draft ben lomond national park ski slope plan 2010

s k i s lo p e p l a n - a p r i l 2010

Ben Lomond NATIONAL PARK

Department of primary industries, parks, Water and environment

of 131 Ben Lomond National Park Ski Slope Plan April 2010

Cite as: Parks and Wildlife Service 2010, Ben Lomond National Park Ski Slope Plan, Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of Primary Industry Parks Water and the Environment, Hobart.

© Parks and Wildlife Service Department of Primary Industry Parks Water and the Environment, 2010

Apart from fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research, criticism or review, as permitted under the Commonwealth Copyright Act 1968, no part of this document may be reproduced for any means without written permission from the Department of Primary Industry Parks Water and the Environment, GPO Box 44, Hobart, Tasmania 7001.

Page 2 of 131 Ben Lomond National Park Ski Slope Plan April 2010

Table of Contents

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................8 2 PLAN SETTING........................................................................................................................11

2.1 PLAN AND MANAGEMENT BACKGROUND........................................................................................................... 11 2.2 SCOPE ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 11 2.3 OBJECTIVES............................................................................................................................................................................ 11 2.4 SKI SLOPE PLAN CURRENCY.......................................................................................................................................... 12 2.5 PLAN PREPARATION ......................................................................................................................................................... 12 2.6 CONSTRAINT ISSUES......................................................................................................................................................... 13 2.7 BEST PRACTICE.................................................................................................................................................................... 13

3 THE SKI SLOPE ........................................................................................................................16 3.1 THE LOCATION .................................................................................................................................................................. 16 3.2 CLIMATE.................................................................................................................................................................................. 16 3.3 TOPOGRAPHY ..................................................................................................................................................................... 17 3.4 DRAINAGE (refer also to 3.3 and 4.2.3.2) ..................................................................................................................... 17

4 VALUES OF THE SKI SLOPE .................................................................................................20 4.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................ 20 4.2 NATURAL VALUES OF THE SKI SLOPE ....................................................................................................................... 20

4.2.1 Flora, Background ............................................................................................................................................................ 20 4.2.1.1 Plant Communities ....................................................................................................................................................................21 4.2.1.2 Species...........................................................................................................................................................................................21 4.2.1.3 Vegetation Issues .......................................................................................................................................................................21

4.2.2 Fauna.................................................................................................................................................................................... 22 4.2.3 Geology and Soils ............................................................................................................................................................. 22

4.2.3.1 Geology..........................................................................................................................................................................................22 4.2.3.2 Soils ................................................................................................................................................................................................23

4.2.4 Environment....................................................................................................................................................................... 24 4.2.4.1 Assessment and Management ..............................................................................................................................................24 4.2.4.2 Visual Impacts.............................................................................................................................................................................24 4.2.4.3 Noise..............................................................................................................................................................................................25

4.2.5 Ecological Processes ........................................................................................................................................................ 25 4.2.6 Snow (see also 6.9)........................................................................................................................................................ 25

4.3 CULTURAL RESOURCES & VALUES.............................................................................................................................. 29 4.3.1 Customary Activities ....................................................................................................................................................... 29 4.3.2 Historic heritage values .................................................................................................................................................. 29 4.3.3 Aboriginal heritage ........................................................................................................................................................... 30 4.3.4 Engaging the Community, Community Groups and Neighbours.......................................................................... 30

4.4 PROTECTION OF VALUES: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS (EIA’S).......................................... 30 5 EXISTING USES, FACILITIES AND SERVICES...................................................................33

5.1 OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................................................................. 33 5.2 ACCESS.................................................................................................................................................................................... 33

5.2.1 Walking Tracks (‘summer’ and ‘winter’) .................................................................................................................... 33 5.2.2 Activity Areas (‘winter’) ................................................................................................................................................. 33 5.2.3 Oversnow Vehicles (‘winter’) ....................................................................................................................................... 34 5.2.4 Access Restrictions (‘winter’, see 5.2.3 above also)................................................................................................ 34 5.2.5 Servicing & Maintenance (‘summer’) ........................................................................................................................... 34 5.2.6 Skier Egress (‘winter’) ..................................................................................................................................................... 34

5.3 COMMUNICATION (‘winter’) ......................................................................................................................................... 37 5.4 UTILITIES ................................................................................................................................................................................. 37

5.4.1 Water and Water Supply ............................................................................................................................................... 37 5.4.2 Electricity and Energy ...................................................................................................................................................... 37 5.4.3 Toilets (sewered) ............................................................................................................................................................. 37

5.5 SNOW SPORTS (‘winter’).................................................................................................................................................. 37 5.5.1 Snow Activity Instruction (‘winter’) ............................................................................................................................ 38

5.6 PARKS & WILDLIFE SERVICE............................................................................................................................................ 38 5.7 SKI PATROL (‘winter’)......................................................................................................................................................... 38 5.8 ACCOMMODATION WITHIN THE SKI SLOPE........................................................................................................ 38 5.9 SERVICE AND STORAGE BUILDINGS.......................................................................................................................... 39 5.10 RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES........................................................................................................................................... 39

5.10.1 Tobogganing (‘winter’) ........................................................................................................................................................ 39 5.10.2 Terrain Park (‘winter’) ........................................................................................................................................................ 39


5.10.3 Snow Play (‘winter’) ............................................................................................................................................................. 39 5.10.4 Competitions, Races and Fun Days (‘winter’ mostly) ................................................................................................. 39 5.10.5 Cross-Country Skiing (‘winter’)........................................................................................................................................ 40 5.10.6 Jumps (‘winter’)..................................................................................................................................................................... 40 5.10.9 Oversnow Vehicle Tours (‘winter’)................................................................................................................................. 40

5.11 TOW USE ACTIVITIES (‘winter’) ..................................................................................................................................... 40 5.11.1 Skiing and Snow Boarding Terrain ................................................................................................................................... 40

5.11.1.1 Natural obstacles and risk management...........................................................................................................................41 5.11.1.2 Skiing Runs18 (see also Map 3)..............................................................................................................................................41

5.11.2 People...................................................................................................................................................................................... 42 5.11.2.1 Skill Levels......................................................................................................................................................................................42 5.11.2.2 Skill Level Segregation ...............................................................................................................................................................42 5.11.2.3 Skier Circulation...........................................................................................................................................................................42 5.11.2.4 Crowding ........................................................................................................................................................................................43

5.11.3 Slope Capacity (Terrain Capacity) ................................................................................................................................... 43 5.11.4.1 Tows, Description........................................................................................................................................................................47 5.11.4.2 Condition and Suitability ...........................................................................................................................................................47 5.11.4.3 Tow Capacity ................................................................................................................................................................................47 5.11.4.4 Surfacing ........................................................................................................................................................................................48 5.11.4.5 Tow Tracks (see also 5.11.4.2)...........................................................................................................................................48 5.11.4.6 Loading and Offloading.............................................................................................................................................................48 5.11.4.7 Ski Tow Risk Assessment..........................................................................................................................................................48

5.11.5 Snow Fences .......................................................................................................................................................................... 50 5.11.6 Summer Grooming (Slope Grooming) (see also 3.1, 3.4, 4.2.1.4 & 4.2.3.1)........................................................ 50 5.11.7 Winter Grooming (Snow Grooming) ............................................................................................................................. 50 5.11.8 Snow-Making.......................................................................................................................................................................... 50

6 APPRECIATION OF SKI SLOPE ISSUES (8 covers issues related to operational practices) ....52 6.1 QUALITY OF SKI SLOPE INFRASTRUCTURE (see also 8)...................................................................................... 52 6.2 BEGINNERS AND NOVICES ............................................................................................................................................ 52 6.3 GROOMING .......................................................................................................................................................................... 52 6.4 AFFORDABILITY................................................................................................................................................................... 52 6.5 VOLUNTEERS........................................................................................................................................................................ 52 6.6 COMMUNITY AND MANAGEMENT............................................................................................................................ 53 6.7 DEMAND TRENDS .............................................................................................................................................................. 53 6.8 TOURISM POTENTIAL ....................................................................................................................................................... 53 6.9 CLIMATE CHANGE ............................................................................................................................................................. 53

7 BETTER USE OF THE SKI SLOPE........................................................................................55 7.1 THE VISION............................................................................................................................................................................ 55

7.2.1 Development Assessment Framework (see also Appendix 5)............................................................................. 55 7.2.2 Other Parameters, Assumptions and Findings.......................................................................................................... 55 7.3.1 Village - Slope Interface .................................................................................................................................................. 56 7.3.2 Access....................................................................................................................................................................................... 56 7.3.3 ‘Summer’ Walking Tracks (see 7.3.1 and 7.13.2.1 also) ......................................................................................... 56 7.3.4 ‘Winter’ Pedestrian Circulation.................................................................................................................................... 56 7.3.5 Pedestrian Access over Downhill Skiing Slopes in Skiing Season ........................................................................ 56 7.3.6 Egress to Public Shelter and Arrival Area.................................................................................................................. 56 7.3.7 Oversnow Vehicles (OSV) and Vehicle Access in Skiing Season (see also 7.13.2.1) ...................................... 57 7.3.8 Vehicle Access in ‘Summer’ ................................................................................................................................................ 57

7.4 COMMUNICATION (‘winter’) ......................................................................................................................................... 58 7.4.1 Intramountain .................................................................................................................................................................... 58 7.4.2 External ............................................................................................................................................................................... 58

