Vallejo Gantner Hut vandalised

[Xplora]

Last time I was at the hut another walker told me of his previous visit when a large group of deer hunters took over the hut and would not let anyone else in. Now that could have been because they had safety considerations but these huts are not provided for that purpose. They are a refuge and not an accommodation. Hunters are allowed to stalk deer in this area and the ones I have seen personally doing the wrong thing there are the doggers. Too many people (bushwalkers escpecially) are treating these huts as accommodation and some do not even pack tents anymore or are just too lazy to put them up. This has been my experience with a great number of huts in the High Country. They are good to sit in and cook a dinner out of the bad weather but people are spreading their gear out like it is theirs exclusively. Gatner hut is one of the worst for this. I know we are all shocked about what has happened here but my personal message is to remind people to respect the hut code.

[waggy]

I don't believe in karma. Too convenient for me. What I think is that whoever was dumb enough to do that to the hut will do it to someone else and get caught. And with luck, justice will be served up in a quick and brutal manner.

[Zone-5]

...justice will be served up in a quick and brutal manner.

Glass breakage alarm and a web based security cam mounted to a large tall pole looking at the front door.

http://webcamerasystems.com.au/info/mounting



...now this would send a clear message that all visitors are considered owners, not just guests.

[Xplora]

Surveillance cameras are not legally allowed to be installed in Vic NP where they could catch someone doing the wrong thing as they infringe the privacy of all those doing the right thing. Pity. Put them up and they would probably be stolen or trashed anyway.

[mickb]

Well we could go back to a 95% reduction in vandals, smart alecks, petty thugs pretty easily if we bring back the cane in school, let cops kick kids up the bum on the street if they muck up instead of uselessly filing them past magistrates. I will even do my bit punching out louts and young thugs on the street. 1970's cure recommended for this problem in other words

[sambar358]

Xplora.....I'm pretty sure that Parks Vic and DELWP extensively monitor land under their control with IR trail camera-type still cameras in order to nab those responsible for seasonal road closure breaches, damaging gates into prohibited access areas and other forms of illegal activity such as vandalising Park infrastructure. I've spoken to quite a few PV Rangers in recent years and I've been assured that there are plenty of these surveillance cameras "out there watching" hoping to get enough evidence to prosecute those resposible for this sort of stuff. While this technology isn't CCTV, I believe that some of the units are hooked into the mobile phone network and provide real-time alerts to illegal activity should they be set-up correctly and their image transfer monitored on a regular basis. Of course these cameras will also monitor "legal activity too"....such as me or anyone else walking past one with a pack on so I'd doubt if the privacy issues of those who are snapped doing the right thing is much of an issue in this regard as these PV/DEPI surveillance units are certainly out there in plenty of areas of the mountains right now ! Cheers

s358

[GBW]

Surveillance cameras are not legally allowed to be installed in Vic NP where they could catch someone doing the wrong thing as they infringe the privacy of all those doing the right thing. Pity. Put them up and they would probably be stolen or trashed anyway.

What law are you referring to that prohibits the use of surveillance cameras in a Vic NP by the relevant authorities?

http://parkweb.vic.gov.au/park-manageme ... nforcement

Use of concealed cameras on public land for compliance activities
Parks Victoria does use concealed camera technology on public land and in marine protected areas for the purpose of gathering evidence and information of people committing alleged offences. These offences include habitat destruction, theft of forest produce, illegal fishing and hunting activities, wildlife poaching, and rubbish dumping.

Concealed camera operations are run according to strict procedures and cameras are only installed by authorised officers at specific locations where alleged offences have been reported.

All concealed cameras are installed within the requirements of the Surveillance Devices Act 1999 and all information captured by cameras is handled in accordance with the Information Privacy Act 2000.

Images of a private nature not relevant to the alleged offences detected are destroyed.

[Travis22]

Cameras are certainly used by Parks Vic and DEPI in the bush.

Ive been to numerous locations where they are located out there. Most of the camera's ive seen relate to seasonal closure tracks known to be illegally used out of season and also Management tracks.

They are also used in known illegal camping areas, rubbish dumping locations and some historical areas etc.

Travis.

[Xplora]

My bad - I should have been more accurate in my wording instead of a short reply. Parks Vic CANNOT put a surveillance device anywhere without a warrant. To obtain that warrant they must substantiate a number of things and the application goes before a Supreme Court judge as follows:

'15 Application for surveillance device warrant
(1) A law enforcement officer (or another person on
his or her behalf) may apply for the issue of a
surveillance device warrant if the law enforcement
officer on reasonable grounds suspects or believes
that—
(a) an offence has been, is being, is about to be
or is likely to be committed; and
(b) the use of a surveillance device is or will be
necessary for the purpose of an investigation
into that offence or of enabling evidence or
information to be obtained of the commission of that offence or the identity or
location of the offender.

