Conserve & Manage Why can’t wilderness just be sacred… LAKE MALBENA!

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 488 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #613256

    Simon Taylor
    Participant

    I am surprised and disappointed that Daniel is the man driving this development. The more remote Western Lakes area is certainly a place that requires some effort and knowledge to experience, but unlike other places in the world that have larger distances or vast mountains to cross, the Tasmanian Western Lakes is achievable for anyone willing to invest some effort and time (on foot) to access it.
    I have no opposition for a properly established, low impact standing camp. But like the majority of anglers who fish the area, do strongly oppose the use of helicopters within the Western Lakes fishery.

    Through negotiation, access could potentially be granted (on foot) from Olive Lagoon, thus giving clients the ‘real experience ‘ of the area.

    People wishing to comment to EPBC have 10 working days.

    Email:
    [email protected]

    Be certain to quote the below to make sure you are heard.

    Reference no….2018/8177

    Title….
    WILD DRAKE PTY LTD / Tourism and Recreation / Halls Island/Tasmania/Halls Island Standing Camp, Lake Malbena, Tas

    Simon

    #613257

    mitch aka 2 fish
    Participant

    I think $urpri$ed is a strong word.

    this is a textbook case of underhanded business.

    cheers,
    shawn

    #613269

    flylife
    Moderator

    Are you saying the clock is already ticking on the ten day comment period Simon, and if so, is there a link to the latest developments and call for comments?

    #613270

    BarryJ
    Participant

    http://epbcnotices.environment.gov.au/

    Scroll down to “Invitations to comment” (blue highlighted link) and then look for Wild Drake Pty Ltd.

    #613271

    flylife
    Moderator

    I’ve answered my own question, it’s in today’s paper apparently.

    #613272

    Simon Taylor
    Participant

    Comments close on July 19th Rob.

    #613273

    Lunkahunter
    Participant

    If you are at all opposed to this please submit your comments before July 19. If this happens there is nothing stopping future development in other parts of the Western Lakes/WHA. The true wilderness experience could be lost forever.
    No choppers full stop end of story. Foot access not a problem.
    Cheers Mark.

    #613274

    mitch aka 2 fish
    Participant

    scribbled, signed and sent.
    there isn’t one person using this forum with a good enough reason not to oppose it.

    and the fact that’s there’s no one defending it under the guise of it ‘being better for future people’s pursuits’ speaks volumes.
    this is just a foot in the door to ruin an area like they’ve done elsewhere.
    when you look to elsewhere who is it that is benefiting?
    and there’s your answer.

    I’ve seen some horseshit in my time, hey.

    cheers,
    shawn

    #613302

    telr
    Participant

    My penny-halfpenny’s worth duly penned & despatched, this area needs helicopters like a napalm attack!

    #613303

    Brad
    Member

    I too am surprised and disappointed to see what Daniel is proposing.

    Having worked with him for a year doing In Season I would never have thought that he would be proposing helicopter-use in the WHA. There is a subtext of conservation throughout our book.

    I have been impressed by his efforts at Lake Ina and the Riverfly business in general, and he has worked hard to put Tasmanian fly fishing on the tourist radar for the last few years, which must surely be a good thing.

    I don’t really have any issues with a small sensitive development on Halls Island, as I see it much like the Cradle Huts facilities, catering to a different clientele than your average bushwalker. That’s fine. I’m rather unimpressed with the current government for the way they have gone about re-zoning the area, and the secrecy surrounding it, but that’s another issue (and not the only thing I’m disappointed by, with this government!)

    I do have a huge issue with the helicopter component though. I just don’t see that any disturbance to the serenity and wildness of the area is worth any amount of money. It seems the height of arrogance that someone with a bucket of money can not only take a shortcut to getting to enjoy these wild places, but ruin the experience for other foot-based users in the process.

    I know it’s not a lot of flights, and they’re not over popular areas, but that makes it all the more reason not to use them, as anyone walking in those areas is most likely trying to escape the “crowded” Western lakes to the north!!

    I, like many others here, also think that it will open the gates to further helicopter use throughout the WHA. Geez, the sight of an airliner jet-trail overhead shatters my illusion that I’m the only person on the planet when I’m out there, imagine how bad it would be to have the thud of helicopter blades, even in the distance.

