north-north-west wrote:I'm struggling to think of areas where such walks could be developed without too severely compromising wilderness values.
I was talking more along the lines of attempting to spread however many thousand extra visits a year across 20-30+ existing, lesser used tracks. Ones that aren't already being thrashed and/or present real safety concerns to less-experienced walkers eg. South Coast Track, Western and eventually the Eastern Arthurs and Mt Anne Circuit.
Agreed - dumping such numbers on a single track would require significant infrastructure/development. An additional few hundred pairs of boots per annum, however, could perhaps be managed far more minimally, both visually and financially speaking.
The Penguin Cradle Trail really should be utilised and promoted more, but again agreed, the "back half" isn't without safety and environmental impact issues. I could think of far worse places to spend a bit of money on track hardening, though.
This current issue, as I see it, is that everyone all wants to do the same half-dozen tracks because they're "iconic" and "famous" and "a bucket list walk" and the ones all their friends do. Marketing isn't going to change that perception overnight, but I feel a part of the solution is to start challenging it and make people aware that, hey, there are all these other awesome places to go too, places for every ability.
Granted one issue is, for the market that equates overnight hiking with huts, current options are rather limited.
I really believe we need more coastal multiday walks around the northeast and west/northwest coast, like Three Capes but minus the boats, flash huts, paved tracks and pricey booking fee/development cost. As a general rule coastal routes are going to be less dangerous to inexperienced walkers, less affected by adverse weather and less dependent on heavy track infrastructure to protect the surrounding environment, compared to alpine routes. I'd love to see a Trial Harbour to Granville Harbour walk near/alongside the Climies Track, or even an extended thru-hike route all the way up to Arthur River perhaps? Water is likely the main issue, keeping tanks filled during summer would be a challenge, which means huts with a decent roof catchment area. Coastal huts don't need to be triple glazed and insulated beyond R8+, but with current bushfire refuge rules, there may me no such thing as a "cheap" hut either.
However I have it on good authority that the market doesn't want more coastal walks, but alpine walks. Can't blame them - it's what I prefer too! But then, I don't require heated huts or dry feet. Another Overland Track-type walk isn't going to happen. There will be no seven-day Eldons or Denison Ranges Track with huts and interpretative trackside art installations for (hopefully) obvious reasons. From what I know, PWS would rather keep the Western Arthurs as-is, and manage the current issues without making it any more attractive than it already is.
The question is where we draw the line between catering to everyone's whims and simply saying "this is what we have to offer - take it or leave it". I'm probably being optimistic/naïve, but in a space of high demand and limited supply, people will adapt their expectations to what's available. If they want facilities and huts anyway.
north-north-west wrote:What is more important - access and entertainment for humans, or protection of the wilderness?
A certain amount of the former greatly aids the latter. Or as an acquaintance once surmised "sometimes you have to give up the arm to save the life".