esspecially if built to mountain bike standard
In that case, the tramping community has a role to play in working with DoC to ensure the walk is built the way we would want.
I have to say I was unimpressed with the sheer amount of mechanical work and blasting necessary to build the Old Ghost Road track. Of course doing this job properly will cost more, so now is the time to stick our oar in when the budgets are being proposed.
I'd suggest that we frame this around 'historic tramping culture' values. Promote the idea that visitors aren't looking for just another 'single lane road' which cuts roughshod over the landscape, but one that has been carefully built to weave into it and lie lightly upon it.
People ARE looking for something different and unique. We have the opportunity to identify what that might look like with this new track. Get in early and say our piece rather than whinge about it.
This post has been edited by the author on 19 November 2015 at 15:24.
is there much consultation required with the wider local community about building a Great walk?
before doc go through ripping open the bush and gouging a wide track through the wilderness? all the great walks to date were built in pre existing tracks and upgraded with heavy use, they were popular tracks already before they were made great walks, they didnt materialise at the outset as great walks. the useage was already there , they werent put in to create the useage..
so DOC can now arbitrarily put a great walk in anywhere they want now without consulting the local community?
queenstown are lobbying for another great walk next to the town.
great walks are totally different to what most tramping tracks are, they are high standard from end to end. the routeburn have put metal in on kilometres of track in the middle of the track as well as widening the track extensively and putting in a fair number of steps on the rougher steep sections.
trampers the most regular users of our mountain parks have their own views of what sort of tracks they want put in. are we now catering for one off users as a preference over the regular users who may want something totally different... its a balancing act catering for all the users of various areas.
I don't think any direct consultation's required for the Great Walk. The law isn't so specific as to differentiate between Great Walks and other tracks (and it barely even mentions tracks). Consultation is, however, required for updating Paparoa National Park's Management Plan to enable all of the changes required to allow for certain types of structures/huts to be built for certain numbers of people, and for certain types of tracks to be put in, and so on.
That consultation will happen too. Even Nick Smith's press release states "The extension of the National Park and proposed new Pike29 Memorial Track will require a review of the Paparoa National Park Management Plan. This will begin shortly and is to be completed in 2016". http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1511/S00270/great-walk-to-memorialise-29-pike-miners.htm
But the fact that it's already decided that there WILL be a Great Walk makes it seem as if the Management Plan consultation could end up being little more than a rubber stamping exercise.
Once again I'm not totally against the idea that a Great Walk could work here. But I'm totally confused and concerned about the stated justifications and process being gone through to get it, and what it potentially means for DOC's role and the rest of the conservation estate in future.
This post has been edited by the author on 19 November 2015 at 15:24.
"We have one wife of a deceased miner say that she is opposed".
Sonya Rockhouse is quoted in the press as being against it as well. One of her sons died in the explosion and another managed to escape.
Also I smell a rat if Mr Monk and the Minister of Conservation are related in view of how quickly this is all going ahead.
[proposed by the families]
@PhillipW: "That's interesting .. do you have a link for this please? Not a trick question, I'm genuinely curious to know more."
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/65532941/pike-river-tragedy-memorial-walking-track-wanted
https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/-it-makes-sense-minister-supports-families-plans-for-pike-river-site-6225607
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/331427/calls-pike-mine-be-national-park
None of it seems to clearly indicate who or what inspired the idea, but it certainly seems to have been the Families Group Committee asking for it.
Eight of the twenty-nine families disagreed with the track memorial idea but the rest were in favour. The Grey Star newspaper has had quite a lot about this topic as content lately.
Having just seen first hand the construction of a new MTB standard track (The Old Ghost Road) NOT in a Nat. Park, I do wonder where the 'line in the sand' needs to be drawn for National Parks. It would be a doddle to upgrade the Able Tasman to MTB standard. Then the Routeburn! Why stop?
Someone assumed that MTBs would only be allowed in winter. I doubt it. If you really want to 'cash in' then all year round is the way - as on the Old Ghost Road. My bet is that this government will stop at nothing to get the dollars flowing.
I really have no problem with these tracks outside Nat. Parks, but in them? Not so sure.
Aha! I've just got it! They are 'National' Parks so, of course, this National Govt. can do with them as they wish. Silly me! lol
they'd never upgrade the entire routeburn to an MTB track. too much work required, too many steep slopes requiring a massive amount of work and theres a lot of dangerous drop offs
National parks are for everyone to enjoy but more so they are for conservation.
It would be ideal if bikes and walkers didnt share the same tracks but the cost of this is more tracks which is bad as well.
As long as bikes follow the rules ie speed limits not running walkers over etc then I find it hard to disagree with them being there
At least they are out there doing it