7.5 UTILITIES AND SERVICES INFRASTRUCTURE.................................................................................................................... 58 7.5.1 Water and Water Supply ............................................................................................................................................... 58 7.5.2 Electricity ............................................................................................................................................................................ 59 7.5.3 Toilets.................................................................................................................................................................................. 59

7.6 SNOW SPORTS .................................................................................................................................................................... 59 7.6.2 Beginner Area, Ski School and Instruction (‘winter’).............................................................................................. 59

7.7 PARKS & WILDLIFE SERVICE............................................................................................................................................ 60 7.8 SKI PATROL (‘winter’)......................................................................................................................................................... 60

7.8.1 Helicopter Evacuation ..................................................................................................................................................... 60 7.9 SERVICES OPERATING HOURS (‘winter’) ................................................................................................................... 60 7.10 SLOPE ACCOMMODATION ........................................................................................................................................... 60 7.11 RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES........................................................................................................................................... 61


7.11.1 Designated Activity Areas and Guidelines ..................................................................................................................... 61 7.11.2 Tobogganing (‘winter’) ........................................................................................................................................................ 61 7.11.3 Snow Boarding (‘winter’).................................................................................................................................................... 62

7.11.3.1 Terrain Park (‘winter’) ...............................................................................................................................................................62 7.11.4 Snow Play (‘winter’) ............................................................................................................................................................. 62 7.11.5 Competitions (‘winter’ mostly)......................................................................................................................................... 62 7.11.6 Cross-Country Skiing (‘winter’)........................................................................................................................................ 63 7.11.7 Jumps (‘winter’)..................................................................................................................................................................... 63 7.11.8 Walking (see 7.3.1, 7.3.3, 7.3.5, 7.3.8 & 7.13.2.1)......................................................................................................... 63 7.11.9 Tubing (‘winter’) ................................................................................................................................................................... 63 7.11.10 Oversnow Vehicles Tours (‘winter’)............................................................................................................................. 64 7.11.11 Ice Skating (all year)........................................................................................................................................................... 64 7.11.12 Other Activities .................................................................................................................................................................. 64 7.11.13 Social (all year) .................................................................................................................................................................... 66 7.11.13 Social (all year) .................................................................................................................................................................... 66 7.11.14 Future Possibilities ............................................................................................................................................................. 66

7.12 TOW USE ACTIVITIES (‘winter’) ..................................................................................................................................... 67 7.12.1.1 Skier Access to Tows..................................................................................................................................................................67 7.12.1.2 Skier Circulation...........................................................................................................................................................................67 7.12.2.1 Proposed Tow Rearrangement ...............................................................................................................................................67 7.12.2.2 Slope Capacity (Terrain Capacity).........................................................................................................................................67 7.12.2.3 Tow Capacities.............................................................................................................................................................................68 7.12.3.1 Tow and Lift Improvement and Installation Principles....................................................................................................68 7.12.3.2 Specific Tow Improvements.....................................................................................................................................................69 7.12.3.3 Future Climate and Tows .........................................................................................................................................................70 7.12.3.4 Facilitating Tow Capacity and Safety....................................................................................................................................70

7.12.4 Ground Surfacing.................................................................................................................................................................. 71 7.12.4.1 Decking and Tow Adjuncts cf 7.13.2.2, 7.12.5.1 ............................................................................................................71 7.12.4.2 Obstacle Bridging ........................................................................................................................................................................72 7.12.4.3 Tow Tracks (see also 7.11.3, 7.12.3.1, 7.12.4.1 -.4 & above)...................................................................................72

7.12.5 Snow Collection and Wind................................................................................................................................................ 74 7.12.5.1 Snow Fences (see also 7.16, point 8 and 7.12.4.1)........................................................................................................74 7.12.5.2 Snow Covers..................................................................................................................................................................................74 7.12.5.3 Wind Protection...........................................................................................................................................................................75

7.12.6 Night Skiing ............................................................................................................................................................................ 75 7.12.7 Workshops, Storage, Generator Sheds & Garaging.................................................................................................... 75

7.13 SUMMER GROOMING (SLOPE OR TERRAIN GROOMING)................................................................................ 75 7.13.1.1 General Appreciation .................................................................................................................................................................76 7.13.1.2 Ben Lomond..................................................................................................................................................................................76

7.13.1.2.1 Rock Removal and Bush Pruning (selective grooming) ...........................................................................................77 7.13.1.2.2 Terrain Modification...........................................................................................................................................................77 7.13.1.2.3 General Grooming Recommendations..........................................................................................................................77

7.13.1.3 Existing BLSA Grooming Proposal..........................................................................................................................................78 7.13.2.1 Vehicle Routes ..............................................................................................................................................................................78 7.13.2.2 Development and Improvement of Tow Tracks (see 7.12.4.3) ..................................................................................78 7.13.2.3 Foundations...................................................................................................................................................................................78 7.13.2.4 Larger Infrastructure ..................................................................................................................................................................78 7.13.2.5 Drainage ........................................................................................................................................................................................79

7.13.3 Machinery for Grooming.................................................................................................................................................... 79 7.14 REHABILITATION (see also 4.2.1.3, 7.12.4, 7.13.1.2, 7.13.2.2, 7.13.2.7 and Appendix 6) ............................ 79 7.15 WINTER GROOMING (SNOW GROOMING) (See 7.12.4.3 too) ................................................................... 81 7.16 SNOW MAKING (photograph of snow-gun use on page 20)................................................................................... 81

7.16.1 Water for Snow-Making ..................................................................................................................................................... 82 7.17 HISTORIC HERITAGE ......................................................................................................................................................... 83 7.18 PROMOTION ........................................................................................................................................................................ 83 7.19 LICENCES AND LEASES..................................................................................................................................................... 84 7.20 PRECIS OF MAIN ACTIVITY ACTIONS........................................................................................................................ 84

8 GOOD OPERATIONAL PRACTICES...................................................................................85 8.1 STAFF SAFETY ....................................................................................................................................................................... 85

8.2.1 Public Safety, General Staff Actions ............................................................................................................................. 85 8.2.2 Signs ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 85 8.2.3 Fog........................................................................................................................................................................................ 85 8.2.4 Safety Codes ...................................................................................................................................................................... 85


8.2.5 Drinking Water................................................................................................................................................................. 86 8.2.6 Shelter ................................................................................................................................................................................. 86

8.3 CARE OF ENVIRONMENT .............................................................................................................................................. 86 8.3.1 Monitoring and Prevention (see also 4.2.1.3, 4.2.4 and Appendix 6)............................................................... 86 8.3.2 Waste .................................................................................................................................................................................. 86 8.3.3 End of Season .................................................................................................................................................................... 86 8.4 Maintenance ....................................................................................................................................................................... 87

9 MONITORING AND PERFORMANCE..................................................................................88 9.1 ECOLOGICAL PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ......................................................................................................... 88 9.2 SOCIAL PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ...................................................................................................................... 88 9.3 ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ............................................................................................................. 88

APPENDICES....................................................................................................................................89 APPENDIX 1 ABBREVIATIONS & ACRONYMS................................................................................................................... 89 APPENDIX 2 RELEVANT SERVICE PROVIDERS IN 2008.................................................................................................. 89 APPENDIX 3 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................................................... 90 APPENDIX 4 SKI SLOPE MANAGEMENT SETTING........................................................................................................... 92 APPENDIX 5 PLANNING DOCUMENTS, LEGISLATION AND CODES..................................................................... 93 APPENDIX 6 ENVIRONMENT NOTES ................................................................................................................................... 95 APPENDIX 7 SKI LIFTS AND TOWS, POTENTIAL SCENARII AND ARRANGEMENTS ....................................... 97 APPENDIX 8 SLOPE AND TOW CAPACITY DATA ......................................................................................................... 99 APPENDIX 9 SOME ACCEPTABLE ‘SUMMER’ ACTIVITIES FOR THE SKI SLOPE AREA......................................111 APPENDIX 10 SNOW FENCES..................................................................................................................................................111 APPENDIX 11 SOME SLOPE GROOMING AND DRAINAGE RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................112 APPENDIX 12 HERITAGE, SUMMIT HUTS ............................................................................................................................113 APPENDIX 13 SOME POTENTIAL MANAGEMENT MATTERS FOR THE NEXT 25 YEARS.................................114 APPENDIX 14 IDEAS FOR RESOURCING .............................................................................................................................114 APPENDIX 15 SUMMARY OF MAIN ACTIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE BEN LOMOND SKI SLOPE .................................................................................................................................................................................118

LISTED PHOTOGRAPHS : Water and Bare Ground near Summit Load 21 Photograph 1

Photograph 2: Slope just beyond Proposed Village T-bar Offload (rocks) 21 Photograph 3: Same Slope from the West rocks 21 Photograph 4: Existing Impacted Routes 34

All unattributed photographs by Andrew Davey

TABLES Table 5.1 Skier Skill Demand on Slope 96 Table 5.2 2008 Slope Capacity by Skill Level 96 Table 5.3 2008 Maximum Tow Capacities in 2008 98 Table 5.4 2008 Average Tow Capacities in 2008 99 Table 5.5 2008 Slope Capacity for Skiing & Snow Boarding, by Tow 101 Table 5.6 Comfortable Carrying Capacity (tow capacity) 103 Table 7.1 Slope Capacity for Proposed Tows Rearrangement 103 Table 7.2 Average Capacities for Proposed Tow Rearrangement 104 Table 7.3 Best Capacities for Proposed Tows Rearrangement 104 Table 7.4 Slope Capacity for Proposed Tows Rearrangement 105 Table 7.5 Average Carrying Capacities for More T-bar Equivalents 105 Table 7.6 Best Capacities for More T-bar Equivalents 106 Table 7.7 Capacities for More T-bars Equivalents ± Chair 106 Table 7.8 Slope Capacity By Tow for More T-Bar Equivalents 107 Table 7.9 Slope Capacity for More T-bar Equivalents ± Chair by Skill Level 108 Table 7.10 Slope Capacity by Tow for More T-bars Equivalents ± Chair 109

