Luxury camp inside Walls of Jerusalem WHA with heli access

[Son of a Beach]

There is now a petition to the Tasmanian Parliament to fix the broken processes around the approvals for this development, and specifically to undo the approvals for this development. Please sign this petition if you care about Tasmania's supposedly 'protected' places:

http://www.parliament.tas.gov.au/EPetit ... ?PetNum=78

(You have to be a Tasmanian to sign it.)

[doogs]

(You have to be a Tasmanian to sign it.)

Is there any particular reason for this? I know it's state politics but it concerns NATIONAL Parks and WORLD Heritage Areas.
Anyone interstate with concerns may want to address them to peter.gutwein@parliament.tas.gov.au or any Tasmanian who wants to back up there petition signing with an email
(Being a concerned Tas resident I've signed the petition and emailed the Tasmanian Parks and Environment minister!)

[Lophophaps]

I do not know if it is a requirement that people who sign petitions live in the state or territory concerned with a matter. Regardless, politicians will take more notice of signatories that live near them.

While petitions are useful, there is much more gain from a well crafted balanced letter. This has more weight of the letters keep coming and are from people who live in marginal government electorates. Note that ministers do not have to reply but public servants nearly always have to reply. Hence, write to a senior PAWS person.

[Nuts]

Replies left me wondering if Hbt is a planet. For instance, under what circumstances can exclusive use align with a free market policy? Quite simply; that use isn't considered exclusive while ever there is no cap or no limit.

(ps. signed, thanks. though i have little interest in a refined process).

[north-north-west]

(You have to be a Tasmanian to sign it.)

Is there any particular reason for this? I know it's state politics but it concerns NATIONAL Parks and WORLD Heritage Areas.

The petition is to the state government, and their specific T&Cs say only Tasmanian residents (and Australian citizens).

[potato]

Thanks NNW, good to know.

[taswegian]

While petitions are useful, there is much more gain from a well crafted balanced letter. This has more weight of the letters keep coming and are from people who live in marginal government electorates. Note that ministers do not have to reply but public servants nearly always have to reply. Hence, write to a senior PAWS person.
Whilst letters are good this is Tasmanian Government and heads of agencies do as directed by the minister.
I'd suggest both, but a response from a ministerial head of a department will be 'crafted and balanced' in response.

[bogholesbuckethats]

Those wanting to attend the Reclaim Malbena event are required to register here

https://www.eventbrite.com.au/e/reclaim ... 1271261531

[Nuts]

I see there's now a boat, which will eventually have a Jetty, which will eventually be a boathouse, in keeping with a standing camp becoming a 5 star eco-resort. Heli access could be banned tomorrow and alternate ingress could easily continue. Exclusivity is the win, not necessarily heli access, which would eventually be inevitable. The lack of choppers could be problematic but not a bottom line, could even be the red herring in future projects. The call to stop heli access addresses only one small degradation, but avoids calling out one's mates employed by established exclusive use,eg. on The Overland Track, in the Tarkine, even the unnecessary proclamation of some sort of ownership over the tent platforms at Wild Dog Creek. It's feeling like a Tassie style protest, hardly possible these days without a tinge of nepotism? Of course it could also be part of a cunning plan, save the purists for round two?

Screen Shot 2019-11-22 at 7.00.15 pm.png (307.45 KiB) Viewed 28286 times

[lefroy]

Could be a blessing in disguise for the reclaim malbena weekend coming up nuts!

[bogholesbuckethats]

Protest group faces ban from walking in park
A bushwalking protest group has been told it must comply with the same laws as the development it opposes.
DAVID KILLICK, Political Editor, Mercury


BUSHWALKERS opposing a development in the state’s central highlands have been told they could be stopped from visiting the National Park site by Federal environmental laws.

A group planning a visit to Lake Malbena next month has been told it may need to apply for assessment of their potential impact under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act — a process that could take months.

The legal advice has put the organised event in doubt, although independent walkers are expected to proceed regardless.

Long-time bushwalker and trout fishing expert Greg French is organising a rally, picnic and community walk — under the banner “Reclaim Malbena” — on the weekend of December 7 and 8. But he has been told the group will have to meet the same environmental standards to walk and camp near the site as the helicopter-serviced luxury camp they are opposing.


The event is intended to draw attention to a tourism development planned for Halls Island in Lake Malbena under the Government’s Expressions of Interest program.