7 Regulation of installation, use and maintenance of
optical surveillance devices
(1) Subject to subsection (2), a person must not
knowingly install, use or maintain an optical
surveillance device to record visually or observe a
private activity to which the person is not a party,
without the express or implied consent of each
party to the activity.
commission of that offence or the identity or
location of the offender.

The above subsection does not apply if they have a warrant.

Private Activity is defined as
private activity means an activity carried on in
circumstances that may reasonably be taken
to indicate that the parties to it desire it to be
observed only by themselves, but does not
include—
(a) an activity carried on outside a
building; or
(b) an activity carried on in any
circumstances in which the parties to it
ought reasonably to expect that it may
be observed by someone else;


2) An application may be made only with
In determining whether a surveillance device
warrant should be issued, the judge or magistrate
must have regard to—
(a) the nature and gravity of the alleged offence
in respect of which the warrant is sought;
and
(b) the extent to which the privacy of any person
is likely to be affected;
(c) the existence of any alternative means of
obtaining the evidence or information sought
to be obtained and the extent to which those
means may assist or prejudice the
investigation; and
(d) the evidentiary or intelligence value of any
information sought to be obtained; and
(e) any previous warrant sought or issued under
this Division or a corresponding law (if
known) in connection with the same offence.

So the cameras can be located in areas where offences are shown to be 'likely to occur' or have occurred (as indicated by Travis) but consideration is given to the 'extent to which the privacy of any person is likely to affected'. They CANNOT put cameras up everywhere just in case something may happen or even after an isolated incident such as the case in question because that infringes the privacy of innocents. All surveillance warrants have an expiration time and to obtain another or an extension there would have to be some evidence they were still needed for the detection of offences and not prevention of offences. The whole point of the Surveillance Devices Act is to ensure people using devices to listen to or watch others do not adversely affect the privacy of innocent people and if they capture innocent acts then there must be a corresponding benefit with the capture of evidence which can be used to prosecute offenders.

If you require more specific information regarding the approved use of surveillance cameras in Vic Parks then you should contact them directly. If they are using them contrary to the Act then they are guilty of an offence.

[sambar358]

Good response Xplora......and from my experience certainly Parks and DEWLP placed cameras monitoring areas with a history of road closure breaches, illegal entry or vandalism would be covered by those Regulations that you listed. Interesting that they need to approval of a Supreme Court judge to do that too. My view of this is that I'm OK with this sort of serveillance as it's only inteded to catch people doing the wrong thing and if someone gets snapped just walking along a track/trail or whatever then that's hardly an intrusion on their rights to privacy IMO. The PV type camera usage would certainly be at the "soft end" of the surveillance spectrum too as these Regs would also encompass the use of listening devices and hidden cameras placed by police to monitor criminal activity as well so from that perspective the "privacy" of non-involved individuals becomes a bit more relevant.

Certainly government agencies are using camera surveillance more regularly for a number of tasks in the bush including monitoring 1080 bait stations for foxes and wild dogs, watching logging coupes where has been evidence of illegal firewood gathering, post cutting or tree felling and a whole range of other activities such as road closure gate damage and illegal entry into areas closed to vehicles etc. I meet PV Rangers fairly regularly when I'm hunting in the winter up in the mountains and from my conversations with them about their surveillance camera usage I'm getting the message that this is becoming more common and in many cases seems to be replacing the actual regular patrolling of these areas that used to occur by local PV staff. It'd be interesting to see if any actual court convictions have been obtained after photographic evidence of (say) and illegal vehicle entry behind a road closure gate has been obtained on a camera, followed up by the PV/Police and then eventually gone to court. Somehow I think getting to this stage would be pretty rare and these surveillance camera are more intended as some sort of low-cost deterent rather than a means to gather evidence to get perpetrators a convicted in Court. Cheers

s358

[Xplora]