FIGURES Figure 1: Throw of Snow verses Snow Fence Separation 48 Figure 2: Example of a Seasonally Dismantled Fence 49 Figure 3: Temporary Fence for Short-Term Snow Catching 49

: Standard Unit of Permanent Snow Fence 49 Figure 4Figure 5.1: Approximate Skier / Boarder Skill Distribution 97 Figure 5.2: Approximate Skier / Boarder Distribution via 2008 Tows 98


Figure 5.3: Comfortable Tow Capacity compared to Slope Capacity for Excellent Snow 99 Figure 5.4a: Comfortable Tow Capacity for Average Snow compared to Slope Capacities 100 Figure 5.4b: Comfortable Tow Capacity compared to Slope Capacity for Average Snow 100 Figure 7.1: Tow Capacity for Average Snow vs. Slope Capacity for Proposed Rearrangement 104 Figure 7.2: Tow Capacity for Average Snow vs. Slope Capacity for more T-bar Equivalents 106 Figure 7.3: Approx Skill Distribution if More T-bar Equivalents ± Chair 130

MAPS Map 1: Zone B, Ben Lomond Skifield 11 Map 2: Downhill Skifield and Tow Layout in 2008 16 Map 3: Skiing Runs & Pods 28 Map 4: Activity Sites and Routes 34 Map 5: Approximate Positions of Snow Fences and Terrain Park 35 Map 6: All Tows 44 Map 7: Possible Slope Grooming 45

Above: cross-country skiers enjoying a flat snow covered area Right: downhill skiing a particularly steep bank


1 Executive Summary

The Ben Lomond Skifield Development Plan (PWS 1993) identifies a “Management Zone B - Primary downhill skiing area” or ‘ski slope’ within the Ben Lomond National Park in north-east Tasmania (Map 1). The ski slopes are one hour from Launceston and just over three hours from Hobart by car. The slopes have traditionally formed part of an affordable family-oriented skifield. Although visitors now come for a variety of recreational, social and educational activities, skiing and snow boarding are still the main focus and visitation is overwhelmingly during the snow season. Most facilities and infrastructure on the ski slopes are centred on snow recreation and sports. Other winter activities include tobogganing, snow-play and socialising. However, the ski slope is accessible all year around and is also used for walking and nature appreciation.

The Draft Ski Slope Plan assesses current facilities, services, conditions and management regimes and guides phased improvements and the potential expansion of infrastructure, facilities and services for ‘winter’ and ‘non-winter’ recreation to meet changing demand and interests. This Ski Slope Plan promotes contemporary guidelines and methods used to successfully manage other Australian ski resorts. The Plan also reinforces the need for all development to be accompanied by conservation and rehabilitation measures, commensurate with impacts and the slope’s natural values.

The Ben Lomond ski slopes are relatively small and marginal, with resources for development and maintenance limited. The slopes have limited gentle and smooth terrain suited to beginner, novice and low intermediate skiers and natural obstacles abound, further challenging skiers.

However, targeted slope grooming, snow farming, winter grooming or / and tow capacity increases will better allow for marginal conditions and improve skier enjoyment. Improvements for more reliable and enjoyable tobogganing, tubing, snow play and other winter recreation are supported. While technically feasible, further trialling, assessment and resourcing of targeted snow making is largely the responsibility of commercial interests. The Ski Slope Plan supports construction of an appropriate vehicle service route to major ski infrastructure, to avoid undesirable environmental impacts and reduce maintenance costs.

Maps in this Ski Slope Plan identify proposed locations of walking tracks, snow fences, tows, skiing runs, activity areas, services and service routes. Several location options are identified for a potential terrain park, tubing and tobogganing facilities. Tables indicate existing and proposed skill, tow and slope capacities. The tows could comfortably handle 300 - 700 patrons in 2009, depending on snow conditions.

There is currently limited directional or interpretive signage for summer visitors. However there is potential for an easy ‘dry shoe’ walk with interpretation to Legges Tor, the second highest peak in Tasmania. The characteristics of the area that appeal to ‘year round’ visitors should be conserved and enhanced, particularly the slope’s visual quality and heritage associated with the area’s skiing history (ie. Summit lodges).

The implementation of many supported ski slope improvements heavily relies on resourcing by commercial operators and volunteer assistance. However, there are actions that will require a coordinated effort from all parties, including the managing authority (ie Parks and Wildlife Service) and community interest groups. An agreed yearly works schedule or plan should be developed by the relevant parties to maximise opportunities to fund and implement components of this plan in a timely and coordinated manner.


Dumitchmill at dawn, a summit hut nestled into Giblin Peak.



Preferred Cross-Country Skiing descent when tows operating B/W zone B base map from 1993 BL Skifield Development Plan

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

North

Distance, metres ZONE B, BEN LOMOND SKIFIELD

A

Map 1 LOCATION

OF SKIFIELD

BillsTow

Approximate proposed ‘summer’ walking track Existing walking tracks

ZONE A

Legges Tor, 1575 m

Giblin

Tow

form

er30

Sec

ond

TowFannies Towformer Big Ben Tow

Sum

mit T

ow

Villa

ge T

ow

Cre

ekTo

w

2 Plan Setting

2.1 Plan and Management Background

The Ski Slope Plan (SSP) must be consistent with the Ben Lomond National Park Management Plan (BLNPMP) 1998 and Ben Lomond Skifield Development Plan (BLSDP) 1993. The latter prescribes the development of a ‘Ski Slope Plan’ to determine the best utilisation of the ski slopes for snow activities and to guide future development. There have been previous attempts to draft ski slope plans1, but none endorsed or implemented by the managing authority for the area.

The BLSDP 1993 deals with the overall development of the broader skifield area (ie. access road, village), while this SSP deals specifically with the downhill skiing slopes which are defined as Management Zone B in the BLSDP 1993 (Map 1). A review of the BLSDP was undertaken in 2006, but a revised document is yet to undergo broad community consultation and departmental endorsement. Priority has been given to completion of the SSP to facilitate commercial interest in ski slopes improvements.

Proposed activities that involves surface or sub-surface treatment which alters the natural terrain, drainage or vegetation must meet the requirements of the Site Disturbance, Ski Slope Grooming, and Rehabilitation – Standards and Guidelines 1993 (PWS), including preparation of a ‘slope grooming plan’ for summer slope grooming works.

The relationships between the various planning documents, and standards and guidelines which apply to the skifield area are shown in Appendix 4. All new ski slope developments or ‘activities’ must comply with all three Plans and, consistent with the PWS Environmental Impact Assessment Policy, may be subject to a specific impact assessment (ie Reserve Activity Assessment). Where there is inconsistency between the prescriptions or recommendations of this Ski Slope Plan and the BLNPMP or BLSDP, the prescriptions of the BLNPMP or BLSDP prevail.

The Ben Lomond Skifield Management Authority (BLSMA) managed the skifield until 2006. In December 2007 the BLSMA (Repeal) Bill 2007 (No 57) was approved and the Parks and Wildlife Service (PWS) assumed the role of ‘managing authority’.

An advisory group, the Ben Lomond Committee (previously Ben Lomond Village Committee), meets with PWS from time to time to help address ‘mountain’ issues but has no statutory authority.

2.2 Scope

The Ski Slope Plan is intended to provide an integrated, long-term approach to year round ski slope improvement and management, optimise visitor enjoyment of the slopes and minimise adverse impacts on the skifield’s natural, cultural and landscape values, over the next 25 years. This SSP takes into account, where feasible, climate change, usage trends, potential resources and commercial reality. Some recommendations to minimise threats to ski slopes values are also noted.

2.3 Objectives

The detailed objectives, or desired outcomes, of the Ski Slope Plan are:

• Ski slope activities form part of a long term plan for the slopes and are integrated with other existing and future activities.

• Greater certainty in regard to permitted activities and priorities and a subsequent increase in the potential for investment in the ski slopes by commercial operators and community interest groups.

1 Margules and Associates, 1990; Graham-Higgs, 1992; R Sutton, 1992 and R Harvey, 1994: see Appendix 3.


• Ski slope management responds to contemporary standards in Australian ski slope management. • All ski slope activities are consistent with the Skifield Development Plan and Ben Lomond National

Park Management Plan 1998, including the PWS Standards and Guidelines: Site Disturbance, Ski Slope Grooming, and Rehabilitation (1993).

• Ski slope activities have minimum impact on the significant natural, cultural and landscape values and critical ecological processes of the ski slopes and any impacts are within acceptable limits.

• Ski slope management reflects a precautionary approach to climate change. In particular, the long-term benefits for visitors are realistically assessed against potential impacts on values and ecological processes.

• Any changes to lift or ski run locations and types, maximise utilisation and enjoyment of the slopes by visitors over the long term.

• There is a mix of snow based recreation and summer opportunities available for a range of visitor skill levels and types.

• There is an agreed approach to summer slope grooming, including appropriate techniques, locations and priorities.

