One of the biggest problems with running trail events is getting the permit approved. The following is my experience so far this year, and I would be interested to hear suggestions/experience from others.

Sitting down in a pre-application conference is essential. Parks staff are absorbed in their own problems - objectors to everything they do, bureaucratic processes to respond whenever anyone complains, fringe green groups that think parks are for passive activity only etc. If we don't talk to them and sell the benefits of opening up parks to a broader group, nothing will change. There are some good keen staff in there though if contact is made.

If the area is a "sensitive" one, ie any quality walking track, offer to cover off their standard worries, eg by instructing runners to walk when passing any runner who hasn't made eye contact, surveying other walkers on the day to provide evidence we don't in fact ruin their day.

If we can incorporate a mass-participantion short course there are advantages - it helps the financial viability, keeps costs to entrants down, you can target the wider community including younger runners (which to me is very important; if run organisers don't target the declining activity of young people, who will?).

In every area there is a "right" course (or 2) which makes the most of natural assets. It takes a few trial runs to find it. Publicising a few informal trials with mates is a good way check it out.

Running relatively small training/"fatass" runs is also a good strategy when the permit hassles outweigh the benefits. But from our experience this year in Queensland, we definitely have plenty of runners keen for more organised trail runs if we can put them on.

Time for a brief and not so happy update. TRAQ had a permit refused for all three course options we put up on the Mapleton Great Walk. Basically we were told fun run/walks were incompatible with the management plans for these areas. Put another way, they're too good for us - runs would however be permitted on rutted forestry roads to the north. More here http://runtrails.org/articles/?p=216#more-216

Local MP Peter Wellington has met with a senior advisor to the Minister, with no response yet. TRAQ is preparing a direct approach to the Minister, who also happens to be MP coving Fraser Island, another proposed trail run for 2008.

Our impression so far is that the negative response of the EPA is firming up, rather than responding to your submissions. 2008 should be an interesting year.

Thanks for the update Greg. Please continue to keep us informed and let us know if we can do anything to help. I, for one, would love to get out there and do some of these runs.

Thanks, Greg. Dealing with bureacracy can be a thoroughly unrewarding experience so we appreciate the effort.

I emailed the address you indicated on the TRAQ website, but got no response - hope they listened. It seems fairly unreasonable to not at least give TRAQ a chance to prove it could run an event without an unnecessarily large impact. The reality is that if people don't know about the areas and use them, there will be more pressure to get rid of the unpreserved areas we have left. I'd like to think that if we can actually make more use of the areas we have without significant negative impacts then that would actually be an incentive for future governments to set aside more land as reserves.

I believe the Queensland Rogaine Association has some similar difficulties with the EPA being over-protective. That is also a fairly low impact activity with similar characteristics:
* low frequency of events in the same area
* participants spread out during the event
* participants are probably more environmentally aware and sensitive than the average person

Have you spoken to the QRA about a common strategy? Might be a good way to go. The World Rogaining Champs last year were held in the Warrumbungles National Park in NSW. I can't imagine the trouble there would have been trying to run an event with 700 competitors in a national park up in Queensland!

Good Luck, Greg, and yeah, please keep us informed and let us know how we can help.

Greg - good luck and please keep the rest of us informed.

Negotiations for another new permit in Queensland are proving difficult and there is a solid chance we will have to convert the February event at Mount Glorious in Brisbane Forest Park into an informal training outing. The parks service is not keen on us using a "new" route through open forest, even if it uses old forestry roads.

At this stage I have had to reduce it to a "trial" run of only 25 entrants to Mount Glorious western ridge trail, and an associated bushwalk to Northbrook Mountain for 45. To highlight the ridiculousness of park service attitudes, I was also told:

- we couldn't use the Cedar Flats picnic area because it had insufficient toilets
(7 including one with wheelchair access!)
- we couldn't cross the road to the start area there because its too dangerous
(not the race course, but walking to the start! best to stay home...)
- we couldn't use the rainforest ridge trail A. because it has trip hazards B. because it impacts on other users
(8 runs there so far, haven't seen a soul yet, haven't fallen over either...)

The real reason for this last one is the general attitude in the parks service that any high-value forest is reserved totally for walkers, 365 days a year. How lucky they are!

Such is life in Australia in 2007... TRAQ is currently drafting a proposal for an adventure sports operational policy including trail running, and with the Qld Outdoor Rec Federation's support arranging a meeting to discuss it with the EPA. At the same time we will present some of our new event proposals as examples, and try to get agreement in principle.

