The past and future of Great Walks

I'm uncertain of the entire history. Great Walks tend to be themed around tourism, which DOC doesn't have a legal mandate to promote. So, the only rationale I can really see for the creation of more Great Walks is to structure any already-existing intensive tourism to protect the places which people are visiting, or to create a beacon for all those people who might otherwise go and visit less safe and less managed places. I agree with @waynowski's statement that turning something into a Great Walk really causes an area to lose something. It becomes much more tame, and at the same time becomes a much higher expense for DOC. On the other hand, there are plenty of lesser-themed walks which DOC's investing in to help promote recreation, and unlike tourism that is one of its mandates. The Holdsworth-Jumbo circuit's gotten lots of investment in the last few years, because it's so handy to places like Masterton. It's much easier now for locals to get their kids into somewhere like Atiwhakatu Hut, or nearby camping, and probably around the rest of the circuit. I don't see why it should need to be a Great Walk, though, and I also don't think it really fits a Great Walk profile very well. (Weather too unpredictible, potentially very dangerous at random times, and so potentially catastrophically inconsistent with the conveyor belt inexperienced tourism which Great Walks tend to attract.) @nzbazza: National Parks? Well, if they were created anyway then I don't personally see why they shouldn't be in places that aren't National Parks. There are plenty of interesting and unique places that aren't National Parked. They're often less protected on paper, but that doesn't make it right. In some cases, the designation is a consequence of politics, or the branch of the government (Lands & Survey or Forestry Service) which happened to be managing the land 50 years ago. In the end, DOC just inherited it all. NP's stayed NP's under the National Parks Act, whereas all Forest Parks automatically became Conservation Parks under the Conservation Act. With 30% of conservation land still having no clear designation as Stewardship Land even though it was meant to be properly reclassified 25 years ago except that nobody got around to it, it shouldn't be unexpected that there might also be plenty of Conservation Park land out there that could have as easily been made a National Park under different circumstances. Just my thoughts. :)