Video crossing the Lodden & Make Wilderness More Accessible?

[Fizzygood]

Thought I would post this is a separate topic in case it gets lost in the 'mud' one...

This is a quickly thrown together video of our recent crossing of the Lodden Plains.

YouTube link - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VL0z0nZrZHU

Cheers, Erin

[eggs]

Very good - thanks for putting it online.

I have planned to go on the track at some stage - and it is now settled that in January we go fair weather or foul!!

On previous occasions I have chickened out due to the fierce weather on the day. But apart from weather there is ever in the back of my mind the knowledge that a friend on their honeymoon had gone in up to the armpits and had to be pulled out by 2 others....

As for the chumps who will be coming along with me - perhaps we had better not let them see this.

Eggs.

[Nuts]

..

[Fizzygood]

Don't know much about the money but in the mean time the #1 rule applies...

Walk straight through it!!

[corvus]

Triffik video hope you were all wearing waterproof boots and socks
According to my latest copy of Wildtimes DS has already donated $100000.00 for trackwork with another $900000.00 to come over the next nine years to be matched by Parks at $50000.00 per year for the same period I guess that should fix the track

[Nuts]

..

[Fizzygood]

The only problem with better access is more visitors... I just hope the track is managed well... its pretty fragile in there!

[Son of a Beach]

It will be great to walk on a better track, but on the other hand, it's good to keep some of these walks difficult, and 'less pleasant' to the less experienced, in order to keep the place from becoming as crowded as Cradle. Do I sound like a snob? Probably.

[Nuts]

..

[corvus]

Hey Nuts,
Do tell !!

[tasdaz]

Great video, brings back many memories of wading through the mud. Did you get many leeches? This walk was my first encounter with them... I only got one so I don't think my blood was too tasty (a touch too much Southern Comfort in there for their liking perhaps)

[tas-man]

Wonderful to be able to SEE the mud - sitting at my computer with warm dry feet - but even better would be another version that just had the sound of the squelching to stimulate the memory juices even more Great VIDEO

[Nuts]

..

[Fizzygood]

I don't walk with anyone who would NOT go straight through the middle of whatever we find, specially if the alternative is destroying more environment!

If people stuck to the middle of muddy tracks and stopped throwing dead wood down to try and walk across (gee I hate this!!), there are really only a few totally off-the-show sections out there that could do with some duck-board!

I really think this walk needs to remain on the harder side of things... Anything like Overland Track numbers would obliterate the wonders on the other side of the mud!!

[Son of a Beach]

I dont think you will get many to walk through the deeper bogs, no matter their conscience. At least a bit of work on the deeper one's (and working back to the start ) would make the walk more pleasant. It is a bit of a dilemma but really... what better way to a susatainable economy than people willing to travel (let alone pay), to just go for a walk? I read an article about Cradle Huts recently, was shocked to see that they now employ 70 staff for up to 6 mths of the year.

Anyhow... thanks for the entertaining vid/mud cam. The sound is a good idea (perhaps smell-o-vision also?)

The state of our economy is certainly an important consideration, but is it more important that the state of our environment, and for us in particular, is it more important than being able to enjoy the wilderness in our backyard without being overrun by large numbers of tourists?

I'm not saying we should discourage tourism. I'm not even wondering what the right balance is, but I'm wondering how we decide what the right balance is. Ie, is our economy really that important?

I know in my own personal life, I'd love to have lots of money to spend, but realistically, if I still have good family and friends, that's far more important. Similarly, if I can still get out bushwalking occasionally, that's more important. For our state of Tasmania, I know that our economy is more important than our wilderness to many people, but is it more important than bushwalking to the bushwalking community?

Sorry, I'm just wondering out loud here. If this ends up getting us off-track, I might have to move my comments to 'Controversy Corner'.

[Nuts]

..

[Robbo]

I tend to agree, Nuts.

Personally, I don't see any real issue in Tassie with increased use and believe that the parks should really be expected to keep up rather than discourage use. Just my view but really, the first time I walked the Overland Track, I thought it was refreshing to see so many others out there, something very rare around the country.