We also plan to present our ideas to other government departments, Sport & Recreation and Premiers. From experience to date, approaching the parks service alone is not working - small is good is their recurring theme. Parks bury themselves in restrictive interpretation of regulations and ignore the broader social and government aims of increasing active participation, building regional communities, tourism promotion. Hopefully we will see some changes in 2008.

TRAQ has also submitted a paper to be presented at the Tracks and Trails Conference, Noosa March 2008. This will present a range of classic large-scale events from overseas, point out that none of these would be likely to receive a permit in Australia, and discuss where we should be moving to in the near future.

This is pretty crap, seems that they are trying to keep the parks pristine to the point were nobody can enjoy them. What's the point of having these wonderful areas of land if we can't use them and nothing your planning seems like it will cause lasting damage. Basically saying runners need to stick to roads and have to contend with cars and their fumes instead of enjoying beautiful trail runs.

Interesting. I'm currently having my own stab at race organising and have found the NSW Parks and Wildlife people to be quite helpful- the only obstruction I've encountered after several months of work was when we were prohibited from entering the Kanangra Wilderness Area, which was a legal issue and not something that NPWS had discretion over. Otherwise they've been very helpful in suggesting routes, providing examples of paperwork from previous events, etc.

Might help that the two NPWS people I'm mainly dealing with are both competitive bush athletes- having run Six Foot Track, Trailwalker, rogaines etc.

Not very encouraging as I seek approval for our current Fat-Ass events. Let's hope WA is more keen on less passive use of bush.

Dave,

Keep this a secret if you get approval. I am not keen on resorting to permits for 'training' runs. Sometimes the best things in life are free.


Rod

Greg does Queensland have an access policy for National Parks. For Rogaining, Orienteering (&Geocaching) there is a specific policy in NSW. Access is always driven by the rapport that can be developed with the Ranger/rangers responsible.

Warrumbungles (7WRC) was the first time NSWRA had access to and the use of a camp ground granted. They ususally prefer that we use a remote clearing within the relevant park or a location external to the park. The Warrumbungle field was originally limited to 500 then stretched to 700.

As MrG has indicated it is about developing relationships and it helps where happenstance has people with some experience involved. Unfortuneatly once regulations and statutory obligations are raised it is a long road to access and credibility. It is a chicken and egg issue. Without access you cannot prove your credibility one way or the other.

As MrG has said Wilderness is no go for any organised activity etc.

Greg contact me if you like and I'll email a copy of the NSW Policy it may help. There is also a NSW Forests agreement covering Orienteering and Rogaining.

We have to prepare a safety plan for both as well as a permit.

The other issue can be the specific plan of management for a Park. NSWRA has and does pay per head a access / susage fees and and has paid a bond.

Cheers

Quote: "Interesting. I'm currently having my own stab at race organising and have found the NSW Parks and Wildlife people to be quite helpful- the only obstruction I've encountered after several months of work was when we were prohibited from entering the Kanangra Wilderness Area, which was a legal issue and not something that NPWS had discretion over. Otherwise they've been very helpful in suggesting routes, providing examples of paperwork from previous events, etc."

The Wild Endurance 100 referred to above is similar to the Trailwalker events, primarily for walkers, and also this one raises funds for conservation. There seems to be a bit of breakthrough with acceptance of this type of event. They're great, really motivating, a fun team experience. But for some odd reason small fun run/walks seem to be labelled competitive and are far less acceptable, though they're more suitable for people with average fitness.

Quote: "Greg does Queensland have an access policy for National Parks."
There are two operational policies here, for orienteering/rogaining and mountain biking. TRAQ is drafting up a new one for "adventure sports" including trail running which we will take to the Environmental Protection Agency as a basis for finding some workable guidelines. One of the things thats noticable about the existing two is how negative they are; its all about what you can't do. Our draft will acknowledge the minimal impact of trail running on the environment, and include in the consideration of group activity permits the positive value of promoting outdoor activity, involving regional communities, tourism promotion.

Will keep adding updates here as we progress, thanks all for info on whats happening in your neck of the woods.

Another update, better news this time:

The permit for Mt Glorious in Brisbane Forest Park on 3 Feb was finally approved. This has clarified several issues about Queensland parks service attitude to runs:
- they are designating specific areas for runs
- these areas will be lower grade forest, on maintenance roads not walking tracks, and more remote/less used areas
- runs are totally banned from walking tracks in quality forest, either because
- they're remote and therefore reserved for "opportunities for solitude with few encounters with others", or
- they're not remote and have good tracks, therefore we'd impact too much on walkers

The real losers with this stance are the fun runners, because they will not issue permits for shorter, accessible runs on quality trails. This is the issue TRAQ will have to push hard on in 2008.

