41
OCTOBER 2004 Northland Conservancy recreation opportunities review Submissions analysis and decisions
OCTOBER 2004
Northland Conservancy recreation opportunities reviewSubmissions analysis and decisions
Northland Conservancy recreation opportunities reviewSubmissions analysis and decisions
OCTOBER 2004
Published by:
Department of Conservation
Southern Regional Office
P.O. Box 13-049
Christchurch, New Zealand
© October 2004, Department of Conservation
ISBN: 0-478-22611-X
This report is the conclusion of the department’s public consultation process ‘Towards a Better Network of Visitor Facilities’, a Recreation Opportunity Review aimed at confirming with the public the mix of visitor facilities needed to provide the recreational opportunities most desired on public conservation land.
CONTENTS
Message from the Conservator 1
Executive summary 2
Public consultation 2 Submitter and submissions 2 Decisions 2 General overview 3 Key decisions 3
1. Introduction 5
Submission analysis process 5 What ‘decisions’ means 6
2. Submitters and submissions 7
2.1 Number of submissions 7 2.2 Nature of submissions 7 2.3 Main proposals by order of total submissions, by Area 8 2.4 Proposals that did not receive submissions 12
3. User group meetings 13
4. Summary of general points from submissions 13
4.1 General Northland submissions 13 4.2 Response to general concerns 14 4.3 Submissions on proposals 18
5. Process 19
6. Decisions 20
6.1 Submissions and decisions by Area and site 20 6.2 Other submissions on proposals 29
7. Summary of decisions 32
Key Decisions 32
8. Overview of decisions in terms of a range of recreation opportunities 33
Appendix 1
What the decisions mean 35
Submissions analysis and decisions 1
Message from the Conservator
The following report details the content of submissions received by Northland
Conservancy as part of the recreation opportunity review public consultation period,
and reports on other feedback received through public meetings and discussion
with stakeholders during this period.
Taking account of the submissions and other information received, decisions have
been made by this conservancy. These decisions align with the strategic direction as
covered by the Principles to Guide a Core Facility Network and the key Policy and
Strategic directions referred to within these, or where there has been identified a
preference through submissions to vary from this direction, these cases have been
noted.
Chris Jenkins
Conservator
Northland Conservancy
Northland Conservancy recreation opprtunities review2
Executive summary
PUBLIC CONSULTATION
Consultation was launched on 30 September 2003 with a press release from the
Minister of Conservation. The Northland Conservancy supported the consultation
processes with public meetings held in all Areas to outline the proposals to
interested parties and key stake holders. Submissions closed 31 January 2004.
These submissions have been considered in terms of the departments legislation,
strategic plans (such as the Northland CMS), the Principles to Guide a Core Facility
Network (details provided as part of the consultation process) and Northland’s
Conservancy Visitor Strategic Plan for Recreation 2003–2009. Consequently, as a
result of submissions, the Conservancy has made some changes to the Northland’s
proposals, and these are listed in this document.
The document and submissions form were sent to 34 iwi authorities and affiliated
Maori organisations in Northland. These included times of the public meetings
with the invitation to approach the department for further information. At least
two public meetings were attended by iwi representatives. Given the political
arena at that point in time, Maori may not have felt that they were consulted.
There were four submissions all representing hapu. One supporting a proposal and
three opposing two other proposals. Two submissions from hapu appear to be due
to miss information. The Areas will engage in further discussion concerning the
specific Area’s management raised in these submissions.
SUBMITTER AND SUBMISSIONS
Northland Conservancy received submissions from 91 submitters commenting
on 112 proposals. Submitters were made up of 45 groups and 46 individuals.
No submitters made direct reference to the Principles to Guide the Core Facility
Network (contained in the National Resource Document). Of the 345 points 165
supported the proposals, 48 supported in part, 50 opposed and 63 were neutral
(this would indicate new proposed facilities or other issues related to the site
e.g. weed control). 19 submissions contained comment that related to regional or
national issues, as well as (or instead of) comment on specific proposals
DECISIONS
The decisions tend to favour proposed retention of some Short Stop Traveller, Day
Visitor and a Back Country Adventure sites that were proposed to be removed and
the basic maintenance of Back Country Comfort and Adventurer facilities.
The financial commitment with the decisions will be less than the original proposals
because two out of three proposed huts are not going to proceed and 3 tracks are
not going to be removed.
Submissions analysis and decisions 3
GENERAL OVERVIEW
Very little has changed from the original proposals for management. The majority of
tracks and associated facilities will be maintained to the relevant standards. There
will be a wider range of recreation opportunities in Northland including old and new
facilities for disabled access (Tane Mahuta, Ahipara Gumfields and Taumarumaru
track), a new opportunity for sea kayaking / tramping accommodation at Deep
Water Cove, a wetland track experience at Waitangi and tracks investigating local
points of interest at Waitata Point and Soda Springs. Also a potential community
development of Kaheka Point as a camping opportunity in the Whangaroa Harbour.
Although Northland Conservancy does not have ‘wilderness’ areas the public process
has shown that some areas are seen by Northlanders as a ‘wilderness’ experience
and these areas should be respected as such, for example not putting huts on the
Waima Range and the retention of access to the Tutamoe Plateau. Hukatere Track,
Kahuwera Pa and the Mangahorehore Route lookout extension (500m) tracks that
have a replicated experience elsewhere in the conservancy will cease maintenance.
KEY DECISIONS
Bay of Islands Area
• Mangahorehore Route will cease maintenance on the lookout extension (500m)
as this will not compromise visitor experience to the main route.
• Merumeru Falls Track proposed will not go ahead as the environmental damage
of putting in a new track would outweigh the benefits as the falls can be seen
from the existing track network.
Kaitaia Area
• The proposed Taumarumaru Track had overwhelming support from local
communities.
• The Ahipara gumfields Walk proposal will be barrier free and accessible for the
disabled.
Kauri Coast
• The two proposed hut facilities in the Waima Forest were significantly opposed
by local communities and people seeking a ‘wilderness’ experience in Northland.
However, there was support for the restoration of Framptons Hut to standard
and for overnight opportunities to occur in the Waima Ranges in the form of
informal camping.
• Mt Tutamoe Track will now be maintained (not cease maintenance) as it is the
only access to the Tutamoe Plateau for hunting and other remote experiences.
• The Hukatere Hall Recreation Reserve will have the Reserve status is being
revoked and the land will revert to crown and be subject to the Land Act and
managed/disposed of by Lands Information New Zealand.
Northland Conservancy recreation opprtunities review4
Whangarei Area
• Bratty’s Bush Track will be retained and maintained to a lower standard as it is an
import access track for botanists viewing native orchids.
• The community halls on Recreation Reserve and Domain land in are being
investigated for vestment in the Whangarei District Council. This will include a
process of consultation with iwi and the Reserves Boards.
Submissions analysis and decisions 5
1. Introduction
• Public consultation was undertaken as part of the department’s recreation
opportunity review ‘Towards a Better Network of Visitor Facilities’.
• Consultation was launched on 30th September 2003, with a Press Release from
the Minister of Conservation, and a press release from this conservancy. Letters
were sent to local recreation groups and other key associates inviting them to
attend public meetings during October 2003 to learn about the consultation
process. Proposal documents and background resource material were provided
as publications and on the DOC website to provide the basis for making
submissions.
• Information about the submission process and meeting were provided to 34 iwi
authorities and affiliated Maori organisations in Northland.
• Meetings were held in the four Areas of the Conservancy to inform public and
stimulate discussion/submissions on the Document. Notes were taken to ensure
the issues raised where reflected in the submissions made.
• One of the positive outcomes from the consultation is that good relationships
are now developing with key associate groups.
• Decisions were made taking into account the following strategic documents;
– Principles to Guide a Core Facility Network
– Conservation Management Strategy for Northland Conservancy
– Hut Standards
– Track and Outdoor Visitor Structures Standards
– National Visitor Strategy
– Northland Conservancy Visitor Strategic Plan 2003–2009
SUBMISSION ANALYSIS PROCESS
• Submissions were entered into an Analysis Database (which allows for reports
on individual proposals and/or submitters for future reference and analysis of
demographics).
• Proposals were assessed considering the submissions information and the
number of submissions opposing or supporting the proposal. The strategic value
of facilities was reviewed as a result of the submissions analysis and decisions
drafted.
• Decisions were documented and forwarded to Areas for manager comment and
sign-off and subsequent Conservator sign-off to the decisions.
• Those proposals that received no submissions were accepted provided that the
original proposal reasons still stood.
• All decisions that differed from original proposals were considered together
to establish the effect this may have on the range of Conservancy recreation
opportunities.
Northland Conservancy recreation opprtunities review6
WHAT ‘DECISIONS’ MEANS
These decisions are to provide the public of New Zealand and the associated user
groups some surety about the future of the core network of visitor facilities the
department manages. The decisions of ‘cease maintenance’, ‘seeking community
agreement’ and ‘removal’ will be a priority for resource commitment and work
programmes for the department over the next five years. Sites with ‘maintain’ will
be brought to standard and maintained.
Proposed assets confirmed by decisions are to be built in the future when resourcing
becomes available. The department’s decisions concerning proposed new tracks are
that the concept of constructing these tracks is approved subject to an assessment
of environmental effects and preparation of a full business case for each. Planning
for these tracks will take place over the next few years and the department does not
plan to begin construction of any of them for at least three years.
This document maps out the next five years priority work for the department
however, there remain some factors that cannot be accurately forecast or guaranteed
at this point in time, such as; future construction costs, the durability of existing
and new facilities, the effects of changing weather patterns, the environment and
changing user group priorities. As a result these decisions are a negotiated outcome
rather than conclusions set in stone.
Formal planning processes will continue to provide the mechanism for changing
these decisions as needed and ensuring public input (e.g. Conservation Management
Review etc), and Conservation Boards will assist the department to manage specific
facility provision issues that arise from time to time.
Submissions analysis and decisions 7
Section One
2. Submitters and submissions
This section provides information on the number of submissions, the nature of
submissions and a description of their content
2 .1 NUMBER OF SUBMISSIONS
• 91 submitters provided submissions representing comment on 112 proposals
• Submitters were made up of 45 group submissions and 46 individual
submissions
• 0 submissions made direct reference to the Principles to Guide the Core Facility
Network (contained in the National Resource Document).
• 19 submissions contained comment that related to regional or national issues, as
well as (or instead of) comment on specific proposals.
• 28 where from the Kaitaia Area.
• 19 from the Kauri Coast Area.
• 12 from the Bay of Islands Area.
• 16 from Whangarei Area.
• Only 6 were from Northland general and the rest (9) from around the country
with only 1 from overseas.
2 .2 NATURE OF SUBMISSIONS
Submissions came from three general sectors:
• Communities interests
• General front country visitors
• Experienced and knowledgeable backcountry users.
Submissions were analysised as:
Support The submission clearly supported the Public Document’s proposals.
Support in Part The submission supported the Public Document’s proposals on
the facilities work but had concerns or issues with related management.
Neutral The submission suggested a management proposal which was
not mentioned* in the Public Document or had comments on the departments
management of this site not related to recreation facilities (e.g. weed control) which
was unrelated to this process.
Opposed The submission was clearly opposed to the Public Document’s
proposals.
* Suggestions put forward by the public are in this document for information
only. As these proposals have not been through a public process the suggestions
are only for future consideration with the public at a later date. You are welcome
to comment on these suggestions with the appropriate Area office but no formal
process is being entered into at this time. Your comments will be noted and
retained for future reference only.
Northland Conservancy recreation opprtunities review8
2
.3
MA
IN P
RO
PO
SA
LS
BY
OR
DE
R O
F T
OT
AL
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S,
BY
AR
EA
SU
BM
ITT
ER
S S
ITE
S /
FA
CIL
ITIE
S
SIT
E
NO
.