• The safety and enjoyment of different visitor activities on or near the slopes is maximised and conflict minimised.

• The condition and quality of ski slope facilities and services is optimised. • Scarce public and private resources are used efficiently for ski slope management and there is

increased community participation in ski slope management.

2.4 Ski Slope Plan Currency

This SSP is intended to have an outlook of 25 years to ensure a long term strategy for ski slopes infrastructure and management, and minimise ad hoc development. However, there may be unforeseen changes in technology, public interests or resourcing that impact the recommendations of this Plan. The plan may be reviewed if a clear need is demonstrated, due to unforeseen circumstances.

• Review the Ski Slope Plan in 10 years or when a clear need is demonstrated due to unforeseen circumstances.

2.5 Plan Preparation

In preparing the SSP most, if not all interest sectors were interviewed2. Considerable information was elicited from skiers, snow boarders, PWS staff, commercial interests, teachers, tobogganers, interested others and Reference Group Members. Comments and other information posted on a skiing web site were also considered. Some of this SSP is based on prior reports, comments on reports and other study of the area. Further specialist information and advice has been provided by staff of, and publications from, PWS, Department of Primary Industry and Water, Department of Environment, former Ben Lomond Ski Management Authority (BLSMA) members and staff, commercial operators and the Ben Lomond Committee.

The non-snow activity public are not as well represented, but are a much untapped potential who could help revitalise the area. Effort was made to discover what they might expect. There is limited high quality demographic data for very recent years.

A number of people commented about issues outside the jurisdiction of the SSP, such as chain hire and bus transport to the slopes. These comments have been referred to the Parks and Wildlife Service for consideration and should be formally addressed through the review of the BLSDP.

2 Interests covered were represented by owners / members / staff / individuals from Parks & Wildlife Service, Alpine Enterprises, Ben Lomond Committee, Ben Lomond Ski Association, Ben Lomond Ski Patrol, Snow Sports, Creek Inn, former Mountain Manager, BLSMA, Launceston Walking Club, Education Dept (outdoor recreation teachers), Field Naturalists, ‘lodges’ and ‘huts’, Northern Midlands Council and visiting individuals. The requirements and views of these and various other potential users were identified (Ben Lomond web forum comments 2007 and 2008; Ben Lomond National Park Tourism Feasibility Study, 2007; Key Issues Paper, July, 2004; Ben Lomond Committee Inc Visitor Survey Results 2007; Year 2000 Report to BLSMA; Margules, 1990; Higgs, 1992; Harvey, 1994; RAA report, A Davey, 2007; many interviews by Davey in 2008 and input from a key stakeholder reference group).


The Ski Slope was intensively studied with and without snow.

2.6 Constraint Issues

In comparison to other skifields, Ben Lomond does not provide ‘great’ skiing3. The mountain has limited vertical terrain for snow sports. The lower skill level skier and snow boarder provide most of the income. To give the skifield a future in a competitive recreation market their needs have high priority. ‘Summer’ visitors also need to be catered for.

The ski slopes are within a national park and has a statutory management plan to guide its development. Many visitors, aware that it is the only skifield which can be developed in Tasmania, want development more in keeping with good skifields elsewhere. By designating a ‘Skifield Development Area’ and ‘Primary Downhill Skiing Area’, the BLNPMP and BLSDP acknowledge that there will be a greater level of environmental impact on the ski slopes. However, the managing authority (ie. PWS) must ensure all activities comply with the statutory management plan and skifield development plan for the reserve.

Most other skiing areas in Australia are also in reserved areas, usually where there is a good, cooperative and productive relationship between operators, interested individuals and the management authority.

The real issue is that the area does not attract the visitor numbers of some other national parks in Tasmania and the income of skifields elsewhere in Australia. This means difficulty for PWS, clubs, commercial interests and individuals in securing the kinds of resourcing desired by some interest groups: this limits development. This means some ‘good to have’ elements of this Plan may never occur or be limited when implemented.

The low population of Tasmania, resulting in both limited visitation and potential revenue, means that expenditure needs to be very targeted and snow activities kept affordable. Patron enjoyment is also paramount. It is hoped that this Plan will allow affordable improvements without prejudicing the area. Where and when feasible, development should be multi-use to maximise the benefits of expenditure. Poor snow years may slow some development and improvements.

Development and services in any area imply some modification of the natural environment and possible change to other values. Good development should be ecologically sustainable, fulfil the core purpose(s) of the area, while harmonising with all other significant values. Vulnerable, endangered species, conservation significant species (eg Sphagnum) and special features, especially features which do not occur elsewhere, should not suffer adverse impact.

2.7 Best Practice

‘Best practice’ skifield management was considered in developing this Plan. Best practice is not directly related to cost or ‘Rolls-Royce’ effort but, rather, what does the job effectively, eg for roads, gravel or bitumen is usually determined by usage levels. On Ben Lomond, the provision of snow sports facilities may differ to other skifields because of its small size, marginality and scarce resources (see also footnote to Rehabilitation of Appendix 6). However, best practice environmental management (eg. rehabilitation, management of hazardous substances, management of water quality) should have the same objectives as contemporary practices employed in other Australian skifields. Best practice is not rule bound, but operates on sound principles directed at fulfilling appropriate objectives(s) within available resources4. Affordability is a given constraint.

3 For brevity the term skiing includes snow boarding in most of the draft Plan. 4 The Perisher Blue “Ski Slope Master Plan” says: “Rules and rigid ‘guidelines’ usually fail to cater for diversity. Even in a national park context, best practice does not mean preserving every plant or animal from the impacts of development, or preventing any changes to soils, water or viewfields. ” “The Precautionary Principle should not be used to postpone ameliorating environmental degradation or development, rather, for the latter, to ensure appropriate controls are put in place to adequately address uncertainties which may have unwanted adverse effects.”


Above: Smoothly groomed and grassed toboggan area below the tree line of an Australian skifield (Lake Mountain) with snow-gun mounts on the sides. The area was treed bushland, which was terrain groomed / rock worked, built up

and grassed. Areas, as smooth as the above, also typify beginner and snow-making areas.

Left: Typical treeless rocky plateau at Ben Lomond Centre: T-bar being loaded Right: Rocky area typical of upper downhill slopes at Ben Lomond



500 metres North

Map 2 DOWNHILL SKIFIELD & TOW LAYOUT, 2009

Back Slopes

Front Slopes

Approximate Positions of:

Major Drains

Mainly Natural Drainage

Workshops & Tow Storages

Service Road

Poled X/C route only

3 The Ski Slope

3.1 The Location

The Ski Slope is a small part of the Ben Lomond plateau in north-eastern Tasmania (Map 1), about one hour from Launceston by car. It occupies 27 hectares5 (about 0∙16%) of the Ben Lomond National Park (16,032 ha) and is typical of the higher plateau area which forms the vast majority of the park. The plateau is relatively dry for its altitude and lacks trees.

The area has a recorded history of skiing in excess of 80 years, and is the most frequented area in Tasmania for downhill skiing, snow boarding and tobogganing. It is the only area now available in Tasmania suited to skifield development. Situated at the foot of the Ski Slope are lodges, public day shelter and toilets, hotel, backpackers, food outlets, equipment hire and a snow activity training business. All are serviced by road, foot track, sewerage and water. There is no mains electricity. Seven tows, under one commercial licensee, service the ski slopes when snow allows in skiing season. Map 2 shows the current layout of the downhill skiing area.

The Ski Slope contains the second highest mountain in Tasmania, Legges Tor (1,575 m), where good views may be had. There are no moderately easy tracks up this feature and no tracks that provide access to the feature from the end of the village road. Walking is not permitted on the intervening downhill ski slopes during winter when there is skiable snow and ski tows are operating.

The skifield is relatively small, but very accessible by vehicle. The skiing and snow boarding appeal greatly to novice to intermediate practitioners. The area rarely has deep widespread snow (sufficient to cover all but a few steep-sided outcrops). Surface rocks provide constant obstacles in most skiing seasons. As a result snow activities commonly focussed on natural bowls, chutes and more sheltered slopes in the lee of wind carrying snow. No ski run exceeds 100 m fall or 500 m length. As a result the potential for more infrastructure dependent on snow activities is relatively limited.

Minor grooming of plants and rock has occurred over much of the skied area except north of the tows, where almost none has occurred. By contrast the south-eastern foot of the eastern slope (front slope) has an area of extensive grooming, dominantly for beginner skiing and snow boarding and tobogganing.

The skiing season officially runs from the start of July to the end of September. Rarely does skiing start before mid July or extend beyond mid September. The vast majority of visits to the area occur in skiing season.

In non-snow periods few visit in spite of the tourism potential. This appears to be due to the lack of suitable visitor infrastructure, services, signs and marketing. Better infrastructure for walking, socialising and appreciating local natural features may remedy this to some extent, provided potential visitors are aware of it.

3.2 Climate (see also 6.9)

The climate is subalpine (no permanent snow) and proximity to the sea limits extremes in temperature. The Ski Slope can receive snow any time of year, but most falls between May and October. Being 40 kilometres from the sea snow melts relatively quickly except between late June and mid-September.

Snowfall is inconsistent, however, immediately prior to and during skiing season it is usual to receive some snow each week, up to three falls from 2 to 25 millimetres are common. Heavier falls occur much less often. The prevailing weather is westerly (northwest to southwest), with occasional major northeasterly influences, and some southeasterly, mainly in the warmer months. The average June - September

5 Page 6 Draft Ski Slope Plan, Dec 1992


temperature is about +0∙ 6 0C6. The coldest occasions tend to be nights during June to August, when temperatures regularly fall to -4 0C and lower. Diurnal freeze-thaw cycles dominate much of the skiing season.

