Bushwalk Australia

Parks Vic have released a management plan for a bunch of parks in eastern Victoria - Alpine, Buffalo, Baw Baw, Errinundra ... - and are chasing comments. According to the PV website

The priorities are to:
- protect and enhance the environment protecting areas recovering after fire, flood and other impacts; controlling pest animal populations, in particular feral horses and deer; and controlling weeds including brooms, willows, blackberry, and hawkweeds
- protect human life and property by reducing the risk of large-scale, severe bushfires spreading across the landscape
- conserve and maintain the cultural heritage of the parks by conservation and interpretive works at key heritage places and fostering the community’s cultural and heritage connections
- ensure the public can enjoy a wide range of recreational and tourism experiences by maintaining access, providing quality facilities and services, enhancing the opportunity for challenging and self-reliant activities and pursuing key tourism initiatives including a Victorian Alps Centre near Falls Creek, a serviced walking experience between Falls Creek and Mount Hotham and new four wheel-drive touring routes
- strengthen community participation in managing the parks, respecting the rights of Native Title holders and the roles and knowledge of Traditional Owners and groups and people with strong traditional ties to the High Country
- improve our understanding of the parks through innovative collection and sharing of community knowledge, scientific research and monitoring ; and
- maximise the social and economic benefits of the parks beyond their boundaries, including water supply, tourism and education.

Management proposes to reduce deer numbers. The priorities are working with neighbours where deer are affecting adjacent private property, protecting high value vegetation communities, and removing isolated, new and emerging populations. Volunteer and professional hunters will be an integral part of Sambar control programs. [nothing about introducing tigers]

supporting walking and cycling routes near Falls Creek, supporting guided hiking between Falls Creek and Mt Hotham, and between Mount Baw Baw and Walhalla. Other tourism proposals include looking at the possibility of Wilderness Camps at Mt Buffalo.

An additional 118,000 hectares of the Alpine National Park is proposed to be made available for hunting as well as allowing hunting of Red, Fallow, Rusa, Chital and Hog Deer in addition to Sambar [sambar358 will be happy]

the hunting season will be shortened by one month in the Alpine National Park, with hunting from 15 March to 15 December, to avoid much of the peak visitor period, and ten ‘No Camping with Firearms Areas’ in existing and proposed deer hunting areas are proposed to be established. [or maybe sambar358 won't be happy]

comments on the draft plan are invited and should be sent to Parks Victoria by Monday 25 August 2014.

Here's the link

http://parkweb.vic.gov.au/about-us/news/vision-for-alpine-national-parks-released

Earwig wrote:[nothing about introducing tigers]

I seriously LOL'd. (Yes I know the Re: to S358's post )

I'm a little unsure about the no camping with firearms in certain 'areas' thing tho...

Personally I'd prefer no firearms in the ANP on any long weekend but maintain full access as it currently stands.

Travis.

Slightly more direct link

http://parkweb.vic.gov.au/explore/parks ... /resources

We'll the list of no firearms in certain area's certainly doesn't effect me as I wouldn't base a hunt from any of these areas directly but...

Travis

I like tigers.

Some interesting reading there Earwig....been plowing thru it most of the arvo ! What.....no plan to introduce Tigers to control the deer in the draft.....still I can put that in my submission and certainly will....LOL !

Yep....a few (proposed wins) in the form of some new country with Wabonga Plateau being OK but the far east block around Willis is pretty marginal lizard country with very few deer but plenty of (protected) feral pigs and horses. Looks good on the map but not so on-the-ground...but it could improve in the future as the deer get there. I see the move to ban firearm possession in those 10 campsies as a good move and most of those camping grounds have had issues with idiots with guns for too long....good to see a proposal to have that addressed. Most hunters prefer to camp away from the mob so that rule won't impact on most of us and the idiot minority we can do without as well !

Broadening the deer species to be hunted is a good move as it now allows hunters to take any fallow or red deer encountered in the ANP....no rusa or chital present and not likely to be and Hog deer are highy regulated and a coastal specific species not ever likely to get into the ANP....one month season & a limit of 2 on them under a tag system so they shouldn't have been incuded in "the bag" and that will be pointed out via AHO submissions I'm sure. At the moment we can take only a sambar under the Regs. & allowing hunters to take other deer species which are currently in low numbers in isolated pockets within the ANP may enable them to be controlled or even eliminated before they get out-of-hand. We've been on about this for about 10 years so good to see that PV have (finally) embraced it via the Draft.