VIS
ITO
R S
ITE
S
(DO
C M
AN
AG
EM
EN
T
SIT
ES
)
PR
OP
OS
AL
IN
TH
E
PU
BL
IC S
UB
MIS
SIO
N
DO
CU
ME
NT
PU
BL
ISH
ED
20
03
NU
MB
ER
OF
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
’I S
UP
PO
RT
’
NU
MB
ER
OF
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
‘I S
UP
PO
RT
IN P
AR
T’
NU
MB
ER
OF
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
‘NE
UT
RA
L’
NU
MB
ER
OF
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
‘I O
PP
OS
E’
TO
TA
L
To
tal
13
348
3350
283
Gen
eral
Co
mm
ents
on
No
rth
lan
d
/ D
epar
tmen
t o
f C
on
serv
atio
n
19
BA
Y O
F IS
LAN
DS
AR
EA
Pro
po
sed
Dee
p W
ater
Co
ve H
ut
1010
31D
eep
Wat
er C
ove
Pic
nic
Are
aM
ain
tain
Sit
e –
Req
uir
es
Up
grad
e
111
00
12
Tak
apau
Tra
ck10
2003
W
aih
on
ga G
org
e M
ain
tain
Sit
e –
Req
uir
es
up
grad
e
54
00
9
Mau
nga
ho
reh
ore
Ro
ute
s, P
uke
ti10
3010
Mai
tai
Bay
Hea
dla
nd
Tra
ckM
ain
tain
Sit
e0
60
06
Fore
st P
oo
ls C
amp
site
1020
09Fo
rest
Po
ols
Am
enit
y A
rea
Mai
nta
in S
ite
– R
equ
ires
Up
grad
e
40
10
5
Ru
ssel
l T
ow
nsh
ip0
05
05
Wai
pap
a T
rack
1020
10W
aip
apa
Riv
er T
rack
Mai
nta
in S
ite
– R
equ
ires
Up
grad
e
10
30
4
Om
ahu
ta K
auri
San
ctu
rary
Wal
k10
2023
Om
ahu
ta K
auri
San
ctu
ary
Ro
adM
ain
tain
Sit
e –
Req
uir
es
Up
grad
e
40
00
4
Wai
tata
Po
int
Tra
ck10
0277
Wai
tata
Po
int
No
n-v
isit
or
DO
C
man
agem
ent
30
00
3
Jack
son
s R
oad
B
rid
ge10
2029
Jack
son
s R
oad
Mai
nta
in S
ite
– R
etai
n
Key
Ass
ets
30
00
3
Nik
aup
on
up
on
u R
ou
te P
uke
ti
No
t R
eco
rded
On
DO
C’s
Syst
em A
s C
lose
d F
or
A
Nu
mb
er O
f Y
ears
.
Th
is w
as n
ot
in t
he
pu
blic
su
bm
issi
on
do
cum
ent
as i
t h
as b
een
clo
sed
fo
r a
nu
mb
er o
f
year
s
00
03
3
Op
ua
Kau
ri W
alk
1020
90O
pu
a Fo
rest
Kau
ri W
alk
/Oro
mah
oe
Ro
ad t
o P
aih
ia
Tra
ck
Mai
nta
in S
ite
– R
equ
ires
Up
grad
e
30
00
3
Submissions analysis and decisions 9
SU
BM
ITT
ER
S S
ITE
S /
FA
CIL
ITIE
S
SIT
E
NO
.
VIS
ITO
R S
ITE
S
(DO
C M
AN
AG
EM
EN
T
SIT
ES
)
PR
OP
OS
AL
IN
TH
E
PU
BL
IC S
UB
MIS
SIO
N
DO
CU
ME
NT
PU
BL
ISH
ED
20
03
NU
MB
ER
OF
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
’I S
UP
PO
RT
’
NU
MB
ER
OF
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
‘I S
UP
PO
RT
IN P
AR
T’
NU
MB
ER
OF
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
‘NE
UT
RA
L’
NU
MB
ER
OF
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
‘I O
PP
OS
E’
TO
TA
L
Pu
keti
Fo
rest
Gen
eral
3
00
03
Wai
ho
nga
Go
rge
1020
03W
aih
oan
ga G
org
e K
auri
Wal
k/
Tak
apau
Tra
ck;
Pu
keti
Mai
nta
in S
ite
– R
equ
ires
Up
grad
e
12
00
3
Wai
tan
gi W
etla
nd
Wal
k10
2078
Wai
tan
gi W
etla
nd
sP
rop
ose
d3
00
03
Wh
anga
mu
mu
Wh
alin
g St
atio
n10
1025
Wh
anga
mu
mu
Tra
ck /
Wh
alin
g
Stat
ion
Mai
nta
in S
ite
– R
equ
ires
Up
grad
e
00
30
3
Mer
um
eru
Fal
ls T
rack
1914
32M
eru
mer
u F
alls
Tra
ck
Pro
po
sed
0
00
22
Flag
staf
f H
ill10
1001
Flag
staf
f H
illM
ain
tain
Sit
e1
10
02
Flag
staf
f H
ill s
uro
un
din
g T
rack
s10
1000
Flag
staf
f H
ill L
oo
p T
rack
sM
ain
tain
Sit
e0
11
02
Kah
eka
Po
int
Cam
psi
te19
1591
Kah
eka
Po
int
/ St
Pau
ls R
ock
Tra
cks
Pro
po
sed
20
00
2
Kah
eka
Po
int
Tra
ck10
2041
Kah
eka
Po
int
/ St
Pau
ls R
ock
Tra
cks
Mai
nta
in b
y co
mm
un
ity
10
01
2
Mah
inep
ua
Pen
insu
la T
rack
1020
50M
ahin
epu
a P
enin
sula
Tra
ckM
ain
tain
20
00
2
KA
ITA
IA A
REA
Tau
mar
um
aru
Co
asta
l T
rack
1030
06T
aum
aru
mar
u R
eser
veM
ain
tain
Sit
e –
Req
uir
es
Up
grad
e
261
30
30
Cap
e R
ein
ga C
oas
tal
Wal
kway
Gen
eral
1040
05In
clu
des
Th
e 6
Sect
ion
s O
f
Cap
e R
ein
ga C
oas
tal
Wal
kway
& C
ape
Rei
nga
Lig
hth
ou
se
Mai
nta
in S
ite
60
10
7
Man
gam
uka
Go
rge
1030
36M
anga
mu
ka G
org
e W
alkw
ay
/Mic
row
ave
Tra
ck
Mai
nta
in S
ite
30
02
5
War
awar
a Fo
rest
– G
old
en S
tair
s10
3041
War
awar
a T
rack
Mai
nta
in S
ite
– R
equ
ires
Up
grad
e
23
00
5
Fram
pto
n H
ut
1050
07
Wai
ma
Fore
st T
rack
s M
ain
tain
Sit
e –
Req
uir
es
Up
grad
e
21
10
4
Ho
kian
ga K
ai I
wi
Co
asta
l W
alk
– M
aun
gan
ui
Blu
ff W
alk
1050
03W
aip
ou
a C
oas
tal
Tra
ck
/Kaw
eru
a H
isto
ric
Site
Mai
nta
in S
ite
– R
equ
ires
Up
grad
e
21
00
3
Mau
nga
tan
iwh
a W
alkw
ay 1
0303
6M
anga
mu
ka W
alkw
ay /
Mic
row
ave
Tra
ck
Mai
nta
in3
00
03
Northland Conservancy recreation opprtunities review10
SU
BM
ITT
ER
S S
ITE
S /
FA
CIL
ITIE
S
SIT
E
NO
.
VIS
ITO
R S
ITE
S
(DO
C M
AN
AG
EM
EN
T
SIT
ES
)
PR
OP
OS
AL
IN
TH
E
PU
BL
IC S
UB
MIS
SIO
N
DO
CU
ME
NT
PU
BL
ISH
ED
20
03
NU
MB
ER
OF
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
’I S
UP
PO
RT
’
NU
MB
ER
OF
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
‘I S
UP
PO
RT
IN P
AR
T’
NU
MB
ER
OF
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
‘NE
UT
RA
L’
NU
MB
ER
OF
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
‘I O
PP
OS
E’
TO
TA
L
KA
UR
I C
OA
ST A
REA
Pro
po
sed
Tw
o H
uts
In
Wai
ma
Ran
gers
1050
39P
awak
atu
tu –
Kaw
eru
a R
oad
sM
ain
tain
Sit
e10
00
1222
Wai
ma
Fore
st T
rack
s10
5007
Wai
ma
Fore
st T
rack
sM
ain
tain
Sit
e –
Req
uir
es
Up
grad
e
40
115
20
Mo
un
t T
uam
oe
Tra
ck10
5036
Mt
Tu
amo
e T
rack
Cea
se m
ain
ten
ance
00
07
7
Fram
pto
ns
Hu
t10
5007
Wai
ma
Fore
st T
rack
s
(Fra
mp
ton
s H
ut)
Mai
nta
in
21
10
4
Ho
kian
ga K
ai I
wi
Co
asta
l W
alk
incl
ud
ing
Mau
nga
nu
i B
luff
Wal
k
1050
03H
oki
anga
Kai
Iw
i C
oas
tal
Wal
k
incl
ud
ing
Mau
nga
nu
i B
luff
Wal
k
Mai
nta
in S
ite
– R
equ
ires
Up
grad
e
30
00
3
Tu
tam
oe
Tra
ck10
5035
Tu
tam
oe
Tra
ckM
ain
tain
Sit
e3
00
03
Wao
ku C
oac
h R
oad
1
0501
0W
aoku
Co
ast
Ro
ad /
Wek
awek
a T
rack
Mai
nta
in S
ite
– R
equ
ires
Up
grad
e
12
00
3
Kaw
eru
a H
ote
l10
5003
Wai
po
ua
Co
asta
l T
rack
/
Kaw
eru
a H
isto
ric
Site
His
tori
c Si
te0
02
02
Tan
e M
ahu
ta10
5013
Tan
e M
ahu
taM
ain
tain
Sit
e (c
arp
ark
to
incr
ease
siz
e)
20
00
2
WH
AN
GA
REI
AR
EA
Tan
gih
ua
Hu
t10
0170
T
angi
hu
a Fo
rest
– B
ack
Co
un
try
Ad
ven
ture
s
Mai
nta
in S
ite
– R
equ
ires
Up
grad
e
29
00
11
Bra
tty’
s B
ush
Tra
ck10
0080
Bra
tty’
s B
ush
Sce
nic
Res
erve
Clo
se S
ite/
Rem
ove
All
Ass
ets
00
08
8
Pea
ch C
ove
Hu
t10
0130
Pea
ch C
ove
, B
ream
Hea
d
Res
erve
Up
grad
e Si
ze/C
apac
ity
26
00
8
Tan
gih
ua
Fore
st W
alks
1001
70T
angi
hu
a Fo
rest
– B
ack
Co
un
try
Ad
ven
ture
s
Mai
nta
in S
ite
– R
equ
ires
Up
grad
e
13
30
7
No
rth
Ru
ssel
l Fo
rest
10
1034
No
rth
Ru
ssel
l Fo
rest
M
ain
tain
Sit
e4
03
07
Submissions analysis and decisions 11
SU
BM
ITT
ER
S S
ITE
S /
FA
CIL
ITIE
S
SIT
E
NO
.
VIS
ITO
R S
ITE
S
(DO
C M
AN
AG
EM
EN
T
SIT
ES
)
PR
OP
OS
AL
IN
TH
E
PU
BL
IC S
UB
MIS
SIO
N
DO
CU
ME
NT
PU
BL
ISH
ED
20
03
NU
MB
ER
OF
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
’I S
UP
PO
RT
’
NU
MB
ER
OF
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
‘I S
UP
PO
RT
IN P
AR
T’
NU
MB
ER
OF
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
‘NE
UT
RA
L’
NU
MB
ER
OF
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
‘I O
PP
OS
E’
TO
TA
L
Pu
ken
ui
Fore
st T
rack
s10
0141
Pu
ken
ui
Fore
st
Mai
nta
in S
ite
– R
equ
ires
Up
grad
e
13
10
5
Pea
ch C
ove
Tra
ck10
0130
Pea
ch C
ove
, B
ream
Hea
d
Scen
ic R
eser
ve
Mai
nta
in S
ite
– R
equ
ires
Up
grad
e
22
00
4
Bre
am H
ead
Tra
ck10
0131
Bre
am H
ead
Tra
ck,
Bre
am
Hea
d S
cen
ic R
eser
ve
Mai
nta
in S
ite
– R
equ
ires
Up
grad
e
20
10
3
Mim
iwh
anga
ta C
oas
tal
Par
k
Gen
eral
1010
51M
imiw
han
gata
Co
asta
l P
ark
Mai
nta
in S
ite
– R
equ
ires
Up
grad
e
01
20
3
Smu
ggle
rs B
ay T
rack
1001
34B
usb
y H
ead
Sce
nic
Res
erve
Mai
nta
in S
ite
– R
equ
ires
Up
grad
e
20
10
3
Northland Conservancy recreation opprtunities review12
2 .4 PROPOSALS THAT DID NOT RECEIVE SUBMISSIONS
BAY OF ISLANDS AREA
Kahuwera Pa Track Cease Maintenance
Link Track between Puketi
Amenity Area and Manginangina
This facility has community support prior to the public consultation process. It will be funded and
maintained by the Puketi Forest Restoration Trust.
