Waterfall Valley Site Plan

[Nuts]

The Reserve Activity Assessment is available for public viewing.

Keeping in mind this is the public hut & facilities, with a whole bunch of relevant stakeholders.

The development has absolutely nothing to do with private huts and exclusive infrastructure.. nothing to do with The Tasmanian Walking Company.. right!?


browse on down to the consulted 'key stakeholders':

(I had to read it twice too) Who's pulling the strings in our parks?

Waterfall_Valley_Huts_RAA.pdf

(1.42 MiB) Downloaded 763 times

[Nuts]

So to recap:

The key stakeholders include:

*The local developer (with no known association)
*Bushwalking Tasmania , who, on The South Coast Track & luxury huts EOI 'supports the proposal and dismissed concerns over its wilderness character'

Maybe the two club reps can reassure the public their best interests are represented? Has capacity been discussed? What determines the extent of development?

Personally, I'd like reassurance that this was built without collusion:

Screen Shot 2019-10-02 at 2.30.34 pm.png (916.06 KiB) Viewed 26037 times

(We use this site as much as any other group and, to my knowledge, never asked for this shelter)

Always been quite proud of the fact that commercial walkers could co-habit without the need for any such exclusive infrastructure, myself.

I've asked the management team to reconsider the way they formulate the current (Windermere) plan, I'd rather no commercial representation and think this is reasonable. I've appealed to the responsible minister to urge/allow his departments to be at least reasonable and forthright on these plans. So far, no acknowledgement.

[tastrax]

What on earth is that building and where is it in the RAA or other site plan documents?

[north-north-west]

It looks like the one at the group camping platform up behind the old Waterfall Valley Hut. Metal surface on the shelf so presumably it's for cooking and possibly also food storage.

[Nuts]

It is indeed on the group platform and may have been placed before the site activity assessment. I find the whole process a bit bizarre, strange but oddly necessary to (play some small role to) defend the park and even the park service more and more as the re-imagining plays out. Especially to defend against such a structure, designed for our use. At the same time, I doubt any dissent will be appreciated from most involved, from the builder to the responsible minister.

Unfortunately, the human condition where building = progress, appears to need a re-focus/thought check/ intervention when it comes to wilderness.

[Overlandman]

From ABC
Well done to all involved. Looking forward to seeing it in person.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-06/ ... m/12234154