“It’s to protest the lack of transparency,” Mr French said. “We refuse to be denied access to our own land, especially when the processes which led to the privatisation of that island were just so opaque.”

Mr Finch said the state’s parks service had already tried to prevent the event from going ahead by saying just eight people at a time would be allowed into the area.

And he said Parks was not able to tell him whether participants were able to visit Halls Island or not because of a lease over the island — the details of which are not public.


“DPIPWE is saying it’s commercial-in-confidence and they have no ability to show us,” Mr French said.

“From our perspective it’s absolutely impossible for anyone to know what their legal obligations are. If we don't have a right to know what the law is, how do we know if we’re within the law or not? It’s like something out of Kafka.

“It’s a normal thing when you’re holding an event to have to get an event permit, but it’s not normal to be harassed about it.”

He said Parks also said attendees would be required to carry out their own faecal waste — a requirement not imposed on any other bushwalkers in Tasmania.

“Because it is advice that’s not applied to other people, it feels like intimidation, and that’s what bothers me,” Mr French said.

The proponent of the development, Daniel Hackett, said he was unavailable to comment. The Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service did not respond to a request for comment by deadline.

[tastrax]

What a load of %$^#* rubbish - dont call it an organised event and none of this will apply. If a few folks all spontaneously decide to go to the same place then so be it.

[pazzar]

What a load of %$^#* rubbish - dont call it an organised event and none of this will apply. If a few folks all spontaneously decide to go to the same place then so be it.

So what would this mean for a walking club? All their trips are organised events. Do they now need permits to do so? The world is going crazy.

[Lophophaps]

The PAWS response very much seems to be an attempt to stop the protest. If the laws apply then it is up to PAWS to cite them. Does PAWS usually enforce federal laws? I do not know.

There's a similar situation with bushwalking leadership. In some jurisdictions there are a lot of requirements for bushwalking leaders, many onerous. The easy way around this is not to have a leader. So for the forthcoming protest, say that there is no organisation, no leader, nothing formal. Then if people turn up it's just a bushwalk.

What rules state that eight people at a time can visit a region? Camp a little distance away and have a day trip. If PAWS will not advise of the law or regulation abut access then there can be no breach if people visit. It's a legal maxim that laws and regulations must be made known so that there can be compliance. It's a denial of natural justice to not state laws and regulations and then prosecute people for breaching them. This will be fun in court, and I can see PAWS backing off. Call their bluff.

[Son of a Beach]

Wish I had more leave time available. I would prefer to go back in via the Lake Meston route that I used last time anyhow, and then I could be there without being part of any organised event.

[pazzar]

Here's the letter sent to the head of DPIPWE by Greg French seeking clarification.

Dear John Whittington
I am trying to verify whether the lease holder of Halls Island has the right to exclude access to the general public. I accept that he has the legal right to exclude people from the hut, but I am specifically asking about the rest of the island. It is vital that your officers provide clear advice on this matter as there is no other way for the public to know their obligations under the law. (The conditions of the lease are ‘commercial in confidence’ and are not publically available.)
On 4 March 2019 Jason Jacobi, General Manager of the PWS, issued this advice to the TNPA:
‘There are now both a non-commercial lease for the historic hut, and a commercial lease for the development proposal. I am advised that the agreement holder is currently working to enable organised public access to the non-commercial lease area, being the hut. The commercial lease over the remainder of the island is contingent on the development obtaining all necessary approvals. If those approvals are secured, then the lease affords the operator exclusive use.’
To date the development has not obtained the necessary approvals.
On Friday 22 November 2019 Matt Bryce, the PWS Director of Landscape Programs, telephoned me in regard to Reclaim Malbena event. On Monday 25 November he emailed this advice:
‘You mentioned people going onto Halls Island and the lease provides the lessee exclusive possession of the island and you will need to get permission from the lessee before going onto the island.’
I questioned the validity of this assessment. On Tuesday 26 November Matt Bryce emailed this response:
‘Further to our phone conversation yesterday. I have checked with our Property Services staff. It appears that the PWS are not in a position to grant a group event authority for Halls Island without the prior written consent of the Lessees. It remains the Lessee’s prerogative whether or not to grant others permission to visit Halls Island.’
I immediately emailed Matt Bryce and asked if his advice superseded that of his General Manager. Later that day (Tuesday 26 November) Matt emailed this response:
‘I do not believe my advice contradicts the letter to TNPA which simply advises that the agreement holder is working towards public access to the hut. The access is at the agreement holder’s discretion. Hence I have advised that you seek their agreement to access the area.’
I have reason to believe that the general Manager’s advice is the correct advice. I feel that Matt Bryce’s advice is designed to stop the Reclaim Malbena event, and that as such it verges on intimidation.
Could you please ask your staff to explain how they reconcile the conflicting pieces of advice. If the two pieces of advice cannot be reconciled, could you please confirm which advice is the correct advice and provide a written apology.
Sincerely
Greg French

