Bushwalk Australia

Hi all,

Parks Victoria has removed all of the PDF park notes documents from its website. All those really useful maps, descriptions etc are just gone. It’s a real travesty. The new website is very lightweight and not very useful or easy to navigate. You can’t search by geographic area, it’s like they’ve just given up on providing comprehensive information to hikers and other park users.

You can still find the old park notes on archive.org’s wayback machine but someone really needs to be accountable for this. I’m going to email a complaint about the terrible website design.

Am I just grumpy or does anyone else agree with me?

electricmonk wrote:Hi all,

Parks Victoria has removed all of the PDF park notes documents from its website. All those really useful maps, descriptions etc are just gone. It’s a real travesty. The new website is very lightweight and not very useful or easy to navigate. You can’t search by geographic area, it’s like they’ve just given up on providing comprehensive information to hikers and other park users.

You can still find the old park notes on archive.org’s wayback machine but someone really needs to be accountable for this. I’m going to email a complaint about the terrible website design.

Am I just grumpy or does anyone else agree with me?

Not sure what you mean. I navigated from the home page to the Alpine National Park page and on the right a little way down found all these



See here:
https://www.parks.vic.gov.au/places-to- ... ional-park

The info’s still there, but you do have to scroll a long way down to find it.

Agree that the website could be improved - it appears to significantly favour looks over usability.

It has got better of late, the current style has been a round a few years now and the PDF's etc that @Xplora pointed out have only arrived more recently.
Doing a quick search again this morning of some of my local parks its still a bit hit an miss.
They seem to all have links to local features, (some of which have zero info when you get there) but most don't have any PDF download and little useful info to actually get there let alone to find the start of a walking track.
(eg Warby Ovens and Chiltern Mt Pilot)

Wazza.

Different mob (DELWP) and a few years old but something along these lines with a half decent map...

https://www.ffm.vic.gov.au/__data/asset ... Trails.pdf

Looks like they’ve created a small number of these new style “visitor guides” but the old “park notes” are just gone. If you put the parks website into the wayback machine you can find way more information via the old park notes PDFs. Very stupid.

I have a large collection of real paper hard copy Topographical maps. They are generally all I require.

paidal_chalne_vala wrote:I have a large collection of real paper hard copy Topographical maps. They are generally all I require.

It is useful to have some extra information on walks that topos don't provide...times, distances, terrain, vegetation, track conditions, water, campsites, POIs, cultural and historical information etc. While all this can be found elsewhere the info provided by PV could be greatly improved.

paidal_chalne_vala wrote:I have a large collection of real paper hard copy Topographical maps. They are generally all I require.

Visitor guides and information have always been very basic but useful information for travellers. The basic maps have helped us and we did not have to purchase a whole map just for one short walk. I recall there was reference in some to other maps that can be bought to give more detail but not sure if that still is the case. I am sure your large collection of paper maps does not extend to all of Victoria.

Parks visitor guides are also placed in tourist information centres. Most people will however pull out their phone now and look it all up so having it accessible online is important. It is not something I would often do so making it easy is good. I am not sure of the response a complaint would get but the complaint would need to be specific. Site examples. Good luck.

It certainly feels like every "update" to the PV website over the past decade has resulted in a reduction in both functionality and usefulness, especially in terms of finding information about walks.

I've sent a comprehensive email to info@parks.vic.gov.au complaining about the new website.

I mean, check out the old site. There's just no contest:
https://web.archive.org/web/20190306211 ... ic.gov.au/

It had useful links such as:
"Find a Park"
"Parks by Name"
"Parks Locator Map"
"Visitor Guides"

You would think that some basic requirements of this new website would be:
a) a comprehensive directory of parks managed by Parks Victoria
b) a map of Victoria's parks

The worst part is the lack of visitor guides. You can sometimes find them if you click enough links but often in non-intuitive places.

The redesign appears to have been led by this new administrative team that came in in 2017 led by Matthew Jackson, who has previously worked for smaller scale and vastly more commercial organisations like Philip Island Nature Parks and Currumbin Wildlife Sanctuary. The website redesign was led by communications chief Lisa Patroni who also came in in 2017 and previously worked for Victoria Racing Club and Peter Rowland Catering. Very corporate. I can only assume that the problem is a broad lack of familiarity with the purpose and nature of Victoria's national parks.

These are people who are focused on Melbourne's brand and presenting Melbourne as a product but have no experience with managing public amenities like Victoria's National Parks.

Anyway, I'm sure they're smart enough people but people need to communicate to them that the website doesn't contain nearly as much useful info as it used to and that they need to add this information back in. The site used to be a public amenity in itself as a directory to the greatest of public amenities, Victoria's national parks. I was half tempted to complain to the environment minister Lily D'Ambrosio but I'll see what reply I get first.

Any reply, electricmonk?

Looks like the design culprits behind it are these folks: https://paulvayanos.com/project/parks-victoria-website.

Have a read through for the rationale on effectively killing the information previously provided.

Joris wrote:Looks like the design culprits behind it are these folks: https://paulvayanos.com/project/parks-victoria-website.

Have a read through for the rationale on effectively killing the information previously provided.

Wow. That is some of the most jargonised material I've ever seen.

Multiple spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors. "we addressed the pain points" ?????? "Looking for a balance of city, hiking adventures, wildife encoutners and Australian beachers."