The area experiences strong winds which strongly influence snow settling patterns. Very little snow gathers in areas when exposed to wind. Many, if not most, snow falls are brought by north-westerly winds changing to south-westerly, with the south-westerly being colder and drier. North-west winds favour the southern and eastern slopes with snow, southwest winds may only favour the front slopes and no wind favours an even snowfall. Snow bearing strong cold south-westerly winds frequently leave very little snow anywhere on the Ski Slope because most of the snow blows onwards and is lost.

Fog and mist are common. Total annual precipitation is 1150 to 1300 mm rain equivalent7. The amount as snow is unknown, but from observations of the last 19 winters, total snowfall seems extremely unlikely to exceed 2∙0 m in most years. This equates to about 200 mm rain. It can rain in ski season and remove considerable snow. Summer - early autumn can have prolonged dry periods.

3.3 Topography

The Ski Slope lies between 1410 and 1575 m ASL and mainly drains south to Big Ben Creek and east to Ford River in Meadow Vale. Big Ben Creek flows into the Ford River which flows into the North Esk River. Gradients are very gentle near the watercourses and gradually steepen to about 30 % on the main skiingslopes save for a very short steep section just below the summits. The Summit Tow area has a little more expanse of steep ground nearer 40 %.

The highest areas mostly end in 10 to 25 metres of steep bouldery ground to the south, east and west but for a small plateau between Giblin Peak and Legges Tor. When snow is sufficient the steep bouldery ground to the east and south offers steep skiing for the more able. The vast majority of the Ski Slope is uneven ground of gentle to moderate slope (≤ 25 %).

Several bedrock and large boulder patches are scattered over the mid slopes. A few bedrock exposures end in vertical drops. Bedrock exposures can be relatively smooth and flat or with protrusions (ie mamilliform), mostly tens of metres wide. Most other areas have one to a few surface boulders. Lunchtime Rocks, near Village Tow, has by far the largest boulder outcrop on the lower slopes; some boulders exceed 5m length.

3.4 Drainage (refer also to 3.3 and 4.2.3.2)

The Ski Slope largely dispersively drains into the Big Ben Creek and Ford River. Most to all of the area may be dry by mid summer and much of Big Ben Creek and the upper Ford River may then cease flowing.

One of the greatest challenges to skiable snow is water, whether on, under or through snow8. Water can rapidly deteriorate snow. Good drainage is crucial in wet areas, especially where relatively thin snow occurs. The foot of the front slopes and, to a lesser extent, the foot of the back slopes are such areas. Considerable work was done from 1998 to 2005 to redirect water and groom the lower front slopes.

Near the foot of the main south-eastern slope a north-northwest - south-southeast cut-off drain has been installed to stop water reaching the lowest part of the front slopes (Map 2). A confluencing drain in a hollow between Bass and Summit tows conducts water to the service road gutter near Ski Patrol. A shallow drainage depression runs through the lower Toboggan Area from the Beginners area, it fills when sufficient rain or snow melt occur. The back slopes drain naturally although some ground impacted by heavy machinery when moist has led to minor localised changes. Some small areas have or had vegetation, mainly cushion plants, which controlled water flow and speed by ephemeral ponding. In the Big Ben -

6 Based on data of the 1980’s from P Faulkner, 1986 7 Bureau of Meteorology: average annual rainfall maps, 2008 8 Once snow thins damage to the underlying ground may occur; eg from oversnow vehicles and those undertaking snow activities.


Fannies area some of the vegetative dams have been breached, thereby redirecting water flow locally and causing erosion.

Further work may be required to: (1) channel water from the Ski School - lower Toboggan area, (2) remove water efficiently from above and around the Summit Tow loading area (Photograph 1), (3) deal with warmer weather pools near loading entrances to back slope tows, especially Bills, and (4) to halt erosion near Fannies.

Snow-making guns at Mt Buffalo: Lenko (two in rear) and Diamond (one in foreground). Note the groomed flat ground

Photograph: Ski Lift Engineering Pty Ltd


1 water and bare ground near Summit Tow 2 slope just beyond proposed Village T-bar in good snow, has many rocks 3 same slope viewed from the west, rocks are more obvious


4 Values of the Ski Slope

4.1 Introduction

The Ski Slope has a number of values of significance ranging from recreational, social (traditional use for snow recreation), potential historic heritage (summit lodges), a threatened fauna species (spotted-tail quoll), two unusual flora occurrences (Podocarpus lawrencei and Hymenophyllum petalatum), the rare carpet willowherb, a part of a geological area feature (dolerite, entire Ben Lomond block) in a modified environment. Currently the only item under possible threat may be the example of rare carpet willowherb, reported in 1983, in the most skied and groomed area close to Bass Tow ± 200 metres.

The area has been skied for over 80 years, has undergone many changes. The key or unique values of the Ski Slope directly relate to skiing and snow: this differentiates it from the rest of the park. Without skiable snow the area would not have access, infrastructure or services beyond, perhaps, a long rough walking route to Legges Tor. While other values may exist, none appear as significant as those associated with snow recreation. This is demonstrated by the unusual skew to heavy visitation in skiing season. Other values are largely unrecognised by the majority of visitors.

The Ski Slope itself contains five “summit huts” of historic heritage interest which represent earlier shelter built by pioneer skiers. The downhill slopes are served by seven permanent tows, before 2003 there were eight.

The most critical factors for the ‘health’ of ecological processes are vegetation, soils and drainage. The latter two are usually secondary to vegetation. The potential for ground impacts, and subsequently impacts on ecological processes, is affected by flora type(s), applied pressure, number of passes, wetness, gradient, local topography and soil type. The main activities which could compromise the environment are associated with summer grooming, drainage relocation / alteration, road and dam making, tow installation, tow servicing and hut use. There have been past impacts from slope development and there is potential for minor ongoing impacts associated with use by visitors participating in skiing and walking. Oversnow vehicles on snow have no detrimental effect, however when cover is too thin, soft or non-existent the underlying surface may be impacted.

4.2 Natural Values of the Ski Slope

4.2.1 Flora, Background

The Ski Slope landscape is treeless 9 with extensive exposed bedrock, boulder outcrops, vegetated ground with isolated boulders to scrub or grass dominated areas. Bushy scrub tends to dominate more sheltered north-eastern and eastern areas north of Summit Tow where almost no skiing occurs. On the skiing and more exposed slopes and well drained areas the vegetation is dominantly low shrub- and heath-land with areas of native grass. In less steep areas and near the foot of many slopes species typical of drainage runnels and slow draining ground are more common (eg scoparia, pineapple grass and some cushion plants). Sphagnum intermixed with mostly herb species occurs in a limited number of low flat areas. Grass dominates the lowest (and least steep) slopes near Village and Bass Tows and the beginner area, which includes some poorly revegetated ground.

Minor grooming of plants has occurred over about 30 % of the main downhill skiing slope. The south-eastern foot of the eastern front slope has had some extensive grooming for beginners and tobogganing.

The area included by tows has been variably impacted by skiing, service vehicles and, to a lesser extent, walking. Oversnow vehicles have left impacts on parts of the main route used by them. Heavy machinery has left some obvious impact along the foot of the back slopes and at least one tow (Photograph 4).

9 Treeless except for a few stunted bushy introduced eucalypts above Foresters lodge and Podocarpus lawrencei.


4.2.1.1 Plant Communities The vegetation community is “eastern alpine vegetation” (TasVeg) interspersed with rock (cryptogamic lithosere) which occupies the vast majority of the surrounding area for some kilometres. The main shrubs / bushes are Richea scoparia, Orites acicularis and Orites revoluta. J Davies (March 1990) surveyed the ski slopes and identified seven plant sub-communities:

Grassy Shrubland (Richea scoparia - Emposdisma minus - Poa gunnii) Bolster Shrubland (Abrotanella forsteroides - Pterygopappus lawrencei) Grassy Shrubland (Orites revoluta - Poa gunnii) Grassy Shrubland (Orites acicuaris - Bellendena montana - Poa gunnii) Skeletal Rock Herbfield (Ewartia catipes - Gentianella diemensis) Lichen Community (boulderfields) Grassland (Poa costiniana - Poa gunnii)

There is no known threat and all the plant sub-communities (of stably co-existing plant species) are well represented and reserved, undisturbed, elsewhere and on the Ben Lomond Plateau11.

4.2.1.2 Species Epilobium willisii (carpet willowherb) and Scleranthus brockiei (mountain knawel), both listed as ‘rare’ under the Threatened Species Protection Act 1995, have a reported isolated occurrence within 250m of the Ski Slope. The reported occurrence of carpet willowherb is, imprecisely (± 200 m in 1983), near Bass Tow (lower part of the former 30 Second Tow). The latter has been groomed since. The grid reference for the mountain knawel record, places it just below the car park, outside the Ski Slope. Podocarpus lawrencei and Hymenophyllum petalatum (small leafy fern, growing in a crevice10) are reported to have a highly localised occurrence, so should not be disturbed. 2007 Natural Values Reports for the slope lists no features under related values and RAMSAR sites. Species listed as endangered or vulnerable have not been cited in plant surveys.