    By all means run tourist operations in the area. The more people enjoying it the better. But not at the expense of others. Equal effort and reward is needed for all.

    #613311

    babelfish
    Participant
    quote [email protected]” post=324434:

    …. I know it’s not a lot of flights, and they’re not over popular areas …. .

    That’s how it starts, and then expands from then on forever. Will end up like some areas of NZ … I once fished the NZ SI West Coast – everywhere you went there were choppers flying over taking clients to hard to get to areas. One day a couple of us did the hard yards and ventured into a remote spot, we got down onto the river in a deep valley surrounded by steep cliffs, we had to get down there using a rope to scale down a cliff for about 150ft … about an hour into fishing a chopper goes over and deposits clients upstream. We had to turn back, up the cliff and to the car .. all that effort for not even a half day of peace.

    #613312

    Greg French
    Participant

    Respondents to the epbc must remember that comments are being solicited only for the ‘additional information’. Luckily the helicopter route and landing pad are included in additional pdfs. If you have already submitted a comment but have not responded directly to the ‘additional info’, it would pay to resubmit. Remember, all respondents should visit epbcnotices.environment.gov.au/ then scroll down to ‘Invitations to comment’ and look for Wild Drake Pty Ltd.

    By way of example, part of my submission goes like this:

    My main problem with the current proposal is that it flies in the face of the community-endorsed management plan. The fact that two central tenants of that plan – the ones dealing with helicopter access and wilderness zoning – have been overridden by the state government in order to hasten processing threatens to further undermine the public’s faith in democratic processes, and potentially places the TWWHA at existential risk. The ‘additional information’ provided by the developer merely exacerbates my concerns.

    The additional information shows the helicopter route tracking directly over the best and most popular fishing waters in the untracked parts of the Western Lakes’ core wilderness, namely lakes Ina, Nive, Lenone and Ingrid. I cannot think of a route which would be worse for the amenity of current users, or of likely future users.

    I am also alarmed that the helipad is not on the leasehold, but some distance away on public land, further exacerbating the impact of helicopters on existing users and on wilderness values. (I should point out that the additional pdf files provided by the developer contradict each other in respect to the site of the helipad. Part1.pdf (1.85 MB) locates the site on the mainland while proposedhelicopterroute.pdf (1.08 MB) – under the heading ‘Searches of endpoints’ – locates the site on the leased island. Undoubtedly, this will have caused confusion for some respondents.)

    #613320

    brokenwater
    Participant

    Great to see such strong opposition to what really could be a massive blow to Wilderness Trout fishing and bushwalking in this state. I tend to avoid forums and group chats as I am a fairly private person. But this has pushed me out of that once complacent fishing privacy comfort zone, to stand up to a proposal that threatens the ambience in our unique western lakes and TWWHA for not only other users, but for the environment and remote values it offers locals and visitors alike. Two words, Foot access, It’s our point of difference to most other unique fisheries in the world, and once we lose it, it’s hard to regain, a precedence is set. I’m lucky enough to have visited the areas in question, whilst it is patronised less frequently than the northern western lakes, it is nonetheless patronised by those who seek that extra remote experience they cannot get from other entry points, for this to be taken away for pure monetary gain, does not fit into the Tasmanian Trout fishing culture we have built. When I was guiding, my ethos was to be neither seen nor heard. One still shakes their head at how the current state government used every means possible to allow it to get to this referral stage, I’d be proud of a shepherd that good on the footy ground, and as stated a management plan changed at a whim
    … I only hope that our federal environment minister sees what we see and hears us, and puts an end to the newest threat of commercial heli ventures in our WHA, they do not belong, they cannot coexist with foot access or remote area values… Keep up the fight

    Brett Smith
    Formerly Broken Water Trout Tours…

    #613341

    garygreene
    Participant

    Just sent off my response ( I use the term my response loosely, as mainly ideas and info pilfered from others) The important thing is to get on board and be heard.

    #613352

    brenmac
    Participant

    I’ve responded with my objections as per Greg’s directions. The Wilderness Society has a template one you can submit if you don’t have the time to bang one out on the keyboard.

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 488 total)

This topic is temporarily locked.