I haven't checked out the new PV website as yet, but will be doing so and will add my 2 cents' worth to their Inbox.

Yes, if PV management has any sense, they would chuck this illiterate rubbish in the bin and withhold payment.

The designer's premise is so far from what is required as to be laughable. It states that "the Parks Victoria website isn't the primary tool used when it comes to planning a visit". Of course it isn't! That's not what it's for. Commercial interests look after that. PV looks after (or should be looking after, even though grossly underfunded), the environments it manages. The website exists to document factual information which intending visitors may wish to read. It does not need "hero pictures". What a joke.

I'm with you Eremophila, in sending my 222 cents' worth.

If this weather continues it may be a good weekend for reading in any event.....

It seems as though they are gearing the website to funnel users towards the "jewel in the crown" better-known attractions, and to commercial tour operations.

None of those handy little PDF maps, although they have forgotten to remove reference to the maps:

Download the Mount Buangor State Park visitor guide and map for more information about the park and the experiences to be had within its borders.

But when you click on the link: Mount Buangor State Park visitor guide (PDF) it's just the visitor guide, the map isn't there.

The visitor guide does list and describe the walking tracks. These longer walks require detailed maps and planning and preparation before undertaking them. But no indication of where one might find a map.

It's like they don't really want you to go further than the campgrounds and picnic areas. Terrain hazards: Uneven ground!!!!! Gee whiz!!!!

The language is interesting, quotes and then my comments in brackets.

a high bounce rate (Me falling off Mount Bogong or any of my telemarks.)
eliminate assumptions and long winded conversations (Me climbing Mount Bogong.)
such as national National geographic and lonely planet (Not to be confused with the local NG. Missing capitals is a capital crime.)
Hilights (Can anyone spell highlights?)
The information that did provide useful reflected on quick look up cases (Research on the meaning continues.)
Common priority themes that persuaded users to convert included photography, (What about people that like their religion?)
impact / effort matrix (There are no spaces with a forward slash!)
Engagement -> Conversion -> Planing (A woodworker does planing. Planning trips is good too.)
the aim was to deliver a snapshot of the of the type (Wow!)
a series of tests where made, which included treejacking (Try "was made". It will not work - trees are too top heavy to jack up.)

I've not listed a lot of longer bungles.

A much simpler method is to determine the goals by meeting and enquiring with PV staff, users, and especially peak bodies like VNPA. using the goals website can be designed. The Bogong High Plains part is fair, with a bit of hyperbole and typos. There's no style guide. Access notes are missing.

More work is needed.

I don't think the visual design is any better than the ideas being pursued. Did they consult bushwalkers ... at all??

I spotted a clanger, of a place I first began exploring in 1985...

Great Otways National Park

Just because there is a National Park and a Forest Park that cross over here and there is no reason for pluralism. The plural form is nonsense anyway.
But I think the designer of that dog's breakfast is trying to sound more impressive than capable, with a pretentious patina of PostIt notes and scribbles that somehow (I don't know how) convey valid ideas or assumptions. What is UX and UI?? My niece surmised UX is user experience and UI is user input.

And treejacking? What!? Oh my...a quickie wedged up against two regnans (the poor things)...? The big question is why PV chose to hack a reasonable, long-proven site (I enjoyed downloading visitor guides and maps, and fortunately still have a few pdfs of these, though doubtless dated now) into what it has now become, a clunky resource that is neither straightforward nor for the most part, helpful or fulfilling.

The ambition doesn't match the reality of a site with 1000s of pages all auto populated with useless generic information and plug-ins.

Perhaps it is by design that all current third party guidebooks provide info on official walks only. Private sector parknotes.

Eremophila wrote:If this weather continues it may be a good weekend for reading in any event.....

It seems as though they are gearing the website to funnel users towards the "jewel in the crown" better-known attractions, and to commercial tour operations.

None of those handy little PDF maps, although they have forgotten to remove reference to the maps:

Download the Mount Buangor State Park visitor guide and map for more information about the park and the experiences to be had within its borders.

But when you click on the link: Mount Buangor State Park visitor guide (PDF) it's just the visitor guide, the map isn't there.

The visitor guide does list and describe the walking tracks. These longer walks require detailed maps and planning and preparation before undertaking them. But no indication of where one might find a map.

It's like they don't really want you to go further than the campgrounds and picnic areas. Terrain hazards: Uneven ground!!!!! Gee whiz!!!!

Don't know about others, but I would not rely on Parks Victoria's mapping for getting around Mount Buangor/Mount Cole, or even Wilsons Promontory. Not for bushwalking and definitely not for mountain biking (at which your example, Mount Buangor, is extremely popular). There are better, more detailed and accurate maps of this and other large environments (e.g. available at Melbourne Map Central). The people I have met at Mount Buangor/Mount Cole have been a mix of local day trippers and (very) experienced longer-distance overnight walkers (as seen on 31st August this year). Not mummy bloggers pushing a pram with Jun'or to Instagram the wildflowers. The only places that are straightforward and do not require a map are Upper and Lower Ferntree Falls and the higher Cascades Falls, all less than 100 to 200 metres from Ferntree Camping and Picnic Area.

The commercial focus in PV began a long time ago. I think something is in the works at Wilsons Promontory and Croajingalong for seasonal tourism experiences.