Species conservation is covered by prevailing guidelines and this SSP. The flora named above are not threatened by the recommendations of the SSP or when snow covered. If it still exists, the specimen of Epilobium willisii near Bass Tow may be at risk if subject to skiing on very thin snow, although it was not cited in a Reserve Activity Assessment for Bass Tow in 2004. All species which may be affected by this Plan are well represented elsewhere11.

Climate change, possible drying and less snow may threaten damp area species, like cushion plants, sphagnum and pineapple grass. Ironically snow-making or farming which increase snow could help the species survive.

4.2.1.3 Vegetation Issues Loss of plant cover on slopes may allow water to speed up leading to erosion. Plant growth on the ski slopes is slow due to the cool harsh climate, snow and poor nutrient supply. The main enemies of revegetation are erosion, frost heave, dry periods and local herbivores11. In some areas wallaby have totally halted revegetation. Passive revegetation, seeding and isolated plantings are very prone to fail in much of the area due to frost heave. Summer-autumn can be too dry for good plant growth.

New plants, seeds and bare soil need weather and animal grazing protection, if warranted. New plants and seeds should be surrounded by established dense vegetation or a mat of organic litter sufficient to stop frost heave and erosion. To foster native plant growth while preventing erosion, alternatives must include laying mats of established vegetation of dominantly non-local species which can survive several years but do not regenerate. This allows local species to invade, grow and take over. This was very successful at Mt Mawson (instant lawn) many years ago where / while pedestrians were kept off. It is often used in Australian alpine resorts. Diseases which threaten local native flora must not be introduced. Revegetation of disturbed ground should occur soon after disturbance to prevent erosion and frost heave.

10 J Davies 1990: Vegetation Survey of the Ben Lomond Ski Area 11 The ‘rehabilitation’ of ground near Bass Tow began failing after watering ceased and local wallaby were able to regraze the area.


Open grassy areas are common in high areas of the plateau. The desire to groom need not mean an unnatural scene. ‘Feathering’ groomed and grassed areas into contrasting areas improves aesthetics.

No matter what the vegetation is, concentrated traffic will kill it. That is a major reason for roads. Some low use hardened routes could be vegetated sufficiently to appear moderately natural. Some tow loading areas suffer significant threat because of aspect, high skier traffic volumes, turning and water. Good drainage or / and ramps are crucial where relatively thin snow tends to occur. Retained and extra snow may then prevent problems. (See also: 7.14, 4.2.4, 7.14, 7.13.2.1, 7.13.2.4 & Appendix 6)

• PWS should investigate having a base study of the entire skifield to identify areas needing, or likely to need, revegetation, erosion control and drainage improvements and locate and locally protect the specimen of Epilobium willisii near Bass Tow if it exists and needs protection.

• The proponent(s) of a development shall be responsible for assessing, monitoring, reporting and preventing or controlling impacts.

4.2.2 Fauna

It is probable that there has not been a detailed survey of the entire Ski Slope. Bennet wallaby and wombats are present throughout the area. The only reported threatened species is Dasyurus maculatus, subsp. maculatus (spotted tail quoll) seen tens of metres to the east and south of the tows, outside the skied area. Quolls have been living in the area for many years without apparent affect from humans and have been reported fighting under the floor of the Ski Patrol building.

Based on estimated geographic range Aquila audax fleayl (wedged tailed eagle), Perameles gunnii (eastern barred bandicoot) and Pseudemoia rawlinsoni (glossy skink) may be present, however after many visits to the slopes in all seasons, only eagles have been observed in the area. The nearest nesting place is much further west; no nests are within 1 km of the Ski Slope.

Invertebrate species have not been surveyed and are poorly understood.

There are no known issues currently; any review of this Plan should consider any fauna issues reported or suspected.

4.2.3 Geology and Soils

4.2.3.1 Geology The surface or underlying rock of the entire Ben Lomond Plateau, tens of square kilometres, is Jurassic dolerite. The vast majority of it is in undisturbed condition of the same geology, geomorphology, weathering patterns and glacial effects as is / was the Ski Slope. The dolerite is listed as an area feature, but has no point features listed in the PWS Natural Values Report 2007 and more recent inspection found no unique features on the Ski Slope.

The dolerite of lower two thirds of the tow area is dominantly covered by soil and vegetation but for mostly small bedrock outcrops, surface boulders and cobbles. Lunchtime Rocks, near lower Village Tow, is an outcrop of rounded columnar boulders.

Most exposures of bedrock have been smoothed by past glacier and /or freeze-thaw action and erosion. The rock has hexagonal jointing typical of much of the surrounding area. Much of the exposed semi-flat bedrock near tows has been groomed previously by removing loose surface rocks by hand to form small piles or partly fill hollows. There are a few drill holes, protruding bolts and disused small concrete pedestals on the rock.

The area encompassing the full Ski Slope and extending 1∙25 km east, 1∙3 km south, 1∙6 km west and 1∙1 km north has the listed geoconservation values of (1) Northeast Tasmania Dolerite Periglacial Systems, (2) Ben Lomond Terrain, (3) Rodway Valley Blockfield, (4) Ben Lomond Glacial Ice Margins, (5) Ben Lomond


Dolerite Horst Mountain, (6) Ben Lomond Dolerite Periglacial System and (7) Ben Lomond and other Dolerite Horst Mountains. The horst values are only sensitive to very large scale changes12. The other values can be degraded by ‘higher intensity’ shallow ground disturbances. The Rodway Valley is well south of the Ski Slope.

In the downhill skifield proper (Map 2) the values have been considerably changed by grooming (including rock transfer), tow tracks, drainage, drilled rocks, foundations and vehicle passes, some excavation and erosion13. Some freeze-thaw effects (eg periglacial) have been relatively little modified by development; a few have been confused for human-initiated erosion. Outside the main downhill area, the rest of the Ski Slope has had little disturbance except very locally for huts and tracks. In general the above values are well represented in unmodified form just outside the downhill skiing slopes.

There is considerable pressure from skiers for much more rock grooming. For safety, skier enjoyment and servicing purposes there is a need for further rock grooming, but less need for broad scale terrain modification (7.13). An EIS is required for all significant development and would consider geoconservation values.

4.2.3.2 Soils Soils range from nil to peat and / or mineral soils. Most soil has increasing underlying clayey weathered parent rock downslope. Peat tends to dominate the more gently sloped soils and drainages. Most peat has underlying clayey soil. Virtually all soil is typical of subalpine areas: parent rock fragments are commonly present throughout soil profiles, except some peat. Some subsoil is cobble dominated mineral soil. The soil types present occur throughout dolerite country subalpine Tasmania, including the rest of the Ben Lomond plateau. No soil features were found or are listed in the PWS Natural Values Report.

Without vegetation cover, soils may be prone to frost heave and faster water flow which tend to accelerate erosion. Good root mat development greatly slows the effect. Where there is poor root development most soils are very prone to erosion. Subsequent hail and rain facilitate erosion, with the effect that, even in some near-horizontal areas of bared soil, water flow tends to remove fine material to yield ‘pebble beds’. Potentially exacerbating erosion is strong thawing: more water may flow over more ground than occurs during most rain-only events.

Although elastic to some extent, soil may be compressed locally by vehicles to alter drainage. Root damage may also occur. This is more likely on the lower slope areas where soil is deeper and moisture can gather. In general a big effort is made to keep oversnow vehicles on snow which avoids soil problems. However a significant potential compromise is approximately 15 m of the most trafficked route, the Home Trail, where it is prone to water during thaws. Drainage or a crossing is warranted.

Machinery as heavy as 20 tonne has been used (NTAC, PWS and BLSMA) in some places for more than three return trips. The result varies from no damage to significant damage: ground which eventually has little vegetation and most fines washed away. An area near Fannies which has / had peat soils and sporadic cushion plants typifies this. Not far from Fannies and in the Village and Bass Tow areas similar machinery had extremely little impact. Where soil is largely unaffected, access occurred when the ground was dry.

Significant erosion has occurred along parts of some tow lines (lower central Big Ben, upper and central 30 Second and upper Creek Tow) and a former access route from NTAC. The worst is a small narrow erosion gully on Big Ben: in the 1960’s a dozer blade was dropped to smooth the surface during descent of the slope. The cobbly gully is probably continuing to very slowly erode and is unlikely to revegetate significantly for years without intervention.

Vehicular servicing of infrastructure and for remediation works is required, however suitably constructed vehicle tracks or routes, which would protect the environment, are lacking.

12 As stated in Natural Values Report notes on sensitivity; the skifield itself does not display horst features directly as it is well inside the uplift zone. 13 The Village area, road to the Ben Lomond Village, service roads, downhills slopes and dam have all created significant changes to the local geology and related values.


Except for loading areas, skiers and snow boarders are unlikely to compact soil as their footwear has a high surface area and they strongly prefer to stay on snow to prevent damaging their equipment and for safety.

See 4.2.1.3, 7.3.8, 7.14 and Appendix 6 in regard to control of existing erosion problems; help should be sought from commercial interests, volunteers, Wildcare, Greencorps, PWS, special environmental grants and subsidies, NRM, LandCare, etc…

4.2.4 Environment

4.2.4.1 Assessment and Management Environmental impact assessment (EIA), usually through PWS’ “Reserve Activity Assessment” (RAA) process is the key mechanism for assessing and mitigating impacts of new activities on the ski slopes (Refer 4.4)

The RAA may also be used to assess and monitor current activities and conditions. However, except for public and incidental reporting of issues, a void can exist when and where there is no development or for aspects which are not pertinent to a development. Some good remediation has occurred but was not monitored or maintained once significant progress was made. The result is that some remediation later regressed. Mostly, continued monitoring would have identified that a little more timely care was needed to ensure a good outcome. Consequently significant problems have gone unnoticed until obvious and habituated.