A couple of other issues the sometimes heated negotiations have clarified:
- its a power relationship, by which I mean they make the rules
- if you don't say yes to those then they will feel totally justified in saying no to your permit
- several times I was told "you're not listening" - I listen, I just didn't agree with what I heard!
- in above case, if we stayed within their boundary (omitting the best trail in the area) they said yes
- this makes it hard to raise wider issues, like accessible short runs for newer runners
- another phrase heard more than once was "what's in it for us?", so conservation fundraising is important if we want more trail runs, particularly for underfunded trails maintenance

NSW meanwhile has seen some great progress on new, longer runs; the two 100k Blue Mountains event in May, and now the new Snowy Mountains run in development - see http://www.coolrunning.com.au/forums/index...showtopic=16937

Greg have you thought about a lobbying campaign by coolrunners? Perhaps an email drive to press home the unreasonable nature of their policies towards trailrunners?

"what's in it for us?" Holy crap, do these people not realise that it is our park system they have been given the privilege of being the custodians of?

Bureaucratic red-tape bullshit. You need to go above their heads and get a favourable decision handed down the line to these wankers so they have some 'positive direction.'

"What's in it for us?" I wouldn't snitch a few bucks off the entry fee from the runners to give to these clowns ... give it as a 'donation' to the local and/or federal member and you'll see some action.

Then you need to find out where these tossers live and hold some fatass events beginning, finishing at and encompassing all their residential addresses at about 5 a.m. every Sunday morning until they reflect and arrive at an attitudinal reconsideration.

Geez that sort of crap pisses me off - and we are all contributors into the coffers that pay these cretins!

Did you ever think you would see the day when you would pay the wages of people who prevent you from having a run with your friends on land we all own? WTF?

Dog.

Time for another update. TRAQ (Trail running assoc qld) has arranged a meeting with QPWS regional managers (parks service) to discuss better access under the group activity permits system. Our proposed agenda follows, and there is an attachment which gives more detail, including some of the ludicrous decisions by the parks service over the last year.

We have also applied for a meeting with the Minister Sustainability who is responsbile for QPWS, Andrew McNamara. Andrew has shown interest in a trails event on the Fraser Island Great Walk, so it will be interesting to compare these two meetings. Will post an update at end of April.

Proposed agenda QPWS 24 April:

1. Presentation by TRAQ on our aims and overall program, different types of events, and our problems with permits (30 mins max)

2. Discussion on QPWS core positions which underpin permit declines (30 minutes)
2.1 permits are based on dividing up conservation lands, each area for exclusive use by different groups
2.2 individual walkers have exclusive rights to desginated walking trails, every day of the year, vs shared use
2.3 there is excessive demand for use of SEQ walking trails on conservation land
2.4 large group actities are incompatible with conservation, vs good event design

3. Other specific barriers to group activity permits (30 minutes)
3.1 unevidenced general statements about participants risk, public risk, environmental risk
3.2 role of rangers via permits should focus on setting boundaries, raising risks for discussion, post-event review; not re-designing the event

4. TRAQ's five specific requests (30 minutes)
4.1 Approval in principal of Mapleton fun run/walk
4.2 Favourable consideration of one trails event per year on new Great Walks
4.3 Support for Trailwalker events in Brisbane Forest Park and Fraser Island Great Walk
4.4 Support for regional trails events, including in national parks
4.5 QPWS sets event limits at sustainable levels, with 200-400 as a general guide for established events

We are happy to talk about any other issues QPWS wishes to add. Attending will be:

Don Wallace, TRAQ president and chair Queensland Athletics non-stadia commission (eg urban little athletics and cross-country)
Ian Javes, TRAQ vice-president, Glasshouse Trails Series race director
Greg Waite, TRAQ treasurer, Lake Manchester and Mt Glorious race director
Kathy Kingsford, QORF observer/participant

Click to view attachment

Good luck!

I've had experience with these po-faced bureaucrats. They are the dregs of the public service. Every little win they have over you is their only way of getting their jollies, before they go home, kick the cat and get berated by their spouses for their many failings.

In my case, I was actively involved in the lobbying related to the plans to ban horse-riding from Queensland forests before the last state election. The agenda was driven by Green extemists advising the then responsible minister, Desley Boyle. Policy was made without a skerrick of evidence, something you're facing right now.

