About Remote Huts
(Top Olderog Biv in the Arahura catchment: Photo Andrew Buglass 2004)
Origins Of The Website
This site was created in 2003 to profile a number of remote
high-country huts and bivouacs in central Westland that were unmaintained or poorly maintained,
and under potential threat of removal. An online group
called Permolat was created in conjuction with the site to organise remote hut users into a collective that
would be able to take on some of the maintenance in an effort to preserve these structures.
Around 150 huts with a network of tracks and bridges providing access can be found on the
western side of the Southern Alps from Karamea down to Haast.
The majority were erected from the 1950's to the mid 1970's by the New Zealand Forest Service, ostensibly
for introduced animal control purposes. They provided rudimentary shelter for government deer cullers
employed to cull an exploding population of introduced red deer, seriously damaging
high-country ecosystems. Although initially concerned with animal control, there is clear evidence
from as early as the mid-1960's of a recreation ethos and intent in NZFS Hut construction. And the Department continued
to build huts long after cullers were rendered
unneccessary by commercial helicopter venison recovery operations, right through to the early 1980's in fact.
Along with facilities established by Lands and Survey and tramping and alpine clubs
a dream network of remote accommodation and trails for hunters,
trampers and climbers had come into being. In 1986 the newly created
Department of Conservation (DOC) took over management of
high-country resources from the NZFS, but under a much more stringent funding regime.
In the ensuing years many of the more remote, less used huts and tracks, stopped
receiving maintenance, creating a spiral of disuse and disrepair.
Economic Rationalism
The "User
pays" models fashionable in Government departments in the 1980's
as a means of providing funding for facilities proved unworkable with these low-use
facilities. Large numbers of huts in the DOC estate were left unmaintained and became run down
or delapidated.
Access tracks overgrew, and footbridges
were washed away or damaged and not repaired or replaced.
Deteriorating access and lack of information on routes and hut conditions deterred all but
the hardiest from using these facilities. Decreasing levels of use justified
continued low or zero maintenance, and so on.
Remote Hut Users Unite
During the years of neglect a small group of individuals continued
to use and derive considerable pleasure from remote huts. There were attempts
in an uncoordinated fashion to keep the trails open and the huts useable.
DOC didn't appear particularly able or willing at the time
to maintain them or vouchsafe their existance and it was difficult to justify
using taxpayers' money on something used by so few, especially when there so many other
areas of more pressing need. The most pragmatic and obvious response
was for the hut users themselves to take on or share some of
the maintenance role. This was beginning to happen in an ad-hoc fashion
when a DOC Review of high country facilities took place in 2003.
DOC's 2003/ 4 Review of High-Country Facilities
The Review was a means of rationalising Government funding of high-country resources, including
the 150 or so huts and bivs in the Tai Poutini Conservancy.
The outcome was a two-tier maintenance system. Around 80 structures would be
fully maintained, and another 60 or so minimally maintained. Minimal maintenance had been happening
by default for a couple of decades in any case.
A smaller number of huts and bivs considered too delapidated, unsafe, or unused,
and were designated for removal.
DOC consulted with the various interest groups during the Review,
and this resulted in a few positive outcomes in terms of hut and bridges being shifted back to fully maintain status, or from
remove back to minimally maintain.
A couple of overgrown routes
were reinstated to full maintenance.
Losses and trade-offs occured as well, some of which can be viewed in the
Archive Of Huts Removed Or Lost.
Minimal Maintenance
This is defined as,
"two-yearly inspections
with minor maintenance that
can be done with basic tools to keep the structures
sanitary and watertight." This could include painting, repairs
to windows, and sealing, however once a hut is deemed to be no longer
weatherproof, safe or sanitary, DOC would remove it (ironically at considerable cost,
and comparable enough maintenance to have gotten it
back to a suitable standard). Hut removal would also occur in the case of major
damage, such as a tree falling on a hut. Under this type of regime it seems inevitable
that minimal
maintenance huts and bivs will vanish by slow attrition over time.
Murphy's Law
Around the time of the DOC Review and the creation of this site,
some unexpected, major one-off funding was received from the then Labour Government. In the
Hokitika area this was used for a maintenance initiative well beyond the
"minimal" level on most of the structures that had recently been consigned to
this category. Over the summer of 2003/ 4 the huts (even three designated for removal)
received some kind of maintenance. Painting, sealing, general floor and frame repairs,
and re-piling was carried out, and
for many huts this was their first maintenance in 30
years. The work done has the potential to extend the life of some structures another 15-30 years.
DOC used contractors and volunteers to
do the maintenance and unfortunately the quality of the work varies considerably.
In some cases huts were painted without adequate preparation, or areas of
rust or dry rot were simply covered with paint. These particular huts are unlikely to
get the boost to their life expectancy they could have had, but I guess every little bit helps.
