Bushwalk Australia

Hi all

Looking forward to getting to do the Ducane Range this coming March after our planned trip this year was cancelled with the borders shut down.
Just to help with the planning, I'm wondering if anyone has a GPX file of this walk that could be shared. I haven't had much luck finding anything.

Thanks

iGBH wrote:Hi all

Looking forward to getting to do the Ducane Range this coming March after our planned trip this year was cancelled with the borders shut down.
Just to help with the planning, I'm wondering if anyone has a GPX file of this walk that could be shared. I haven't had much luck finding anything.

Thanks

If you need someone to provide a GPS route then this walk may not be for you. It's along a ridge line, surely you can plot you're own way points to keep you on the right line in foggy conditions.

doogs wrote:
If you need someone to provide a GPS route then this walk may not be for you. It's along a ridge line, surely you can plot you're own way points to keep you on the right line in foggy conditions.

Thanks Doogs. We are well experienced with off track walking on mainland and Tas. I was just wanting a GPX to overlay on my maps to assist with rough planning beforehand, and also to load into GPS's as a fallback while on the walk.

Although not a .gpx here is a pic of a .gpx on a map.. if you haven't before, try the layers on TheListmap webpage too. It's a really useful tool for bushwalking in Tasmania.viewtopic.php?f=42&t=5206&p=62597&hilit=Du+Cane+range#p62597

Thanks team.

Rule 24 says
Avoid posting detailed information on accessing sensitive areas without recognised tracks to public topics, but rather use private messages, email, or other non-public means to communicate such information instead. Feel free to ask questions about such areas publicly, so long as the post includes a reminder of this rule to get answers privately only.

Much of the area is off track and sensitive, so please send GPX files by private messages.

Thank you.

Moderator

Hu, yes, details. It may seem a bit quaint in this age but a group or two following a detailed track, then a group the other way seeing where others have exited the hard bits to the soft bits or coming across the signs of a campsite.. away it goes... I too think it's worth moderating for this rule (or rather the tremendous positive attitude reflected in the rule). The early discomfort here seems to have resonated to affect other bigger online groups. Or maybe that's wishful thinking.

Ahhh....the 'ol rule 24. It certainly does reflect a tremendous positive attitude and is one of the most valuable tools in the tool box.
Pity its so damn rubbery though......
Pretty easy to find major breaches of this rule that havent been called out without looking too hard. LouPhi comes to mind immediately.
Plenty of others.

( I'm ready to be abused so dont hold back ! )

As a community we all need to call it out when we see it

Mechanic-AL wrote:Pity its so damn rubbery though......
Pretty easy to find major breaches of this rule that havent been called out without looking too hard. LouPhi comes to mind immediately.
)

(without checking back through those many pages) there's a zoomed out map of the route.. there were some spot map links?
But no argument from me. In regards to preserving high places such as this, I don't think a map has been shared (or photo, perhaps since Gustav's roadshows), that was truly necessary, none are benign.

Please don't ever share GPX files to sensitive areas on public platforms.

Every time a gpx track is shared a little bit of the spirit of exploration dies.

With apologies to JM Barrie.

Mark F wrote:Every time a gpx track is shared a little bit of the spirit of exploration dies.

With apologies to JM Barrie.

Yay some one gets it.... do today's youngsters wonder how anyone ever bushwalked before GPS were available?

A GPX 'track' can be made to only contain a few points... e.g. where peaks and pinches are located. Up to the author as to how much detail there is.

Warin wrote:A GPX 'track' can be made to only contain a few points... e.g. where peaks and pinches are located. Up to the author as to how much detail there is.

Good idea. Give all these people asking for GPS tracks bogus files?

ILUVSWTAS wrote:

Warin wrote:A GPX 'track' can be made to only contain a few points... e.g. where peaks and pinches are located. Up to the author as to how much detail there is.

Good idea. Give all these people asking for GPS tracks bogus files?

I still am very concerned at the amount of people who feel they need a GPS route given to them to complete a walk. Learn to use a gps properly, plan your routes, don't rely on others for the info.
Skills and routes used to be passed down through clubs and informal walking groups. This led to slow increases in for traffic to remote areas. Also it created a bit off a buffer so that inexperienced walkers wouldn't go from the creepy crawly trail to the Southern ranges in a season.
Please don't share .gpx routes with people that you don't know!!!

In the 80s there was no internet and so, no online forums, but there was Chapman. I agree gear and technology made it easier to bushwalk in remote locations, but I don't see how some of you can be so worried about gpx files (in fact gpx can only contain few waypoints such camping spots, intersections, huts or waterpoints) and then be ok giving out information on a public forum. What is the difference, I'm asking? Just an example, Strava heatmap is showing where people are walking, all over the world, including the bit from Procyon Peak to Oberon saddle. How are you going to stop internet and its info sharing?

CBee wrote:In the 80s there was no internet and so, no online forums, but there was Chapman. I agree gear and technology made it easier to bushwalk in remote locations, but I don't see how some of you can be so worried about gpx files (in fact gpx can only contain few waypoints such camping spots, intersections, huts or waterpoints) and then be ok giving out information on a public forum. What is the difference, I'm asking? Just an example, Strava heatmap is showing where people are walking, all over the world, including the bit from Procyon Peak to Oberon saddle. How are you going to stop internet and its info sharing?