The suggestions under 4.2.1.3 could include some environmental aspects. 7.12.7, 8.3.1 and Appendix 6 and below provide some environmental guidelines.

• PWS should progressively assess the Ski Slope and environs to build a data base of status, issues and potential issues, monitor as necessary and verify monitoring by others.

4.2.4.2 Visual Impacts One can see the many structures of the Ski Slope from under 1500 metres to the Ben Lomond Village, when approaching by vehicle. At about 400 m the tows become clearly visible. Near the foot of the Ski Slope some other features are obvious, including from one orientation, the decking along Village Tow. Ski fences are scattered over the slope, most are not stark, however at least five are on various sky lines.

Of the seven permanent tows three reach the main skyline (ie. Giblin, Fannies and Summit). No tow is visible by 100 metres in a northerly arc from west to northeast. By two to three kilometres the obviousness of the tows is greatly diminished in other directions.

Being a longstanding skifield the overwhelming majority of visitors expect to see and accept tows and buildings and other relevant infrastructure. Many want to see the tows so that they know which are running, can gauge the queue sizes and snow cover or view certain people. Some slope developments like grooming do not obstruct viewfields and rarely cause significant changes to the general landscape.

It is not economically feasible to dismantle larger infrastructure to improve aesthetics, if that were possible. More generally, costs may influence what can be seasonal14. Access to assemble and dissemble has negative impacts unless by stable route. To disguise structures into the environment creates a ‘winter’ hazard in many cases. The structures are less than the minimum needed to serve the skier and allow maintenance of the tows: eg more snow fences would aid skiability. A number of guidelines, policies and actions to minimise less desirable impacts are recommended in Appendix 6.

Some components may have adverse impacts on the visual quality of the Ski Slope, including out of season infrastructure and some snow capturing devices (eg. tyres, matting, rope), equipment and waste stored around sheds and lifts, protruding steel, broken markers, old wood, general litter, electric cables, old

14 See footnote to 8.3.3


footings, ski ramps/bridges, sheds and areas of erosion. The impacts may be pronounced in the absence of snow cover

4.2.4.3 Noise The main sources of noise are oversnow vehicles and diesel motors, mostly in skiing season. While they can have a minor impact on the ski slopes environmental quality, tow motors are sufficiently distant from accommodation and public congregation areas not to be an issue. Maintenance and development may have associated noise, but are limited to working hours. Most accept the need for diesel generators, most of which are switched off at night. While no standardised assessment of noise generating equipment has been undertaken, most would consider some oversnow vehicles to be noisy, especially when high revving or under high throttle. Noisy use at night should be avoided. Should grid electricity become available diesel generation noise would eventually cease in lieu of cheaper grid power. Electric motors are cheaper to buy and maintain.

Snowmaking activities are likely to be undertaken at night time, and these impacts need to be considered as part of environmental assessments for snowmaking.

Noise is unlikely to be impacting on any significant natural values of the area.

• All new motors / generators and the use of oversnow vehicles near accommodation should be sufficiently quiet to not cause an ‘environmental nuisance’, meeting legislation and other OH&S recommendations.

4.2.5 Ecological Processes (see also 6.9)

Very little formal study of ecological processes has occurred in the area15.. Medium to large above-surface animals which could be affected by pruning of potential shelter are no more than 150 m from good sized bushes (for Ben Lomond). Global warming (refer 6.9) could be a threat, but current models indicate this is unlikely for the area during the life of this Plan. Other potential threats are weeds, disease and fuel / chemical leaks. The latter shall be controlled (9.3.1 & 7.1.2.7; eg bunding, drip trays and absorbent layers). The mobilisation of silt from eroding areas and drainage lines, has the potential to impact on waterway health. Specific entities from which a threat directly originates should resource reasonable remediation.

• Study of ecological processes and identification of critical elements and processes should be encouraged by PWS to better plan for possible problems.

4.2.6 Snow (see also 6.9)

Snow is currently Ben Lomond’s dominant drawcard. Apart from drifts, hollows and areas subject to lea conditions, there is commonly little more than 150 – 200 mm of snow on much of Ben Lomond during skiing seasons. Much of the lower front and back slopes, the top of Bills, much of the Giblin slopes, Creek Tow and relatively exposed rises, ridges and boulders commonly have little more than sufficient snow for skiing. Bare patches may be present. Afternoon warmth affects the foot of the front slopes most. Snow softens and is worn away or melts, rocks and bare patches appear. Ski and snow board edges strike underlying rock obstacles and can be damaged. Loss of snow cover on some tow tracks is common.

Reliable skiing terrain follows gullies, depressions and distinctly lea slopes (where deeper snow protects ground from impacts.) In strong wind most of a snowfall may blow past the skifield with the occasional exception of east facing areas nearer Summit Tow.

15 With the exception of a few buildings at the foot of the front slope, all fixtures in the activity areas of the ski slope have very small footprints. Skiers stay on snow so have very little effect on the biomass or the ecology. With the exception of the groomed south-eastern part of the eastern ski slopes, tow lines, minor vegetation pruning and areas of past erosion, the area is intact. Vegetation communities and associated biota on the ski slopes are well represented elsewhere, nearby, and not under threat. Fauna dependent on the communities are not threatened from current local impacts. There is some potential for chemicals, hydrocarbons and silt to pollute waterways.


The area has some history of unreliable skiable snow cover: skiing seasons and their start are unpredictable. Stops and starts during a season are extremely detrimental to snowfield use and viability. Advance bookings are avoided. Snow farming (gathering extra snow when it falls) and snow-making are the only ways to bridge intra-seasonal breaks. Only snow-making can guarantee a starting date. Unless suitable alternative snow activities are popular, they will help little to sustain visitation.

Main Summit Offload: left, Note the rocky egress; right, View down Summit tow, more rocks

Tobogganing Dangers: Over and into rocks outside the toboggan area


Cross-Country Skiing: Igloo camping and touring


Pedestrian Routes Fence Entry Paths Main Skiing Pods Less Used Terrain Home Routes A.E. Proposed Tow Existing Tow Skier Egress to Cars Major Rock Exposure

Little Slalom

Snow Play Area

Lunchtime Rocks

Cross Country Skiing Route Normans Folly

FREQUENTED SKIER TERRAIN

500 metres North

Map 3 SKIING RUNS AND PODS Giblin Folly


4.3 Cultural Resources & Values

4.3.1 Customary Activities

Skiing, walking, hut / lodge uses and associated socialising, snow play and tobogganing are the longest standing main activities. Skiing is a key part of the mountain’s history: many clubs have established lodges and invested much time, effort and money in the mountain. Strong social values exist. Clubs, such as the Northern Tasmanian Alpine Club, founded in 1929, pioneered skiing on Ben Lomond 80 years ago.

With the exception of walking, the activities mentioned are essentially dependent on snow. Otherwise, prior to the road in the late 1960’s, bushwalking to the slope was done by relatively few keen walkers. With easy road access to the slopes snow play, tobogganing and viewing of activities, not associated with skiing trips, have become moderately popular. During the last 20 years snow boarding has become a major activity.

Many Tasmanians value Ben Lomond as the most reliable and only commercial skifield in Tasmania.

All year around activities occur on a small scale, however there is potential for more persons to enjoy more recreational opportunities. These include outdoor education, short and medium walks, botany and botanical exploration, social trips and photography.

It is the highest altitude area in the State with easy road access. It has many services a visitor would want. None-the-less over the past 17 years visitation has declined about 50 % from its peak, mainly in ski season.

A substantial fall in visitor numbers and demand for services cuts incomes and reduces the ability to improve or sustain services. In past years the main reasons cited were unreliable snow reports, unreliable snow, big queues, cheap airfares to other skifields, tow breakdowns, relative costliness and short runs. The main reasons given more recently were:

• too many tow breakdowns, • too expensive and too expensive for what you get, • long queues, • too many rocks / poor snow cover, • unreliable / inaccurate snow reports, • unreliable snow • aging (of skiers), • poor variety of tows open (week day complaint mostly) • cheap airfares and skiing packages to reliable snow with much better facilities and services • competing activities • having to work on Saturdays or weekends • unavailability of chains • not opening on time / not running the tows advertised.

Out of skiing season there are limited opportunities for visitors; the few routes are rough and potential destinations poorly marked. Usually most services or all are closed. Recommendations are offered later in this Plan16.

4.3.2 Historic Heritage Values

There are seven ‘Summit’ huts, none are on the main skiing slopes, but to the western side; five are within the Ski Slope and at or above 1530 m. Two of the huts are tens of metres from the return of Fannies and Summit Tows. Four huts are listed on the Tasmanian Heritage Place Inventory but none are currently listed under the Historical Cultural Heritage Act 1995.

16 See section 7.


The historic huts were established to provide a safe place convenient to skiing. Some owners / users gladly use tows to facilitate access to and from their hut. None had a problem with the tow structures. Current activities associated with the skifield and this Plan do not adversely affect the huts. 7.17 deals with the huts.

4.3.3 Aboriginal Heritage

Aboriginal people are known to have lived several kilometres away at lower altitude, however the local harsh cold climate, lack of fuel, water and shelter meant habitation was probably impracticable.

