People and parks: complement or compromise

Waimarino Bulletin, Volume 6, Issue 260, 25 October 1988, Page 13

People and parks: complement or compromise

The year-long celebration of the centennial of New Zealand National Parks ended recently. One of the features of that celebration year was a monthly newsletter 'Centennial Contact", which publicised conservation issues and centennial activities. This interview with Paul Green, District Conservator for the Tongariro District appeared in the final issue of centennial contact. Des Williams is a conservation officer for DOC.

Des Williams: Paul, you spoke at the Christchurch seminar on the general theme of 'People in Parks' and, more specifically, about Tourist Pressures on Management: Dilemmas at Tongariro' You made two points in particular during your address which sent a buzz through the audience. The first was when you quoted former Chief Ranger, Bruce Jefferies and his remark that Tongariro is a national park under siege'. The second was when you questioned the wisdom of the centennial year slogan 'Parks are for People'. Has anything happened during the centennial year to allay your own thoughts about the 'state of siege' surrounding Tongariro National Park? Paul Green: Not really. We have seen national parks consistently exposed in the media with frequent encouragement for people to use parks. There has been little effort to try and ensure that people understand the need to care for their parks. In spite of a downturn in tourism, summer visitation to Tongariro showed no signs of declining. Facilities were used more than ever and our tracks in particular are suffering from erosion, while our budget for track maintenance is ever decreasing. On the skifields there has been increased pressure for higher lifts on Mt Ruapehu as well as high impact slope modification in order to increase slope capacity and ensure greater safety. There are still frequent claims that 'parks are being locked up'. There do not seem to be too many individuals countering these claims. Des Williams: And the 'Parks are for People' concept - it is easy to share your concerns for Tongariro National Park, where the fragile volcanic ecology with its highly popular skifields is under pressure from high human impact on tracks and other facilities. But what about the less popular, less accessible parks? Do you think the slogan has relevance for those areas? Paul Green: I accept the situation is different in some of our parks. There are parks where visitor pressures are relatively low, but it is a park like Tongariro that the public identify. The Commission survey showed how little some of the other parks are known. It is extremely important that we don't redirect pressures from Tongariro, Milford, etc., unless we have the commitment and resources to protect

them. The first need is to ensure the public know how important it is to care for their parks. Des Williams: The Tongariro-Taupo National Parks and Reserves Board has all but completed a review of its management plan. As District Conservator you are the person who must oversee management of the park in accordance with that plan. Are you happy that you have the policies required to maintain the integrity of Tongariro National Park into its second century? Paul Green: I believe the draft document is satisfactory. It identifies a problem with development pressures and states a philosophy for the management of the park even if itidoes not* give any solutions towards coping with the development pressures. Perhaps this is the first step in a public education process and the next plan can develop the philosophy into policies. The plan does set some limiting factors on the areas i n which development can take place. Des Williams: A number of people - noticeable among them Professor Alan Mark of Dunedin - have stated publicly that national parks have suffered a real 'downturn' since the inception of the Department of Conservation. Do you agree with that view? If so, does it reflect a deliberate policy on the part of the Department o f Conservation to regard the whole of the protected estate with equal importance, or is it merely a lack of money which prevents the department from main-

taining past levels of administration, maintenance and development? Paul Green: I believe that Alan Mark's comment is accurate. I believe it is a result of a perception that national parks have historically been wellfunded and that other conservation requirements have not. To a large extent this i s true. It must be remembered, however, that the integrity of national park management was not questioned during the move to reorganise environmental administration. There is also a determination for the department to have its own image and to prepare completely new strategies and policies. This has been a preoccupation rather than a building on strengths. The problem is that national parks have suffered much of the financial burden. For example, at Tongariro District a net allocation of 2.3 million dollars in 1987 has re-

duced to a little over 0.8 million dollars in 1988! I could best summarise by saying that 'the baby may be getting thrown out with the bath water'. There is a proud tradition of 100 years of national parks in New Zealand. Do we really want to reduce every-

thing to a common denominator and forget the preservation and use of our national park heritage? Where is there a better chance to carry out the department's advocacy role? Des Williams: Because of other pressures on the economy, it seems unlikely to me

at least that any New Zealand Government will ever be able to regard conservation and protection of the environment with sufficient importance to provide the level of funding required by conservation managers. If that is true, those same managers will

forever be faced with the dilemma of trying to balance the equation between preserving parks for their intrinsic worth and beauty, and at the same time making. them available for the benefit, use and enjoyment of the public. Turn page 14

Paul Green interview

From page 13 Do you think there can ever be a fair answer to that equation? Paul Green: I believe that strong management is required to balance preservation and use but finance is required to protect the resource. For example, the main reason for track maintenance at Tongariro is to prevent erosion. It is not Jto ensure that people keep their feet dry ! ! The people are going to continue walking whether or not we maintain the tracks. Our huts are generally present for safety or environmental reasons and not just for comfort. The impact of people camping at Ketetahi Springs would be horrific if there was no hut. Isolated parks may be able to be left unmanaged without causing any environmental

damage, but that option does not exist at Tongariro. I don't consider 2.5 million dollars of taxpayer benefit unreasonable to protect the integrity of Tongariro National Park. Des Williams: And finally Paul, both you and I will probably be absent from the bicentennial celebration of national parks in New Zealand. Would you like to hazard a guess as to a slogan which might be appropriate then? I'm sure it won't be 'Parks are for People'! Paul Green: This is too hard for me to answer. I hope it won't be 'Where are our Parks?" or 'What are Parks?' 'Parks are for People' would be a great theme if we can ensure a complete understanding during the next one hundred years. That is our challenge.