KAITAIA
Spirits Bay Campsite Maintain
Tapotupotu Campsite Was ‘Upgrade to higher standard’ will now be ‘maintain’ as this is a serviced camp (the highest
standard).
Maitai Bay campsite Was ‘Upgrade to higher standard’ will now be ‘maintain’ as this is a serviced camp (the highest
standard).
Rarawa Campsite Was ‘Upgrade to higher standard’ will now be ‘maintain’ as this is a serviced camp (the highest
standard).
KAURI COAST AREA
Ari Te Uru Proposed
Trounson Kauri Park Was ‘Upgrade to higher standard’ will now be ‘maintain’ as this is a serviced camp (the highest
standard).
Waipoua Campground Was ‘Upgrade to higher standard’ will now be ‘maintain’ as this is a serviced camp (the highest
standard).
Pakotai Track Maintain
Hukatere Hall Recreation Reserve The Reserve status is being revoked and the land will revert to crown and be subject to the Land
Act and managed/disposed of by Lands Information New Zealand.
WHANGAREI AREA
Otamure Campsite Maintain
Purirui Bay Campsite Maintain
Uretiti Campsite Maintain
Waikahoa Campsite Maintain
Tangihua Lodge Associated Assets Owned & maintained by Community Group
Investigation of the vestment of the following halls/Domains in the Whangarei District Council is underway. This will include a process
of consultation with iwi and the Reserves Boards.
Hukerenui Domain Waikiekie Domain Recreation Reserve
Maungakaramea Domain Waiotira Domain
Oakura Domain Waipu Centennial Domain
Parakao Domain Waipu Cove Domain
Ruakaka Central LP Hall Reserve Whatatiri Domain Recreation Reserve
Springfield Domain Whareora Hall Recreation Reserve
Taurikura Hall Site
Submissions analysis and decisions 13
3. User group meetings
After the launch of the process each Area hosted a public meeting on the proposals.
One additional meeting was held at the Maungakaramea Hall with the local rate
payers association dealing mainly with the Tangihua Hut proposal.
4. Summary of general points from submissions
Nineteen submitters expressed concerned over general issues to Department of
Conservation policy and strategy. Eight were opposed to the proposals because
there are concerns that DOC is biased towards international not domestic users.
There is also concern at excessive spending to upgrade facilities to too high a
level. Preference is that DOC keeps to its hut and tracks service standards and does
not exceed them. Some people also felt that increase funding should be going to
possum and pest control and habitat rehabilitation. One submitter supported the
funding of recreation facilities.
4 .1 GENERAL NORTHLAND SUBMISSIONS
19 submitters expressed issues on the general thrust of Northland and the
department’s proposals they are;
• Concern over the perceived "flashing up" of facilities beyond public’s
expectations, security in car parks, perception of DOC spending too much
money on the ‘front country’.
• Opposing the booking of huts and Northland not using hut tickets,
• The department ignoring the issues raised by the public,
• Concern about the environmental damage from existing maintenance and
proposed facility construction,
• Other topics include a lack of facilities or mention of the Motor Homes
overnighting in carparks, sea kayaking, disabled users, 4x4 wheel drive (dealt
with in the National report), the Te Araroa pathway and the profile of NZ
Walkways.
• One submitter was concerned about the poor management of access and facilities
in the Te Paki area.
• 2 hapu opposed the process due to lack of separate consultation.
• 1 submission opposes the loss of backcountry routes in general.
Northland Conservancy recreation opprtunities review14
• 3 hapu felt that they are not public and should have been consulted separately
as partners and this should have occurred before the public process was
undertaken. Northland has made a concerted effort through the Area Mangers to
engage iwi and inform where we can. We have had four submissions from iwi
and hapu. Though not extensive these submissions were from all over Northland
and indicate that iwi were aware of the process.
4 .2 RESPONSE TO GENERAL CONCERNS
Consultation process
Some concern was expressed that the process of consultation would not result in
the department taking account of public submissions, including new proposals the
community are promoting. The timeframe for the consultation process was criticised
for being too tight and running over the summer holiday period. Information
provided through the Proposal Summary documents did not provide sufficient
information for some people. Some submitters wanted assurance that there was
some way of ensuring consistency in approach across the country.
ResponseThe department asked the public of New Zealand to contribute to the process of
public consultation accepting the Principles of Consultation found in the DOC
Consultation Policy, which requires the department to take account of what
submitters have to say. The department decided on a four month period for
accepting submissions and publicised the process at the end of September 2003 and
throughout October. Guidance has been provided to encourage national consistency,
with all submissions considered on their own merit, and the overall strength of
submissions on common issues. Regional Office has provided a national overview
of the process, including submission analysis and decision making, and direction to
conservancies on issues of consistency. An independent team of representatives of
key national recreation associate groups were on a reference group that was briefed
on the national overview and provided feedback for the department to consider.
Protection of the environment
Submitters expressed concern that DOC’s decisions on the future of visitor facilities
should not lead to increased adverse effects on rare or endangered species or the
ecosystems that sustain them. This concern includes issues such as crowding and
litter. There is a desire to know what management options DOC is choosing to
manage these issues, and suggestions include concentrating people to well managed
locations as well as encouraging a greater spread of people to less used places.
ResponseThe department will promote best practice in the development of new facilities
or upgrading existing facilities, through the use of an assessment of environmental
effects. Recreation opportunities and associated visitor activities, accommodation,
facilities and services, information and interpretation should be compatible
with the purposes for which the area is held (Draft General Policy Conservation
Act). There is an inherent conflict in managing for the conservation of natural and
Submissions analysis and decisions 15
historic values and the provision of visitor access, and experience to date is that
this can be achieved with sound management practices and the cooperation of
the visiting public. “Recreation opportunities and associated visitor activities,
accommodation, facilities and services, information and interpretation should
be compatible with the purposes for which the area is held; be compatible with
and managed to protect, and to minimise adverse effects on, natural, cultural
and historic values and their intrinsic worth; be managed to protect, and to
minimise adverse effects on, the qualities of solitude, remoteness, wilderness,
peace and natural quiet, where these qualities are present” (Draft General Policy
Conservation Act). The department will take action to achieve these outcomes. The
challenges mentioned are shared by protected area agencies across the globe, and
there are no easy answers. There are possible impacts associated with visitor access
to conservation areas that need to be managed. The decisions currently being made
for visitor facility provision are only one of the factors influencing changing use
patterns and impact creation.
Facility management costs
Another key theme from submissions is concern that DOC may not be seeking
to provide the most cost effective solution for facilities. Past management with
a more limited budget had retained the current facility network, so why should
more funding mean less facilities in the future. At the same time there were other
submissions that were seeking assurance that DOC would complete any work
done to the best practice that was known. DOC is also challenged to consider the
importance of all visitor facilities and to take the necessary action to ensure that all
the current network can be retained.
ResponseThe best use of funds will be considered on a case-by-case basis as decisions are
made on construction methods and costs, with advice from engineers and other
relevant specialists. Currently costs are determined using model costs based on
previous experience and typical design standards. The costs associated with
providing huts vary according the service standard of the hut, and local conditions
that will influence design and transport costs. Codes of practice must be followed
that have been developed to ensure the safety of the users of the hut and their
expectations about the service standards to be provided. Low cost options used in
the past (such as deferring maintenance) simply leads to higher management costs
at a later date. While cost efficiency is desirable, this does not necessarily lead to the
conclusion that only low cost facilities should be provided.
Equitable allocation of new funding
Many submissions suggested that the backcountry adventurers’ opportunities are
being eroded at the expense of facilities of higher service standards, and that
this situation is unacceptable. These arguments range from simply noting that
a reduction in facility provision is not fair, through to suggestions that it is not
appropriate for DOC to fund the higher cost facilities. A range of recreational
opportunities has been interpreted as meaning a range of destinations all at one
service standard rather than a range of opportunities for a range of different types
of visitors. The interests of disabled people have been supported by a number of
submissions, which promote the provision of higher service standards.
Northland Conservancy recreation opprtunities review16
ResponseMore funding will become available and as a result more funding will be allocated
to basic backcountry facilities, as well as to the provision of higher service standard
front country facilities. The department will aim to meet its objective “a range of
recreational opportunities should be provided in different settings for visitors
with different capabilities, skills and interests” (Draft General Policy Conservation
Act). The department recognises a visitor group that prefers tracks and huts with
higher service standards, a preference born out by independent research and the
numbers of people using these facilities. Many New Zealanders enjoy the higher
standard facilities and opportunities for these people will be provided as part of the
range of recreation opportunities that DOC manages. There is approximately seven
times the length of basic tramping track and route being retained as there is length
of track to the easy tramping standard. There are five times as many huts managed
to the lower service standards (Standard and Basic huts) as there are managed to the
higher service standards (Serviced and Great Walk huts).
Tourism
A major theme coming through many submissions is concern at the effect of
increasing numbers of international tourists now seeking backcountry experiences,
requiring higher standard tracks and huts and contributing to crowding at more
popular locations and creating unacceptable impacts on the environment that
would not have occurred with the more stable domestic users. The department
is being challenged on its actions given its legislative mandate which requires
DOC to ‘foster’ recreation and ‘allow’ for tourism, whereas such a distinction does
not appear to be made. Suggestions have been made to seek to charge tourists
specifically to fund the provision of facilities that are use predominantly by tourists.
Response“The department is not convinced that there is a hierarchy between the recreation
and tourism aspects of s.6(e) of the Conservation Act.” The management of a range
of recreation opportunities, as promoted by the 1996 DOC Visitor Strategy and
incorporated into the draft General Policy for the Conservation Act and related Acts,
enables the department to manage for the different types of visitor needs associated
with New Zealand’s conservation areas. As for tourism, the commercial aspect of
this are dealt with under Part IIIB of the Conservation Act. This requires commercial
operators to obtain concessions when conducting activities on land administered
by the department, which may have specific conditions imposed in particular to
ensure protection of natural, cultural and historic values. Tourism contributes to
New Zealand’s economic wellbeing and this is recognised through Government
funding for visitor facilities and conservation work as a whole. Work is programmed
to improve the ability of the department to understand and respond to issues of
crowding and impacts, problems which are not created exclusively by one group
alone. Many New Zealanders enjoy the higher standard facilities and opportunities
that support nature-based tourism and are provided as part of the range of recreation
opportunities that DOC manages.
Submissions analysis and decisions 17
Four wheel drive opportunities
Submitters supporting four-wheel-driving wish to see more opportunities for this
activity, noting that they also allow less able people to access areas of parks they
would otherwise not get to see, and because of the contribution they can make to
search and rescue operations.
Response4X4 vehicle use is recognised as a popular recreation activity, and many old access
roads have been designated for this type of use. Unfortunately, some irresponsible
4X4 drivers have created impacts through thoughtless vehicle use of conservation
lands that has led to restrictive policy and a preference by managers for this activity
to occur off conservation lands. Vehicle use and other forms of transport should
be compatible with the outcomes sought in different places (Draft General Policy
Conservation Act), and as such are not always permitted access. There are limited
such opportunities in conservation areas, nor is this situation likely to change
except for the opportunities that may arise through High Country Tenure Review in
the South Island. Roads accessible to 4X4 vehicles may provide important access in
situations of search and rescue, but roads are not maintained by the department for
these purposes alone.
Camping
Submissions relating to camping were predominantly about access for motor-
caravans or more camp grounds. A request for approval to park overnight at day
visitor locations which would have a benefit to other visitors by improving security
at road ends.
ResponseThe department prefers that all overnight visitors at vehicle accessible locations
to use designated camping areas. There is a good network of camping grounds
throughout New Zealand that provide powered sites, and serviced campgrounds on
land managed by the department also provide this opportunity. It is not considered
a priority for the department to provide more serviced campgrounds, in view of
the commercial opportunity that such facilities provide for private businesses. The
preferred option for motor-home wastewater disposal is to coordinate with local
authorities in providing the required service at locations where the waste can be
best managed. Good information about where to find wastewater disposal facilities
will also be key to encouraging the right behaviour, a project DOC and the Ministry
for the Environment are jointly working on.
Te Araroa Trust
There were a few “a little surprised to see no mention whatsoever of the national
trail in the Recreation Opportunities Review....”