[tastrax]

What a load of %$^#* rubbish - dont call it an organised event and none of this will apply. If a few folks all spontaneously decide to go to the same place then so be it.

So what would this mean for a walking club? All their trips are organised events. Do they now need permits to do so? The world is going crazy.

You could always test the system by filling out an events form for every club event on crown land.... I suspect you would get an exemption pretty quickly.

https://parks.tas.gov.au/about-us/condu ... d%20events

[tastrax]

The critical words in Greg's letter are "To date the development has not obtained the necessary approvals.". If that is the case then its still open slather to the island.

If, all approvals have been granted, then the lessee has the right to prevent access if the lease is over the whole island.

LISTMAP would suggest that the lease is over the whole island - LISTmap Bookmark - Halls Island Lease: https://maps.thelist.tas.gov.au/listmap ... kId=438231

PS - Anyone can visit Lake Malbena, its entering the island that is the issue

[Lophophaps]

The critical words in Greg's letter are "To date the development has not obtained the necessary approvals.". If that is the case then its still open slather to the island.

If, all approvals have been granted, then the lessee has the right to prevent access if the lease is over the whole island.

Well said, a very valid point.

Greg's letter makes sense, more so than the replies. The best way to get rid of a bad law is to enforce it, exactly as the law says. If there is a requirement to, say, register with PAWS, do so, swamp them. Then when the system falls apart with no replies, , complain. Or if they say that registration must be several weeks ahead, call this what it is - stupid. Sometimes trips are contingent on fine weather, with tentative arrangements made firm on the Thursday. So at 9 am on a Friday contact PAWS, "We're leaving in eight hours and need the permit by 4 pm." The media might like this.

[Nuts]

I'm not entirely sure why he is even asking. That lease should have reverted to the public given the subsequent inclusion in wWHA, the altered management plan is morally if not legally wrong. Without any wider implications, as a fisherman / retiree, exercise no confidence in our park service remit to protect wWHA, not recognise any new ownership and march right on in. Set up camp wherever I chose and celebrate the freedom to do so.. Test their resolve to uphold degrading wilderness and shine some light on their mandate to do so. Six guns to attempts at anti protest laws, it'll only get harder from now.

Not that I can encourage others, thinking out loud.

[Lophophaps]

I suspect that Greg is asking so as to comply with the law and be seen to comply. The PAWS responses are shining light on the matter.

[Nuts]

This law's an *&%$#!, best not approached from the rear offering carrots.

[stepbystep]

An announcement about the Reclaim Malbena event will be made tomorrow.

It will be going ahead despite immense pressure from authorities. The anglers and the walkers organising this will not be intimidated. We will stare them down, because we are right and because the very integrity of the World Heritage Area is at stake.

[farefam]

Well said SBS. If the Franklin blockaders had listened to this sort of nonsense from PAWS (of all people!!!!) the hydro would have had their way. Politicians only listen to the public if there is strength in numbers, bad publicity for them in the television and press, and particularly to their local re-election prospects being targeted. I do hope that the national TV media have been invited to attend.

[MrWalker]

PWS are fairly specific about what events require permission and make it clear that things like a club walk do not require a permit.

Events
Authority must also be obtained to hold events on the PWS managed Crown land, particularly where the event is commercial, excludes public access or involves erecting temporary structures. Examples of events requiring authority include carnivals and regattas.

If you can avoid excluding the public, and don't drag along a huge tent big enough for a crowd then it is clearly not an "Event" as described on the PWS website.

So if someone wants to go to L Malbena and suggests some friends might want to come along then this is clearly not an Event that requires a permit.

