Cradle mountain day walk area boundary

[Captain Cool]

Hi all,
First post here so excuse me if this has been discussed before, but I'm wondering if someone can tell me where the official boundary to the cradle mountain "day walk area" is? I'm asking because I'm doing the overland in may with a friend but we were hoping to camp somewhere on day 1 within short striking distance of cradle summit for day 2. Was originally thinking of heading to Scott Kilvert hut for night one, but wasn't sure how far/long it was to backtrack to the cradle summit and would prefer to take the first day nice n easy since we probably won't hit the track until the afternoon anyway. Saw on the parks website camping isn't permitted in the day walk area, but couldnt see anything that clearly defined where this is. Any info is appreciated. Thanks guys

[eggs]

We started just after lunch and went to Scott-Kilvert hut and then climbed Barn Bluff as a side trip on the way to Waterfall Valley hut the next day.
It was April and there was plenty of time to do this.
Another group of about 6 used the same time to dump their packs at the track junction and go back along the face of Cradle and climb it before returning and going on to Waterfall Valley. So yes - you could use the hut as a base.

I know some might differ, but I would be reluctant to set up camp before at least passing the side of Little Horn. I would think anything out towards Artillery Knob would be fine as it is essentially trackless.

See also this topic: http://bushwalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=2096&hilit=camping+near+cradle

[Son of a Beach]

This is just word-of-mouth, but the source was a ranger on the Overland Track...

The day walk area ends at Waterfall Valley, or at Scott Kilvert. Ie, the only place you can camp before Waterfall Valley, is Scott Kilvert. Or so the ranger told me.

[Captain Cool]

Thanks for the info - I also spoke with parks and they were a bit vague on the details, they wouldn't really give me a specific point where the official day walk area boundary is. They didn't want to say it was ok to camp before SK or waterfall valley, but they didn't really say it wasn't either. Also warned that I could be fined up to $500 if caught camping in the wrong area.....so I guess it's on to SK hut for night one to be safe, and backtrack to cradle the next morning if the weathers clear!

[Liamy77]

i called cradle mt nat park on their open 7 days phone number listed on the PWS OT web site.... 13:00hrs on sat.... No *&%$#! answer apart from a robot then cut off 3 times!!! *&%$#! service without even as much as an answering machiene!!
COME ON PWS LIFT YOUR GAME IN PEAK SEASON ON A WORLD CLASS TRACK!

i then tried lake st clair nat par... fairly helpful, but didn't know where the day walk boundary is supposed to be...
I was given a mon- fri number for "Cathy Raymond" (PWS) who is supposed to be the one responsible for the OT (03) 6233 6047
SO I'LL CALL MONDAY N SEE IF THIS PERSON CAN ACTUALLY ANSWER WHAT OUGHTTO BE AN EASY AND OBVIOUS QUESTION...
If parks don't know where the boundary is then HOW CAN THEY ENFORCE IT??

seriously how hard is it to post a map with a boundary drawn on it?

[Nuts]

Where would You put it so as not to encourage 'perimeter' camping?
How would You then enforce it?

Too hard basket i'd say... good luck to them, i suspect that the vague answer Is the policy..

[Liamy77]

you would put it so that the perimeter is fairly stated & shown and in a non sensitive area.... thought that was *&%$#! obvious!!! And how do they enforce it now?! (i'm fairly sure that i could camp without leaving a trace and carrying out my poo and rubbish without being spotted but that is not ethical to do (despite my dodgy humour i choose to live as ethically just as i can).... -instead of not telling where it is and threatening $500 fines if you get it wrong - hard to not do when they have issues telling where it is or isn't! the boundary would probably have to be changed as the condition of the land is dynamic and not static....

look i understand why they feel this way (i agree with the need to protect the area) and i am not condoning goin around pissing off rangers - i am just saying that this is not the appropriate way to protect a public area!
protect it and say it out in the open where it is sensitive or not, appropriate to camp or not.... hell at least answer the phone as advertised on their own website!! otherwise you can be where you believe it is ok after trying to get good info unsucessfully and be inadvertantly in a area at risk- thereby defeating the whole point of the "yes minister" tactics that caused the misunderstanding!

what it boils down to is pick a spot and hope you get it right or we'll fine you a pile of $-is that just and fair? NO


i dont really expect them to listen or change their ways - im more cynical and less naive these days....i'm sure that you are right - it is deliberately vague so we are pushed/bullied into erring on the "safe side" i just believe there are better/fairer ways of achieving the same environmental outcome.

