Maintenance of unofficial tracks

[jonnosan]

In the national park near to where I live (blue mountains) there are a number of historic tracks that are not officially maintained. The canonical example of this is the Lindeman Pass, constructed in the early 20th century, never officially opened, fell into disrepute, then was recut and publicized by Jim Smith and others in the 1980s. Some sections of this are very clear, other parts though are quite overgrown, including some of the access tracks that connect to the Lindeman from the top of the escarpment.

I am interested to hear people's views on the ethics and legality of maintaining these tracks. Eg some or all of
- tying ribbons and/or nailing markers to trees
- removing dead trees and branches from the track
- pruning branches on living trees that are blocking the existing path
- pruning branches on living trees that are not yet blocking the path, but would if left unchecked
- cutting a new section of a track through the bush where the original has been overgrown and lost, or else blocked due to landslide or an obstacle that is too big to move.

[tasadam]

Good question!
I watch with interest.

[jonnosan]

I just noticed I wrote the Lindeman track fell into "disrepute" - I actually meant "disrepair" but disrepute is probably apt as well, from the politics around that track described in Jim Smith's book

[Moondog55]

Personally; I would say "Go for it" not much of a fan of any of the National Parks management, too much politics and not enough actual work being done. Does not take much to keep a track delineated and I admit to putting one or more cats-eye reflectors on certain tracks myself. A trick I learnt from deer hunters is to always carry a pair of sharp secateurs on the belt and snip off offending branches on the way past and a small folding pruning saw does not weigh much either and cheap $8- at Bunnings

[sthughes]

If it's an existing track I think it's great if people donate their time to maintaining it. Though I do think some are a little overzealous with the pink tape!.

[walkinTas]

Though I do think some are a little overzealous with the pink tape!.

+1

Sometimes I think there is a bit of a communication problem around track closures. It is not always easy to understand why a good track suddenly loses official support or is closed. Two tracks I can think of: the Jackson creek track connecting the Moses Crk Trk and the Lake Myrtle Trk; and the Riggs Pass Trk at Cradle. Both good and useful tracks, but very much lacking official support and I think now closed. There may be good reasons for not maintaining these, but where is the communication and discussion with the walking community?

[Penguin]

Having done a little bit of "guerilla track maintenance" I would also say go for it.

There are too many tracks in Tasmania falling into disrepair and not enough money in Park's budget to do adequate maintenance. If you approach Parks they rightfully say that you must not do any work as their insurance does not cover you, and you probably do not have the certificates needed for their OH&S requirements.

A couple of us have adopted a track. We have been a bit slack lately, but after the storms a couple of years back, we put a lot of effort into clearing timber and rerouting the track. Well a mate did most of it and I was a semiuseful sidekick. Parks did clear a few large trees but no further work. We cleared all the smaller stuff - up to 40cm and fixed the track itself.

Our main issue is that some others took it upon themselves to try to open up a few local walking tracks for trail bike use. We undid some of their work to return it back to a walking track - feel very little guilt about this.

Be judicious and you will be helping others enjoy the local bush safely.

[jonnosan]

Though I do think some are a little overzealous with the pink tape!.

How much is too much? And where do you get the stuff from, anyway?

[stepbystep]

Though I do think some are a little overzealous with the pink tape!.

How much is too much? And where do you get the stuff from, anyway?

Bunnings.

Mt Murchison struck me as overtaped, a year ago there was even tape on a cairn??? It was hard to get a decent photo without tapes in it all on a very clear track.

I recently did Mt Weld and it was a bit sketchy to follow in places through the forest, ironically a group from a walking club came through an hour later retaping, it was a touch over zealous, for example a large streamer of ribbon in the middle of a high moorland, when a tape at either end would have been sufficient.

I used to carry tape but don't anymore, I will on occasion retie when I see one has fallen to the ground, if it's in a tricky spot

[sthughes]

Though I do think some are a little overzealous with the pink tape!.

