Goto Chockstone Home

  Guide
  Gallery
  Tech Tips
  Articles
  Reviews
  Dictionary
  Links
  Forum
  Search
  About

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

  Shop
Chockstone Photography
Australian Landscape Photography by Michael Boniwell
Australian Landscape Prints





Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

 Page 1 of 2. Messages 1 to 20 | 21 to 24
Author
Survey feedback- Pines campground.Results in.
access t CliffCare
11-May-2015
2:57:34 PM
Hi Everyone,

CliffCare is looking to gather some information about The Pines campground at Mt Arapiles. What you like about it, what you don't and how you think it can be improved. This feedback from the people and community that use the campground is really important. I will be presenting this information to the Arapiles Advisory Group, of which I am a member and this in turn to Parks Victoria. Take the small amount of time to register your thoughts

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1sxfUN2aEShTuv5_RA0zk10DcxR94P1-TEfeBAigBHow/viewform?usp=send_form

ajfclark
11-May-2015
6:08:56 PM
Clickable
dan_b
12-May-2015
10:59:07 AM
done

Sabu
12-May-2015
12:25:21 PM
Thanks for organising this Tracy, it would be very interesting to find out the results!
Wendy
12-May-2015
12:59:54 PM
Hi Tracey,

I'm not sure this survey is appropriately worded to get unbiassed results. It has several moments of suggesting that the pines are the only source of shade. There is no wording of use of local natives to generate shade in the same manner that you say "plant pines to create shade". So it directs anyone valuing shade to choose the pines option. There is also no option to say "I value the native vegetation" as part of the experience, only to say "I value the history and tradition of the pines". Yes, there is the "other" option, but by having actually worded options, people do tend to choose from those so what you choose to list and how you word it affects how people respond.

I'm sure we all know on here that I am firmly in the no more pines camp. There was nowhere to list my concerns with the pines in the survey (which are myriad and don't really fit into a single "other" box along with driving off the road, camping outside of designated areas, pooing all over the place etc etc). Or to say I don't really want to face this same question in another 70 years when another lot of pines die when we could plant natives that last 100s of years. Still, we probably won't be around to deal with that problem ourselves, even if the WImmera is at all tolerable after another 70 years of unchecked climate change.

Sorry to be a grumble bum.

Wendy
access t CliffCare
12-May-2015
1:53:41 PM
On 12/05/2015 Wendy wrote:
>Hi Tracey,
>
>I'm not sure this survey is appropriately worded to get unbiassed results.
>It has several moments of suggesting that the pines are the only source
>of shade. There is no wording of use of local natives to generate shade
>in the same manner that you say "plant pines to create shade". So it directs
>anyone valuing shade to choose the pines option. There is also no option
>to say "I value the native vegetation" as part of the experience, only
>to say "I value the history and tradition of the pines". Yes, there is
>the "other" option, but by having actually worded options, people do tend
>to choose from those so what you choose to list and how you word it affects
>how people respond.
>
>I'm sure we all know on here that I am firmly in the no more pines camp.
>There was nowhere to list my concerns with the pines in the survey (which
>are myriad and don't really fit into a single "other" box along with driving
>off the road, camping outside of designated areas, pooing all over the
>place etc etc). Or to say I don't really want to face this same question
>in another 70 years when another lot of pines die when we could plant natives
>that last 100s of years. Still, we probably won't be around to deal with
>that problem ourselves, even if the WImmera is at all tolerable after another
>70 years of unchecked climate change.
>
>Sorry to be a grumble bum.
>
>Wendy

Hiya grumble bum :)

I will be the first to say that this isn't a perfect survey but I do think it covers a lot of areas, questions and statements that have come up over the years. At some point we had to bring the questions down to a workable amount and those which we thought would give us an overall idea of the thoughts out there. So far the feedback has been quite similar to much of what I have heard over the years through speaking to many who use the campground. It wasn't just put together by myself but by a range of people and as I noted, using many of the previous questions and information gathered to inform the questionnaire. Fixing up the campground also has a number of logistical and resource issues which we are working with - whether we like it or not and again these have informed the questionnaire. Many people have used the Other option to write a little more in detail and I do think there is nothing to stop you from doing this. And they have also sent me emails, again going into a little more detail. Please feel free to do so. These results aren't being pumped into some program whereby at the end it gives me an overall average. This is manual and I will be including many of the extra thoughts provided. I also think that those that are firmly in the all natives camp will choose accordingly and those who are not so fussed will also do likewise.