I live in an area surrounded by forest. I run in the forest every day, and know the trails well. Over the last decade, we have seen:

• A simple minded approach to burning off (QPWS simply won't do it), which makes the potential fire load enormous and dangerous.
  
• Neglect of the fire trails, which means that if there are fires, they can't be fought or defended against.
  

As for horses, the old myths were trotted out ... destruction of native vegetation, for one. The native vegetation on many of the trails is lantana. Horses don't eat lantana! Carrying seeds through droppings ... what the hell do these simpletons think birds do in their spare time? Damage to the trails ... I've seen more damage done by QPWS hoons in their 4WD vehicles than I've ever seen from horses.

I don't see horse riders dropping cigarette packs and other litter. I often see walkers and others do so.

I applied for a riding permit in the two adjacent forest areas. It was given for a short period for one, and declined for the other. The reasons given were lies, made up no doubt by some pony-tailed cardigan wearing bureaucrat named Tristan who had never ventured out of his air-conditioned Queen St office. I went and took photos providing evidence of the lies, and re-submitted the application, with a copy to the minister. I got the permit.

In the end, the tide turned. Dopey Desley was moved on, and Peter Beattied realised, almost too late, that he had made a tactical error ... he hadn't realised how many young girls are in pony clubs, and they had actively organised a campaign with the parents. It was far more effective than at first thought.

A while back I was running on a forest trail when I came across two QWPS 'rangers' stopped beside their 4WD enjoying a fag and a natter. All part of the day's job. One of them had the impertinence to yell at me 'who said you could run here?' I gave him the finger and continued on.

Great stuff Greg. Let's hope we get the correct result from the minister.

Nice post Bellthorpe - I need a laugh now and again over this permits business, or I'd be very angry ...

Is this serious? You can drive a 4WD through the bush but you can't run through it? That's f'n stupid. Does this stuff happen in other states as well or just QLD? I would have thought people should be encouraged to use native areas in such healthy ways.

Down at La Perouse (the closest bush to me) they regularly go through and clean up the tails that are there for people to use.

Good luck Greg.

Part of the upcoming Wildendurance course goes through land which is jointly administered by National Parks and Sydney Catchment Authority. I can send sweeps and medical teams through this land in 4WDs, but not on mountain bikes or dirt bikes.

how can they say runners cause more damage than walkers. runners dont drop cigarette butts and fast food wrappers everywhere they go.

One thing I've learnt in the last year is there are many silly rules made by bureaucrats, and only one simple way to change them - make it public. For example, do an event review afterwards, then forward it with a letter highlighting any poor decisions to the relevant department head so it doesn't just dissappear.

Of course you need to use this top-down approach with some discretion, as it generates some illwill, but better that than live forever with some of this nonsense.

Example: Enoggera Reservoir. Received a BCC letter saying the walking track around it (beyone the BFP HQ circuit) is closed to walkers because of "complex land ownershiip discussions which are expected to take three years to resolve" ie bureaucrats take three years to agree among themselves, so public keep out meantime. This is the prettiest short forest walk in Brisbane, and hardly anyone knows about it - these poeple are unbelievable...

Report on meeting with parks service follows; next up, 15 minutes of fame with the Minister at community cabinet on Sunday...

The short report is that Queensland Parks and Wildlife Division agreed to set up a User Group forum. Its aims are to take a coordinated approach to agreeing an annual trails events calendar, and to ensure new event proposals and user concerns about policy boundaries are reviewed at senior level. The group will also be open to adventure event organisers, and will be coordinated by the Queensland Outdoor Recreation Federation.

QPWD conceded that events on walking trails, on the Great Walks and in national parks are not specifically ruled out. On the other hand, QPWD did not offer any specific changes at all, so it remains to see whether any new permits will be issued in practise.

Our permit declines are littered with unevidenced assertions that runs are dangerous or impose on other users too much. Despite their lack of experience with running events we have found rangers in Queensland quite opinionated on how our events should be run.

We take these issues very seriously and always think through our run proposals carefully before applying for a permit. We hope that recent problems have been partly a result of our differences over policy, and with the user forum in place future permit discussions can be more positive.

QPWD representatives were Guy Thomas (Manager Tourism and Visitors), Wolf Sievers (Director Terrestrial Parks), Jason Jacobi ( District Manager SEQ), Mick Cubis (senior ranger Mapleton) and Ross (not recorded). TRAQ were Don Wallace, Ian Javes and Greg Waite. Kathy Kingsford attended for QORF.

