Mapping out handy locations on bushwalk.com

[perfectlydark]

Matt that is perfectly written.
Step -apologies I was not inferring yourself to be unhelpful, just an atmosphere I often see in many threads (again not yourself). I thought this site was a 'virtual' spot for enthusiasts to chat and share info politly, this is not always the case though and I have seen members hounded off for daring to have different view points than "the establishment".
My rants over I hope matt makes a call that is in the best interests of both the environment and also enthusiasts (if noone took interest the govt would be more than happy to flog the lot off for farmland and shopping centres)

[Nuts]

Yes, good contribution Matt!
The hunters though, you (members here from NSW) didn't want to work things out with them? The answer, all options quickly dismissed, was -no?

Anyhow, it seems there isn't a lot to listen too so far? Can geo-tagging or mapping out handy locations be of any real benefit? How? At what cost? What's next?
I'm all ears, i'm just happy for now that neilmny agrees with me

[MickyB]

do the research by asking polite and friendly questions of more experienced walkers

I am 50/50 as to whether this idea should go ahead but I totally agree with stepbystep. I have rarely dealt with anyone who is not willing to share info about certain areas. A lot of the time the proviso is keep that information to yourself and don't make it public knowledge. PM's are a good way of doing that with more knowledgeable and experienced hikers

[neilmny]

The reference to tastrax "educational link".........there are other places besides Tasmania there is a whole world out there guys.

...and I challenge you to find a track monitoring program anywhere in the world that has been running as long as the one in Tasmania.

Lets start with your own state....

Not knocking this tastrax or meaning to offend, my point was regarding a blanket approach to the whole country
not the sensitive areas of Tassie or in fact the sensitive areas on the mainland. The "educational" link reference was as it was
put to me to get educated by following the link not at all meaning to be condescending to your work.

[neilmny]

Yes, good contribution Matt!
The hunters though, you (members here from NSW) didn't want to work things out with them? The answer, all options quickly dismissed, was -no?

Anyhow, it seems there isn't a lot to listen too so far? Can geo-tagging or mapping out handy locations be of any real benefit? How? At what cost? What's next?
I'm all ears, i'm just happy for now that neilmny agrees with me

[PeterJ]

Just a comment on one of the original subjects in this discussion, that of geocaching.

It would be very rare that a geocache is placed at a location that is sensitive enough to cause damage in bushwalking locations. I am certainly not aware of any.

Geocache containers are usually modest in size and placed in spots that are not obviously visible to anyone passing. People pass by them day after day without realising there is one close to them. The fact that a foreign object is somewhere in bush is in my view no worse than buried toilet paper left by walkers and other visitors and certainly not as bad as the unburied toilet paper that I constantly see.

[stepbystep]

All good perfectlydark...

FWIW, and I digress a little, but I've had discussions with a client about full digital interpretation of a walking track via a phone app. This included push notifications as you go through an environment to alert the walker what to look out for, features/flora/fauna etc plus tracking features, maps, checklists, photo galleries etc etc etc

Not my idea of fun but it takes all sorts.

[doogs]

So personal judgements and attacks as you have made aside

Personal attacks? I have been accused of being several things in this thread without much reasoning on the behalf of the accuser, then when I've had enough and bite back I am the worst in the world. Especially when they have clearly not read any of the material offered to them to help them understand my point of view.

....so areas that are not closed off (ie free to access by anyone) should still only be for special people like yourself. Noone else has any right to be there. That seems like your argument doogs?

No. That is not my point at all. And why do you think that I think I am special? If Parks and Wildlife have a policy where information given on off track areas should remain vague in both printed and digital formats then why should it even be considered as a possibility on this forum. It also goes against the rules of the forum. By giving GPS coordinates for these tings on an interactive map these 'rules' are being broken. I don't have a problem with the idea for areas with infrastructure set up for human interactions within the Parks or on the mainland IF their policies allow. I also don't have a problem with sharing advice through private messages or emails if anyone reads a track report I have written on this site or see a photo I have put up and wants more information I will happily oblige them. Generally I am not a stickler to the rules of society but this is one I am quite passionate about standing up for.

Doogs,
I am waiting to be educated by the elite..

If I come across the elite that you speak of I will be sure to pass on the message

[baeurabasher]

Doogs,
I am waiting to be educated by the elite

I'm here now, what did you wish to know?

