Yep - two wrongs don't always make a right, but sometimes a second wrong can right the first one so the end product is less wrong, rather then twice as wrong. Remember the primary wrong here is the fact that people bolted where they shouldn't have and did so knowingly . . .
I'm wondering how many of the current complainants contacted Neil to discuss the situation and offer their services (gratis) to fix the problem? I know I did and that at that time very few people had contacted him . .
Is it really going to be 'almost impossible' to remove remaining chalk with bolts removed? I tend to think not just that it is a bit more work now. I am guessing most of it was rap-bolted in the first place which makes things heaps easier . . .
Wont actually quote you but merely point out that you also don't have the authority to say that he doesn't have the authority.... Not that he seems to be speaking 'on behalf' of the organisation anyway but merely relaying his understanding of NPWS intentions . . .
Finally, I'll repeat, the original problem is the real issue, the fact that the rings were placed is what has lead to their removal. As such that fact should bear primary responsibility.
Did any of the ringers contact NPWS, admit to being the people responsible and offer to remedy the situation? Or did they take it upon themselves to do the removal without contact? Surely that would have been the best course of action, as then they would be the ones being judged on how well they remediated the area that they had destroyed ...
Maybe they can go remove the chalk now as penance . . .