there were a lot of submissions to DOC regarding the aspiring park mgmt plan that ended up having a ban on expanding huts in the park and holding the no's of overnight walkers on the routeburn at the same level
yet DOC let the private guiding company epxand their huts and increase the no of overnight walkers they were guiding on the track.
so how much do DOC really follow the mgmt plans?
the routeburn tunnel proposal was at complete odds with the park plan to avoid major construction in the park. not to mention the toxic problems with tunnel tailings that would be left in the park next to a major river where it would be prone to being washed into the river during floods.
and the tunnel proposal made it all the way to the final approval process..
it was a ridiculous case of DOC not being able to do anything to stop the process that went against conservation in the area and was pro major tourist developement. not to mention the monorail that was also proposed on DOC land in an ecologically important area. the plan there was so vague and inaccurate it should never have been considered. they claimed a six metre wide corridor would be cleared in the forest , but to avoid tree fall damaging the monorail or monorail car they would have to clear a 50 metre wide corridor or the operation would have become dangerous and too expensive to keep repairing and maintaining. they developers wouldnt stipulate the exact route either, making it impossible to accurately gauge the ecological impact of the monorail... yet that proposal also made it through to final approval phase in the process.... those two proposals should never have got anywhere near that phase, the park board should ahve rejected the proposal and that should have been the end of it, you had a case with kate wilkinson ignored the park boards recommendation in craigieburn about not turning over land to a private developer and allowing a major ski resort to be able to be built, and she allowed the swapping of the land for another piece of land in banks peninsula that they didnt have to swap they could have easily obtained it without cost...
one of the board members went public with the boards recommendation and the minister fired them after that happened. the govt and doc are playing fast and loose with their own plans. DOC is becoming more of a tourism organisation and less of a conservation organisation, at the very least it should be renamed or split off so there can be a pure conservation arm again that can proceed with the service of conservation and not be in conflict with their own department which is promoting tourism at the expense of conservation as happened in the old Forestry Service.. but at least the forestry service wre a lot better at building large volumes of traks and huts across the country and not neglecting some areas
The fox is guarding the chicken coop...
haha, so whats new?
- and now its 2015, same government but Maggie Barry as minister and Lou Sanson as director general, and a recent ruling from the ombudsman that DoC has to stick to the CMS plans.
FMC are probably more effective now than they have ever been .... its a good time to learn how to make submissions and to get your hands dirty doing something constructive.
doc won't change their allowing more overnight walkers on the routeburn though despite the ombudsman saying they broke their own rules...
no they won't change it back - we have to live with DoCs mismanagement. (and i wouldn't want to pay the penalty clause if DoC had to reverse their concession contract with John Davies). Money rules.
Its hard to get anything I'd call a tramping experience on the routeburn track itself these days ....thats probably been true for a while .... but a 100m off the track it changes (for the better IMO). Try crossing emily pass, following double barrel creek, camping at lake wilmot ...
In most cases we can't get back what has been waved goodbye. The issue here was not specificlly the numbers on the routeburn but the meaning of a CMS. Learn from the past and do it better. Making the consultation process work, and even improving it, is a worthwhile goal. How to get decision making away from the bureaucrats and businessmen? Should the rock burn become the next dart valley?
The reality here is not that CMS/ROR determinte direction but Lonely Planet et al. determine how popular a route is & CMS/ROR are forced always to play catchup. I have no useful suggestions as to what you do when LP recommends some pristene, unspoilt area and 100s of visitors flood there and overwhelm ecisting facilities.
WRT people not reading and commenting on CMS/ROR: that is a wider problem. How many of us read proposed district plans either? We have a democtatic structure in NZ that supposedly allows our input to most things that afftect us - but even people passionate about a cause like myself find it hard to be arsed. I've no useful answers to that one either.
I sometimes read them, and submit, but I also think there's a role of NGOs. The likes of FMC and F&B make some very worthwhile and highly qualified submissions which get some decent respect by planners more often than not.
This doesn't necessarily mean that what *they* submit will automatically fit what you happen to think about every single thing. That' a very difficult ask for any group trying to represent the interests of lots of people. But if you're not inclined to spend much time staring at plans or working with Conservation Boards yet still want to be represented, then I think there's value in giving support to other groups which are roughly aligned, and then make sure they know what you think about issues and why.
By 'giving support', I mean actually join them and provide some financial support, or even committee/admin support, as opposed to just ranting on their facebook pages.
This post has been edited by the author on 10 April 2015 at 12:55.
NGOs F&B FMC .... the handful of people doing the endless work are no different from the group here, except most of them don't have much time left to spend on forums.
<a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/go_wild/15814056960" title="renovate by Hugh van Noorden, on Flickr"><img src="https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8620/15814056960_ba7f3a16c2.jpg" width="500" height="313" alt="renovate"></a>
This post has been edited by the author on 10 April 2015 at 14:41.
Yep. I couldn't argue there.
