Tasmaps 1:25000 scale maps no longer show tracks that ARE on older versions, and are still passable... I think that loss of this knowledge is shameful and will not help the environment longterm.

And having felt out the standing of this forums policies on this issue....
I would like to encourage you all to post tracks and huts ideally with small scans and or pictures of tracks that are no longer shown...
Please bear in mind that this DOES NOT mean the track is still passable NOW... but if you have checked it lately let us know huh? Might be worth checking for access -P&W etc?

[ILUVSWTAS]

Ohhh you naughty boy......

[Liamy77]

Ohhh you naughty boy......

Not at all... if TASMAP have printed them then they are RECOGNISED tracks!
And as my signature says - i value info and preparation... besides less widespread impact if you follow a track - even an older one!

[north-north-west]

Brett:
Who the *&%$#! blue blazes is/was Oliver Cornwell?

[Liamy77]

I am guessing he ment Englands"Oliver Cromwell"...

[vagrom]

The latest 2010 edition of SW Tas, the 1/250,000 series, has really cleared off well known tracks in a big way. The Jane River track is gone and (am I wrong?), Moores Track on the west coast, amongst others. So the parks are looking wilder again.
These four maps of the entire state meet at about Mt Ironstone, so the South West one covers the three great parks and a lot of the Plateau.
No good for navigating of course but great to colour copy relevant parts to have with you as you scan the horizon from peaks, good with a compass in that way too. The Walls can be recognised from a long way into the south west.

[Beeper]

Alot of those old tracks are indicative only, I wouldn't rely on them for accuracy (in location).

[flyfisher]

I find it annoying that we pay public servants to make these maps but they are not totally accurate with selected information left off them.

These are not free issue so they should contain all available tracks etc. and if the maps are not improving then perhaps that department should be closed down.

ff

[ILUVSWTAS]

Excellent point FF. Exactly what good are they in this day of GPS navigation?? We certainly dont need the 12500 serious to navigate by vehicle.

[walkinTas]

I guess one would have to ask what is the purpose for printing the map? Another way of asking that question - who is the intended audience? If the maps are intended to be indicative of topology or indicative of land use then perhaps they are fit for purpose. But if the maps are intended to be accurate guides to visiting walkers, then you would have to question why they would be published with inaccurate data.

[ILUVSWTAS]

Another good point WT.
I like the avatar change BTW.

Is that the episode where Cartman is confronted by the UFO??

[Liamy77]

Another good point WT.
I like the avatar change BTW.

Is that the episode where Cartman is confronted by the UFO??

I bet he had good satphone reception!

[north-north-west]

I bet he had good satphone reception!

*choke cough splutter*
Don't say things like that while I'm eating. Do you have any idea how long it will take to clean all that mess off the monitor?

[Buddy]

This trend is also evident on the new 1:250000 NW TAS. map. All vehicle tracks south of Sandy cape have been omitted. Bit rough considering the new Management Plan for the APCA is still only in draft form!