And as has been said by a few already, us elite dont just go to the hard off track places from the start, we build the necessary networks, resources and years of experience before doing so.

[neilmny]

Well Johnny come lately If your going to quote, quote the whole sentence or point
or is your elite attention span lacking and you couldn't concentrate long enough to read it all?
To you I say, you have no more right to enter a fragile area than anyone else. Experience what a joke.
So it's OK to destroy something with your clodd hoppers as long as your experienced at doing it, is it?

[baeurabasher]

Well Johnny come lately If your going to quote, quote the whole sentence or point
or is your elite attention span lacking and you couldn't concentrate long enough to read it all?
To you I say, you have no more right to enter a fragile area than anyone else. Experience what a joke.
So it's OK to destroy something with your clodd hoppers as long as your experienced at doing it, is it?

Is that better?

And no, you are still missing the point. GOING there is fine, Plotting all the features and the HOW to get there on an amateur aggressive internet forum isn't.
And for the record, the behavior shown by you on this thread is disrespectful, uninformed and quite frankly just plain rude. I should expect you will receive some type of warning or ban for the way you have spoken to several members. And you deserve it.

I shall now leave this discussion. Good day sirs.

[north-north-west]

Matt's right with his four questions. We need to start this discussion there (and please leave out the personal comments).

And the most important word in all this is 'some'.
Some points, some information, some walks. Sure, as far as that goes. In fact we do that anyway, with trip reports and general advice. But to take it further, with specific GPS co-ordinates for specific items so anyone can imagine they can just get up and go there . . . *shudder*
And who decides which points and which walks? Anyone who has any information? Formally constituted authorities (like the various state P&W Services)? In this forum, do we pile the whole point by point decision-making process on Matt and the other moderators?

Does anyone out there disagree with the premise that there are some places where access (even just foot traffic) needs to be controlled/limited? That there are places that are not appropriate targets for Mr/Ms Joe-I've-got-a-brand-new-GPS-Blow to learn about what it's like to be out in the bush?
If you do agree with that, then how do we control the relevant information, and that access?

It's really not as simple as "let's make a list of useful GPS co-ords", and everything's just fine from there on. There can be massive consequences, to both the environment and the people using that information. (Yeah, I'm more concerned about the environmental damage but then, the environment doesn't have a choice; it can't dictate access. People have to do that.)

ps: Just who was the first *&%$(@ who decided to use the term 'elite' as an insult?
pps: This is all very poorly expressed. Maybe it is more accurate to just say "I don't trust any of you with what I've learnt. Learn it all the hard way yourselves, like I did."

[neilmny]

Well Johnny come lately If your going to quote, quote the whole sentence or point
or is your elite attention span lacking and you couldn't concentrate long enough to read it all?
To you I say, you have no more right to enter a fragile area than anyone else. Experience what a joke.
So it's OK to destroy something with your clodd hoppers as long as your experienced at doing it, is it?

Is that better?

And no, you are still missing the point. GOING there is fine, Plotting all the features and the HOW to get there on an amateur aggressive internet forum isn't.
And for the record, the behavior shown by you on this thread is disrespectful, uninformed and quite frankly just plain rude. I should expect you will receive some type of warning or ban for the way you have spoken to several members. And you deserve it.

I shall now leave this discussion. Good day sirs.

I am no more disrespectful than a person who shows up, selectively quotes and misleads using only part of what I said and then has a crack at me.
At no time has anyone suggested " Plotting all the features and the HOW to get there on an amateur aggressive internet forum" Please read the whole thread and it will be clear what is being robustly discussed.

I have shown no less respect for anyone than has been shown to me. I do respect the right to all opinions and my right to offer my opinion, it seems some feel it is a right for only a select few. I don't recall resorting to name calling but others have directed that behavior towards me and others opposing there opinions.

I expect you should receive a warning for agitating in an uninformed manner with no intention of contributing anything to the discussion then nicking off with a flourish feining offence.

Sorry folks but I'll leave that line of the subject, now getting back to the real subject.

[perfectlydark]

Fair points nnw. Just an observation, there seems to be an assumption that coordinates to a few.features such as water, hazards etc will lead to a sudden flux of random unprepared walkers. What is this presumption based on? Would you walk somewhere your not familiar with on the basis of finding some random gps coordinates for a useful yet not particulaly exciting feature online?