People keep commenting on how much fuss there has to be in order to get a few trees planted. As I think everyone can see, there are many differing opinions so therein lies the problem as to the amount of fuss. What is a definite is that there will need to be compromise from all camps.

Cheers,

A fellow often grumble bum.
patto
12-May-2015
3:32:59 PM
Native pines do not provide the same amenity in the campground as the existing ones. Amenity for the campers is the reason why they exist at all so why not continue that? The campsite location means it has the water to support them so why not continue with the tradition.
Reluctant
12-May-2015
3:32:59 PM
My bum needs to grumble.

Here's some suggested survey questions.
Do the toilets need to be doubled in size?
Do showers need to installed. Or at least wash stalls?
Which months would be best ( least used ) for a closure period for maintenance and rejuvenation?
Would you use a second campsite on summit road opposite bushrangers bluff?
Would you camp in the flat areas south of the pines if they where open?
Play equipment for kids?
Fire period review?
Electric barbecues?
Solar recharge station for phones etc?
Upgrade / enlarge dishwashing area?
Defined pathways?
Fireboxes?
Road and gutter upgrades?
Hot water?

Just a few off the top of my head. I love going to araps for the climbing and social. The campsite sucks. I'm not alone in that thinking. Less small fix. Big overall plan required.

patto
12-May-2015
3:41:27 PM
On 12/05/2015 Reluctant wrote:
>My bum needs to grumble.
>
>Here's some suggested survey questions.
>Do the toilets need to be doubled in size?
>Do showers need to installed. Or at least wash stalls?
>Which months would be best ( least used ) for a closure period for maintenance
>and rejuvenation?
>Would you use a second campsite on summit road opposite bushrangers bluff?
>Would you camp in the flat areas south of the pines if they where open?
>Play equipment for kids?
>Fire period review?
>Electric barbecues?
>Solar recharge station for phones etc?
>Upgrade / enlarge dishwashing area?
>Defined pathways?
>Fireboxes?
>Road and gutter upgrades?
>Hot water?
>
>Just a few off the top of my head. I love going to araps for the climbing
>and social. The campsite sucks. I'm not alone in that thinking. Less small
>fix. Big overall plan required.
>
>

Seriously WTF!?! Did you just provide a list of the worst things we could do to the Pines? How about we install a DisneyWorld theme park too for the rest days....
BA
12-May-2015
3:45:46 PM
On 12/05/2015 patto wrote:
>Native pines do not provide the same amenity in the campground as the existing
>ones. Amenity for the campers is the reason why they exist at all so why
>not continue that?

My recollection is that the pines were planted by Natimuk Primary School and were intended to be cut down and sold as a fundraiser. When I first started going to Araps there was a fence around the pines and we camped outside the fence. They were definitely NOT planted for the amenity of campers.
patto
12-May-2015
3:53:36 PM
On 12/05/2015 BA wrote:
>My recollection is that the pines were planted by Natimuk Primary School
>and were intended to be cut down and sold as a fundraiser. When I first
>started going to Araps there was a fence around the pines and we camped
>outside the fence. They were definitely NOT planted for the amenity of
>campers.

I don't care if they were originally planted by Vikings for their Longships. They currently still exist and have been kept in the campground for their amenity.

HAROLD
12-May-2015
4:02:21 PM
Reluctant, you may want to rethink that. In the Grampians, Parks Vic class campgrounds with showers (actually just a bucket with holes in it- bring your own water and/or means of heating it) as reason to charge $38 a night. What do you think they will want to charge for your suggestions? I think in light of this keep things as basic and natural as possible. If you want facilities go to the caravan park or whatever in Nati.
lacto
12-May-2015
4:54:51 PM
The original pines were established in a fenced off area and would have access to ground water . Now with compaction and the heavy use of the ground water I doubt you could re-establish a plantation again . both of these factors are why they are dying out as their life span is much greater . planted for forestry the best cycle for production per ha is around 30 years which is only fraction of their life eg mountain ash is 80 years yet they survive for hundreds of years
One Day Hero
12-May-2015
5:24:41 PM
On 12/05/2015 Wendy wrote:
>There was nowhere to list my concerns with the pines in the survey (which
>are myriad and don't really fit into a single "other" box

Good point Wends. There needs to be a tickbox for "I'm Natimuk gentry, so the mere sight of unwashed hippy filth polluting my private training venue disgusts me"

Also maybe "I haven't actually camped in the pines for over a decade, so I don't want or need a campground at Arapiles"
Reluctant
13-May-2015
9:00:31 AM
Good to see chocky remains consistent. Shoot the messenger.