[stepbystep]

PWS are stating that this 'event' won't qualify as an event but must be assessed as a 'controlled action' under the EPBC Act, which would take months. For context Mr Hacketts huts, walking tracks, hundreds of helicopter flights, helicopter pad and boat weren't deemed necessary to be assessed under the act, but 30-40 respectful bushwalkers committed to 'leave no trace' practices are a risk to the environment. This is state sanctioned intimidation. I feel really sad for the hundreds of wonderful people that work for the service whose bosses are doing this at the behest of this radical right wing government.

[bogholesbuckethats]

Posted By Greg French on FlyLife forum
https://flylife.com.au/forum/topic/why- ... na/page/28

I encourage independent bushwalkers to attend.

RECLAIM MALBENA

As a result of unprecedented pressure from a government agency – the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service – the Reclaim Malbena event will need to be modified. Following contradictory advice form that agency’s officers, we have received legal advice that we can run the event as follows:

Members of the public and media are invited to attend a public morning tea, picnic and rally at the trawtha mukaminya (Gowan Brae) boom gate. The culmination of this rally will see 8 bushwalkers depart for Lake Malbena where they will stage a symbolic reclamation of Halls Island and the wilderness of Lake Malbena.

Remember, the Hodgman Liberal government gifted Halls Island to a developer without public notification or any assessment process, and once development approvals have been finalised public access will be excluded from the island for decades to come. More than ever before, we need your attendance at this rally.

The alteration of the Reclaim Malbena event has come about due to threats from the Parks and Wildlife Service to impose draconian conditions on our original action. We had planned to have a picnic at Olive Lagoon and then have 16 experienced bushwalkers and wilderness guides rally on the Lake Malbena shoreline. All these people have great respect for the landscape and were to enter the area firmly guided by the principles of ‘leave no trace’. The issue was discussed at a federal level, and we were notified that we might have to have the event assessed as a ‘controlled action’ under the EPBC Act, which would take months to process. In short, we are being locked out.

It’s worth noting that the proponent for Malbena development was never required to undertake a ‘controlled action’ assessment. His proposal was waived through, despite it involving hundreds of helicopter flights per year, construction of permanent luxury accommodation, the creation of kilometres of walking tracks, the importation of unsanitised boats and the construction of a helicopter landing pad. Yet 16 bushwalkers from an official ‘event’ was deemed too much of a potential threat to the environment. Remember, if the walkers were not part of an ‘event’ they would have been free to enter the area as two groups of 8 private walkers. Still are. Furthermore, if the PWS was genuinely concerned about environmental impacts it could have modified or cancelled the event simply by tweaking our compulsory ‘event permit’ application, which presumably would be the normal way of doing things. (We never even got a chance to submit our application, which was not due to be lodged until several days after we were notified of the EPBC discussions.)

We consider the threat of EPBC assessment to be a slap in the face to the traditional users of the area. Still, we have been legally advised that we cannot encourage walkers to attend the lake shore as part of our private walk. Our sincere apologies go to those dedicated lovers of wild Tasmania who wanted to join that part of the formal protest.

The good news is that the restrictions on access apply only to the event itself. After the rally at trawtha mukaminya (Gowan Brae) independent walkers and fishers remain free to enter the Western Lakes as normal. After the rally, as independents, you remain perfectly entitled to go for a fish or a walk in our beautiful and still wild Western Lakes.

Reclaim Malbena – For a wild and free Western Lakes and World Heritage Area.

[Lophophaps]

Nice. I wonder what the government will do now. If chellenged on the ground, ask for the name and contact details of the government staffer. Also ask for the details of which law says that independent walkers cannot go over the Central Plateau. Carry park passes. It's a long way for media to drive and walk. Is there a way to keep the media informed without them being present?

[Nuts]

wah, a controlled action is for matters of national concern. 'Significant' threats (like developments requiring rezoning?) not the trivial impact of a few desperate nature lovers on an overnight camp!

[tastrax]

I suspect PWS cant do anything to you whilst at Gowan Brae as they have no authority - much of it is freehold title land / aboriginal land (although it does have some conservation covenants under the Nature Conservation Act). I cant imagine any PWS authorised officers being there in an official capacity as there are so few a number of them and they are more likely to be in the crowd!! I will take some doughnuts for them....

You are only obliged to give your name and address if they have reasonable grounds to suspect that you have committed an offence, so definitely ask what the offence is.