How much is too much? And where do you get the stuff from, anyway?

Depends, but putting big bows on 5 consecutive trees then nothing for 100m makes me roll my eyes a bit. I'd say being able to see the next marker from the prevous one is enough. I like to have to look for them a bit. Preferably I don't like being able to see more than a couple of markers ahead. If the foot pad is obvious no markers are needed at all in my opinion. Strategic placement is the key, as long as it does the job but doesn't make the place look like a runway at night it's all good.
It's survey tape, Bunnings would have it I suspect.

P.s. Ahh Bunnings it is. Personally I prefer cairns and blazes over flourescent tape, but I know a lot would disagree with the environmental side of that.

[phan_TOM]

a year ago there was even tape on a cairn???

I went for a walk up an un-maintained track last year and in some places there was at least ten piecs of pink tape within a few metres of each other, I honestly couldn't see the point of it and removed all of them except for one. Quite a few bits on the ground etc too, I go bushwalking to get away from rubbish...

otherwise I say go for it, like anything tracks are in constant change with growth and decay, I can't see a problem as long as its not wholesale carnage with a chainsaw etc. Theres a couple of combined use tracks (walking and MTB) that I regularly do and the owner of a local bike shop is oftne up there with secateurs/pruning saw and with the rainforest its almost a full time job! I applaud his dedication.

I'd say being able to see the next marker from the prevous one is enough

Yeah, I agree & if you can't see the next one usually it appears if you keep on going anyway

[photohiker]

The tracks I walk here in SA, I do a bit of clearing. Not the first time I have to duck and weave, mind you. About the third time - it gets attacked!

[Nuts]

If a route dosent form into a track then it doesnt really need ongoing taping does it.. I'd suggest biodegadable tape and yes, Just enough... Good chance you'll follow someone else map interp and perhaps not the best route anyway.. All to save a little time.. Same issue with published route maps and notes really but it's another equally unpopular topic.. I've pulled them out where excessive.

A tape on a cairn, that's amusing.

On old tracks I would agree with wtas, I'd also add that some attempt to find out why a track has been closed or reassigned would be a good idea rather than assuming the worst.

[gayet]

I would first ask why the track is not maintained.
1. If it's left to allow the track to repair/rehabilitate or reduce traffic - then no don't maintain it
2. If due to lack of funds or resources etc, then maintain it but do not extend or alter it

Don't create new tracks, don't encourage further degradation of already damaged areas. Retagging - keep it to a minimum - able to see next tag and maybe 2 only from present point.
Minimal interference really

[TerraMer]

I would first ask why the track is not maintained.
1. If it's left to allow the track to repair/rehabilitate or reduce traffic - then no don't maintain it
2. If due to lack of funds or resources etc, then maintain it but do not extend or alter it

Don't create new tracks, don't encourage further degradation of already damaged areas. Retagging - keep it to a minimum - able to see next tag and maybe 2 only from present point.
Minimal interference really

Totally agree but tag the trees a little more subtly. It is not pleasant seeing that colourful tape on trees when your in nature to escape civilisation.

[bmak]

I'm inclined to say that a track no longer maintained should be left untouched. Walk it if you wish but do so as nature leaves it and it only makes the walk more interesting anyway.

[tom_brennan]

Many of the tracks in the Blue Mountains were constructed around the turn of the century. They were often built to a high standard, well benched and with sandstone steps, walls and stairs. For National Parks to even restore a single one of these tracks costs in excess of $1m. They simply don't have the money to do more. See
http://www.unescobkk.org/culture/world- ... ing-track/
for an example of one of the most famous ones.

They have also recently restored the Grand Canyon Track near Blackheath.

The fact that many of these tracks still survive at all is testament to the skill of the track builders who built them. The stonemasonry is a work of art, much of it still in excellent condition over 100 years on.