ResponseThe Memorandum of Understanding between the department and Te Araroa Trust
provides a commitment that the department will allow for Te Araroa to achieve its
shared objective. All Conservators have been advised that the department supports
Te Araroa. While the department was aware of much of the alignment for Te Araroa
Northland Conservancy recreation opprtunities review18
through information supplied by the Trust, there had not been discussion with
the department in many cases to specify proposed new track alignments, and as
such were not included as formal proposals. The department expected the Trust,
as a community group, to use the consultation process to clarify further the issues
of route alignment. These discussions will be ongoing as the concept progresses
towards reality. The Te Araroa route in Northland has been proposed to follow
existing department maintained tracks.
Tracks for disabled users
Northland has proposed three disabled accessible tracks at Taumarumaru, Ahipara
and Tane Mahuta which had strong public support, however opportunities for the
disabled requires further investigation.
Locking of huts
There were a number of submissions against future locking of huts in Northland
(all bar the Tangihua Hut and Frampton’s hut are locked). In balance members of
the Whangarei Tramping Club who built and gifted the Peach Cove and Tangihua
Huts spoke strongly in favour of locking the huts at a public meeting. Northland’s
destination huts are locations where people go to stay because of the beach setting.
These huts are locked due to the ease of boat access which increases the chances
of vandalism and theft. The Tangihua Hut and Frampton Hut which are a traditional
bush tramping experience will not be locked in the foreseeable future. The other
huts in Northland will continue to be locked and available to users through a
booking system at the appropriate Area office.
4 .3 SUBMISSIONS ON PROPOSALS
Similar themes came through with the submissions about specific proposals some
general points were:
• The holding on to Northlands’ remote experience in the Waima Ranges and the
Warawara Forest. Manage and maintain these areas with simple facilities like the
track networks that already exist, but only ‘to standard’.
• Near tourist hot spots like Bay of Islands, the Kauri Coast, Cape Reinga bring
walking and tramping experiences to ‘standard’ so the visitor group they are
catering for are satisfied with their experiences.
• There is a strong group of supporters for existing tramping tracks and routes.
They want them managed and maintained to their designated standard, not
‘flashed up’.
• The submissions raised managers awareness of issues that had not previously
been considered.
– 8 submissions related directly to botanising and track access to sites mainly
for native orchid enthusiasts.
– There is a small but focused contingent of remoteness seekers.
Submissions analysis and decisions 19
Section Two
5. Process
• Submissions were entered into an Analysis Database which allows for reports
on individual proposals and/or submitters for future reference and analysis of
demographics.
• Proposals were assessed considering the merit of submissions and the number of
submissions opposing or supporting the proposal. The strategic value of facilities
was reviewed as a result of the submissions analysis and decisions drafted.
• Decisions were documented and forwarded to Areas for manager comment and
sign-off and subsequent Conservator sign-off to the draft decisions.
• Those proposals that received no submissions are accepted provided that the
original proposal reasons still stand and no general submission theme arising
from further analysis had influence on that decision.
• All decisions that differ from original proposals were considered together to
establish the effect this may have on the range of Conservancy recreation
opportunities in terms of relevant legislation and ROR process guidelines
namely:
– Consistency with Principles to Guide a Core Facility Network
– Visitor Strategy
– CMS/CMP objectives
– Proposal document Conservancy overview section
– Northlands 1–5 year Visitor Strategy Plan
– Ability to comply with Tracks and Outdoor Visitors Structures (SNZ HB
8630:2004) given the main users or potential users of the track.
Northland Conservancy recreation opprtunities review20
6
. D
ecis
ion
s
6
.1
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S A
ND
DE
CIS
ION
S B
Y A
RE
A A
ND
SIT
E
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
SIT
E N
AM
ES
SU
MM
AR
Y O
F S
UB
MIS
SIO
NS
AS
SE
T N
AM
E
(AS
SE
T
NU
MB
ER
)
AS
SE
T T
YP
EIF
AS
SE
T I
S
CU
RR
EN
TL
Y
OP
EN
TO
PU
BL
IC
OR
IGIN
AL
AS
SE
T
PR
OP
OS
AL
DE
CIS
ION
DE
CIS
ION
EX
PL
AN
AT
ION
BA
Y O
F I
SL
AN
DS
AR
EA
Flag
staf
f H
ill
Tra
ck
1010
01
2 su
bm
issi
on
s su
pp
ort
ing
this
im
po
rtan
t
ico
n s
ite
in m
ain
tain
ing
faci
litie
s to
stan
dar
d o
r a
hig
her
sta
nd
ard
. 1
neu
tral
sub
mis
sio
n f
ocu
sin
g o
n t
he
eco
logi
cal
valu
es o
f th
e ar
ea a
nd
in
tera
ctio
n w
ith
wal
kin
g p
ub
lic.
Flag
staf
f H
ill
(974
05)
Sho
rt W
alk
Op
enM
ain
tain
Mai
nta
inT
his
tra
ck h
as a
hig
h n
um
ber
of
use
rs
and
nee
ds
to b
e co
nst
ruct
ed t
o b
e ab
le
to w
ith
stan
d t
he
pre
ssu
re.
Flag
staf
f H
ill L
oo
p
Tra
ck 1
0100
0
2 su
bm
issi
on
s 1
pro
po
sin
g re
view
of
all
thes
e tr
acks
fo
r co
llect
ive
up
grad
e.
1 n
eutr
al s
ub
mis
sio
n p
rop
osi
ng
do
gs
be
able
to
be
take
n o
n t
his
tra
ck a
nd
focu
sin
g o
n t
he
eco
logi
cal
valu
es o
f th
e
area
an
d i
nte
ract
ion
wit
h w
alki
ng
pu
blic
.
Flag
staf
f H
ill
Loo
p T
rack
(974
03)
Wal
kin
g T
rack
Op
enM
ain
tain
Mai
nta
in
Fore
st P
oo
ls
Cam
psi
te 1
0200
9
5 su
bm
issi
on
s, 4
su
pp
ort
ing
this
fac
ility
and
its
up
grad
ing.
1 n
eutr
al s
ub
mis
sio
n
rela
tin
g to
th
e n
eed
of
toile
t fa
cilit
ies.
Fore
st P
oo
l
Am
enit
y A
rea
Ro
ad (
9923
4)
Gra
vel
Ro
ad
(2W
D)
Op
enM
ain
tain
Mai
nta
inR
equ
ires
rep
air
for
safe
ty i
ssu
es.
Riv
er u
nd
ercu
ttin
g h
as m
ade
road
to
o
nar
row
fo
r sa
fe p
assa
ge.
Jack
son
’s R
oad
Bri
dge
102
029
3 su
bm
issi
on
s in
su
pp
ort
of
mai
nta
inin
g
this
fo
rest
acc
ess.
Jack
son
’s R
oad
(983
97)
Gra
vel
Ro
ad
(2W
D)
Op
enM
ain
tain
DO
C o
wn
ed
Co
mm
un
ity
Mai
nta
ined
Fore
stry
co
mp
anie
s as
sist
wit
h
mai
nte
nan
ce
Kah
eka
Po
int
Cam
psi
te 1
9159
1
2 su
bm
issi
on
s in
su
pp
ort
of
a ca
mp
at
Kah
eka
Po
int,
1 s
ugg
esti
ng
wee
d c
on
tro
l
as w
ell.
Kah
eka
Po
int
Cam
psi
te
(191
591)
Cam
p g
rou
nd
Pro
po
sed
Pro
po
sed
Seek
ing
com
mu
nit
y
mai
nte
nan
ce
Pro
po
se f
or
com
mu
nit
y m
ain
ten
ance
via
FND
C t
ake
on
man
agem
ent
of
Kah
eka
Pt,
po
ssib
ly r
ein
stat
e
cam
pgr
ou
nd
at
Kah
eka
Pt.
Req
uir
es
iwi/
hap
u c
on
sult
atio
n.
Submissions analysis and decisions 21
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
SIT
E N
AM
ES
SU
MM
AR
Y O
F S
UB
MIS
SIO
NS
AS
SE
T N
AM
E
(AS
SE
T
NU
MB
ER
)
AS
SE
T T
YP
EIF
AS
SE
T I
S
CU
RR
EN
TL
Y
OP
EN
TO
PU
BL
IC
OR
IGIN
AL
AS
SE
T
PR
OP
OS
AL
DE
CIS
ION
DE
CIS
ION
EX
PL
AN
AT
ION
Kah
eka
Po
int
Tra
ck
2 su
bm
issi
on
s. 1
fro
m h
apu
wh
o f
eel
they
hav
e n
ot
bee
n c
on
sult
ed a
nd
awai
t fu
rth
er l
iais
on
bef
ore
ch
ange
s in
man
agem
ent
to t
he
site
. 1
sup
po
rtin
g
stat
ing
com
mu
nit
y in
volv
emen
t is
key
to
the
site
s w
eed
co
ntr
ol.
Kah
eka
Po
int
Tra
ck (
9734
2)
Wal
kin
g T
rack
Op
enM
ain
tain
by
Co
mm
un
ity
Seek
ing
com
mu
nit
y
mai
nte
nan
ce
Pro
po
se f
or
com
mu
nit
y m
ain
ten
ance
via
FND
C t
ake
on
man
agem
ent
of
Kah
eka
Pt,
po
ssib
ly r
ein
stat
e
cam
pgr
ou
nd
at
Kah
eka
Pt.
Req
uir
es
iwi/
hap
u c
on
sult
atio
n.
Mah
inep
ua
Pen
insu
la T
rack
2 su
bm
issi
on
s, 2
su
pp
ort
ing
up
grad
ing
of
pen
insu
la a
nd
(1)
hap
u w
anti
ng
furt
her
kore
ro/i
nvo
lvem
ent
in d
evel
op
men
t.
Mah
inep
ua
Pen
insu
la T
rack
(973
46)
Wal
kin
g T
rack
Op
enU
pgr
ade
to b
rin
g to
Stan
dar
d
Mai
nta
in
Mau
nga
ho
reh
ore
Ro
ute
s, P
uke
ti
1020
06
6 su
bm
issi
on
s al
l su
pp
ort
th
e b
asic
mai
nte
nan
ce o
f th
e tr
ack
bu
t th
ey a
lso
ob
ject
to
th
e sh
ort
enin
g o
f th
e tr
ack
as t
hey
fee
l it
will
co
mp
rom
ise
use
r
exp
erie
nce
.
Man
gah
ore
ho
re
Loo
kou
t
Exte
nsi
on
Ro
ute
;
Pu
keti
(97
233)
Tra
mp
ing
Tra
ck
Op
enM
ain
tain
at L
ow
er
Stan
dar
d
Rem
ove
(an
d
no
t re
pla
ce)
Th
e M
aun
gah
ore
ho
re l
oo
kou
t
exte
nsi
on
ro
ute
(99
233)
is
rare
ly u
se
and
is
a re
turn
tra
ck,
this
tra
ck w
ill b
e
rem
ove
d (
500m
) th
e re
st o
f th
e ro
ute
(973
35)
will
be
mai
nta
ined
.
Mer
um
eru
Fal
ls
Tra
ck R
oad
102
011
2 su
bm
issi
on
s 2
op
po
sin
g as
th
ey
feel
pre
sen
t tr
acks
pro
vid
e go
od
op
po
rtu
nit
ies
to s
ee t
he
falls
wit
ho
ut
crea
tin
g a
new
tra
ck.
Mer
emer
e Fa
lls
Tra
ck (
1914
32)
Pro
po
sed
Pro
po
sed
Dec
lined
(rem
ove
)
Th
e p
ub
lic s
ub
mis
sio
ns
pro
cess
did
no
t
sup
po
rt t
his
pro
po
sal.
Mo
tuar
oh
ia I
slan
d
Tra
ck 1
0100
9
2 su
bm
issi
on
s su
pp
ort
ing
the
up
grad
ing
of
this
tra
ck.
Mo
tuar
oh
ia
Isla
nd
Tra
ck
(974
06)
Wal
kin
g T
rack
Op
enU
pgr
ade
to b
rin
g to
Stan
dar
d
Mai
nta
inT
he
trac
k h
as s
afet
y is
sues
ass
oci
ated
wit
h t
he
site
e.g
. p
ines
nee
d t
o b
e
rem
ove
d a
s th
ey h
ave
reac
hed
en
d o
f
thei
r lif
e.
Nik
aup
on
up
on
u
Ro
ute
Pu
keti
Th
is i
s a
trac
k fa
cilit
y th
at h
as b
een
lo
st
thro
ugh
att
riti
on
. 3
sub
mis
sio
n s
up
po
rt
re-o
pen
ing
and
mai
nta
inin
g o
f th
is t
rack
.
