I recently did part of a track along the Matakitaki river (not sure what the tracks official name is) and the route on the sign at the start of the track was quite different to the actual route, and the route shown on topomap.co.nz.
Apparently a route should have orange markers, and this did until it left farmland and entered the bush. There was a quadbike track you could follow but several times this disappeared or changed route after a tree had blocked the original path. The really confusing bit was when it crossed the river (which was not shown on the DOC signage, they had it going all the way up one side, kind of a big deal considering how big this river is!!!!). Luckily the river was just low enough for me to cross, otherwise I guess I would have had to have turned back as there was quite a lot of cliffs bordering the river, making bush bashes not really possible.
The worst, most misleading part were the inaccuracies of the route up above the forks. On DOC's signage it showed the route to Bob's hut vying off before the forks. I didn't ever manage to find this turnoff, and with the clarity of hindsight and knowing what I now know, wonder if it even exists. And also on the topomap site it shows another route to Bob's hut after crossing the east Matakitaki branch (this route wasn't even shown on DOC's map). And lastly, DOC's map shows the route going down the true right side of the east Matakitaki, whereas on the topomap site the route goes down the true left side of the river!! I'm fairly certain the topomap site has it all correct and it's DOC that doesn't. Pretty shocking discrepancies between these two maps, I can totally see how tourists get lost in the bush!!
Is this common with many tracks? I have mostly only done great walks, which DOC appears to pay a lot more attention to. I will email them with my concerns, though it will most likely fall on deaf ears.
I certainly will never set out without a tent after this experience. It's a good thing I'm always following a river, so can't really get too lost.
This post has been edited by the author on 3 January 2015 at 02:18.
I normally take track maps with a grain of salt without further info. LINZ sourced data (which much of DOC's data seems to be based on) has been getting better since LINZ started incorporating people's supplied GPS data to map tracks, but tracks often still come and go and shift around much more rapidly than maps can ever keep up. It still sounds concerning if DOC's advising something on a sign that's apparently so wrong.
How does the map on DOC's sign compare with DOC's more centralised track maps? Try visiting http://maps.doc.govt.nz/ , open the Advanced Viewer, switch on Operational-Layers/DOC-Recreation/Tracks, then scroll down the left and switch on the Topo base map (ignore the tracks shown directly on the topo, though, which might also be inconsistent with topomap.co.nz if either is out of date), then zoom in to see what tracks DOC have on record.
In any case, maybe you should flick an email to DOC's local office (maybe Nelson? I'm not sure) and let them know. Maybe someone installed the sign upside down.
This post has been edited by the author on 3 January 2015 at 07:15.
maps promote the use of our remote areas.
The Topo50 tracks layer has a pretty colorful history, derived largely from the 260 series maps. Carrying the new gps around this last month, some tracks are pretty good, while others bear little resemblence.
DOC's tracks layer is to on average no better than LINZ's. It makes changes for the sake of changes in many cases. However as said above there are some gps tracks starting to emerge, and DOC notes on each track what the source of the data was.
For my part, the new years ambition here is to fix Egmont Nat park, and its about third done already.
This image shows the start of the track to Fanthoms Peak. The pink is LINZ, the purple DOC, and the black is my gps track, confirmed by multiple passes. The three lines converge out of the bushline where the track is visible on the 0.4m orthophotography.
http://zoneblue.org/files/tracks-example.png
BTW forgot to mention there is an initiative to change all this, called the Local Government Geospatial Alliance's NZ Walking and Biking Tracks Project , here.
http://lgga-nz.blogspot.co.nz/p/tracks-project.html
They are asking for data / corrections etc.
izogi - lol @ the map being upside down. May as well have been, at least then the track would have been going up the correct side of the river.
Someone could be in for a seriously grim trip if they didn't have a tent, or spare time. Luckily for me I had both, and the weather was terrific. Apart from the safety aspect, it's also makes for a bit of stress and robs you of a little enjoyment when you lose confidence in the route you're trying to follow.
On a side note, how the hell do you get onto and across those three wire "bridges" with a heavy pack on? This one started about a metre off the ground. I turned back, mostly cos I was shattered already by then. Would require quite a leap to get up on the thing, not even possible with my pack on. Guess I could have made multiple crossings with bits and bobs of my gear if I was really keen to get across it.
Was very weird how quiet the birdsong was in this valley, like a bloody morgue. Didn't even see a robin for 20km or so!! Yet Reefton is teaming with birds. Interesting to see the variances from region to region.
This post has been edited by the author on 3 January 2015 at 14:30.
Remember that most maps are derived from ariel photos and under bush a lot of terrain is pretty much guessed at. Cow saddle in the tararuas is like this. The map shows the track on one side of the stream when it is on the other. Is it the stream or track thats wrong?
"Was very weird how quiet the birdsong was in this valley, like a bloody morgue. "
Why not phone the local DOC office and find out what predator control in that area compared to Reefton? Always illuminating.
I wouldn't say that there were birds there, but in my own experience it's not always easy to gauge bird presence.
What seems to be a very quiet place can suddenly become very noisy in the early morning, or shortly after it's stopped raining or in different wind or temperature conditions. There can also be plenty of other circumstantial factors which can be radically different yet not necessarily obvious. Sometimes the listener also has an effect. eg. Some people are much better tuned to hearing higher or lower noises, and that perceptual ability changes through your life.
This is one reason why I'm cautious about trusting anecdotes from people noticing (or not noticing) bird life during arguments about the Duke Rudolf of Rheinfelden, especially with such high emotion around the circumstances through which he died during that skateboard accident. You really need reliable objective measurement methodology to be certain about birds.
This post has been edited by the author on 5 January 2015 at 11:31.
Good god izogi, you totally lost me with the "Duke Rudolf of Rheinfelden" comment. My quick google search has me wondering if skateboards existed back then.
Anyways, emotional or not, I'm without doubt it was the quietest valley I can recall ever being in, barring the one that are covered in tussock rather than beech forest. Won't be hurrying back any time soon.
geeves - lol was that a tongue in cheek comment? How can I say whether it's the river or track that is wrong? The river hasn't shifted course if that's what you're suggesting.