We heard that QPWD is currently debating whether large group events should be allowed on the Great Walks, prompted by Townsville park service’s 2007 decision to allow the “Run the Whitsunday Great Walk” event. Everywhere outside Queensland has already figured out that this type of event is good policy, but in South East Queensland they’re divided and want “consistency”.

To put it very plainly the parks service is at a crossroads. They need to come to terms with what is common practise elsewhere and support a balanced program of larger events, with all the attendant advantages of promoting the outdoors and fitness, regional tourism and building communities. This is not a conservation issue; its just a sensible policy for shared use of existing walking trails.

We were also interested to hear of the new MOU (memorandum of understanding) between QPWD and bushwalkers, which includes guidelines for acceptable numbers and a framework for annual discussion, rather than a crude set of rules. TRAQ has since seen a copy - oh dear... 12 pages long, and its all about controlling and limiting access to the bush. Doesn't look so promising after all.

A full report on TRAQ's case can be found at http://runtrails.org/articles/?p=525

Why don't you but one of em a plane ticket and bring them down for WE or TNF to observe. I'm sure if you contacted the organisers they would arrange a meeting with a local ranger down here.

Seeing is believing

It's not like you are trying to set up 'Ultra Elephant Races'. You have relatively small numbers running on marked trails with marshalls etc in place.

As 2P mentioned, TNF and WE have approvals to run people thru the Blue Mountains NP. Dont know the exact numbers, but participation would be in the hundreds for these events. Probably the best example in Sydney is Trailwalker with 1800 taxpaying individuals travelling over NPWS trails all thru Sydney. Your beauracrats seem to be very possessive of their little patches of land.

Keep fighting the fight.

I guess to start with greg you could a self-imposed limit of 50 people or 100 people so the nervous nellies know they won't be facing "hundreds".

Kev,

Wasnt advocating for them to have hundreds in their events. More so just showing the common sense approach that seems to be adopted by our NPWS for approval of events in Sydney/NSW.

I have seen some of their events in the TRAQ newsletters and I think they do put fairly low caps on the entrants already. It seems to be from Greg's posts and experience a perception issue against runners by officials that is their primary problem.

In NSW most of the decision making is left to the local area manager. Some of the managers are supportive of runners and other groups, and some are not. The Royal National Park is home of some of the best trails NSW has to offer, but the chances of getting a permit to race on anything but Lady Carrington Drive (a road closed to traffic) are next to nothing. In Wollongong, the local running club is unable to get permits to run on any of the walking trails, and so have to resort to muddy fire roads. My hunch is that both the WE and the TNF100 would not follow such contrived routes if it were not due to restrictions placed by the park management. The mountain runners would leaping over the moon with joy if they were allowed to hold runs in the Barrington tops on the fire roads. There are many parks and reserves in NSW that are off limits to orienteering and Rogaining simply because the local area manager is against it.

It seams ridiculous that a group of people may go for a run on any walking trail without breaking any rules, and yet they are unable to do so as part of an organised event.

With what funds do we buy them a ticket?

All depends how bad you want it, pay for it out of your own pocket then recoup it from proceeds from events..... also there are a few philanthropists out there in CR Land.

Just to clear up a few points for Pipi and others, speaking as the organiser of the WE and having had a little insight into the organisation of the TNF100....

It's correct that in NSW discretion to grant a licence for a race is granted by the Regional Manager, so there is fair amount of discretion. For the WE and TNF the four officers we liased with the most wre the Regional Manager, Commercial Licencing Officer, Operations Manager and Regional Assets Co ordinator, and all have been quite helpful- all of them being runners or rogainers probably helped a fair bit. The only time NPWS said "no" to us was when WE was at one point going through a declared Wilderness Area- which by law cannot have organised events, so there was no scope for any discretion.

The main reason the WE and TNF courses look as they do is not because of NPWS requirements but because the upper Blue Mountains are actually not well suited for long distance runs. Most trails run to the end of a ridge and terminate; many other trails run through Catchment or Wilderness Areas which are off limits by law. We have also had considerable trouble with private landowners in the Megalong valley who are difficult to track down and often not amenable to negotiation when they do talk to us. Between all these factors there are not many options left so it is quite a squeeze!

Rod - I wasn't questioning anything you said. I am aware of the small fields but wasn't sure if that was self-imposed or just small numbers entering. Thinking if self-imposed then it might get the event over the line for permission then work on a strategy to increase the cap.

Kev,

No problem, was just clarifying my post.