Th
is r
ou
te
will
no
t b
e
re-in
stat
ed.
Th
is t
rack
was
clo
sed
ap
pro
xim
atel
y
9 ye
ars
ago
. T
her
e ar
e o
ther
op
po
rtu
nit
ies
in t
he
Pu
keti
Fo
rest
fo
r
this
typ
e o
f ex
per
ien
ce.
Om
ahu
ta K
auri
San
ctu
ary
Wal
k
1020
20
4 su
bm
issi
on
s 3
sup
po
rtin
g re
pai
rs t
o t
he
road
an
d 1
su
pp
ort
ing
imp
rove
men
ts o
n
the
trac
k.
Om
ahu
ta K
auri
San
ctu
ary
Wal
k
(983
96)
Gra
vel
road
(2W
D)
Op
enU
pgr
ade
– T
o B
rin
g to
Stan
dar
d
Up
grad
e si
ze/
cap
acit
y
Ro
ad i
s to
be
up
grad
ed t
o a
llow
fo
r
safe
vis
ito
r p
assa
ge o
n a
nar
row
an
d
win
dy
road
.
Op
ua
Kau
ri W
alk
1020
90
3 su
bm
issi
on
s in
su
pp
ort
of
re-o
pen
ing
this
fac
ility
an
d m
ain
tain
ing
it t
o s
tan
dar
d.
Op
ua
Kau
ri W
alk
(990
68)
Wal
kin
g T
rack
Clo
sed
Up
grad
e
– T
o B
rin
g to
Stan
dar
d
Mai
nta
inO
pu
a Fo
rest
Kau
ri W
alk
has
bee
n
clo
sed
fo
r 5
year
s d
ue
to b
oar
dw
alk
bei
ng
bel
ow
sta
nd
ard
. O
ram
aho
e to
Pai
hia
Tra
ck n
eed
s to
be
up
grad
ed t
o
stan
dar
d.
Northland Conservancy recreation opprtunities review22
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
SIT
E N
AM
ES
SU
MM
AR
Y O
F S
UB
MIS
SIO
NS
AS
SE
T N
AM
E
(AS
SE
T
NU
MB
ER
)
AS
SE
T T
YP
EIF
AS
SE
T I
S
CU
RR
EN
TL
Y
OP
EN
TO
PU
BL
IC
OR
IGIN
AL
AS
SE
T
PR
OP
OS
AL
DE
CIS
ION
DE
CIS
ION
EX
PL
AN
AT
ION
Pro
po
sed
Dee
p
Wat
er C
ove
Hu
t
1010
31
12 s
ub
mis
sio
ns
of
wh
ich
12
sup
po
rt t
he
pro
po
sal
of
a h
ut
at D
eep
Wat
er C
ove
to
bre
ak t
he
8 h
ou
r tr
amp
mak
ing
it m
ore
avai
lab
le t
o g
rou
ps
of
less
er fi
tnes
s an
d
for
sea
kaya
kers
/bo
atie
s. O
ne
gro
up
wo
uld
lik
e th
e h
ut
pro
vid
ed i
t is
bo
oke
d
like
the
Cap
e B
rett
hu
t. 1
als
o s
ugg
este
d
the
low
erin
g o
f th
e co
nce
ssio
n.
Dee
p W
ater
Co
ve H
ut
(190
075)
Serv
iced
Hu
tP
rop
ose
dP
rop
ose
dP
rop
ose
dT
he
Cap
e B
rett
tra
ck o
ne
of
No
rth
lan
d’s
pre
miu
m o
vern
igh
t
tram
pin
g tr
acks
, h
ow
ever
8h
r to
th
e
Hu
t is
to
ard
uo
us
for
man
y u
sers
that
hav
e th
e fi
tnes
s an
d e
xp
erti
se t
o
uti
lise
this
are
a. D
eep
Wat
er C
ove
is
app
rox
imat
ely
hal
f w
ay t
o t
he
Cap
e,
mak
ing
it t
he
idea
l si
te f
or
a n
ew
hu
t fa
cilit
y. T
he
hu
t ca
pac
ity
will
app
rox
imat
ely
22 b
un
ks (
sam
e as
Cap
e
Bre
tt).
Pu
keti
Fo
rest
Tra
cks
Gen
eral
1020
01
3 su
bm
issi
on
s al
l su
pp
ort
ing
mai
nte
nan
ce,
1 ca
llin
g fo
r a
revi
ew o
f
trac
ks i
n t
he
area
to
en
cou
rage
mo
re,
1
aski
ng
for
all
trac
ks t
o b
e re
op
ened
an
d
bro
ugh
t to
sta
nd
ard
. W
eed
co
ntr
ol
also
calle
d f
or.
Mai
nta
in
Th
ere
is a
co
mm
itm
ent
to g
etti
ng
the
exis
tin
g tr
ack
net
wo
rk i
n t
he
Pu
keti
Fore
st t
o s
tan
dar
d a
nd
mai
nta
ined
.
Ru
ssel
l T
ow
nsh
ip5
neu
tral
su
bm
issi
on
s su
gges
tin
g va
rio
us
wal
ks i
ncl
ud
ing
3 ar
eas/
wal
ks t
o b
e o
pen
for
do
gs.
Loo
p T
rack
At
Mat
awh
i B
ay
Res
erve
(D
ogs
).
Oki
ato
To
Ru
ssel
l T
rack
(Do
gs).
Oki
ato
Mic
row
ave
To
wer
Tra
ck.
Ru
ssel
l T
rack
s
To
Be
Op
en F
or
Do
gs.
Hu
rst
Par
k
Tra
ck.
Pro
po
sals
by
the
sub
mit
ters
no
t th
e p
ub
lic
do
cum
ent.
Dec
line
at
pre
sen
t b
ut
kep
t fo
r
con
sid
erat
ion
if w
arra
nte
d.
Th
e d
epar
tmen
t w
ill n
ot
op
en a
ny
trac
ks i
n t
he
area
su
rro
un
din
g R
uss
ell
to d
ogs
. T
he
on
ly p
rop
ose
d t
rack
th
at
will
go
ah
ead
is
Wai
tata
Po
int
(as
liste
d
bel
ow
).
Tak
apau
Tra
ck
1020
03
9 su
bm
issi
on
s in
su
pp
ort
of
the
reo
pen
ing
of
this
po
pu
lar
des
tin
atio
n
Kau
ri e
xp
erie
nce
, 3
on
th
e co
nd
itio
n i
t
rem
ain
s a
tram
pin
g tr
ack
and
1 d
oes
no
t
wan
t an
y b
rid
gin
g o
f th
e st
ream
.
Tak
apau
Tra
ck
(973
34)
Easy
Tra
mp
ing
Tra
ck
Clo
sed
Up
grad
e
– T
o B
rin
g to
Stan
dar
d
Mai
nta
inT
his
tra
ck w
ill b
e re
-op
ened
an
d
mai
nta
ined
to
sta
nd
ard
. T
her
e is
a
req
uir
emen
t fo
r st
ruct
ure
s to
pro
tect
the
kau
ri r
oo
ts.
Submissions analysis and decisions 23
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
SIT
E N
AM
ES
SU
MM
AR
Y O
F S
UB
MIS
SIO
NS
AS
SE
T N
AM
E
(AS
SE
T
NU
MB
ER
)
AS
SE
T T
YP
EIF
AS
SE
T I
S
CU
RR
EN
TL
Y
OP
EN
TO
PU
BL
IC
OR
IGIN
AL
AS
SE
T
PR
OP
OS
AL
DE
CIS
ION
DE
CIS
ION
EX
PL
AN
AT
ION
Wai
ho
nga
Go
rge
3 su
bm
issi
on
s su
pp
ort
ing
the
mai
nte
nan
ce w
ith
tw
o r
equ
esti
ng
bas
ic
mai
nte
nan
ce.
Wai
ho
anga
Go
rge
Kau
ri
Wal
k (9
7333
)
Wal
kin
g T
rack
Op
enU
pgr
ade
– T
o B
rin
g to
Stan
dar
d
Mai
nta
in
Wai
pap
a T
rack
4 su
bm
issi
on
s, 1
su
pp
ort
ing
mai
nte
nan
ce
of
this
tra
ck,
2 p
rop
osi
ng
a h
ut
at C
amp
Cre
ek,
1 p
rop
osi
ng
a lin
k to
th
e P
uke
ti
Fore
st t
rack
s.
Wai
pap
a T
rack
(973
37)
Tra
mp
ing
Tra
ck
op
enm
ain
tain
/
up
grad
e
Mai
nta
inT
he
trac
k w
ill b
e m
ain
tain
ed.
Cam
p
Cre
ek w
ill n
ot
be
use
d f
or
a sh
elte
r si
te
as t
his
lo
cati
on
flo
od
s re
gula
rly.
Wai
tan
gi W
etla
nd
Wal
k 10
2078
3 su
bm
issi
on
s in
su
pp
ort
of
acce
ss
to w
etla
nd
s fo
r ed
uca
tio
nal
rea
son
s
and
ad
dit
ion
al t
rack
s. C
on
cern
s w
ere
exp
ress
ed b
y 2
sub
mis
sio
ns
on
th
e w
eed
pro
ble
m a
t th
e si
te a
nd
1 s
ub
mis
sio
n
po
ssib
le c
om
mu
nit
y in
volv
emen
t in
erad
icat
ion
.
Wai
tan
gi
Wet
lan
d W
alk
(190
506)
Wal
kin
g T
rack
Pro
po
sed
Pro
po
sed
Pro
po
sed
To
man
age
exis
tin
g in
form
al a
cces
s.
Th
is s
ite
is c
lose
d t
o t
he
larg
er
po
pu
lati
on
bas
e o
f th
e B
ay o
f Is
lan
ds,
and
po
pu
lar
tou
rist
des
tin
atio
n.
Th
is
site
has
man
y ex
citi
ng
po
ssib
iliti
es f
or
a co
asta
l w
etla
nd
ex
per
ien
ce f
or
visi
tor
and
lo
cal
peo
ple
alik
e.
Wai
tata
Po
int
Tra
ck 1
0027
7
3 su
bm
issi
on
s a
ll su
pp
ort
ing
the
pro
po
sed
tra
ck f
or
reas
on
s o
f la
ck o
f lo
cal
wal
ks i
n t
he
area
.
Wai
tata
Po
int
Tra
ck (
1914
91)
Wal
kin
g T
rack
Pro
po
sed
Pro
po
sed
Pro
po
sed
To
giv
e ac
cess
to
his
tori
c fe
atu
res
of
Wai
tata
co
asta
l b
atte
ry.
Wh
anga
mu
mu
Tra
ck 1
0102
5
3 Su
bm
issi
on
s, p
rop
osi
ng
a b
ack
to
nat
ure
cam
pin
g ex
per
ien
ce f
or
sea
kaya
kin
g, 2
wit
ho
ut
faci
litie
s an
d 1
wit
h.
Pu
blic
Pro
po
sed
Faci
lity.
Info
rmal
cam
pin
g
Dec
lined
No
cam
pin
g is
allo
wed
at
this
sit
e.
KA
ITA
IA A
RE
A
Cap
e R
ein
ga
Co
asta
l W
alkw
ay
Gen
eral
104
018
7 Su
bm
issi
on
s su
pp
ort
ing
the
Cap
e
Rei
nga
Co
asta
l w
alkw
ay n
etw
ork
to
be
mai
nta
ined
to
sta
nd
ard
. 1
sub
mis
sio
n
neu
tral
pro
po
sin
g a
Gre
at w
alk
wit
h a
ll
asso
ciat
ed f
acili
ties
.
Tap
otu
pto
tu
Cam
psi
te t
o
Kap
ow
airu
a
Tra
ck (
Spir
its
Bay
) &
Pan
do
ra
Ro
ad t
o
Ko
hu
run
aki
Tra
ck
(973
28 /
9732
9)
Tra
mp
ing
Tra
ck
Op
enM
ain
tain
Mai
nta
in
Northland Conservancy recreation opprtunities review24
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
SIT
E N
AM
ES
SU
MM
AR
Y O
F S
UB
MIS
SIO
NS
AS
SE
T N
AM
E
(AS
SE
T
NU
MB
ER
)
AS
SE
T T
YP
EIF
AS
SE
T I
S
CU
RR
EN
TL
Y
OP
EN
TO
PU
BL
IC
OR
IGIN
AL
AS
SE
T
PR
OP
OS
AL
DE
CIS
ION
DE
CIS
ION
EX
PL
AN
AT
ION
Ho
kian
ga K
ai
Iwi
Co
asta
l W
alk
– M
aun
gan
ui
Blu
ff
Wal
k 10
4018
3 su
bm
issi
on
s su
pp
ort
ing
acce
ss o
f th
is
trac
k an
d t
o s
tan
dar
d d
ue
to p
ub
lic
inte
rest
an
d h
isto
ric
valu
es.
