Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

Author

Sydney National Parks - Climbing & POM Review

willy

3-Sep-2010
11:35:37 AM

On 3/09/2010 Philtown wrote:
>A lot of the focus on the Royal POM is around the shacks these days. We
>(family has had one for 4 generations)

i smell a summer fishing/surfing/climbing trip being put foward this summer


vwills

3-Sep-2010
12:56:26 PM

The draft POM which is available in the library on the link says adventure activities are allowed with permission and after payment of the appropriate fees and must not occur in culturally sensitive sites. See below

Personally I would be tempted to just lay low rather than draw attention to the areas already in use.

"Adventure Activities
Occasionally adventure activities such as hang gliding, rock climbing and
abseiling occur within the Royal National Park. Hang gliders regularly land
within the park after taking off from Lawrence Hargraves Memorial Lookout near
Stanwell Tops.
Adventure activities are generally considered to be appropriate within the three
areas, depending on the site, but require the permission of the Director-General
(or delegate) and are subject to any necessary fees and conditions.
Policies
* Adventure activities are permitted in Royal National Park with the consent
of the Director-General (or delegate).
* Written permission to conduct adventure activities must be obtained from
the Service and will be subject to payment of fees and any conditions
considered necessary."


rodw

3-Sep-2010
2:07:57 PM

I.E NPWS of saying its banned..Ive never heard if them giving out a permit for rec climbing....anyone else????


wallwombat

12-Dec-2010
8:16:16 PM

Well, the draft plan of management for Sydney Harbour NP is up for public exhibition and on page 63 it states "Adventure activities such as base jumping, abseiling and rock climbing will not be permitted in the park". What a f.u.cking surprise!

Their reasoning behind not permitting climbing is on page 113. Here it is.

[Quote]
»Adventure activities such as rock climbing have the potential to conflict with other park visitors at North Head. The numbers of visitors to North Head is increasing and most visitors visit North Head for the harbour and city views, for whale watching and for viewing specific harbour events such as the start of the Sydney to Hobart yacht race.

»»There is an acknowledged increase risk to visitors who may be enticed to the cliff edge to view rock climbers

»»Trampling of vegetation and the creation of new tracks is damaging to the environment and to the flora and fauna of the area

»»Rescue operations are hazardous

»»Geotechnical reports indicate that the cliffs at North Head are unstable

»»Much of the face at North Head is comprised of poor quality, ‘chossy’ rock

»»Fishing clubs have voiced concern about any outcomes in the plan of management that may impact their ability to utilise ladders on the cliff faces to access the rock platforms

Rock climbing will not be permitted in any part of the Park including North Head. However, in the case of North Head, there is a potential opportunity to provide a cliff face adventure activity on a highly controlled and licenced basis. This type of activity might utilise some of the heritage structures and existing access routes across the rockface.

Orienteering and rogaining will be permitted on formed walking tracks and roads with written consent. Provision of a risk assessment and appropriate public liability insurance will be a requirement for consent.

Base Jumping is not be permitted in Sydney Harbour National Park.

Support will continue for relevant groups and authorities with search and rescue activities in the planning area.

The use of illegally installed metal ladders to access the rock platforms at the base of North Head is not authorised. DECCW will erect signs to indicate that the access equipment installed in the rock face is not installed or maintained by the department

An opportunity may arise in co operation with an approved commercial operator to provide safe access to the rock platform for anglers.
[Unquote]

So much for consultation. I can't say I'm surprised though.

The bit that says, "However, in the case of North Head, there is a potential opportunity to provide a cliff face adventure activity on a highly controlled and licenced basis." seems to be leaving themselves the opportunity, in the future to open it up to commercial operators. This is a worry and reeks of double standards. I may be reading it wrong but I doubt it.

The PDF of the Plan of Management can be found here,

http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/parkmanagement/SydneyHarbourNPdraftPOM.htm

It's 315 pages long and I warn you, the time you spend reading it, you will never get back. I think I have covered all the sections relevant to climbing in this post anyway.

What a pack of muppets.

rightarmbad

12-Dec-2010
8:40:48 PM

So they state that the rock face is unstable, yet they want to charge out usage to paying operators and let fishermen fish below?