Sean's experience is interesting in that he has to liaise with 4 x officials from the one organisation. Fantastic that they have all come to the party, but I can imagine the problems if one or two dont share the enthusiasm for an event.

No real easy solution. Maybe an NPWS events manager, together with the respective park/regional manager to negotiate with, but again, 1 dissenting voice would make it hard.

It is interesting to hear the behind the scenes stuff that goes into putting these events on. I think I will just stick to organising fatass runs.


Rod

On Sunday TRAQ met Queensland's Minister for Sustainability (EPA, QPWD) Andrew MacNamara, the EPA's Director General Peter Wall and a senior advisor. Andrew was very clear about his support for seeing some shared use of walking trails for larger events, and will keep informed on progress to get some locations identified at the first User Group meeting (see above).

We'd hoped for a positive response at this meeting, as ministers are generally much for conscious of wider goals like promoting active lives, tourism and regional communities than departmental staff, and we got it. This now gives us a lot more confidence that there will be progress in the user group, and we are busy looking at which new areas are most suitable for trails events...

Excellent news!! Great reward for all the effort put in you guys.

Join TRAQ here.

Time for another update - we've just had the first meeting of a Queensland Trails Forum and its off to a good start, particularly because QORF (Queensland Outdoor Recreation Forum) had brought together a diverse group of interested groups with relevant experience.

Kathy (QORF) started off with background on the Mountain Biking Forum, which had similar aims and ran for about five years. While we initiated this meeting thinking only of trail runs/walks, it makes sense to keep the broad representation of the first forum, including groups like mountain bikers, orienteering, rogaining and adventure racers. Perhaps Nature-Based Large Group Activities Forum covers it better, but what a mouthful (suggestions for improvements please!).

One key question for TRAQ is how much acceptance we will see for large events on walking tracks, particularly the Great Walks. These trails networks are a recent intitiative, conceived to provide the multi-day wilderness experience many Queenslanders missed. Most of our national parks were recently converted from state forests and offer mostly maintenance roads with few true long-distance trails.

No explicit thought was given to large events when these new trails were approved, so large events still tend to be seen as conflicting with management plans and policies designed around small groups of walkers. One novel and really positive option mentioned at the meeting was for sections of parks to be designated as recreation areas for a set number of days per year. This sounds like a practical and flexible policy which could accomodate and manage large events.

Finishing on another positive outcome, QPWS took up the meeting’s suggestion to provide a case study which would illustrate their policies applied to a specific location, and include a range of options which might make possible their support for, for example, shared use of a walking track. This is a good practical approach which will clarify the boundary issues around what separates approval from refusal in group activity permits.

This seems like a good place to leave the story for now. We can look forward a useful discussion around the QPWS case study, and for our part TRAQ will prepare a balanced proposal of existing and new locations for 2009-1010 to help focus our next discussion - though it seems specific event approvals will still be decided outside the forum.

Greg,
Sounds look you are making some progress which is great news. No doubt there will still be a few setbacks on the way but hopefully before too long you will have some well earned successes too.

Thanks to yourself and those like you for keeping at it.

At our second Queensland Trails Forum meeting the Parks and Wildlife Service presented an analysis of three Queensland permit applications, two declined (Rainbow Beach, Mapleton) and one accepted (Lamington Classic 2008). This was very interesting as it included the detailed rationale behind the decisions. We certainly have our work cut out, as there were many different reasons cited for the declines, some we'd seen in the formal decisions and some new from the internal documents.

Simon Hughes, a policy officer and ex-ranger from QPWS, had presented all these criteria within an overall framework which linked back to the governing legislation and policies. I've had a first try at structuring a new permit application for Mapleton 2008 so that each criteria is addressed; it will be interesting to see how the application progresses. TRAQ will also present our perspective on key permit issues at the next forum. Our two main points will be the value and viability of shared-access multi-user trails policies, and the limitations of the QPWS Landscape Classification System as a tool for deciding permits.

The backgrounder for that meeting will be linked in here when completed, and a general response to permit issues raised by QPWS can be downloaded here: http://runtrails.org/articles/wp-content/u...mitappendix.pdf

youre a much more patient and tolerant man than me greg.
which isnt hard i guess.
thanks for all your hard work.
keep it up!

If truth be told I have the exact opposite reputation with the parks service; I got downright grumpy last year. This year the plan is to stick to clarifying exactly what our differences are, avoid the arguments but put the issues out for public view (consult locally, talk to MPs, articles to local papers, Trails Forum papers), and see what results.