Nuts wrote: If it was as easy as calling for a Ta Ann style boycott of private developments in public reserves.. but it's not, even some die hard bushwalkers and conservationists don't see any real issue (or didn't, like Bob, they may be coming around to at least acknowledge their choices). And detached tourists everywhere will follow each other without question, tick-lists in hand. Any second thoughts, well too late for those places or ideals that are already lost. Forever.
tastrax wrote:Maybe they could even implement the strategy they already have!
https://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/Documents/Wal ... 1-2020.pdf
tastrax wrote:Maybe they could even implement the strategy they already have!
https://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/Documents/Wal ... 1-2020.pdf
Nuts wrote:Is it true, that 'money pours into parks from iconic walks'?
Mountain Rocket wrote:tastrax wrote:Maybe they could even implement the strategy they already have!
https://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/Documents/Wal ... 1-2020.pdf
I want to face-palm but thanks for sharing this tastrax.
For those wondering what other trackwork you could do with a few million, here is what the current strategy proposes:
Somehow I don't think we'll see a proposal to even spend $2k upgrading tracks at Anne, Mt Field, Port Davey or the WAs.
stepbystep wrote:If the NP’s got even a moderately fair amount of funding in relation to the money they earn those tracks would be fit for purpose and designed to work with the lowest impact to the environment. ‘New money’ will only erode more and more and more and more. That sir is the folly. Protecting what isn’t yet eroded is paramount to ensuring what is precious about this place is preserved. And if the other states fund us a little so be it, they can come visit anytime. The Tarkine offers a massive pressure release opportunity
stepbystep wrote:The Tarkine offers a massive pressure release opportunity
geoskid wrote:I think existing National Parks can be sensitively monetised...
tastrax wrote:Most of the imagery was taken back in 2015/16 - you can check by turning on the following layer in LISMap - State Aerial Photo Index
I dont know of any proposals for huts in the area - way too much trackwork to be done before it would appeal to a commercial operator
geoskid wrote:Nuts wrote:Is it true, that 'money pours into parks from iconic walks'?
Hi Nuts, been a while
Well no, not necessarily of course, but it helps to make the pie bigger.(and can be a negotiating point). And Tassie needs a bigger pie. We are a welfare state, I don't mean individually, I mean we are dependent on the other states. We get handouts from the other states in the GST carve up. It kind of makes boasting about our sweet things when we are subsidised by states that dig *&%$#! out of the ground a bit hollow. We need to stand on our own feet here, and make our own money.
geoskid wrote: No, making a new iconic track does not necessarily erode wilderness. Of course it depends on definitions. Is it a hut in the wilderness, or does a hut magically make the wilderness disapear?
bogholesbuckethats wrote:Might just be being overly paranoid but I've noticed a significant improvement in state aerial imagery on the LIST for a number of bays along the SW cape (Stephens Bay, Windowpane Bay and New Harbour). I am aware of the proposal for ~6 huts along the SCT but I didn't think that might also include parts of the SWC. Any ideas?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests