Publishing track information

[walkinTas]

I found this document (pdf file) while surfing. It may prove interesting reading for any BWT members who are wondering why some track information isn't openly published or is hard to find. First look at the track classifications and descriptions on page 3, then look at the recommendations on publicity on page 5.

[tasadam]

Funny that there has never been any contact made by Parks to us here to make us aware of this. Perhaps our rules comply with their policies?

[tastrax]

I suspect there are a few Parks people on this forum (I am certainly one). The document that you are referring to seems to have come from the BATR (bushwalking and track review) or TAG (Track assessment group) walking review but I have just done a check on the Parks website and most of the documents no longer appear.

The publication guidelines have been around since the mid 90's in the original World Heritage Area Track Strategy, that was reinforced in further documents in about 2001/2.

In general the moderators and individuals on this site do a good job and remind folks of the need to limit specific details of walks in off track areas. There is also a notice on the top of the "walks and locations" forum about the forum rules ...

"Please avoid publishing details of access to sensitive areas with no tracks." In general that is respected by most and they take the details off line or as private messages.

I also think that part of the joy of going to remote areas is the sense of discovery that is earned having journeyed from nature trails, overnight walks, longer walks...then off track and remote walks. Much of the desire to limit remote track details is to ensure that those opportunities continue to exist into the future (for those who have the desire). Some folks disagree and think that all information for every location should be freely available. Its an argument that surfaces on a regular basis and to be honest is probably a battle that Parks are gradually losing given the free availability of Google Earth (at high resolution in some remote places) and the proliferation of websites where you can download track files not to mention things such as blogging which has taken off in recent years.

Is it just progress? Who knows, but I hope that my children can still have opportunities to "discover" remote places just as I have.

[dee_legg]

Found all the classification of different grading to be very interesting.
Thanks for posting it up Walkingtas!

[Son of a Beach]

In general the moderators and individuals on this site do a good job and remind folks of the need to limit specific details of walks in off track areas. There is also a notice on the top of the "walks and locations" forum about the forum rules ...

"Please avoid publishing details of access to sensitive areas with no tracks." In general that is respected by most and they take the details off line or as private messages.

It's worth noting that I had never actually heard PWS official views on this sort of thing (but maybe I could have guessed it). The similar rules here were designed with common sense in mind for the sake of preserving areas that would be easily damaged by lots of visits. It's good to see that PWS have jumped on board with our ideas!

I can relate to people who think that all the information should be available, but there are good reasons for keeping a lid on some things. I have my own special places out there that I don't describe to many people, and I too enjoy finding my own way in strange places from time to time. As you say, it's just wonderful to have these 'discovery' experiences, and to form a close association with such places because of the way you came upon them.

[ben.h]

Ah yes, this reminds me...
Years ago (before BWTs birth), I requested track notes (particularly directions to the start of the walk) for Nevada Peak from someone who knows the place quite well and the notes came with this disclaimer:

Enjoy. Please don't publish the details, but feel free to give them to people individually who will carefully enjoy the walks. These tracks are not supposed to be advertised. This walk is rated T4 by PWS, and promotion is limited. The details of how to find this walk were originally sent to me kindly by [name removed] of the Hobart Walking Club, in the knowledge that finding the track is a little tricky.


The mention of PWS T4 prompted me to search for and download that exact same document walkinTas!

I don't mind that people keep information of such tracks on the "low down". It lessens the "damage" by the careless masses and when obtaining "classified information" like this it feels a little bit more special and ensures you've done your research!

The same type of thing happens with mountain bike "secret trails" all over Hobart and surrounds.

[walkinTas]

Funny that there has never been any contact made by Parks to us here to make us aware of this. Perhaps our rules comply with their policies?

Informally and loosely they probably do. I just hadn't heard of the classifications, nor read the justifications, and thought it all rather interesting. Especially since the forum admin arrived at similar conclusions about publicity.

I suspect there are a few Parks people on this forum (I am certainly one). The document that you are referring to seems to have come from the BATR (bushwalking and track review) or TAG (Track assessment group) walking review but I have just done a check on the Parks website and most of the documents no longer appear.

I think you are right and these may only be BATR recommendations. I don't know if these recommendations were ever formally adopted by PWS, but they certainly look like a very reasonable approach. Do you know if there is any formal acknowledgment by PWS?

This letter from the TNPA suggests there was originally suppose to be a review of the BATR's work sometime in 2009. I'd love to know if this is still going to happen and what has become of the work and priority one reviews and suggestions to date. There is only a little bit of info at the PWS site.

The mention of PWS T4 prompted me to search for and download that exact same document walkinTas!

I suspect the track classifications have been in existence for some time. Does anyone know if these are official PWS classifications or where they originated?

Edit: spelling

Last edited by walkinTas on Mon 19 Jan, 2009 7:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[tastrax]

Unfortunately the "track management team" that used to exist in Parks and work on this type of material is all but lost these days. Grant Dixon (yes, also the WILD photographer) is the only person left and his focus is on the track monitoring and research work (part time only).

I am more than happy to place on the web the public documents from which the classification system was developed. It will take me some time to get them out of my archive.

In a nutshell

The system was devised by Martin Hawes in the early 90's to compliment a monitoring program and the WHA Track Strategy
Then the Australian Standard (AS 2156 parts 1 and 2) was developed (in conjunction with other Parks agencies and some walking clubs)
Then the BATR and TAG process made some amendments (class 3A and 3B)
Parks continues to use both systems (as one is prescriptive and the other descriptive)
There is now another process underway (led by Parks Victoria) for a more "touristy" type classification system

[walkinTas]

Unfortunately the "track management team" that used to exist in Parks and work on this type of material is all but lost these days.

Does that mean the whole BATR process is finished and gone too?

I am more than happy to place on the web the public documents from which the classification system was developed. It will take me some time to get them out of my archive.

Yes thank you. I'd certainly be interested. I think it always helps to have a reason as an alternative to a rule.

[tastrax]

Does that mean the whole BATR process is finished and gone too?

I dont work in Hobart office any longer but in general terms all walking track issues are a lower priority these days - I suspect that means the BATR process as well (personal opinion... may not be PWS policy).

[tastrax]

A few documents on some of the past track management and the new Victorian led Trails Classifications scheme.

http://www.wyatt-family.com/phil/parks.htm