In my recent meeting with PWS, it become clear that while there are size limits to various sections of the Parks and WHA's around the state, they have no idea of how many people are actually visiting them, and do not have the personnel to find out. I am from the state to the north, and one of those involved in introducing more people to the magnificence of Tasmania. We are working closely with the PWS to fit within their guidelines and not be a contributers to the demise of your natural environmental resources, while looking for ways where we can be positive contributers in other ways.

It is about balance, and places like Frenchman's may be one of those places that should be left as natural as possible and thereby limit the numbers who visit. I personally got to visit it while doing a rafting trip, so I have not had the opportunity to experience the, 'sodden lodden's'.

Tony Robinson

[Son of a Beach]

Not that my opinion will make one iota, and I expect that someone will find something in it to be affronted by.

I hope not. Differences of opinions are healthy, and it's good to be able to understand everyone's different ideas as much as possible.

[Fizzygood]

Perhaps PWS could initiate a program where walkers voluntarily report back on log book numbers....or, if Parks weren't interested maybe we could have a section here Nik for the same purpose.

I know this data is gathered when log books are replaced but something more current may be of value!?

If this information could be used to better manage tracks then I would certainly participate!

[Joe]

Great video Fizzygood....nice to see that we share taste in music as well as British comedy.

Nuts: Its really good to finally find someone who shares my point of view as to exposure of these areas and development of ecotourism in our state. To me the view that walks such as this need to be kept to a select band of locals and not promoted as a viable and quite lucrative industry for out state. Any alternative to our current destructive industry is a good one. At the end of the day its not the numbers that are the issue...its the management. Education and awareness are the big issues with people doing the wrong thing. I would hazard that those that actually care enough to walk to area like this would be quite happy to learn the do's and dont's and obey them if they were presented properly.

[corvus]

Nuts and TWF.c ,
Succinct word from me- DITTO!! who would have thought that three poo... stirrers would be in agreement on this forum

[Joe]

jeebus corv...we need to start an argument about something...this just isn't right

[corvus]

Who me !! never

[flyfisher]

If I can add my 2 cents worth here, I agree with pretty much all that's been mentioned here.
Having said that I wouldn't like to see developments actually AT places like Frenchmans but it can still be a tourist magnet without being ruined.
FF

[Nuts]

..

[Fizzygood]

My opinion..... if you have seen the fragile nature of the track to Barron Pass there is the answer to whether the area should have more visitors or not... I think not!

[Nuts]

..

[Penguin]

Walking we have the same argument often. Do you make it consciously hard/awful to get to so that only the privileged few can get there or do you make it simpler, more can get in, but build better infra structure. Sodden Lodden is one and moss ridge is another. A chain saw taking out a few boughs up Moss Ridge would make the trip so much easier.

I like the idea of the Western Arthurs. Decent tracks. Rudimentary but effective sanitation. And camping platforms. This may spoil some of the aesthetic, but it protests the environment and gives more people access to appreciate what is to be protected. It we want to protect wilderness isn't it better that the voters know what they are protecting rather than some abstract idea?

The one I do not get is the toilet only at wild Dog Creek. It is almost impossible to dig a hole in the Walls. A toilet there would protect the environment longterm even if it looked ugly. Thoughts?

[corvus]

Penguin,
I totaly agree with your comments.

[Son of a Beach]

Do you make it consciously hard/awful to get to so that only the privileged few can get there or do you make it simpler, more can get in, but build better infra structure... Thoughts?

I don't want to make it hard for people to get in. But if the nature of the wilderness is that it is hard to get in, then I'm happy to leave it hard for people to get in - that's nature, and I like it that way*. The exception to this is, of course, when so many people go in anyhow that it starts to damage the wilderness significantly, then measures need to be taken to protect the wilderness (ie, build better tracks, platforms, toilets, etc).


(*Note that I'm not a particularly hard-core walker. If we didn't have the good access roads, and tracks that we have these days, I'd never make it into the places that the walkers of 100 or even 50 years ago used to get to).

EDIT: I was going to split this topic, but decided to change the title instead to reflect the direction it's taken (apologies to Fizzygood ).