Back To The Present
We can look back over the last decade as a fairly benign time politically. One in which consciousness
was raised, user groups mobilised using the new electronic media, and DOC had the rare opportunity of having
some discretionary funding and the will to do a surprising of maintenance on the remote resources in central Westland.
2011 presents us with a
different and more ominous scenario set against the background of world financial downturns and new austerity measures
with regard to Government spending. DOC is already critically underfunded and the current Minister of Conservation isn't really.
DOC's current Director General is currently mouthing a mantra of corporate and business partnership, and prepared to cosy up
to anybody, no matter how unethical, or contradictory that may be to conservation principles or aims. We now have Solid Energy
sponsoring blue duck programmes and DOC holding sham consultations while preparing to open up wilderness areas to Helihunting
franchises.
On the Hut and track front they've come up with something called Destination Framework which nobody really seems
to know much about. Some of it appears to be about getting more volunteer input, however DOC is wanting
newer facilities to be mainly focused on bigger populations centers
in the North Island and this will be where the main investment is. This signals a continuation in a trend
over the past few years in which DOC has spent millions in
the Tararua's and Rimutaka's on major hut rebuilds such as Totara Flats,
Atiwhakatu and Turere Lodge. The focus is on large huts in high use areas with
higher fees, often a default tourist hotel in which the occupants are primarily overseas visitors.
At $40 per night huts like Anchorage in Abel Tasman and Welcome Flat in the Copland are out of range of a lot of New Zealanders
wanting to take their kids for a tramp. The idea of community help
for remote areas like Westland with a lot of basic huts could be a sly means
to further reduce funding so that this area's money could
be stripped back and funneled north to pet projects near Auckland.
Watch this space, or ask John Key or Kate Wilkinson next time you meet 'em out tramping.
The Aim Of This Website
Remote or low-use huts won't ever have a high priority
in terms of Government funding, and as such will always be vulnerable to periods of
neglect and threat of removal. The aim of this website is to raise and maintain awareness
of this wonderful resource, and encourage its continued use by providing up-to-date
information on hut and track conditions. We want to get high-country recreationalists actively involved in
carrying out trackwork and hut maintenance that DOC is unable or unwilling to do, hopefully
in collaboration with them.
The first sucess along this line was with
Scottys Biv in the Taipo valley, which was getting visited
every 3-5 years and had been designated for removal. The Biv was taken on as a
"maintain-by-community" project by the Permolat Group. It received 10 visits in a
year after being profiled on this website, demonstrating how easily a spiral of
declining use can be reversed.
Area Covered By The Site
The Remote Huts website focuses on 58 huts and bivs in the Westland area. There
is potential to expand the site. We are happy to help folk
start something similar in their own region using this website as a template.
Permolat
Permolat is an online group with
115 members currently. It connects remote hut enthusiasts and is a great
medium for coordinating maintenance and preservation projects.
In 2008 our second contract was confirmed for
Mid Styx Hut in the Styx valley. Permolat volunteers
re-piled and re-floored the Hut in 2009 with the assistance of DOC who flew our
materials in free of charge. Proposals are pending for
Lower Olderog Biv and
Campbell Biv
in the Arahaura catchment, both of which were originally designated for removal inthe 2004 Review.
In 2010 Permolat assisted with a project
by the Mt. Brown Hut Community Project Team to relocate
the old Lower Arahura Hut to the Mt. Brown tops above Lake
Kaniere
(www.facebook.com/pages/Lake-Kaniere-New-Zealand/Mt-Brown-hut/349616583077
and www.flickr.com/photos/mtbrownhut/).
We provided some funding and volunteer input for construction and trackwork.
Volunteer Trackwork
Informal trackwork by Permolat members and other individuals has become commonplace on trails
in central Westland that are no longer officially maintained by DOC.
Permolat has reopened the upper Waitaha valley and carried out
trackwork in the Arahura, Kokatahi, Toaroha, Taipo and Mikonui valleys, and some of the frontal tracks in
South Westland. It is not unusual now to see folk tramping in this area with a pair of loppers
attached to
their pack. We want to encourage more of this.
How You Can Help
When visiting a "minimal maintenance" or "maintain-by-community" hut please carry out
any minor repairs that are needed with any tools and materials on site. Otherwise, notify us
using the contacts below and we'll attend to it.
Also, please give us updates the routes and tracks you are using
if they lie outside of the DOC gambit.