(Rep
eate
d f
or
site
104
018)
Far
No
rth
Ro
ad
To
Tap
otu
po
tu
/Kap
ow
airu
a
Tra
ck J
un
ctio
n
(in
clu
din
g K
auri
Bu
sh T
rack
) &
to T
apo
tup
totu
Cam
psi
te
Tra
mp
ing
Tra
ck
Op
enM
ain
tain
Mai
nta
in
Man
gam
uka
Go
rge
1030
36
5 su
bm
issi
on
s, 3
su
pp
ort
th
e o
ngo
ing
mai
nte
nan
ce o
f th
is t
ram
pin
g tr
ack
to
stan
dar
d.
2 h
apu
op
po
se i
n g
ener
al s
om
e
of
DO
C p
olic
ies
in r
elat
ion
ship
to
th
is
area
.
Man
gam
uka
Go
rge
Wal
kway
/Mic
row
ave
Tra
ck (
9732
1)
Tra
mp
ing
Tra
ck
Op
enM
ain
tain
Mai
nta
in
Mau
nga
tan
iwh
a
Wal
kway
103
036
3 su
bm
issi
on
s in
su
pp
ort
of
op
enin
g th
e
Mic
row
ave
sect
ion
of
this
tra
ck w
hic
h
has
bee
n l
ost
th
rou
gh n
egle
ct.
Man
gam
uka
Go
rge
Wal
kway
/Mic
row
ave
Tra
ck (
9732
1)
Tra
mp
ing
Tra
ck
Op
en
(mic
row
ave
sect
ion
clo
sed
)
Mai
nta
inM
ain
tain
Tau
mar
um
aru
Co
asta
l T
rack
1030
06
30 s
ub
mis
sio
ns
rece
ived
on
th
is p
rop
osa
l
26 i
n s
tro
ng
sup
po
rt o
f th
e in
itia
tive
thre
e n
eutr
al a
nd
rel
ated
to
th
ings
lik
e
wee
d c
on
tro
l, to
ilets
fo
r th
e si
te.
On
e
sup
po
rt i
n p
art.
Tau
mar
um
aru
Co
asta
l T
rack
(191
233)
Sho
rt W
alk
(fo
r d
isab
led
)
Pro
po
sed
Pro
po
sed
Pro
po
sed
Th
is i
s a
com
mu
nit
y su
pp
ort
ed
dis
able
d t
rack
fo
r sh
ort
co
asta
l w
alk
taki
ng
in h
isto
rica
l fe
atu
res.
War
awar
a Fo
rest
– G
old
en S
tair
s
1030
41
5 su
bm
issi
on
s in
su
pp
ort
of
this
fac
ility
keep
ing
mai
nte
nan
ce t
o t
he
stan
dar
d.
At
the
mo
men
t it
req
uir
es a
dd
itio
nal
mar
kin
g.
War
awar
a T
rack
(973
22)
Tra
mp
ing
Tra
ck
Op
enU
pgr
ade
– T
o B
rin
g to
Stan
dar
d
Mai
nta
in
KA
UR
I C
OA
ST
AR
EA
Fram
pto
n H
ut
1050
08
4 su
bm
issi
on
s in
to
tal.
3 su
bm
issi
on
s
all
sup
po
rtin
g th
e m
ain
ten
ance
of
this
faci
lity,
1 s
ub
mis
sio
n r
equ
ests
to
mai
nta
in
its
amb
ien
ce.
1 su
bm
issi
on
req
uir
ed m
ore
info
rmat
ion
.
Fram
pto
ns
Hu
t
(238
80)
Stan
dar
d H
ut
Op
enU
pgr
ade
– T
o H
igh
er
Stan
dar
d
Mai
nta
inFr
amp
ton
s H
ut
had
3 s
ub
mis
sio
ns
to
sup
po
rt m
ain
ten
ance
of
this
hu
t.
Submissions analysis and decisions 25
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
SIT
E N
AM
ES
SU
MM
AR
Y O
F S
UB
MIS
SIO
NS
AS
SE
T N
AM
E
(AS
SE
T
NU
MB
ER
)
AS
SE
T T
YP
EIF
AS
SE
T I
S
CU
RR
EN
TL
Y
OP
EN
TO
PU
BL
IC
OR
IGIN
AL
AS
SE
T
PR
OP
OS
AL
DE
CIS
ION
DE
CIS
ION
EX
PL
AN
AT
ION
Ho
kian
ga K
ai
Iwi
Co
asta
l W
alk
– M
aun
gan
ui
Blu
ff
Wal
k 10
5003
3 su
bm
issi
on
s su
pp
ort
ing
mai
nta
inin
g
this
sit
e to
fo
r p
ub
lic i
nte
rest
an
d h
isto
ric
valu
es.
2 sp
ecifi
cally
tal
k o
f en
suri
ng
the
Mau
nga
nu
i B
luff
Wal
k is
op
en a
nd
mai
nta
ined
.
Wai
po
ua
Co
asta
l
Wal
kway
– K
awer
ua
Ro
aden
d t
o
Kai
Iw
i La
kes
& O
map
ere
to K
awer
ua
Ro
aden
d (
9736
1
/ 97
360
/
9736
02)
Tra
mp
ing
Tra
ck
Op
enU
pgr
ade
– T
o B
rin
g to
Stan
dar
d
Mai
nta
in
Kaw
eru
a H
ote
l
1050
03
2 n
eutr
al s
ub
mis
sio
ns
pro
po
sin
g th
at t
he
ho
tel
is u
pgr
aded
an
d m
ade
avai
lab
le f
or
ove
rnig
ht
acco
mm
od
atio
n.
Kaw
eru
a H
ote
l
(229
24)
Oth
er B
uild
ing
Clo
sed
No
n-v
isit
or
DO
C
man
agem
ent
No
n-v
isit
or
DO
C
man
agem
ent
Th
is h
ote
l is
a h
isto
ric
bu
ildin
g an
d w
ill
be
man
aged
by
the
dep
artm
ent
for
its
con
serv
atio
n b
ut
no
t fo
r p
ub
lic a
cces
s.
Mo
un
t T
uta
mo
e
Tra
ck 1
0503
5
7 su
bm
issi
on
s al
l o
pp
osi
ng
the
clo
sure
of
this
tra
ck.
Co
nce
rns
are
lost
of
acce
ss
to t
he
pla
teau
an
d w
ater
fall
avai
lab
le o
n
the
trac
k an
d i
t is
th
e o
nly
tra
ck o
f an
y
len
gth
ava
ilab
le t
o D
arga
ville
to
wn
ship
.
Ever
yon
e re
qu
ests
ret
ain
ing
the
trac
k to
min
imu
m s
tan
dar
d.
Mo
un
t T
uta
mo
e
Tra
ck (
9737
5)
Tra
mp
ing
Tra
ck
Op
enR
emo
ve (
and
no
t re
pla
ce)
Mai
nta
inT
her
e w
as s
tro
ng
sup
po
rt (
7
sub
mis
sio
ns)
th
rou
gh t
he
pu
blic
pro
cess
to
ret
ain
th
is t
rack
fo
r ac
cess
to t
he
sum
mit
pla
teau
an
d h
ave
a tr
ack
of
lon
ger
du
rati
on
nea
r D
arga
ville
.
Pro
po
sed
Tw
o
Hu
ts I
n W
aim
a
Ran
gers
105
007
22 s
ub
mis
sio
ns
10 s
up
po
rtin
g th
e
pro
po
sed
hu
ts (
4 ge
ner
al s
up
po
rt &
the
rest
sp
ecifi
c) r
easo
ns
are
incr
easi
ng
use
& l
oca
l d
evel
op
men
t &
pro
vid
ing
safe
use
). 1
2 o
pp
ose
fo
r en
viro
nm
enta
l
reas
on
s, s
ho
rt t
imes
bet
wee
n t
he
hu
ts &
loss
of
a b
ackc
ou
ntr
y ca
mp
ing/
tram
pin
g
exp
erie
nce
& p
erce
ived
lac
k o
f n
um
ber
s.
Th
is n
eed
s to
be
take
n i
n c
on
sid
erat
ion
wit
h t
he
Wai
ma
Tra
cks
(20
sub
mis
sio
ns)
as t
he
15 o
pp
ose
d d
o n
ot
wan
t fu
rth
er
dev
elo
pm
ent
of
the
area
as
a w
ho
le.
Wai
ma
Hu
t
(191
604)
Serv
iced
Hu
tP
rop
ose
dP
rop
ose
dD
eclin
edT
his
fac
ility
was
pu
t u
p i
n t
he
Pu
blic
revi
ew a
s an
op
po
rtu
nit
y th
at w
ill g
ive
No
rth
lan
d a
un
iqu
e m
ult
i d
ay t
ram
pin
g
exp
erie
nce
th
rou
gh t
he
kau
ri f
ore
st.
Th
is h
ut
wo
uld
lin
k w
ith
Fra
mp
ton
s
Hu
t w
hic
h w
as n
ewly
acq
uir
ed w
ith
a
lan
d a
cqu
isit
ion
. H
ow
ever
th
ere
was
com
mu
nit
y o
bje
ctio
n t
o t
he
faci
litie
s.
Northland Conservancy recreation opprtunities review26
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
SIT
E N
AM
ES
SU
MM
AR
Y O
F S
UB
MIS
SIO
NS
AS
SE
T N
AM
E
(AS
SE
T
NU
MB
ER
)
AS
SE
T T
YP
EIF
AS
SE
T I
S
CU
RR
EN
TL
Y
OP
EN
TO
PU
BL
IC
OR
IGIN
AL
AS
SE
T
PR
OP
OS
AL
DE
CIS
ION
DE
CIS
ION
EX
PL
AN
AT
ION
Tan
e M
ahu
ta
1050
13
2 su
bm
issi
on
s su
pp
ort
ing
the
up
grad
ing
of
this
fac
ility
to
in
clu
de
road
sid
e
faci
litie
s &
hav
e a
man
agem
ent
pla
n.
Tan
e M
ahu
ta S
ite
Am
enit
y A
rea,
To
ilet,
Sh
ort
Wal
k
Op
enU
pgr
ade
to b
rin
g to
Stan
dar
d
Up
grad
e
to h
igh
er
stan
dar
d
Site
nee
ds
sign
ifica
nt
alte
rati
on
to
tra
ck
surf
ace
to h
ard
en i
t fo
r h
igh
vis
ito
r
use
an
d k
eep
vis
ito
rs o
ff d
elic
ate
vege
tati
on
, am
enit
y ar
ea r
equ
ires
up
grad
e/ i
ncr
ease
siz
e ca
pac
ity
to c
ater
for
incr
easi
ng
nu
mb
ers
and
to
en
able
a
dis
able
d s
ho
rt w
alk.
Tu
tam
oe
Tra
ck3
sub
mis
sio
ns
sup
po
rtin
g th
e co
nti
nu
ed
mai
nte
nan
ce o
f th
is t
rack
.
Tu
tam
oe
Tra
ck
(973
74)
Wal
kin
g T
rack
Op
enM
ain
tain
Mai
nta
inT
her
e is
su
pp
ort
fo
r th
e co
nti
nu
ed
mai
nte
nan
ce o
f th
is s
ite.
Wai
ma
Fore
st
Tra
cks
1050
07
20 s
ub
mis
sio
ns.
4 s
ub
mis
sio
ns
sup
po
rt
an u
pgr
ade
of
trac
k fa
cilit
ies
in t
he
area
.
15 o
pp
ose
th
e u
pgr
ade
of
faci
litie
s b
ut
sup
po
rt e
xis
tin
g tr
ack
net
wo
rk a
nd
acce
ss a
nd
2 a
gain
st r
e-ro
uti
ng
trac
ks
via
Fram
pto
ns
Hu
t. 1
su
bm
issi
on
was
neu
tral
su
gges
tin
g ve
geta
tio
n c
lear
ance
,
sto
ck c
on
tro
l an
d p
ests
co
ntr
ol.
Th
ese
sub
mis
sio
ns
mu
st b
e vi
ewed
in c
on
jun
ctio
n w
ith
th
e p
rop
ose
d
Wai
ma
Hu
ts s
ub
mis
sio
ns
esp
ecia
lly a
s
the
12 o
pp
ose
d d
o n
ot
wan
t fu
rth
er
dev
elo
pm
ent
of
the
area
an
d d
id n
ot
nec
essa
rily
co
mm
ent
on
th
e h
uts
spec
ifica
lly.