It's unimportant what I want from the basic or Disneyland. What I was trying to put forward was the idea that a survey asks basic questions without agenda and includes items that may gain an unfavourable outcome to those who put the list together. Only then can these opinions be addressed.
It is however the case that surveys are now more like petitions put forward by proponents to support their agenda.

Perhaps surveys on chocky should include the pecuniary and affiliations of those putting them forward.
I don't own or receive payment for goods or services in natimuk or araps or from climbing or affiliated associations. Only fair I go first.
kieranl
13-May-2015
9:34:32 AM
On 13/05/2015 Reluctant wrote:
>Good to see chocky remains consistent. Shoot the messenger.
>
Where was the messenger shot? Patto's thought your suggestions were " a list of the worst things we could do to the Pines" and Harold that extra facilities will increase camping costs.
I can't see any personal criticism there, just comments on your ideas.

Wendy
13-May-2015
9:47:18 AM
On 12/05/2015 One Day Hero wrote:
>On 12/05/2015 Wendy wrote:
>>There was nowhere to list my concerns with the pines in the survey (which
>>are myriad and don't really fit into a single "other" box
>
>Good point Wends. There needs to be a tickbox for "I'm Natimuk gentry,
>so the mere sight of unwashed hippy filth polluting my private training
>venue disgusts me"
>
>Also maybe "I haven't actually camped in the pines for over a decade,

>so I don't want or need a campground at Arapiles"

yadda yadda yadda yadda ... I have probably spent more actual nights camped in the pines over the last 25 years than most people on here, so surely if anyone was going to be attached to the "tradition" of goddamn pines, I would be?? And are you saying that I am not unwashed hippy filth anymore but in fact "gentry"? Or that the average climber actually is unwashed hippy filth? I thought theywere all well off owners of flash subarus these days? and didn't your abandoned degree get as far as teaching you about good research methods and constructing surveys:)?

Whilst I rarely camp at the Mt now, again I would still actually spend more time at the Mt than most. So i have to see these shitty bloody pine trees where there could be something continuous with all the surrounding vegetation. Plus i spend more than enough time camping elsewhere to be realistic about providing reasonable camping. If pines were the ideal campsite tree, why don't we just plant them in the gramps, buffalo, frog, assorted other national parks around the country? The pines is a wind blasted dusty hole most of the year. Native veg would provide shade and wind shelter. allow undergrowth (once the bloody acidity is rebalanced). Feed and shelter native wildlife. Look good. Flower in various seasons. What is so awful about that?
Wendy
13-May-2015
10:26:21 AM
Whilst Reluctant's list includes a bunch of things I'd hate to see at the mt, the point that a survey is an unbiassed canvassing of ideas is one I agree with. The least biassed has completely open ended questions (which is also the hardest to sort out data from as people could say anything). The next is an extensive list of options with no value statements about the benefits/constraints of any of them that we could say yes/no to each.

I don't think the campground particularly sucks. I've certainly stayed in worse. But it isn't exactly paradise. But how much can one expect when paying basic fees as well? Even while I'm not having to pay them as a day visitor, I am completely in support of campgrounds being simple, sustainable and affordable. Whilst Buffalo is rather luxurious camping for those of us used to roughing it, it has a truckload of drawbacks from it as well. I don't want Araps to have those. The Gramps situation should ring warning bells to anyone wanting a drastic increase in facilities at the Mt.

Wendy
13-May-2015
10:26:29 AM
Anyway, my extended rant from the survey for Tracey:

What do I like about camping at Araps?

- reasonable price, basic but adequate facilities, close to the climbing, sociable but with enough space to run away if desired, the environment and native vegetation, birds and animals,

Not like/ issues with camping at araps?

- online booking, poor self regulation by campers and climbers (camping outside of designated areas, pooing everywhere, driving/parking off roads), running the bore dry, collecting firewood, fires outside of designated areas and outside of fire season, tables and picnic shelter only provided in day use areas (leading to people camping in day use areas to be close to them), bloody ugly non native pine trees, dust bowl from lack of understory, lack of wind shelter

General elaboration:

Shade is always nice in a camp ground, but so is wind shelter and the pines have never provided any wind shelter. a belt of native shrubs around some shade providing natives would be great.