In the case of "minimal maintenance" huts it is still worthwhile letting DOC know about repairs needed, as
they still have a key
role there. Take a pair of loppers with you and/ or a small fold up pruning saw and help by keeping the
trails DOC has ceased maintaining trimmed,
marked and open, particularly at key entry and exit points. DOC is currently OK with
this as long as it is a pre-existing track, that hand tools only are used, and
traditional markers (permolat, strips of venetian blind historically used by NZFS). Don't use their plastic orange triangles
on non-maintain tracks. Donations to Permolat (Remote Huts: Kiwibank 38-9006-0758147-00) are very welcome,
as are any good photos you may
have of huts
on the site.
DOC Input
DOC in Westland has been supportive of our efforts and generous in assisting
us and other community groups involved in projects in the area. They appear more
open to community input and collaboration than some
conservancies in other areas, and acknowledge a need for better communication with
community groups.
DOC have offered to provide
some materials if an individual wants to carry out
simple repairs such as sealing leaks or replacing louvres. For more complex
tasks such as painting, replacement of framing timbers or piles,
they may co-work with individuals as volunteers,
provided they are capable and can meet DOC and local body building
code standards and DOC Health and Safety requirements. In
specific instances they will consider ferrying materials
to a hut site. They did this for the Mid Styx and Mt. Brown projects.
Interested individuals may also
accompany
DOC maintenance staff as volunteers. This happened
on the 2003/ 4 maintenance programme, and
feedback from the volunteers was reportedly positive.
Response To The Latest Government Austerity Measures
DOC Hokitika are fairly confident they can maintain most of their existing infrastructure. The
maintenance done in 2003/ 4 will have given most of the huts and bridges a big enough boost to tide them over what is hopefully
a cyclic economic downturn. Some losses are still likely. Polluck Creek Hut may get
the chop due to pending maintenance, and it's low use. Three swingbridges will be removed in the Crawford,
Otehake and Mungo valleys.
All of these
bridges are at places where the rivers can be forded safely at normal flows. The Griffin Creek (Taramakau catchment), Headlong Spur
and Scamper Torrent (Waitaha Catchment), and Goat Creek and Mt. Barron tops tracks (Otira catchment) will be dropped from the
maintenance schedule. Permolat could be able to pick up all or some of these.
Reconsiderations Of Plans for Hut Removal
Strong negative public response to some of DOC's proposed hut
removals have captured the attention of the media in recent times.
The planned removal of one hut in
Kahurangi National park was halted as a result of public pressure.
A surge in coordinated community responses to take on maintenance of
facilities occured in response to DOC removal activities, which were viewed by many as unneccessary or autocratic.
It is our experience that levels of use hut use rise significantly with increased publicity,
better tracks, quality information on
their condition, and community buy-in in projects.
DOC Hokitika was reconsidering its planned removal of Serpentine Hut
in the Hokitika valley after local kayakers
expressed interest in taking over its upkeep (although this appears to have fallen through). Some swingbridges
designated for removal have been reinstated to maintain, or minimally maintain
as a result of community feedback. If you have a concern about a hut or bridge being removed, ring your local DOC
office and let them know. It really does make a difference.
Fully Maintained Huts
There are a number of "fully maintain" huts on the website. The Huts weren't in any category when
the site was created, but are now, at least for the time being, relatively safe from destruction or disintegration.
We've left them on the site due to their remote location, relatively
low-use, and continued vulnerability to future funding cuts, or other bureaucratic whims.
Remote Hut Adoption
A number of huts on this site were informally
adopted by individuals or groups in years past when they weren't being maintained,
kept in immaculate order sometimes, and
even provisioned with gear (See Griffin Creek Hut,
Browning Biv, Koropuku Hut and
Newton Hut).
This had a positive impact on their condition and level of use.
If a single individual or group were to take on responsibility for
each of the minimal maintenance huts on
this site, their survival prospects would be greatly enhanced. Think about it!
No Free Lunch
Using taxpayers' money to
fully fund a resource that
get used by less than 4% of the population is hard to justify, and it is unlikely that
remote huts will ever be a high priority in the greater scheme of things.
Remote huts are more than just
physical shelters from the elements however. They act as gymnasia, churches, residential respite care, hunting lodges,
hermitage, batches, retreats, spas (if there's a hot pool nearby), and more.
It is highly probable that remote hut users live
longer (if they don't peel off a mountain side on the way to one), have less mental
and physical health issues, spend less time in jail, are generally more productive members of society
than non-users. Getting the bureaucratic bean-counters to look at it this way is difficult to say the least.
All power to the politically active who consult, lobby, write submissions, and use the system.
There is another species that likes to whinge in hutbooks about
the crap job DOC is doing, when they could quite adequately attend to the relatively simple repairs that
they are complaining about. This is an understandible condition, and a hangover from the "era of entitlement"
for which the NZFS
is partially to blame, by providing and maintaining such a good system for so long.
Interestingly, the complaining sub-species is usually the same one
that doesn't replace the firewood they use in the huts, clean the billies, or
carry their trash out when they leave.