I've personally spent time on the Empire Pass track, and the tracks around the old Hydro Majestic Hotel at Medlow Bath, clearing them of debris and branches. They are part of the cultural heritage of the Blue Mountains, and I think individuals doing their little bit are the only way to keep them from disappearing altogether.

[walkinTas]

I'm inclined to say that a track no longer maintained should be left untouched...

I would first ask why the track is not maintained.
1. If it's left to allow the track to repair/rehabilitate or reduce traffic - then no don't maintain it

As I said above, it is not always easy to understand why a track is no longer officially supported. OR even if it is an official decision. I'd be inclined to agree with both of you. If the reason is environmental and the track or area are closed for regeneration or other sound reasons, then I don't believe the track should be "unofficially" reopened. However, a lot of marginally popular tracks in Tassie seem to be in decline simply because of a lack of funding or similar reasons. This is not just 'Parks' tracks either. A number of 'Forestry' tracks up and down the east coast are in sorry repair. Many tracks have had wind-blown trees across them for a long time with no apparent attempt to clean them up, just occasional efforts by walkers, or walkers have simply tagged an alternative route around the problem.

Does anyone know if any of the States publish a list of "officially supported" tracks OR "officially closed" tracks.

[sthughes]

I consider "closed" tracks entirely differently from "neglected" tracks. Around here most tracks are just let go due to lack of funding, the few that are closed for a reason are a different story.

[walkinTas]

So what does "not officially maintained" in the OP mean?

[Penguin]

I consider "closed" tracks entirely differently from "neglected" tracks. Around here most tracks are just let go due to lack of funding, the few that are closed for a reason are a different story.

Agreed - it would be sad to see early bushwalkers put off by "starter" tracks being difficult for families on day walks just because previously open day tracks had become difficult due to lack of general clearing maintenance. We know in Tassie that the government is not flushed with money in either Parks or Forestry to upkeep these old and valuable tracks.

A good pair of loopers and a hand saw can make a hell of a difference for access.

[jonnosan]

So what does "not officially maintained" in the OP mean?

In the case of the Lindeman track, it was constructed (meaning - route surveyed, bush cleared, steps cut into rock, stone embankments built in places) around 100 years ago with private funds on what was then crown land. For political reasons (conflict between what was then two seperate councils in the region, combined with anti-german hysteria during World War I) it was never officially opened, and was not maintained. In the 1980s, a local bushwalking enthusiast and author called Jim Smith discovered the track, and with the help of other volunteers, restored it. He also wrote a book called "The Blue Mountains mystery track : Lindeman Pass" that describes the history of the track, and also includes a map & guide.

Sometime after that, the land through which the track passes was made part of the Blue Mountains National Park. The NPWS does not perform any maintenance on it, I assume because they have limited funds, and those funds are best spent on maintaining the high-traffic tourist trails. AFAIK it is not closed; one end of the track has a NPWS sign that says "Lindeman Pass. This is an historic route which is rough and indistinct in places. Please do not proceed without an experienced navigator".

But since the Blue Mountains has attracted bushwalkers since before that term existed, and before much of it was made into National Park there are also many other tracks in the area that were either constructed by local landowners (for their own pleasure, or to attract tourists), or else areas in which solid foot pads formed organically from decades of visitors.

So I am not referring to tracks that have been intentionally closed (whether for safety reasons or to allow wilderness to regenerate) - I am more than happy to stay right away from them. Nor am I referring to turning a 'negotiable way' (perhaps marked with cairns and ribbons) into a defined track - I understand that if no track exists,it is better if people walk in different spots to minimise erosion. My question is just about situations where a track already exists (clearly visible on the ground) but is becoming overgrown or damaged.

[colinm]

FWIW, I hassled NPWS to maintain a marked track (topo had it marked) which had become overgrown and awful. They complained about lack of resources, and in the end they collaborated with one of the bushwalking clubs to cut back the overhanging vegetation.