I have absolutely no attached to the "traditional" pines. The gums have approximately 2 gums in them but that has never stopped people calling them the Gums campground. Similarly the pines will still happily get called the pines even if they only have a small percentage of native pines in them. And there is already a reasonable stand of native pines planted.

Pines are noxious weeds. They acidify the soil. They spread. They are ugly. They are unfitting with the native vegetation of the park. They provide no natural food or habitat for native wildlife. They also have relatively short life spans and will need replacing in another 70 years where local species (other than acacias!) can grow for 100s of years. The soil will also be further acidified and difficult to plant in for this 3rd generation planting. People picture them as the perfect campground shade tree without thinking that they were already well established (they were 50 years old or so when I first saw them) before climbers started coming there and will be straggly not very shady things that need babysitting for 20 years yet.

I am not concerned about limb drop. Campsites across the country are full of eucalypts. There are existing eucalypts in other parts of the camp ground. Limb drop is a (minor) risk in any tree. It is one of those uncontrollable hazards of being in the bush. Campsites in the grampians have lovely shade from natives and who last had a tree fall on them there?

I would like to see more rain water collection to reduce pressure on the bore and have it connected up to the flushing toilets. I am absolutely against the provision of showers and more flushing toilets with the already stressed water supply. Further composting toilets (of an adequate number to deal with the load) could be appropriate. I would be happy to have fires completely banned as it has been resolutely demonstrated that people are not self regulating fire use in the park.

I am not fussed about creating flatter sites. Part of the things to work around in camping is finding the best spot to put your tent. Site work seems like a substantial step towards creating allocated sites and further booking regulation, which I would prefer not to have. Perhaps larger signage or fencing is necessary to discourage people from camping outside of designated areas, but if people continue to fail to self regulate, I guess marked and allocated sites is the unfortunate next step (although I note that this still fails to stop people camping willy nilly at Frog Buttress).

I am also not fussed about group sites. There are only a few weeks of the year when there are multiple large groups at the mount at same time and in general, the camping is spread out enough to get away from whereever a group is if you want to.

Bring back the fee box. On site payment options for fees make paying far easier for people and thus far more likely to actually pay. Someone has to come and clean the toilets so they may as well empty a fee box as well.

Some picnic tables and maybe even a shelter in the camping areas would be great. I actually quite like the idea put forward in that stupid expensive review that the upper gums be redeveloped as a day use area, then the picnic shelter area and lower pines day areas could be opened for camping.
patto
13-May-2015
11:22:59 AM
On 13/05/2015 Wendy wrote:
>running the bore dry

There should be signs at the washing basins about water conservation. Some people, foreigners particularly, waste copious amounts of water. Leaving the tap running while washing pots is so wasteful and unnecessary. You can pretty much wash all your items with 1 pot full of water.

Maybe the taps should be converted to ones which you need to hold down to get flow. This by itself will save plenty of water.

 Page 1 of 2. Messages 1 to 20 | 21 to 24
There are 24 messages in this topic.

 

Home | Guide | Gallery | Tech Tips | Articles | Reviews | Dictionary | Forum | Links | About | Search
Chockstone Photography | Landscape Photography Australia | Australian Landscape Photography | Landscape Photos Australia

Please read the full disclaimer before using any information contained on these pages.



Australian Panoramic | Australian Coast | Australian Mountains | Australian Countryside | Australian Waterfalls | Australian Lakes | Australian Cities | Australian Macro | Australian Wildlife
Landscape Photo | Landscape Photography | Landscape Photography Australia | Fine Art Photography | Wilderness Photography | Nature Photo | Australian Landscape Photo | Stock Photography Australia | Landscape Photos | Panoramic Photos | Panoramic Photography Australia | Australian Landscape Photography | High Country Mountain Huts | Mothers Day Gifts | Gifts for Mothers Day | Mothers Day Gift Ideas | Ideas for Mothers Day | Wedding Gift Ideas | Christmas Gift Ideas | Fathers Day Gifts | Gifts for Fathers Day | Fathers Day Gift Ideas | Ideas for Fathers Day | Landscape Prints | Landscape Poster | Limited Edition Prints | Panoramic Photo | Buy Posters | Poster Prints