[neilmny]

Does anyone out there disagree with the premise that there are some places where access (even just foot traffic) needs to be controlled/limited? That there are places that are not appropriate targets for Mr/Ms Joe-I've-got-a-brand-new-GPS-Blow to learn about what it's like to be out in the bush?
If you do agree with that, then how do we control the relevant information, and that access?

Absolutely agree (not disagree) NNW. (I hate using words like absolutely )

The difficulty arises in that this is a free public forum, is anyone with the knowledge willing to give their time to vet entries to the proposed section so that sensitive areas are not exposed to a free for all.

For the record the highest on my personal wish list is the tagging of relaible water sources, this is not directions to them just a co ordinate so that if you are in the vacinity you know where to look. NNW you know from vast exerience waliking in Victoria how unreliable most water sources are. People are always having to ask about availabiltiy on the Vic threads. I see no harm in this but wish to be enlightened by anyone who knows if this causes risk to the environment.

[taswegian]

as I mentioned earlier I'm not against giving locations or directions of where, for egs, water can be found along such and such a track.
Typical example would be on way to The Walls there could be available water at small ck at Trappers hut, but don't rely on it. (That is Fact)
But what would concern me is that someone posts "Water at the ridge before Lake Obstacle at XYZ coords and if you want a stunning view there is a short stroll off to the west about 50 metres. Its gives an unsurpassed vista down Fury Gorge".(that is fiction)

But what that person didn't know was that Parks had been monitoring NNWest's antechinus and unbeknowingly that 50 metre off track excursion caused havoc to the population in major way. (this could be factual)
I once boggled at how someone saw nothing of any value in where we were standing when the ground all around in every direction was a mass of beautiful little green orchids.
These are the very real dangers that some on this forum see and are legitimate concerns. Far away from being any 'elitist' whatever, we are concerned and rightly so.
Tastrax encourages us to learn some skills and enjoy the great outdoor experience. I think having his background you could only say he speaks from experience and training.
(Generalising) Many tend to live a closeted life where everything is on tap/ demand and expect that in most if not all facets of life.
If they happen to live in places filled with concrete, tarmac, bricks, tiles and tin then life in the real bush can be anything from intriguing or overwhelming to plain terrifying, where the night sounds of a plover yet alone the howl of a Tassie Devil send shivers down their spine. I'm sure there are suitable daylight terrors perhaps best not mentioned.

This whole debate has merit, but if it panders to the 'elitist' (who bought that term into this debate?) who doesn't want to do his or her homework or just wants a quick and easy entry and then I'm out of here type stuff then maybe they need to look elsewhere or do the hard yard and acquire those skills and perhaps even may need to learn an appreciation for the wild and wonderful places that (thankfully for now) Tasmania abounds in.

Tasmania is unique in so many ways when it comes to its weather, its topography and land classifications.
I suggest most of the areas we walk and would be subject to this inclusion of information would be above the 1000 metre altitude.
That puts it into an alpine environment (someone may correct me here thanks) and those landforms can be pristine one moment but degraded the next and recovery extremely slow in our cold and hostile environs.
I am NO expert but have seen how changes can take effect with little warning and also only minor input (help) from humans when it comes to those highland areas.
It's hard to gauge what experience posters here have of our environs in an ongoing relationship with walking and digesting the nature of our high places for extended periods. I am not referring to a 5 day stint in the Western Arthurs.
Rather one that comes from accumulated years of knowledge that brings the understanding of what and how things work, and what affects the outcomes in those beautiful places.

Perhaps those that rile against 'the elitist' view could pause and ponder and consider that some here have valid points to make and are not trying to exclude rather than include a greater diversity of people that can come to an understanding, and appreciate that what they see today and wax eloquent about, is what those before us in past centuries saw and hopefully will in the coming centuries.
regards
Richard

[north-north-west]

Fair points nnw. Just an observation, there seems to be an assumption that coordinates to a few.features such as water, hazards etc will lead to a sudden flux of random unprepared walkers. What is this presumption based on?

Experience. You see enough unprepared and ignorant numpties and you become very cautious in your willingness to pass on information.

Would you walk somewhere your not familiar with on the basis of finding some random gps coordinates for a useful yet not particulaly exciting feature online?