What sort of moron wrote this?

With that sort of brainlessness, it is almost to the point where climbers should pay a legal to nit pick this rubbish to bits.


rodw

12-Dec-2010
11:11:43 PM

No surprise...NPWS bloody hopeless...they continue to sideline rock climbing as an unwanted activity and they wonder why we ignore em...business as usual.


sbm

13-Dec-2010
9:28:00 AM

On 12/12/2010 rightarmbad wrote:
>So they state that the rock face is unstable, yet they want to charge out
>usage to paying operators and let fishermen fish below?
>
>What sort of moron wrote this?
>
>With that sort of brainlessness, it is almost to the point where climbers
>should pay a legal to nit pick this rubbish to bits.

An average person wrote this. They've just unconsciously decided on the outcome they want (i.e. no change to the current situation, because change is hard and scary) and then looked for evidence to support that. This is actually how most people operate a lot of the time.

Including climbers who want to see every bit of cliff made accessible for them to climb.

Plus their knowledge of climbing probably comes from Cliffhanger, Vertical Limit and Red Bull advertising stunts.

I don't think we'll see significant steps forward in access issues until we have a unified national body lobbying with the weight of all the state clubs behind it. Until then we're just another small local interest group whining.


rodw

13-Dec-2010
10:27:54 AM

>»»There is an acknowledged increase risk to visitors who may be enticed
>to the cliff edge to view rock climbers
- usual excuse, despite the fact you can't really see any climbers until they are topping out..they used this one for The Zawn as well.

>»»Trampling of vegetation and the creation of new tracks is damaging to
>the environment and to the flora and fauna of the area
- last I checked there are no plants at the base of the cliffs, and if they are worried about the top that can be fixed with lower offs etc....note the whale watchers never trample vegetation? Im pretty sure climbers as a group are pretty environmentally switched on....from memory this was a reason they used when trying to close Barrenjoey..when it was pointed out 90% of tracks they were concerned with were from fisherman not climbers..corect me if Im wrong...climbing does have impact but it is very localised around the climbing area and can be easily managed.

>»»Rescue operations are hazardous
- and north head is different to any other nat park how?

>»»Geotechnical reports indicate that the cliffs at North Head are unstable
- no shit sherlock..but stable enough to have carpark at the top and lookouts etc?...cliffs by very nature are unstable..thats why there is a cliff there.....this was the excuse used for that cave up in qld wasn't it?

>»»Much of the face at North Head is comprised of poor quality, ‘chossy’
>rock
- and you don't climb on it, nice to know the author is so versed in what climers will climb

>»»Fishing clubs have voiced concern about any outcomes in the plan of
>management that may impact their ability to utilise ladders on the cliff
>faces to access the rock platforms
- not even relevant to us, but good to see they note fishing voiced concerned but not the many post put in by climbers on there stupid ask for feedback site.

Result of the POM "review" was as expected, and as usual very disappointing.

Philtown

13-Dec-2010
1:56:05 PM

Does this mean we can all stop pretending that no-one ever climbs there and start to hit it up MI6 style once again?

widewetandslippery

13-Dec-2010
2:03:24 PM

My reading is that this is still a proposal...... as such this 2010 proposal which will be decided in april 2011 can still be commented on. I will certainly comment (and lie, talking about throwing rangers off cliffs won't go down well).

Philtown M16s are old school, get a tinnie and a rpg man.


Butters81

13-Dec-2010
2:14:17 PM

throwing rangas off cliffs?
ohhhhhh.
Rangers.


sbm

13-Dec-2010
2:23:31 PM

Maybe we need to take inspiration from skateboarders and make up some 'ROCK CLIMBING IS NOT A CRIME' bumper stickers.

Philtown

13-Dec-2010
4:28:54 PM

On 13/12/2010 Butters81 wrote:
>throwing rangas off cliffs?
>ohhhhhh.
>Rangers.