Magistrates have limited powers under the Act and the need for a Supreme court judge to issue the warrant stresses the importance for the people asking for the warrant to justify it. DWELP use trail cams regularly to monitor wildlife and they are not subject to the provisions of a warrant but the cameras would also need to be placed so they would not regularly collect information from people just walking on a track (IMO). You would be unlucky but imagine if someone was caught by a trail cam having a wash in a stream or taking a whizz. I had a strip down wash at Gantner one summer while I was on my own, outside of course. For those thinking it may be a good idea to set up their own trail cameras, you in fact need permission of the land owner to do so and if it were done to produce evidence for a prosecution then it would not be admissable without the warrant. Without a warrant you must inform people they are being recorded for any evidence collected to be admissable in court. Now you could possibly put up a camera and signs informing people they are being recorded. I would have to research that one with regard to Parks or DWELP but you can imagine what would happen to the camera. I also imagine the use of hidden cameras as a low cost deterent in any area would be difficult to sustain unless some sort of evidence was extracted from them. I am more than happy for cameras to be used to catch people doing the wrong thing in those areas where a regular problem has been identified. I think we all have to become resloved to the fact we live in a world where there are many people who have no respect or consideration for others or the country they live in and their reach is extending. I moved out of the city because the constancy of it was making me angry. I am not sure what I will do once these sort of actions become common place in the more remote areas I visit.

[sambar358]

I run a dozen or so of my homebrew trail cameras throughout the winter targetting deer, wild dogs and other critters up in the mountains and these are set in pretty remote locations not visited by too many people but now and again I get the odd 2-legged visitor on a camera. Usually a deer hunter but I've got the occasional inquisitive walker mug-shot with them up-close inspecting the unit. Had a couple of young camo-clad blokes drop their strides in front of the camera and give it a bit of a moon and another one was posing in front of it with a couple of big antler-like sticks on his head like a big stag but all a bit of fun and no harm done or privacy invaded.

A couple of years ago I was asked by a landowner to place one of my units watching a location of his which was being regularly vandalized. This was on his own property so I set-up a unit on a nearby tree in the hope of getting some hard-evidence (as requested by the local Police) to get the perps into court. And we did actually.......the unit took a couple of 100 images of a bloke and his kids in-the-act before one of the kids noticed the camera. Despite a fair effort to get it off the tree they failed but managed to damage it beyond repair however they didn't get into the unit to retrieve the memory card from the camera inside the case. So the PP owner had his proof and a month after.....his day day in court.....and the perps were charged with trespass & melicious damage and the adult & his kids were officially cautioned by the magistrate. The adult was also ordered to pay me $400 for my destroyed trail camera....which he has failed to do of course. For this exercise we were not advised by the Police that we needed a Supreme Court warrant to setup the camera......and the perps in this case were found guilty as charged by the Court.....so maybe we got lucky there or copped a Magistrate who was unaware of that requirement. Cheers

s358

[Solohike74]

I'm very saddened....totally senseless. I've enjoyed a nice rest and great company in that hut.

[bernieq]

Update : glass has been repaired and hut is in good condition - as of 8 Dec 2015

[Hillwalk]

Glad to hear the hut has been repaired. It is disappointing to realise vandals extend even to these great places.

I am thinking of doing a walk to Mt Speculation, camping at Mac. Springs and then a day walk from there, leaving all the heavy gear. What is the protocol with Vallejo Gantner? As far as sleeping goes is it for emergencies only? Is it likely to fill up with people?

This would be roughly mid march, mid week, well before Easter. I would be planning to sleep in a tent, but wondering about the hut if things go wrong with gear etc. as I haven't done this in a long while.

I've only been there once on a day walk to Mt Howitt - it was mid-December 2014 and the campsite was dotted with a few tents, but no-one in the hut.

[Lophophaps]

While Gantner is probably for emergencies, mid-week there should not be many people. A more pressing matter is the presence of mice or the like, things that eat food and will go through cordura to do so. Also, the hut is gloomy and cold, no airlock and big doors that open into the west wind. You may be better sleeping in a tent and using the hut for cooking.

The terrace above the hut has much better views than behind the hut. There are at least two slightly exposed campsites near the bushline on Howitt, with brilliant views.

[Hillwalk]

Thanks for the info Lophophaps.

[Xplora]

On our last trip there the weather was miserable and the hut filled up pretty quick. We pitched a tent anyway as we were staying 2 nights and prefer to sleep alone. More people came the next day. One guy took over the entire upstairs, spreading his gear out everywhere so nobody else could even sit up there. It is a hut placed for shelter and it is good to cook in as mentioned if the weather is bad. Hut code in Vic says you should not sleep in them unless you really need to but mid week on your own I see no problem. You can hang your packs inside to keep them away from mice or the native version (which tend to be more destructive to packs). I prefer to camp where Lop has said on the terrace overlooking the crosscut and the vikings. In March you may get fog in the valley so you can only see the tops. Brilliant sunrise if this happens. Set an alarm to be up before first light. Spec and back in a day is possible if you get an early start and carry light. Remember there is no water along the way.