Less than happy about the proposed reduction to the stalking season by a month and I would expect that hunters and their organisations submissions will focus on this aspect of the Draft strongly. I'd be surprised if the shorter season recommendation will get up....hunter conflict with other user-groups in the ANP is more of a perception rather than a reality and any incidents are quite isolated and usually centered around inappropriate hunting or firearm usage in close proximity to campers and this to a large degree has already been addressed elsewhere in the Draft via several proposed new restrictions. So I expect the March 15 season start to fail....but time will tell on that I guess.

Quite a lot of other interesting stuff in there too for me of course apart from the hunting aspect of it : proposals to improve visitor access in key areas, more walking and mountain bike paths, opening up more areas to horse riding, addressing the feral horse issue, pest plants and animals, wild dogs, getting the balance between access and protection right, attracting more visitors to the Park while minimising their impacts......plenty there to pick-up on and make a submission out of which hopefully many individuals and interest groups will do. What we all get out of this will be with us for 10-15 years I'd think so the time to have your say is now on this....too late after the Final Recommendations come out. Cheers

s358

walkerchris77 wrote:I like tigers.

They would certainly "gee up" the bush experience. But given the reaction to ole crocodile taking his meals where he/she is able I doubt that the general populace would be that thrilled about tigers.

Personally. I think it could be a bit of a buzz - "you've gotta die of sumpthin"

BTW, I didn't make any real ecological assessment of the possibilities before making that comment

They hardly need MORE 4WD routes. How about maintenance and reopening of some of the old walking tracks instead? Only walking related project mentioned is the 'serviced' (ie: commercial) Hotham-Falls thing.

The VNPA has come out with their comments and they are pretty critical.
http://vnpa.org.au/page/publications/na ... ement-plan

1. PROTECTION OF NATURE SHOULD CONSISTENTLY BE THE PRIME OBJECTIVE OF PARK MANAGEMENT

The draft plan gives ample lip service to the prime purpose of national parks – protection of the environment – but then makes increasing concessions to user groups.

It is hard to find any clear management action that actually increases the long-term wellbeing of the parks’ flora and fauna, especially the many threatened species and communities in the park. For example, while horse riders are not allowed through wetland areas such as peat beds, fens, or mossbeds, these areas are inadequately mapped in the plan.


Horse riders should be excluded from all areas where wetlands/mossbeds are common, and any other sensitive areas. Horse camps, which inevitably bring weed invasions, should be very carefully sited. For example there should be no horse camp at The Playgrounds, at the headwaters of the Buchan, where threatened plants are found. All current horse camps need urgent weed control programs.

2. CATTLEMEN SHOULD NOT HAVE PRIVILEGED ACCESS TO PARK MANAGEMENT PROCESSES

Alarmingly, the plan proposes a formal ‘collaborative working relationship’ with the Mountain Cattlemen’s Association in management of the Alpine National Park, even though the cattlemen have consistently argued against the establishment of the park. There is no such relationship proposed with any other organisation.

The plan also supports the infamous alpine cattle grazing trial, even though scientific studies clearly show there is no need for the trial. Decades of evidence show that cattle grazing has done great damage to alpine and sub-alpine ecosystems in many ways, and that grazing does not significantly reduce the spread or severity
of fire across the region. Bizarrely, this important information is not mentioned in the plan.

3. SCIENCE SHOULD BE VALUED MORE HIGHLY BY PARK MANAGERS

The rich and valuable history of alpine science was celebrated in the National Heritage listing of the Australian Alps National Parks, but science is not given great credibility in the management plan. Indeed, if anything, it is overridden by ‘local knowledge’, and ‘cattlemen’s traditional knowledge’.

Many classic scientific studies and important recent studies have been completely ignored. The complexity of managing ecosystems today means management actions must be consistent with scientific studies and advice.
Anecdotal ‘information’ should be tested for its accuracy and relevance. Park management must not be based on hearsay or prejudiced advice.

4. PEST PLANTS AND ANIMALS NEED CLEAR AND EFFECTIVE ACTION

Some aspects of pest management are given welcome prominence in the draft plan, but there is little clear commitment to workable solutions. The significant
and growing impacts of around 10,000 feral horses, for example, are at last given clear acknowledgement, and a range of treatment options are discussed. However, the plan states that ‘the success of feral horse management will largely depend on whether effective control methods are acceptable to the community’. But under the National Parks Act, managers are required to ‘exterminate or control exotic fauna in the park’.

The final management plan must outline how feral horse numbers will be controlled, and also outline an education strategy to inform the public about feral horse (and other feral animal) management in the park.

Similarly, the plan makes it clear that deer are causing widespread and growing damage to the park, but goes weak at the knees when proposing solutions. Deer cause considerable damage to rainforest areas, especially in Errinundra and Baw Baw national parks, but there is no strategy to account for deer in the rainforest section of the plan!

5. COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS DO NOT BELONG IN NATIONAL PARKS

Commercial developments are flagged for some parks, without any apparent concern that they will cause impacts, or present future problems for park managers.

In Mount Buffalo National Park, for example, ‘Wilderness Retreat’ roofed accommodation is flagged, presumably leased to private operators, and a similar option is opened for the Falls Creek to Hotham walk. And while the Mount Buffalo Chalet will have its current very large footprint reduced when dysfunctional buildings are demolished, options for rebuilding on the old footprint should be ruled out.

On page 77, a new Victorian Alps Centre is flagged for the edge of Rocky Valley Dam at the Falls Creek Alpine Resort. The land identified for this was removed from the Alpine National Park recently to allow a small, unobtrusive building by the lake to support summer recreation at the resort. However, the plan now proposes an ‘inspiring space’ there that will also include: a Traditional Owner’s Cultural Centre and Keeping Place; a place to learn about alpine ‘exploration’, mountain cattlemen families, the history of recreation, the development of hydro electricity and environmental conservation.

It will also support alpine ecology field studies and research etc. Add in a café, and this would result in a massive building on the edge of Rocky Valley Dam, visible from many places in the national park.

The idea of a visitor centre is admirable, but it must be more sensitively sited, and any building at the edge of the lake (if necessary at all) should be as unobtrusive as possible.

6. NO NEW TRACK NEEDED AROUND ROCKY VALLEY DAM

A previously abandoned proposal for an ‘around the lake track’ on the southern shore of Rocky Valley Dam, inexplicably, makes a return in this plan. This shared bike/walk track will take visitors into areas around Rocky Knobs, where many of the most intact peat beds and moss beds are found. There is no compelling reason to bring large numbers of visitors to this sensitive area.

7. FIRE SHOULD BE MANAGED WITH GREAT CAUTION

The recommendations for fire management are very confusing. Given that almost the entire planning area has been burnt in recent years, and alpine and sub-alpine areas are known to not need fire for regeneration, it is extraordinary that the draft plan’s ‘Vision’ calls for ‘extensive planned burning’.

There is no clear strategy to manage fire under the park’s ecological imperatives, even though the scientific knowledge to enable good fire management in the high country is readily available to park managers.

Apparently planned burning is seen as the only tool available to reduce severe bushfire. However, building a rapid attack capability for bushfire fire management would be far more effective in a region of steep hills and tall wet forests where planned burning is both difficult, and ill-advised.

The plan makes no mention of the current damaging practice of removing old hollow-bearing trees, the habitat for many birds and mammals, before fuel reduction burns take place.

8. CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS NEED CONSIDERATION

Although climate change impacts in the alpine region of south-eastern Australia are already evident (shrinking snow seasons, increased severe fire, and increased storm events), the future management problems climate change will bring are given little consideration in the plan.

9. IS THE DRAFT A FAIR DINKUM MANAGEMENT PLAN?

Victoria’s National Parks Act asks for a management plan for each national and state park. And those plans should say what actual management actions will be taken in each park to ensure the prime purpose of the Act – the protection of the natural environment – will be achieved.

This ‘plan’ gives precious little detail and covers not one park, but one third of Victoria’s park estate in one slim volume. Parks Victoria plans to produce further plans (an implementation plan and annual work plans), but we see no evidence that these are likely to appear in public.

HOW TO MAKE A SUBMISSION

Please use your own words to frame your submission to Parks Victoria. (If you want your submission to remain confidential, remember to state that.)

Submissions must be received by Monday 25 August 2014 and sent to: [email protected] or to:

• Manager, Park Planning and Procedures, Environment and Heritage Division, Parks Victoria
Level 10, 535 Bourke St
Melbourne VIC 3000

MORE INFO

Parks Victoria’s full draft Greater Alpine Parks Management Plan, and a number of background documents, are available on the Parks Victoria website, parkweb.vic.gov.au.

A printed copy of the draft plan, including all of the maps, can be viewed during normal business hours at the VNPA office: Level 3/60 Leicester St, Carlton. The maps give detailed information on which areas are available for horse riding, deer shooting etc.

(Note: names of people who make a submission
will be listed in the final plan, and their submissions available to the public at a later date, unless marked ‘CONFIDENTIAL’.)

Well said

Wilderness Camps at Mt Buffalo ? The park is pretty small for that, it's only 310 km². It's already pretty constructed for a National Park, and criss-crossed by many roads. It's so small there is no "buffer" zone. Once you're up the road and onto the plateau, it's magic is there. Any new set of lodges would be really standing out in the environment, and really ugly. I would rather if they turned some of the camping spots at Lake Catani into small cabins.