They are possibly descendants of the ones who
moaned about the same things in the NZFS
hutbooks 30 years back. Unfortunately, while all that lobby and complaining is going on,
the hut in question is starting to fall over and vanish back into the regenerating bush.
Happily there exists a third group who are pragmatic,
impatient, action oriented, and with a slightly cynical attitude to changing the sytem from within.
This type feels compelled to fix things themselves. If you think you may be one of the latter, please join us.
The Future
The demand for the remote hut experience is unlikely ever to go away, and may even increase over time.
A growing outdoor, health and
environmental consciousness, along with DOC's apalling management of the tourism/ wilderness interface
has resulted in ever-increasing pressure and overcrowding
on the more popular walking circuits and National Parks. The wilderness has been commodified,
packaged, promoted, and flogged off to Lonely Planet and heli-hunting consortiums.
A parallel hut and track system is emerging. One is extremely well-resourced, risk averse, overcrowded
and out of the price range (exhorbitanthut fees and booking systems) of ordinary New Zealanders. The other
is basic, remote and has a high level of community input.
The more regular appearance of the names of foreign travellers
in remote hutbooks is
both gratifying and unsettling. Many don't appear to have the
the experience, gear, or fitness to safely tackle the remote New Zealand high-country.
A few are dangerously underprovisioned and reach their destinations by luck more than anything.
We met a foreign fellow who'd just completed a high-level traverse in icy spring snow
conditions in sandshoes, with no ice axe. He'd slid from the the range to the scrubline
on his backside in a semi-controlled free-fall. Lucky man. An increasing number
of alpine searches
and body recoveries
in recent years have been for foreigners. All of this leads us to the ubiquitous disclaimer.
Warning!
YOU NEED TO BE PHYSICALLY FIT, EXPERIENCED IN THIS TYPE OF COUNTRY, AND
ADEQUATELY PROVISIONED, TO VENTURE INTO THE REMOTE HUT ZONE.
If you are not go with someone who is, or
try some easier preliminary tramps in areas that have been developed for the less experienced, or stay at home!
Please note also that alpine skills and experience gained in Alaska (for example) are not necessarily
transferable to the high-country here.
Many of the huts and bivs on this site are in remote
rugged, mountainous settings, and the tracks to them
may be overgrown, or in
some cases no longer followable. Some of the huts
in alpine or sub-alpine settings can only be approached
by high-altitude routes. Bush navigation
skills and good quality, appropriate gear is essential.
Rivers (often) and side creeks (usually) are unbridged and
rise rapidly during frequent heavy rain. River or creek
travel needs to be done with caution due to the numerous waterfalls
and gorges that characterise
watercourses in this type of terrain. Heavy snowfalls, more common in winter,
can occur at any
time of the year, and sudden extreme weather changes are normal.
The
alpine crossings above 1500m are likely to be snow covered from winter through to early summer.
The snow tends to burn off in most places by late
summer and the tops may remain bare, aside from areas of permanent snow (usually above 1800m),
into late autumn. This notwithstanding,
folk doing the alpine routes need to be prepared for extreme weather and snow
at any time of year. Ice axes will be needed for some crossings, and crampons
during the colder months in a few places.
Track And Travel Times
The travel times given on this site are provisional and are an indication
of what a fit, experienced tramper should be able to do in this type of country.
They bear no relation to track times
on standard fully mainatined tracks in National Parks, or Great Walks.
Estimates for tops travel are for
times of the year when the the snow has burnt off, usually late summer and autumn.
Travel can be just as fast in
winter, or take considerably longer, depending on snow conditions.
Information On This Site
It is our intention to keep the information provided on this site as up-to-date as
possible. The alps are unstable however, and slips, avalanches and windthrow are constantly altering the landscape.
Rivers change their course during floods and easy sections become difficult or even impassible.
Please inform us of any innacuracies or changes you come across in conditions or routes and we'll update the relevant
hutpage.
Finally, we hope that you will be rejuvenated,
and restored to optimum
physical and mental
wellbeing by your remote hut experience, but
please don't try anything on the site if it is clearly
beyond your capability.
Contact Us or Join Permolat
Information, updates, comments and suggestions can be emailed to Andrew Buglass at
andrew@uchc.org.nz. This is
also the contact for those interested in joining Permolat and getting involved at a
hands-on level in remote hut and track preservation and maintenance activities.
An electronic invitation and log-in will be sent out once your request is received.
This will give you access to an online forum for the sharing of information and organisation of projects.
Hut Photos On This Site
All thumbnail photos on the Hut Pages can be double clicked to provide a full-sized
images.
Thanks
A warm thanks to everyone who
has helped so far with their time, labour, photos, support, donations and encouragement.
Andrew Buglass 2011