[Nuts]

Yer... well..

If it was me i'd put the marked boundary around the entire area out to beyond Waterfall Valley excluding the designated campsites in the valley and the immediate vicinty of Scott-Kilvert Hut.
I d exclude anywhere in the north of the park and withing a kilometer east and west of any of the walking tracks. The hope in doing so would be to 'encourage' everyone to plan on the two hut sites as a good first night...

I'd then, I guess, have no choice but to fine your *&%$#! whether you were an o/s backpacker trying to save a buck, a newbie who couldnt make it past Kitchen Hut or just an 'individual' who couln't give a rats and thought Lakes Wilks, Hanson or Twisted were far enough... I'd also have no leeway to give you the nod if I thought you were an experienced local who would be discrete and treat the place with respect...

[Liamy77]

yeah good point.... Again i agree- i would probably put the boundary there too- and stuff the freedom of judgement up in doing so... maybe it is better if i shut up for a change eh?! i usually blurt first then edit like mad after....
lets hope that the rangers are and stay fair in their judgement as you suggest... i'm sure they try to be...

[Nuts]

No, not at all! I agree it can seem pretty frustrating at first thoughts. I too like things 'out in the open' and given the choice would prefer more of it from the park service. I could be wrong, perhaps no ones thought much about this one...... just as likely

Be interesting to hear what they say...

[chiz]

I have pondered this question before and my interpretation of the cradle mountain day walk map thus 'day use area' is that anywhere contained within the day walk area map prohibits camping with the exception of Lake Rodway/SK Hut as stated within the little disclaimer box. One would imagine anywhere beyond the shown map is outside the day walk area therefore camping/overnight use is permitted.

Just my thoughts,

Cheers

[Liamy77]

sounds like a fair rational.... but maps usually show a bit more than just the main coverage area..... as most features are not rectangular..... the wellingtomn park map for instance shows parts of ferntree - definately not part of the park but is next to it....

[tasadam]

To address the questions raised by the first post, as I see it.
As discussed, the earliest opportunities for camping on the Overland track are either at Scott Kilvert, or Waterfall Valley. These are the two earliest opportunities for camping, so they define the "day walk area boundary".
Another option for you, since you say you "probably won't hit the track until the afternoon anyway", would be to camp at the camping ground before entering the Park, and make an early start the next day.
This gives you a chance to chill after all your travel, have an easy camp (no walking), a meal in a restaurant if you feel like lashing out (or the bistro), and a good nights sleep (with the possums - protect your food).
Then you can get an early start and you will be at Kitchen Hut within a couple of hours. Leave your kit in the hut and take essentials, climb the summit of Cradle (weather permitting, and that's a big "if"), then continue to Waterfall Valley.
Less distance to walk than the Scott Kilvert option, but there is nothing wrong with that option either.

I am not sure how Parks "enforce" the day use area, but to camp elsewhere would be irresponsible. There are no hardened sites. Kitchen Hut is an emergency shelter within the Day Use area and not for overnight camping unless you get stuck in a blizzard or something. How do Parks know you've got a pass? I've never been asked.
It's about doing the right thing more than being enforced to. And I like it that way. Would you enjoy walking through the reserve and being stopped by a ranger at every opportunity, and be asked to show your Parks pass? It would take something away from the experience, like big brother is watching and the ranger with his ticket book will jump out at you from behind the next tree... No thanks. They're always very friendly and helpful people and I don't think they would enjoy having the policing role instilled upon them.
I'm talking about Parks passes here, not Overland Track permits. I believe people do get turned back on the Overland Track if they do not have an OLT pass.

However....... There are those out there that deserve to be prosecuted for their actions in the park. People that leave litter (including toilet paper / tissues behind every bush on popular day walks! grrrr....), people that take a dump on or near the track and don't bury it, people that take things from the packs of other walkers while they are on a daywalk... Those sorts of things. By the way, that last one, if it happens it should be reported to the police (just make sure it wasn't a Currawong), however I do believe such instances are extremely rare.