Quiet you :P

christof

14-Dec-2010
3:59:07 PM

The draft plan of management is on exhibition until the 30th April 2011.
Submissions and comments are being accepted until this date. Submissions can be sent by post to:
The Planner
NPWS
Level 1, 10 Valentine Avenue
Parramatta 2150
Or can be made online at http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/parkmanagement/SydneyHarbourNPdraftPOM.htm


IdratherbeclimbingM9

15-Dec-2010
11:05:33 AM

ww wrote;
(a bunch of bad news, that has me gutted, but I will initially respond here instead of on the gutted thread...)
~> What a joke*.
(*Typed in the most restrained manner I can conjure up at the moment!)

On 13/12/2010 widewetandslippery wrote:
>My reading is that this is still a proposal...... as such this 2010 proposal
>which will be decided in april 2011 can still be commented on. I will certainly
>comment (and lie, talking about throwing rangers off cliffs won't go down
>well).

I most certainly will be responding with comments to them.
The NSW election is in March 2011, though I doubt a change of government will change the attitude of NSW NP&WS...

Did SRC (or climber-spokesperson Mikl?), get a response/feedback from NP&WS after having had more direct liaison with them?


wallwombat

15-Dec-2010
11:37:06 AM

On 15/12/2010 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote:

>Did SRC (or climber-spokesperson Mikl?), get a response/feedback from
>NP&WS after having had more direct liaison with them?

From what I gathered from a recent email I received from Kevin Westren, the Access & Environment Officer for the Sydney Rockies, I believe the answer is no.

M9 check your PMs.


IdratherbeclimbingM9

15-Dec-2010
11:50:04 AM

... this also does not auger well for the Lord Howe Island DMP re climbing on Balls Pyramid.

>'Bang the table' feedback.
~>Yeah, right...


wallwombat

16-Dec-2010
12:27:04 PM

Just received an email from DECCW notifying me that the draft management plan is available for viewing. Everyone who registered and made a comment on that NP forum/discussion thing will be getting one.

Isn't that nice of the scum sucking maggots?


IdratherbeclimbingM9

16-Dec-2010
12:37:22 PM

On 16/12/2010 wallwombat wrote:
>Just received an email from DECCW notifying me that the draft management
>plan is available for viewing. Everyone who registered and made a comment
>on that NP forum/discussion thing will be getting one.
>
~> then wouldn't it be good if they now receive a response from all who made comment before*, to the effect that it appears those comments were not taken seriously as feedback, in this apparently less than transparent process!

(*We really do need to follow this up, and not let them get away with marginalising us.)

... ~> It would be really nice to be able to climb The Fear, and other routes there, without feeling like a criminal, or paying a commercial entity for the privilege?

TonyB

16-Dec-2010
12:53:21 PM

On 16/12/2010 wallwombat wrote:
>Isn't that nice of the scum sucking maggots?

Here's the latest from the bureaucratic public servant wankers:

Page 63:
"OUTCOME 4
Provide rich and memorable experiences in the Park"

"Adventure activities
»»Adventure activities such as base jumping, abseiling and rock climbing will not be permitted in the Park. "

So much for the dozens of submissions we made !!

Page 95:
"Rock climbing, abseiling and other adventure activities will not be permitted in the South Head precinct."

Page 109:
"Rock climbing, abseiling and other adventure activities will not be permitted in the Gap Bluff Precinct."

Page 118:
"There is strong interest and desire from the rock climbing community for rock climbing to be allowed in Sydney Harbour National Park"

Good enought reason to piss those climbers off ...

You want to know why ?? Well the answer is on page 123 ... climbing conflicts with whale watching !!!

"Adventure activities such as rock climbing have the potential to conflict with other park visitors at North Head. The numbers of visitors to North Head is increasing and most visitors visit North Head for the harbour and city views, for whale watching and for viewing specific harbour events such as the start of the Sydney to Hobart yacht race."

There's still a chance though ... if you have a licence and if you are able to use a heritage building as an anchor, p 123:

"However, in the case of North Head, there is a potential opportunity to provide a cliff face adventure activity on a highly controlled and licenced basis. This type of activity might utilise some of the heritage structures and existing access routes across the rockface."

Ah, the twisted workings of the minds of bureaucratic public servant wankers !

http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/parks/20100998SydHarbNPdraftPOM.pdf

There are 176 messages in this topic.