Parks and Wildlife have had a long standing request for anyone who writes books that includes off track walks in Tasmania to leave the route description as vague as possible. This should be extend to various public locations on the internet such as this forum and Facebook bushwalking pages. Obviously it's impossible to police and enforce.
I know it is folly to think that I could stop the spread on internet. However, if I can get some members on this forum to understand that sharing a .gpx to a public space on the internet can cause a lot of environmental damage, then it's worth trying. Another point worth considering is that it may lead inexperienced walkers into situations are needlessly dangerous to them.

As I tried to say, we are, in 2020, sharing every minute of our life. From making a cake, to where we are going to who we meet. 24h per day. Every square metre of our planet is photographed, mapped and available for various uses. Everything is connected, shared and readily available. Not debating if this is good and not denying that few here are still living in the seventies, but Parks and Wildlife should revise their long standing request. Or at least try to upgrade the meaning of the term "remote". My 2c.

CBee wrote:As I tried to say, we are, in 2020, sharing every minute of our life. From making a cake, to where we are going to who we meet. 24h per day. Every square metre of our planet is photographed, mapped and available for various uses. Everything is connected, shared and readily available. Not debating if this is good and not denying that few here are still living in the seventies, but Parks and Wildlife should revise their long standing request. Or at least try to upgrade the meaning of the term "remote". My 2c.

Why? For an individual's selfish wants? The 'memememe nownownow' attitude is a terrible one to have. There's no way that Parks should change their stance..

I know a lot of people who have commented on this post and unfortunately for your argument most are in their twenties and thirties. It's certainly not a case of the internet is this new thing that we don't understand. We've all pretty much grown up with it,
give or take a handful of years. The same can be said for the handheld GPS.
For me, it's about having respect for our National Parks and Reserves system and attempting to encourage others to do the same. I can understand the want to have a .gpx handed to you for a remote walk, if everyone had the same one though the damage to the environment would be significant.
There's enough information out there to complete any walk in Tasmania. You just need to make the effort to look, which a lot of people seem too lazy to do...

CBee wrote: ... I don't see how some of you can be so worried about gpx files (in fact gpx can only contain few waypoints such camping spots, intersections, huts or waterpoints) and then be ok giving out information on a public forum. What is the difference, I'm asking?

The difference is I can say "turn left at the oval pool, then right at the boulder pile and up the spur" and you still have to recognise the right pool, the right boulder pile and determine how big a turn to make in order to get onto the right spur. A gpx file has all the detail; and yet it can be, as in the aforementioned case of the western descent from PB, as much use as a chocolate billy due to stepth or vegetation. As for simply loading on a few of the most significant waypoints, that's not the sort of file people ask for and is also well within anyone's capabilities to plot for themselves using the relevant maps.

I'm directionally dyslexic and still managed to get myself through the DuCane and Pelion circuits, Eldon Range, Wilmot/Franklands, Southern Range etc etc etc without a preloaded gpx file. Basic non-digital nav is not that hard. Just be sensible and don't rush.

My post was not intended to argue respect to National Parks (or any argument really). So I think your assumption that people in possession of a gpx file cause more damage to the environment than, say, someone who uses the information provided on this forum, is not proven. To me, posting photos, having photo competition about remote places, discussing itineraries, giving information about tracks, giving away camping spots etc. is equally significant in advertising outdoor places as giving out gpx files. So I personally believe this bushwalking forum is as much responsible to erosion and environmental damage than any social media and gpx files (and waterproof boots). But I cannot provide data to backup this so I can only post and assume that it is impossible to stop sharing of information over the net, whatever is a gpx file or a trip report. And I have been bushwalking since I believe 1978. But I'm more than happy to read some data and step back from my beliefs.

I'm directionally dyslexic and still managed to get myself through the DuCane and Pelion circuits, Eldon Range, Wilmot/Franklands, Southern Range etc etc etc without a preloaded gpx file. Basic non-digital nav is not that hard. Just be sensible and don't rush.

Disclaimer: I DO NOT USE A GPS TO FOLLOW TRACKS, I use paper maps. But I generally carry a GPS for emergency and I HAVE USED a GPS for emergency reasons.

Cbee... sorry you got so many negative responses... alas

Graham17 wrote:Cbee... sorry you got so many negative responses... alas

Oh yeah, I'm so sorry too...

CBee wrote:giving information about tracks, giving away camping spots etc. is equally significant in advertising outdoor places as giving out gpx files. So I personally believe this bushwalking forum is as much responsible to erosion and environmental damage than any social media and gpx files (and waterproof boots). But I cannot provide data to backup this so I can only post and assume that it is impossible to stop sharing of information over the net, whatever is a gpx file or a trip report. And I have been bushwalking since I believe 1978. But I'm more than happy to read some data and step back from my beliefs.

I think you may have misunderstood. They are not saying "no" to GPX files and "yes" to posting details on this forum in other ways. They are saying "no" to both. In fact it is actually part of the forum rules to avoid posting detailed information about access to sensitive areas. Posting a photo of a particular sensitive location is a little different to posting detailed information about how to get there.

There is also an argument that could be had that perhaps such photos should not be posted either, but at present the forum rules do not prevent that. It's a balancing act, and not everybody is going to be happy with where the balance lies, no matter where the line gets drawn.

It probably does appear to be a bit of a naive or quaint expectation. It's an especially confounding policy by the park service while their other hand is actively promoting parks to open-ended visitor numbers and either exercising or selling off the right to inflict damage (damage in all sorts of confronting or subtle ways).