No, but I'm a member of that supposed 'elite' who learnt it all the long, slow, hard way (and is still learning). I've met too many people out in the bush who think that knowing it's there is enough to get them there and back. People who don't take maps, or find out in advance whether there's a track, or where that track starts, or where it goes.

[Zone-5]

Well, what most of you guys here have done is make academic excuses.. In reality they're just excuses to do nothing!

All this prefect like arrogant moaning about so called protecting adventurous people from their own stupidity is plainly laughable.

It's this type of negative and unhelpful attitude that reflects badly upon this forum as a whole. Seriously from what I've read in this thread I wouldn't trust anything you (negatives) have said to be reliable now, so what good has that done, none!

---------------------------------------------

Matt, just do it and do well at moderating it to keep the retired 'soapies' from turning blue.

Can we get on with it please..

[Zone-5]

And for the record, the behavior shown by you on this thread is disrespectful, uninformed and quite frankly just plain rude.

Well you & Dr No hijacked this thread to promote an exclusive OT discussion about restrictive ranks, rights and privileges to justify the active exclusion of these simple waypoint aids to your fellow bushwalkers as if you had some sort of 'god given' right to do that!

Well buddy, you don't and I welcome your exit from the discussion!

Jeez, if I have to listen to another 'possum' moan about city people, I might just invite you to sit in my old wheelchair for six months and see how you like it when other people tell you you're not allowed to do things because they've decided to say no on your behalf!

Time is not on my side and neither are you so it appears..

[perfectlydark]

NNW I respectfully disagree with your opinion, which is based on anecdotal evidence. Look to be fair if someone of any skill level was intendimg to walk in sensative areas they would do so, regardless of a few feature locations. Research by asking and research by looking end up with the same result, only ome method doesnt leave someone with a semblence of power and control they enjoy by withholding what they know. Really, you are implying people will make trips now just because of some features mapped?

[Nuts]

Screen Shot 2014-01-22 at 12.30.40 AM.png

Jeez, if I have to listen to another 'possum' moan about city people, I might just invite you to sit in my old wheelchair for six months and see how you like it when other people tell you you're not allowed to do things because they've decided to say no on your behalf!

Your stuck in a wheelchair Zone-5, is that what your saying?

[wildwalks]

Well, what most of you guys here have done is make academic excuses.. In reality they're just excuses to do nothing!
-----------------------------------------------------
Matt, just do it and do well at moderating it to keep the retired 'soapies' from turning blue.
Can we get on with it please..

I like the enthusiasm, but I do think it is to early to just build it.

In this thread some people have raised important concerns but raised them in an unhelpful and unfriendly way, then other people have reacted to the tone rather then the content.
The Bushwalking world is a small place and relationships are very important, more important then any points on a map.
It is critical that we discuss this, not only in the hope of finding a good solution but to find the support of the community.

I urge us all to focus on building positive relationships because only then will we be able to discuss this issue and work towards a solution.
If someone insults you, be kind back and bring the thread back on topic. Discussing peoples attitudes in a public space will never (and I use that word carefully) help the debate.

We have briefly discussed in this thread the wider political benefits to the environment by helping people in the community learn to love wild places and how this project may help that.
If we can't even discuss this issue in a friendly way then what hope is there for us helping the wider community?
Now I am not saying that this is the role of this forum, it is just my goal, people join this forum for for many varied reasons - and that is okay.

Although the technology is easy, we should not rush building something that may cause more problems then it solves.

I urge us all to focus not on our own personal grievance but to happily bear with one another in this debate - maybe we can then find a solution to a wider environmental issue dear to all out hearts.

Now if I am paraphrase the original request, it was to 'build a map that forum members can annotate with points of interest on bushwalks'
(points of interest may include possible water sources, views, hazards, campsites, other points that may help walkers)

Here are the broad questions I raised earlier, there may be more.
1) Is it helpful to share some information with the wider community about points along some bushwalks?
2) Is there a way we can help share helpful information whilst still protecting sensitive places?
3) Can we help the wider community better understand the issue to prevent/reduce the amount of specific information published about sensitive areas?
4) As bushwalkers, how does the way we discuss our trips and our knowledge impact others people's desire to protect wild places? (when was the last time you heard a bushwalker say 'I had this great trip planned but decided to not go because the nature of the environment meant it was impossible for me to leave no trace'.?