I think it may not be legal to go about cutting vegetation in a national park, unless NPWS say you can. It seems like it might be a useful thing to do anyway.

If it were me, I'd be opening up a dialog with NPWS and the local rangers, expressing willingness and desire to fix the track up. You might find that they're actually hoping it'll just go away, and won't welcome your endeavours - if there are rare or endangered flora for example NPWS will probably really dig their heels in. And, of course, since you're dealing with lots of layers of decision makers (and some decision avoiders) you'd need to be patient. The other downside of the direct approach is that it makes guerilla track improvement more difficult to get away with

Also, maybe, talk to the local bushwalking club(s). You may or may not want to walk with them, but they may have some interest/ideas/contacts which could be useful in your project.

You'd be on much firmer ground if you could point to maps with the track on it which proves the track is a public thoroughfare - once a public thoroughfare exists, the statutory owner of it is required to maintain it to a reasonable (and appropriate) standard or they can be liable for injuries on the track. From reading the cases in question, the principle seems to be that if NPWS is the only entity allowed to maintain the track, they can't fail to do it. You'll probably have to show that it's a track in regular use, to show that it is (in fact) a public thoroughfare. Once you've proven that NPWS are obliged to maintain it, or are exposed to liability for injury, it's likely they'll be more amenable to cooperative clearing by volunteer labour.

From what you've said it's an improved track - stone steps, etc. That seems to strengthen the case that it's an existing public thoroughfare whether or not it was officially 'opened' or is marked on LPI/LPMA topos.

[puredingo]

I've had to re-access my position on the marking/maintenance of tracks. For selfish reasons it made me mad that "tourist" who didn't bother to do their homework could romp around my little part of the world and not do the hard yards as i did as a young fella to properly explore it and work it out for themselves. But that attitude was bourne out of the fact I really didn't do much walking outside of my little bubble until lately....then half way up Beloon pass I'd over shot the gully I was meant to be on and was more North than I should of been and it was about the third attempt....it was about then I realised I would just about sell my soul for a neon sign with arrows and about every 20 meters a little booth with one of those Westfields info woman in it to give me directions.

Ugly, gaudy over-taping of tracks and too obvious rock cairns can be annoying and sometimes pointless.....until you need them!

[tasadam]

Check out the weight, or lack thereof...
http://www.stihl.com.au/products/produc ... odelID=548
Seriously considering...

[tastrax]

In general I would say that most Parks staff are happy to allow (via regulation/permit) the maintaining of tracks by individuals/groups to an agreed standard. The problems generally occur when the parties cant agree on a standard (ie one feels that the track should be cleared to two metres and the other thinks 600mm is enough). Via negotiation there can normally be a resolution.

In general cutting of any vegetatation without a permit is an offence (on PWS land and maybe even forestry) and its amazing how fast PWS staff find out about illegal cutting, generally from other walkers. Its the same with taping, some folks hate it and report new tapes in remote areas or on obscure routes where they feel its inappropriate.

Develop a rapport with the local staff and you would be amazed at what they will legally agree to...

[tas-man]

Check out the weight, or lack thereof...
http://www.stihl.com.au/products/produc ... odelID=548
Seriously considering...

I have had one of these for several years and can highly recommend it.

[Binder]

There now fairly simple ways around the liability / insurance issue for volunteers doing work on Parks.
I would be really happy to talk to anyone about track clearing in the Southwest. Thinking of Red Tape Ck, Condominium Ck and Port Davey/Arthurs plains tracks for starters...

PM me if anyone interested.

Cheers

[colinm]

Really? What are they? The Scouts are having kittens about the new federal laws applying OHS standards to volunteers. If you know a simple way around, I'm all ears.

[tastrax]

In Tassie its as simple as joining Wildcare - they cover all the liability and OHS requirements (in association with the host organisation .... like Parks and Wildlife)

http://www.wildcaretas.org.au/pages/home.php

There may be other organisations in NSW that do the same thing