Another National Park under attack? - you be the judge

[neilmny]

A whole of mountain concept for Mount Buffalo..............at this point I've only read the first 6 pages and what the? It's a *&%$#! National Park!
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/an8n1pightk7 ... 02-17+.pdf

"The Mount Buffalo Destination Advisory Group (MBDAG) was established in November 2015 to work collaboratively with Parks Victoria to provide strategic
recommendations about the future of Mount Buffalo"

"The Group was appointed by the Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change"

"This proposal describes a series of interlocking opportunities which could combine to deliver a range of powerfully positive outcomes throughout the region.
Importantly, it presents a case for government to support a new and sustainable vision for Mount Buffalo National Park."

[paidal_chalne_vala]

I can only begin to guess what kind of McDonalds golden arches on a rotating steel and glass podium kind of pile of donkey droppings these people have cooked up. Is anywhere safe from development?. "They paved paradise and put up a parking lot......."

[Xplora]

It appears this community group has taken things a bit further than first indicated. Most of the early discussion was about restoration of the Chalet and some development around that area only. An interesting quote in the document
Resolving the challenges associated with Mount Buffalo National Park and its wider environs will result in the delivery of a series of interconnected and self-reinforcing benefits. Primary benefits generated for the region (and the state) include
and then it goes on to talk about financial benefits to the area. Yes they have to resolve a number of issues with the National Park and that could be a hurdle. I also found it interesting the amount of money people are paying to 'glamp'. Almost $300/night. How much will a room at the Chalet cost? I suspect much less. Having stayed there many years ago I felt there was a need to do something to maintain this building and keep it running as an on mountain accommodation/dining source. Lake Catini development on the other hand is taking things a bit far but given they are charging a fortune for a site now and getting it I suspect further development is on the cards. This is all driven by the dollar and you would have to say there is some need for employment in regional areas. The whole mountain already has that soft tourist, family orientated, easy access appeal in my view but now they want mobile cafes and coffee vans. There is no mention of any environmental benefit and it would be hard to imagine there could be. While I am not in favour of commercial development in NP and especially new luxury accommodation facilities, I can see the need for some restructure on Buffalo, certainly not to the extent touted in this plan. My suspicion is the original goal to restore the Chalet is the driving force but there needs to be more on offer to attract the money from the developers needed to complete that task. I think the dollar return is possible, more so than for the FHAC.

[neilmny]

I can only begin to guess what kind of McDonalds golden arches on a rotating steel and glass podium kind of pile donkey droppings these people have cooked up. Is anywhere safe from development?. "They paved paradise and put up a parking lot......."

Brilliant thought PCV they could make the skywalk area a rotating Maccas wander through.
The Maccas rotates while you stand on the stationary skywalk enjoying the view.
When the window comes around there's your Maccas for you to grab.

The whole thing reads like a commercial takeover of the National Park.............I better get up there and enjoy it before they stuff it.

[paidal_chalne_vala]

The prime reason for a National park being created and continuing to exist is to protect natural native flora, fauna and landscapes for the betterment of the planet for centuries to come. NOT to develop them into some kind of Theme Park nightmare that makes them indistinguishable from modern suburbia.

[Xplora]

The prime reason for a National park being created and continuing to exist is to protect natural native flora, fauna and landscapes for the betterment of the planet for centuries to come.

That is one way of looking at it but then you would have to stop people visiting them. Protecting these things is important but also it is about making sure our interaction with them does not cause too much disturbance. It is not unusual to find a kiosk within a NP especially in areas of high visitor numbers. As visitor numbers increase there is a need to provide increased facilities for them. This could be in the way of toilets, rubbish collection, additional camping areas and food/beverage supply. The problem I have with this plan is that it states their target market is the 'high end'. That means more exclusion. 63% of people would come just to walk on the glass bottom walkway. I don't really see the view improved a great deal so it seems these people are more concerned about theme park attractions than the park itself. Visitor numbers fell dramatically once the Chalet closed but have been increasing steadily so I see a need to cater for this increase so the park as a whole can be protected. Providing some hard roofed accommodation could help so some development around the Chalet would not be too offensive as structures already exist.

Remember this proposal is only a community seeking some gain for itself and it has not been sanctioned by the State government or PV. I think it will take some time before that happens and if money was given to repair the Chalet and get it working again then they may drop the rest of the plan if it gets too hard. The outdoor education centre is interesting but I feel they are misrepresenting the figures. It seems the structure would also be used for conferences and ancillary accommodation. Public schools cannot afford high end accommodation for camps and even private schools use the outdoor classroom for their programs. There are two outdoor ed schools in the area and an expansion of these would probably serve just as well.

[paidal_chalne_vala]

Private interests cannot and should not be allowed to exploit a National Park for private profit if it detracts from the conservation of the natural things the park has been established to protect. Moreover if such a scheme is aimed at only those who can afford it then that is even more reprehensible .

[Xplora]

Private interests cannot and should not be allowed to exploit a National Park for private profit if it detracts from the conservation of the natural things the park has been established to protect. Moreover if such a scheme is aimed at only those who can afford it then that is even more reprehensible .

What does this mean? Are you saying the Chalet should not operate again or is it the rest of the development or the entire proposal? You should define your objection to the proposal as it relates to the proposal and maybe in less broad terms. Would it be OK to put up structures within the park if they were not for profit or government run? We can mostly agree that exploitation of parks for profit as you say is not good if it involves significant infrastructure that would destroy a natural environment but there has already been development on Buffalo and long before it was a NP. PV develops and maintains areas for the benefit of park users and then upgrades the facilities to cater for the type and number of visitors using the area. Perhaps Lake Catini could sustain some kind of tent based, up market facility not run by PV if it were not to the exclusion of the ordinary people who can afford to pay more than $50/night for a camp site to PV. That to me is extortion and you have to share your campfire with 2 other sites.

[paidal_chalne_vala]

I tend to agree with you there.

[starrysky]

'Mount Buffalo is waking' I would prefer it stays asleep... Already plenty of great facilities in Bright (plus amazing new gin and coffee place has opened up in Wills street); keep the masses contained there, not further let loose in the NP, imo. Only safe way to enjoy the NP is to leave no trace.

Btw. PCV this was magnificent.

The prime reason for a National park being created and continuing to exist is to protect natural native flora, fauna and landscapes for the betterment of the planet for centuries to come. NOT to develop them into some kind of Theme Park nightmare that makes them indistinguishable from modern suburbia.