Please share ideas that may help. This is a brainstorming session, crazy, unworkable, impractical and outright dangerous ideas are okay at this stage, they may just lead to something workable.
Can I encourage everyone to just be creative, If you see an idea that just won't work - don't squash it - but see if you can some up with something more crazy and outrageous.
Don't be too serious at this stage, have fun, whilst been kind with each other.

Heck the solution we come up with may not even involve a map - lets see.

Sorry for the long post.

Matt

[perfectlydark]

My 2c
1) yes
2) absolutely. We dont need to publish routes but points of interest, along with cautionary notes (where applicable) of the nature of the area and your responsibilities when accessing it
3) bit tougher as we are one part of a wider community, I dont have any input but for our part to make clear respect the land.
4) keep discussions friendly. I I mentioned people will go where they want. All we can do is try to impart the importance of understanding and respecting the land (I think this system will actually improve the ability to do just that). Simply not talking about certain areas will not help in their conservation.
Remember it is there for all. Any resource that improves a walkers experience and understanding/ respect and preparedness is only a good.thing

[doogs]

There doesn't need to be any change to the forum in my opinion to gain handy hints and knowledge of an area prior to visiting it. If you would like to find some information on an area then use the search function, or start a thread in the appropriate sub forum asking for the information you wish to learn and someone will answer or send a PM, or if you find out someone has been somewhere where you wish to gain knowledge of then send them a PM and they will likely reply with the required information. I am not against changes but this has worked so far for most users on the forum and it keeps the information written on the forum vague as is requested by the Parks and Wildlife service.
I would much rather interact with a person to gain knowledge, rather than a interactive map. I thought the idea of a forum was to discuss and learn with others, be it through Private Messages or in a discussion?

[wildwalks]

Interesting point Doogs -- tend to agree with you on that.
I can also see how some information for popular walks could also be pulled together in a more helpful way, could work on a nice map.
I am more thinking about less experienced walkers. As experience grows then the more information you need to dig around for -- But for people getting into bushwalking I can see benefit in making that a bit easier for them (for easier and more accessible walks)
Not sure - appreciating hearing the ideas.

Thanks

Matt

[Zone-5]

Jeez, if I have to listen to another 'possum' moan about city people, I might just invite you to sit in my old wheelchair for six months and see how you like it when other people tell you you're not allowed to do things because they've decided to say no on your behalf!

Your stuck in a wheelchair Zone-5, is that what your saying?

To digress..

No mate, not now, but I was unable to stand up for about five months. But being stuck in a wheel chair does give one a unique perspective with regard to those who assure to advise in your best interest, but in fact it's mostly in their best interest. That's what I see a bit of here.. Similarly fatigue from this injury can play a part in bushwalking so I have to be mindful to maintain a level of endurance training with in the bounds of what I am capable of. So for me bushwalking is a pleasurable form of strength training that can bring both rewards and risks at the same time.

Oh and this is the real 'Dr No' pictured below..
..as yours is the not so nasty 'Dr Evil' which was a take off of Donald Pleasance's role as 'Ernst Stavro Blofeld' in the Bond film 'You Only Live Twice'. So your off the mark a bit with that one but granted, a worthy try.

[Zone-5]

I am not against changes but this has worked so far for most users on the forum and it keeps the information written on the forum vague as is requested by the Parks and Wildlife service.
I would much rather interact with a person to gain knowledge, rather than a interactive map. I thought the idea of a forum was to discuss and learn with others, be it through Private Messages or in a discussion?

Ok doogs, I respect your concerns but this does not actually change anything! All this does is provide an abbreviated version of member trip points should they wish to contribute them. It may in fact and I think it will allow users of the forum to see more of what is on offer in the forum by allowing them to see a wider offering of experience in a more compact structure.

If I saw on this new thread that some one had documented a permanent and reliable site for fresh drinking water at Wineglass then I would immediately follow the associated link to the posted thread which that find is linked to. Similarly if someone posted danger points not easily recognised at the walks in Hinchinbrook Island QLD then I would be very interested in looking at the main story thread that it is linked to as well. It would open up the entire forum for members like me that have just joined and are more interested in bushwalking than routinely reviewing the entire site to glean out some specifics!