Als
o s
ee p
ub
lic p
rop
ose
d
trac
ks f
or
this
are
a.
Six
Fo
ot
Tra
ck
(Mo
un
tain
Ro
ad
to M
t H
autu
ru)
An
d T
aita
Bri
dle
Tra
ck
and
Pro
po
sed
Car
par
k (9
7363
/
9906
4 /
1912
78)
Tra
mp
ing
Tra
ck
Op
enSi
x f
oo
t tr
ack
– U
pgr
ade
– T
o B
rin
g to
Stan
dar
d a
nd
Tai
ta B
rid
le
trac
k m
ain
tain
Mai
nta
inT
his
tra
ck i
s a
Bac
kco
un
try
Ad
ven
ture
r
Tra
mp
ing
Tra
ck w
hic
h i
s a
stan
dar
d
the
dep
artm
ent
bel
ieve
s w
ill b
est
rep
rese
nt
the
use
r to
th
e ar
ea a
nd
no
ove
r d
evel
op
th
e si
te.
Wao
ku C
oac
h
Ro
ad 1
0501
0
3 su
bm
issi
on
su
pp
ort
th
e m
ain
ten
ance
of
this
fac
ility
an
d 2
req
ues
ts o
wn
ersh
ip
&/o
r cl
osu
re o
f ro
ad t
o v
ehic
les
to b
e
reso
lved
du
e to
th
e h
isto
ric
sto
ne
wo
rk o
f
the
road
get
tin
g d
amag
ed.
Wao
ku C
oac
h
Ro
ad W
alkw
ay
Wai
ma
to
Tu
tam
oe.
(973
65)
Tra
mp
ing
Tra
ck
Op
enU
pgr
ade
– T
o B
rin
g to
Stan
dar
d
Mai
nta
inT
his
sit
e is
to
be
mai
nta
ined
an
d t
he
issu
es o
f o
wn
ersh
ip &
pre
sen
t ve
hic
le
acce
ss t
o b
e re
solv
ed a
s it
is
imp
acti
ng
on
th
e h
isto
ric
sto
ne
feat
ure
s o
f th
is
site
.
WH
AN
GA
RE
I A
RE
A
Bra
tty’
s B
ush
Tra
ck
1000
80
8 su
bm
issi
on
s o
pp
osi
ng
the
clo
sure
of
this
sit
e. I
ts s
ign
ifica
nce
is
for
bo
tan
isin
g
and
ap
pra
isal
of
rare
orc
hid
s.
Bra
tty’
s B
ush
Tra
ck (
9738
4)
Sho
rt W
alk
Will
ch
ange
to
Wal
kin
g T
rack
as a
lo
wer
stan
dar
d.
Op
enR
emo
ve (
and
no
t re
pla
ce)
Mai
nta
in
at L
ow
er
Stan
dar
d
Th
is t
rack
will
be
mai
nta
ined
at
the
low
er s
tan
dar
d o
f a
wal
kin
g tr
ack
du
e
to t
he
low
nu
mb
ers
bu
t sp
ecia
list
visi
tors
th
at u
se t
he
trac
k (f
or
orc
hir
d
view
ing)
.
Submissions analysis and decisions 27
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
SIT
E N
AM
ES
SU
MM
AR
Y O
F S
UB
MIS
SIO
NS
AS
SE
T N
AM
E
(AS
SE
T
NU
MB
ER
)
AS
SE
T T
YP
EIF
AS
SE
T I
S
CU
RR
EN
TL
Y
OP
EN
TO
PU
BL
IC
OR
IGIN
AL
AS
SE
T
PR
OP
OS
AL
DE
CIS
ION
DE
CIS
ION
EX
PL
AN
AT
ION
Bre
am H
ead
Tra
ck
1001
31
3 su
bm
issi
on
s 2
sup
po
rtin
g th
e u
pgr
adin
g
of
the
trac
k an
d 1
is
neu
tral
in
dic
atin
g a
pro
po
sed
fac
ility
in
th
is c
ase
a to
ilet
at
the
Urq
uar
ts c
arp
ark.
Th
ere
may
hav
e
bee
n c
on
fusi
on
rel
atin
g to
tra
cks
so s
ee
Pea
ch C
ove
Tra
ck w
ith
rel
atio
n t
o t
he
net
wo
rk o
f th
e ar
ea.
Bre
am H
ead
Tra
ck (
9738
9)
Easy
Tra
mp
ing
Tra
ck
Op
enU
pgr
ade
– T
o B
rin
g to
Stan
dar
d
Up
grad
e
to H
igh
er
Stan
dar
d
Up
grad
ing
site
to
Day
vis
ito
r to
refl
ect
the
curr
ent
use
r gr
ou
p.
Mim
iwh
anga
ta
Co
asta
l P
ark
Gen
eral
101
051
3 su
bm
issi
on
s. 1
su
pp
ort
ing
in p
art
the
mai
nte
nan
ce b
ut
aski
ng
for
up
grad
ing
to a
hig
her
sta
nd
ard
th
e tr
acks
in
th
e
area
. 2
neu
tral
su
bm
issi
on
s 1
pro
po
sin
g
ove
rnig
ht
cam
pin
g (d
rive
in
) to
be
esta
blis
hed
an
d 1
su
gges
tin
g o
nly
fo
r
self
co
nta
ined
mo
tor
ho
mes
etc
fo
r 1–
2
nig
hts
sta
y o
nly
.
Mai
nta
in S
ite
– R
equ
ires
Up
grad
e.
Wit
h i
nte
rest
in
th
e b
oth
th
e la
nd
an
d
mar
ine
feat
ure
s o
f th
is p
ark
fore
cast
usa
ge i
s to
in
crea
se.
No
rth
Ru
ssel
l
Fore
st 1
0103
4
6 su
bm
issi
on
s. 4
su
pp
ort
ing
the
mai
nte
nan
ce o
f th
e tr
amp
ing
trac
ks
to s
tan
dar
d i
n t
his
are
a. 3
neu
tral
as
2
op
po
se T
e A
raro
a cr
eati
ng
a n
ew t
rack
at t
he
Pap
akau
ri S
trea
m w
hic
h w
as n
ot
pro
po
sed
an
d i
s n
ot
hap
pen
ing
(th
eir
trac
k is
to
use
th
e O
ld R
uss
ell
Ro
ad f
or
this
sec
tio
n).
1 s
ub
mis
sio
n i
n s
up
po
rt o
f
dev
elo
pm
ent
of
iwi
bas
ed t
ou
rism
pic
k
up
/ d
rop
off
op
po
rtu
nit
ies
No
rth
Ru
ssel
l
Fore
st W
alkw
ay
(974
22)
Easy
Tra
mp
ing
Tra
ck
Op
enM
ain
tain
Mai
nta
in
Pea
ch C
ove
Hu
t
1001
30
7 su
bm
issi
on
s. 5
su
bm
issi
on
s o
pp
ose
the
lock
ing
and
bo
oki
ng
of
this
hu
t.
All
7 su
pp
ort
th
e fa
cilit
y as
a w
ho
le.
1
sub
mis
sio
n s
up
po
rtin
g th
e re
pla
cem
ent
of
the
toile
t. 1
su
bm
issi
on
op
po
sin
g an
y
dev
elo
pm
ent
in t
he
area
.
Pea
ch C
ove
Hu
t
(240
95)
Serv
iced
Hu
tO
pen
Up
grad
e –
Size
/Cap
acit
y
Up
grad
e –
Size
/Cap
acit
y
Th
is h
ut
is i
n t
he
dev
elo
pin
g B
ream
Hea
d S
cen
ic R
eser
ve t
hat
is
bei
ng
man
aged
as
a m
ain
lan
d i
slan
d.
For
this
reas
on
th
e h
ut
will
be
imp
ort
ant
in t
he
futu
re t
o a
llow
peo
ple
to
ex
per
ien
ce
the
daw
n c
ho
rus.
Th
is h
ut
is a
lso
bei
ng
inve
stig
ated
fo
r fu
ture
dis
able
d a
cces
s
wit
h a
dis
able
d s
ho
rt w
alk
fro
m t
he
bea
ch.
See
sect
ion
4.2
fo
r lo
ckin
g o
f
hu
ts r
esp
on
se.
Northland Conservancy recreation opprtunities review28
SU
BM
ISS
ION
S
SIT
E N
AM
ES
SU
MM
AR
Y O
F S
UB
MIS
SIO
NS
AS
SE
T N
AM
E
(AS
SE
T
NU
MB
ER
)
AS
SE
T T
YP
EIF
AS
SE
T I
S
CU
RR
EN
TL
Y
OP
EN
TO
PU
BL
IC
OR
IGIN
AL
AS
SE
T
PR
OP
OS
AL
DE
CIS
ION
DE
CIS
ION
EX
PL
AN
AT
ION
Pea
ch C
ove
Tra
ck
1001
30
4 su
bm
issi
on
s 2
sup
po
rtin
g m
ain
ten
ance
/
up
grad
e d
ue
to c
on
dit
ion
of
the
trac
k.
2 su
pp
ort
bas
ic m
ain
ten
ance
of
trac
k as
con
cern
ed w
ith
fu
rth
er d
evel
op
men
t
crea
tin
g p
ote
nti
al e
nvi
ron
men
tal
dam
age.
Pea
ch C
ove
Tra
ck (
9738
8)
Easy
Tra
mp
ing
Tra
ck
Op
enM
ain
tain
Mai
nta
inT
his
tra
ck r
equ
ires
up
grad
ing
to
stan
dar
d.
Pu
ken
ui
Fore
st
Tra
cks
1001
41
5 su
bm
issi
on
s 4
sup
po
rtin
g th
e
mai
nte
nan
ce o
f fa
cilit
y (3
of
thes
e ar
e
con
cern
ed w
ith
wid
enin
g o
r ex
cess
ive
dev
elo
pm
ent)
. 1
neu
tral
wan
tin
g D
OC
’s
pri
ori
ty t
o b
e re
turn
ing
the
fore
st t
o g
oo
d
hea
lth
no
t re
crea
tio
n f
acili
ties
.
Pu
ken
ui
Smal
l
Loo
p T
rack
(973
91)
Wal
kin
g T
rack
Op
enM
ain
tain
Mai
nta
inIn
clu
des
tw
o b
rid
ges
pro
po
sed
som
ewh
ere
on
th
e tw
o t
rack
s.
Smu
ggle
rs B
ay
Tra
ck 1
0013
4
3 su
bm
issi
on
s 2
in s
up
po
rt o
f th
e tr
ack
net
wo
rk a
nd
bri
ng
the
inte
rpre
tati
on
an
d
faci
litie
s to
a h
igh
er s
tan
dar
d.
1 n
eutr
al
ind
icat
ing
the
nee
d f
or
pu
blic
to
ilets
.
Smu
ggle
rs T
rack
,
Bu
sby
Hea
d
(973
90)
Wal
kin
g T
rack
Op
enU
pgr
ade
– T
o B
rin
g to
Stan
dar
d
Mai
nta
inT
his
tra
ck r
equ
ires
up
grad
ing
to
stan
dar
d.
Tan
gih
ua
Fore
st
Wal
ks 1
0017
0
Th
ere
wer
e 7
sub
mis
sio
ns
4 in
su
pp
ort
of
mai
nta
inin
g th
e fa
cilit
ies,
3 t
hat
wer
e
con
sid
ered
neu
tral
rel
atin
g to
gai
nin
g
lega
l ac
cess
at
the
wes
tern
en
d a
nd
the
fen
cin
g to
kee
p g
razi
ng
ou
t o
f th
e
Res
erve
.
Tra
cks
aro
un
d
the
Tan
igh
ua
Lio
ns
Lod
ge
Tra
mp
ing
Tra
ck
Op
enU
pgr
ade
– T
o B
rin
g to
Stan
dar
d
Mai
nta
inT
hes
e tr
acks
req
uir
e u
pgr
adin
g to
stan
dar
d.
Th
e is
sue
of
lega
l ac
cess
at
the
wes
tern
en
d n
eed
s to
be
exam
ined
.
Tan
gih
ua
Hu
t
1001
70
11 s
ub
mis
sio
ns
on
th
e H
ut.