The fact that this may include verifiable GPS way points adds a very powerful resource to the pocket of the potential traveller as they can be assured that there are areas that can be anticipated with some assurance of accuracy! Similarly exclusion zones or areas can be documented to warn travellers off without being overly specific on purpose.

I have never believed in the geocache zombie race mentality because of it's purely self serving aims. I am hoping that we can develop something that is the opposite of the geocaching scorecard where the journey is augmented, safer and made more pleasant outside of any goal oriented pursuits. If I thought that this would in any way encourage geocache zombies to crash the bush in monster trucks I wouldn't of ever considered suggesting this. This can be done so that that cannot happen and Matt knows it too I'm sure.

Most people don't have the time to patiently look through the entire forum to weed out the particular story threads that match their interests and you will probably find that like me if I wanted to investigate a new walk I would be very interested in looking at a log of what people found on that walk as a basis for preparing to walk it. I would rather find out about reliable member experiences listed in a shortened format than make a repeat mistake or miss something on a walk that required a more dedicated troll of the entire forum. For most users the fun of knowing something is there can be just as satisfying as actually going there.

Ok you may not like the change but the change will only affect those who are interested in it, for you it changes nothing unless you choose to part take in it. Oh and doogs, you will be able to actively address any concerns brought up by any entry as the members here will all be able to vet any entry through Matt that reveals anything that is deemed inappropriate. Hopefully the member vetting will ultimately result in a less controversial listing and more of a benign one of informative on track help guides accurately documented by way of user verifiable waypoints. No harm in that!

---------------------

1) Yes
2) Yes
3) Yes
4) Bushwalkers aren't stupid, given the correct information and an accurate database of facts, judgements based on informed debate can mitigate environmental degradation by accurately avoiding sensitive locations while still enjoying the magic that it hopes to offer.

A good understanding is never based on ignorance but ignorance can assure that something is destroyed without having ever having been aware that damage is being done.

[Nuts]

Yes! I prefer Dr Evil for this occasion!

Aside from the set of rules, moderation largely depends on luck as it stands.. Look back and you'll find that jumping up and down doesn't really help. There are standing topics on here that (in spreading use) effectively break forum rules.

At least, how things are, the cringe-worthy topics have a chance to be burried or Not found in a search... Even some of the experienced walkers and possibly some parkies don't understand how harmful innocent comments can be, especially outside their own stomping grounds. At least they recognise the need for concern. It might just be a campsite hammered or track formed but they accumulate.

It's not attitude based on heirachy, the level of concern is likely more something to get or not. For me it's between the bush and Everyone, no-ones effect (affect?) in particular.

Show me a map of areas i'm familiar with and I'm sure I can only show you what to remove. Not trying to be unhelpful to forum members ease of access or perceived safety. I don't think it is a given that map points can make things safer considering the benefits. To me the rest of it, ease, fun- it's like giving away the plot at the doors of the cinema.

So I can't help much in taking it further, I do hope any points don't diminish the system doogs is talking about or loose even more from the forum.

[perfectlydark]

As a suggestion would people be more open to it if it was locked behind something such as post count? many forums do similar things and are not accessable or searchable by randoms. So in theory only "experienced" people that are regulars to this site would see it anyway, which in the mean time.gives plenty of time to indoctinate with bushwalk ethics (like we all have the same.view on things lol) but you get my point. This would then not result in these big increases in traffic everyone is so afraid of?

[wildwalks]

Interesting idea Perfectly Dark -- Some kind of qualification process. You could actually have levels of information and levels of access.
You could also do a 'by personal invite'. We could give permission to 5 people we trust on the forum and they are allowed to invite people who are trustworthy.
I am thinking that if we are going to document anything on this map that it should probably only be stuff that we are happy to be open in the public area.

This is a map for a popular walk in NSW (the Six Foot Track). This contains more information then we are suggesting (it has full tracknotes).
http://wildwalks.cartodb.com/viz/3e05e3 ... /embed_map
But it gives people access to a lot of images, and points of interest.
(there are videos and other bits of information that does with it

Also worth looking at the wiki on the site. eg
http://bushwalk.com/wiki/index.php/Cate ... ian_Places
A similar project has been started many years ago - although it did not gather much momentum.

Matt