Th
ere
was
som
e co
nce
rn a
bo
ut
the
per
ceiv
ed
flas
hin
g u
p o
f th
is f
acili
ty D
OC
is
goin
g
to m
ain
tain
it
to a
‘St
and
ard
’ fa
cilit
y
acco
rdin
g to
th
e h
ut
serv
ice
stan
dar
ds.
11
sup
po
rt t
he
faci
lity,
of
wh
ich
9 o
pp
ose
the
lo
ckin
g an
d/o
r b
oo
kin
g o
f th
e h
ut,
1
sup
po
rted
lo
ckin
g th
e h
ut.
Tan
gih
ua
Hu
t
(235
34)
Stan
dar
d H
ut
Op
enU
pgr
ade
– T
o H
igh
er
Stan
dar
d
Mai
nta
inT
his
is
on
e o
f th
e fe
w b
ush
tra
mp
ing
hu
t ex
per
ien
ces
in N
ort
hla
nd
. W
e
can
ex
pec
t vi
sito
r n
um
ber
s in
th
is
area
to
in
crea
se a
s p
eop
le o
ver
flo
w
fro
m t
he
mo
re p
op
ula
r tr
acks
, an
d
are
loo
kin
g fo
r a
mo
re w
ilder
nes
s
exp
erie
nce
, h
ow
ever
giv
en c
urr
ent
use
an
d c
om
mu
nit
y fe
elin
g th
is h
ut
will
co
nti
nu
e to
be
mai
nta
ined
as
a st
and
ard
hu
t. S
ee s
ecti
on
4.1
fo
r
resp
on
se t
o c
on
cern
ove
r lo
ckin
g o
f
hu
ts.
Submissions analysis and decisions 29
6 .2 OTHER SUBMISSIONS ON PROPOSALS
Bay of Islands Area
The following received 2 submissions supporting DOC’s continued maintenance
proposals:
• Moturua Island Track 101016/97412
• Kororipo Pa Walk 102064/97351
The following received 1 submission supporting DOC’s continued maintenance
proposals:
• Harrison Reserve Track 101014/97413
• Lane Cove Hut 102045/23518
• Manginangina Kauri Walkway 102007/97333
• Marsden Cross Historic Reserve Walk 102085/97356
• Matauwhi Bay Amenity Area 101007
• Motukawanui Hut (neutral – as more information required) 102053/23514
• Ngaiotonga Kauri Grove Walk 101032/97421
• Urupukapuka / Cable Bay Campsite 100160
• Urupukapuka Island Track 101018
* Facilities proposed by the public (i.e. neutral submissions – all are 1 submission unless otherwise stated). • Informal camping at Whangamumu Harbour for sea kayakers (3 submissions)
• Shelter or hut at Camp Creek, Waipapa Track (2 submissions).
• Pear Tree bay proposed camp at Whangaroa
• Tracks in the facinty of the Russell township to be open to dogs
• A loop track to be constructed in Matawhi Bay Reserve and open for dogs.
• Loop track at Matawhi Bay Reserve (open for dogs).
• Okiato to Russell track (open for dogs).
• Okiato Microwave Tower Track.
• Russell tracks to be open for dogs.
• Hurst Park track.
• Tracks around Kaikohe either at Lake Omapere or the SDIR Grassland down
Cumbers Road
• A Link track from the Puketi Forest tracks from Waipapa Track
• Pear Tree Bay, Ranfurly Bay Scenic Reserve to re-open and maintain – there is no
plan to do so (staff submission)
Kaitaia Area
• Ahipara Gumfields proposed walk 190487 received two submissions in support.
This track will go ahead over the next five years due to the public support (local
community, business and concessions) expressed prior to this process.
• Soda Springs track proposal 104051/99036 received one submission in support.
This track has been supported by the public in the past, although not through
this process. It is a low priority for the Area but is still a possibility within the
five year plan.
Northland Conservancy recreation opprtunities review30
Kauri Coast Area
The following received 1 submission supporting DOC’s continued maintenance
proposals:
• Tokatoka Scenic Reserve Walk 100250-97400
• Four Sisters Track 105017/99066
• Lookout Track, Waipoua Forest 105027/97371
• Te Matua Ngahere 105017/97367
• Trounson Kauri Park 105032/97373
• Waiotemarama Gorge Track 105005/97362
• Waipoua Visitor Centre Road 105038
• Wekaweka Track 105010/99067
• Yakas Kauri Track105048/97369 & 105019/97368
• Hukatere Scenic Reserve Track is to be removed and not replaced as there is
no need for this facility in the community. There was one submission with an
offer of community support/maintenance from a group outside of the immediate
area.
* Facilities proposed by the public (i.e. neutral submissions – all are 1 submission unless otherwise stated). • A loop track to be made in the Waima Forest for easy use by trampers (2
submissions).
• A link track to be made between Waima Forest, Hokianga Harbour and Kai-Iwi
Lakes – a possible ‘Coast to Coast experience’ (2 submissions).
• Kawerua Hotel be upgraded and made available for public accommodation (2
submissions).
• Waipoua Visitor Centre – road an issue move Visitor Centre to Tane Mahuta. The
Visitor Centre Road is being upgraded in the next 12 months due to the safety
issues with the present road.
Whangarei Area
• Mt Manaia received 2 submissions in support of upgrading the site.
The following received 1 submission supporting DOC’s continued maintenance
proposals:
• Brynderwyn Walkway 100210/97396
• Kauri Bushmen’s Memorial Walk 100230/97398
• Mangawhai Cliff Walkway100200/97395
• Otito Walk 100050/97381
• Ruapekapeka Pa Track (upgrade currently underway) 101048
• Tanighua Forest – Kauri Dam Walk 100178/99213
• Whananaki Coastal Walkway 100040
• Waikaraka Walk Way (with an offer of community support) 100100/97386
• Waipu Caves Walkway 100180/97394
• Whangaruru Bland Bay Lookout Track
• Whangaruru Ocean Beach Loop 101044
• One submission was received in regards to the Waipu Cove Reserve Camp. This
facility is managed by the Reserve Board under agreement therefore it is not
managed by the department – any issues should be address by this Board.
Submissions analysis and decisions 31
* Facilities proposed by the public (i.e. neutral submissions – all are 1 submission unless otherwise stated). • Drive-in camping opportunity at Mimiwhangata (this submission requested DOC
look for further camping opportunities due to the reduction in the number of
commercial opportunities.
• Ability for NZ Motor Caravan Association to stay 1–2 nights are Mimiwhangata
Farm.
* Suggestions put forward by the public are in this document for information
only. As these proposals have not been through a public process the suggestions
are only for future consideration with the public at a later date. You are welcome
to comment on these suggestions with the appropriate Area office but no formal
process is being entered into at this time. Your comments will be noted and
retained for future reference only.
Northland Conservancy recreation opprtunities review32
7. Summary of decisions
The financial commitment of the decisions will be less than the original proposals
because two out of three proposed huts are not going to proceed and two tracks
are not going to be removed.
Very little has changed from the original proposals for management. The majority of
tracks and associated facilities will be maintained to the relevant standards.
KEY DECISIONS
Bay of Islands Area
• Mangahorehore Route will cease maintenance on the lookout extension (500m)
as this will not compromise visitor experience to the main route.
• Merumeru Falls Track proposed will not go ahead as the environmental damage
of putting in a new track would outweigh the benefits as the Falls can be seen
from the existing track network.
Kaitaia Area
• The proposed Taumarumaru Track had overwhelming support from local
communities.
• The Ahipara gumfields Walk proposal will be barrier free and accessible for the
disabled.
Kauri Coast Area
• The two proposed hut facilities in the Waima Forest were strongly opposed by
local communities and people seeking a ‘wilderness’ experience in Northland.
However, there was support for the restoration of Framptons Hut to standard
and for overnight opportunities to occur in the Waima Ranges in the form of
informal camping.
• Mt Tutamoe Track will now be maintained (not cease maintenance) as it is the
only access to the Tutamoe Plateau for hunting and other remote experiences.
• The Hukatere Hall Recreation Reserve in the Kauri Coast Area will have the
Reserve status is being revoked and the land will revert to crown and be subject
to the Land Act and managed/disposed of by Lands Information New Zealand.
Whangarei Area
• Bratty’s Bush Track, in the Whangarei Area, will be retained and maintained
to a lower standard as it is an import access track for botanists viewing native
orchids.
• The community halls on Recreation Reserve and Domain land in the Whangarei
Area are being investigated for vestment in the Whangarei District Council. This
will include a process of consultation with iwi and the Reserves Boards.
Submissions analysis and decisions 33
8. Overview of decisions in terms of a range of recreation opportunities
There will be a wider range of recreation opportunities in Northland including
old and new facilities for disabled access (Tane Mahuta, Ahipara Gumfields and
Taumarumaru track), a new opportunity for sea kayaking / tramping accommodation
at Deep Water Cove, a wetland track experience at Waitangi and tracks investigating
local points of interest at Waitata Point and Soda Springs. Also a potential community
development of Kaheka Point as a camping opportunity in the Whangaroa Harbour.
Although Northland Conservancy does not have ‘wilderness’ areas the public process
has shown that some areas are seen by Northlanders as a ‘wilderness’ experience
and these areas should be respected as such, for example not putting huts on the
Waima Range and the retention of access to the Tutamoe Plateau. Hukatere Track,
Kahuwera Pa and the Mangahorehore Route lookout extension (500m) tracks that
have a replicated experience elsewhere in the conservancy will cease maintenance.
Submissions analysis and decisions 35
Appendix 1
WHAT THE DECISIONS MEAN
Decisions for facilities in the Conservancy have been made by DOC as an outcome
of this process of consultation. The options for future management are grouped
under 13 broad headings.
Maintain
The facility will continue to be maintained, to the appropriate standard, providing
recreation opportunities the same as, or similar to, those currently available. If it is
a building or a structure it will be replaced with a similar facility at the end of its
useful life. DOC will bring the asset up to the required standard if it is not currently
to the required standard.
Proposed (new)
A new facility will be developed in a place where there has not previously been
one.
Replace
A new facility will be built replacing an existing facility that will soon reach the end
of its useful life.
Upgrade to higher standard
The facility requires upgrading to a higher standard or to a larger size to meet the
needs of the main visitor and/or mitigate against visitor impacts.
Maintain to lower standard
The facility will be maintained to a lower standard than has previously been the
case. Often this will mean continuing to manage to a lower standard because the
original standard intended for the facility was too high and never achieved.
Remove
Remove the facility (if a structure, sign, hut or building). If a hut, remove by the end
of 2006. If a track, remove markers, plant out track entrances and leave the track to
revert to a natural state, or assist this process if necessary.
Minimal maintenance
Used for huts and other buildings. The building will be inspected by DOC on a
regular cycle. Inspectors will travel with basic tools and equipment and some minor
maintenance (that can be done during the regular inspections) will be undertaken.
When the building is no longer weatherproof or becomes dangerous or unsanitary,
Northland Conservancy recreation opprtunities review36
it will be removed, unless there is a community group willing and able to bring it up
to standard and maintained to standard (see Seeking Community Maintenance)
Cease maintenance
For tracks, markers will be left until they naturally disappear, but the track will
be left to revert to a natural state. Roads are closed to motor vehicles. Carparks,
amenity areas and campsites are left to revert to a natural state and any associated
buildings or signs will be removed. Signs will be placed at track entrances stating
that the track is no longer maintained.
Close site/remove all assets
Remove all assets (structures, signs, huts, track markers etc), plant out track entrances
and leave the site to revert to a natural state. Closed sites will be removed from all
visitor information. Where necessary the site or part of it will be rehabilitated.
Own by DOC but maintain by community
The facility is one DOC believes should be retained. It is one that could realistically
be maintained by a club, community group or local authority. The facility may
already be maintained by the community. A management agreement should be
established if one is not already in place. The funding assumption is that DOC will
not cover maintenance costs, but will fund inspections and replacement.
Owned and maintained by the community
The Department currently has a formal agreement in place with a club, community
group or local authority to maintain the asset. If, in the future, that agreement falls
over, the future of that asset will be determined following consultation with the
community.
Seeking community maintenance
The asset currently has no formal agreement in place and is not one that DOC
believes it should maintain at all. The facility should only be retained long term if
the community agrees to take it on. It is one that realistically could be maintained by
a club, community group or local authority. DOC will discuss ongoing maintenance
and replacement of the facility with such groups and should establish a management
agreement for that maintenance
Non-visitor DOC management
For facilities receiving very little or no visitor use, the facility will be managed by
the department for other purposes, such as to accommodate pest control staff or to
access a biodiversity conservation area. The facilities will not normally be available
for visitor use.