The area has had many visitors, investigations and works over some decades. These and inspections in 2007 and 2008 covering most of the Ski Slope, except the far north-eastern area, found no evidence of aboriginal heritage. No sites are known or listed17. Unless a find of possible Aboriginal heritage origin occurs there is no need to resurvey the main skiing areas.

If any Aboriginal heritage is located or suspected, works must cease and the Aboriginal Heritage Office immediately contacted for further advice. All aboriginal relics are protected under the provisions of the Aboriginal Relics Act 1975.

4.3.4 Engaging the Community, Community Groups and Neighbours

The Ben Lomond Committee (BLC) is the key community body representing the interests of the skifield and includes the Ski Slope neighbours. PWS and BLC meet regularly and liaise on many issues. There is also an informal business committee; it has representation on the BLC. The business committee or individual businesses meet as required.

• PWS and BLC should liaise on all issues which may significantly affect the ski slopes or their management prior to action.

4.4 Protection of Values: Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA’s or RAA’s)

The PWS Environmental Impact Assessment Policy requires development which may impact natural, social and economic values to undergo a detailed process (ie. Reserve Activity Assessment) to identify conservation, cultural and other values, evaluate them and formulate specific protection measures for unacceptable threats. Some work may not need an RAA or full RAA, eg low impact / intensity activities, however approval from the Managing Authority is still required. During preparation of this Plan relevant values have been taken into account and additional suggestions made to help reduce impacts.

This Plan may be used in support of proposals for activities and developments supported by this Plan. Appendix 6 cites some situations for which particular values may not need further survey because of existing surveys and consideration and information in this Plan.

17 The Aboriginal Heritage Office in 2005 states: “No aboriginal heritage sites were listed at Ben Lomond or in the surrounding area.”


Left: Pools near Big Ben Creek Right: Probable glacial gouges in dolerite near Legges Tor


Photograph 4 EXISTING IMPACTED ROUTES

(Giblin Tow to Dam & Village Tow)

Bills Tow North Village Tow base Big Ben shed Creek Tow Giblin Tow

Fannies Tow shed

Dam Service road end

Adversely impacted ground

100 metres


5 Existing Uses, Facilities and Services

5.1 Overview

The Ski Slope has a mixture of public, private and commercial infrastructure, the majority of which is in the south-east to south of the Ski Slope within easy access from the car park. Structures include “summit huts”, a radio transmitter, skiing tows (with associated ramps, operator shelters, fuel, storages and workshops), a ticket sales and staff amenities building, a hut for race materials, oversnow vehicle sheds, two Ski Patrol-PWS buildings, a large commercial hire and kiosk building, a dam, sewer and water lines, part of the village gated gravel road, a short boarded footpath, rough tracks, drains, bridges, fences, permanent obstacle markers, electrical cables (under and on ground), a pole mounted snow camera, cross-country skiing markers and decking over a few hazards (Maps 2 - 6).

Four commercial businesses operate on Ben Lomond, two operate in the Ski Slope: (1) ski tows, (2) kiosk, equipment hire and training. PWS own the Ski Patrol and Snow Sports (formerly Ski Rentals) buildings and are responsible for walking tracks and their development.

Much infrastructure on the Ski Slopes is ageing but usually functioning. The last significant development was in 2004 - 5. This included considerable grooming of the toboggan area to Bass Tow area (Maps 4 & 7) when the former 30 Second Tow was replaced by a much shorter tow to become a beginner tow, Bass. Buildings in the area were resited south of Ski Patrol below the service road. Only the Ski Patrol – PWS workshop / garage was renewed. In 2007 a proposal was lodged by Alpine Enterprises to rearrange the existing tows Fannies and Village.

5.2 Access

Most access to facilities and services is good as they are close and connected by tracks, pads, service roads and a boardwalk. Ben Lomond, a commercial skifield, is most unusual in not having formed service routes to tows where required. This is detrimental to the environment, safety, ‘summer’ aesthetics and operations.

5.2.1 Walking Tracks (‘summer’ and ‘winter’)

Two rough walking tracks, a short wide boarded path and cross-country route markers are the main assets (Maps 1 and 4). The main foot access to the Ski Slope is the wide boarded path from the car park to Snow Sports from where the service road gives pedestrian access to the skifield near Ski Patrol. Many walk a short-cut from the top of the car park to the main slopes passing between Rumdoodle and Edelweiss lodges. There is no track to Legges Tor from the car park or Village. The Carr Villa Track from the north ends at the top of Summit Pass near Bills Tow. In the extreme north of the Ski Slope a rough track runs from the road to the Carr Villa Track near Ben Bullen. There are long-standing pads / tracks near most huts.

Apart from the boarded walk to Snow Sports, tracks range from very rough to marked routes. Where tracks are is far from obvious to anyone new to the area: there are no signs and marking is very poor except for a poled cross-country route from the dam, along which some markers have fallen. Pedestrians awkwardly access the padless cross-country route in ‘winter’ and wander onto the southern skiing slopes, some with toboggans. On skiing days most are requested to leave the downhill slopes for safety reasons.

5.2.2 Activity Areas (‘winter’)

The main skiing slopes, beginner area and the snow play / toboggan area are designated. A fixed cordon fence with two openings near Ski Patrol separates the main slopes, with beginner area, from the road / pedestrian thoroughfare. The southwest corner of Snow Sports accesses the snow play / toboggan area.


5.2.3 Oversnow Vehicles (‘winter’)

Small snowmobiles are used, some have trailers. There has not been a winter groomer on Ben Lomond. Access to the skiing slopes is as for skiers. There is a very a limited number of preferred routes. They are not constructed. The main preferred route runs below Bass and Village Tows then turns up west to the southern (back) slopes passing Fannies workshop (Map 5). Most drivers may only use service roads.

A voluntary code of conduct for OSV use was introduced in 2008 by PWS. This included safety rules, area zoning and permitted purposes. Vehicles are only permitted onto the downhill skiing slopes following application and approval by PWS and may include but not limited to, the ski tow commercial operator, Ski Patrol and lodge lessee/s. The policy has continued to be improved to address emerging issues and needs.

5.2.4 Access Restrictions (‘winter’, see 5.2.3 above also)

For safety reasons, pedestrians are not permitted on the downhill skiing slopes during ski lift operation, although tow operators and patrollers may walk for work purposes. In 2008 the tow area and beginner / ski training area were sometimes separated by a temporary cordon fence running from the main slope entry towards the toboggan area. The toboggan area is separated from the beginner area by a permanent cordon fence running 100 m west from Snow Sports. The fence then runs south above the toboggan and play area to almost reach Big Ben Creek. Signs warn pedestrians below to not proceed beyond the fence. Mostly the fences work well. The rest of the Ski Slope has no fencing or warnings.

The Ski Slope is closed to public access by vehicle. Two gated roads as far the dam and Snow Sports (via Village lodges) allow 2WD access to part of the lower southeastern Ski Slope. A ‘winter’ and ‘summer’ lock system operates; it limits ‘winter’ access to critical purposes.

5.2.5 Servicing & Maintenance (‘summer’)

There is no formed road / service route onto the main ski slope or to tows. Although oversnow vehicles are allowed by permit, access is only possible when there is sufficient snow. Other routine access to the main ski slope, including to tows, is not allowed unless specifically permitted through a written authority. The lack of stable service routes is unusual for a skifield and limits the commercial operator’s ability to service and repair tows and access workshops at the base of Fannies, Big Ben and Summit tows, and undertake rehabilitation works in these areas. Access to the slopes on foot is available to permitted persons in skiing season, but this has its limitations.

Helicopter use is far too expensive for routine use with at least a few trips per season required, exceeding the cost of a stable route. Weather would be much more likely to interfere with work schedules dependent on helicopters, leading to further costs and delays. A service route, albeit to a narrower width, may be beneficial for other uses, like ‘summer’ walking and winter snow grooming. The requirement of affordability, an issue for many tow patrons and potential patrons, supports the construction and use of a multi-purpose service route.

5.2.6 Skier Egress (‘winter’)

Frequently skiers and snow boarders leave the slopes by the direct route to the car park between Rumdoodle and Edelweiss lodges (Maps 3 & 6). Some pedestrians use the same route. It is of moderate slope locally and can be icy or has deep soft snow. Tobogganers using the egress can cause a hazard for other users and should not be encouraged.


7

4 5

1 Alternative Toboggan Run

2 Possible Tubing Run

3 Possible Jumps

4 Existing Rough Tracks

5 Proposed Walking Track

6 Helicopter Landing

7 Public Practice Area, also 10

8 Most Heavily Groomed Area

9 Proposed Village T-bar

10 Ski Training Area, also 7

11 Toboggan (a), Tubing (b) Area

12 Terrain Park

13 Public Shelter & Toilet

14 Snow Play Area

15 Preferred Oversnow Routes

16 Possible Dam

17 Existing Poled X/C Route

18 Proposed Service Route

400 metres North

Map 4 ACCESS & ACTIVITY SITES, indicative; see also Map 1

4

12

3

6

8

14 13

15

16 17

18 & 15

9

5

12 11a

11b

10 Snow Sports

(12)

7


400 metres North

Map 5 APPROX. POSITION OF SNOW FENCES & TERRAIN PARK, other fences may also be considered

Existing Fences Possible New Fences Farming Fences Terrain Park, indicative


5.3 Communication (‘winter’)

There are no special facilities. UHF transceivers are used between all significant parties in skiing season. There are some localised difficulties communicating between the front and back slopes. Relaying of messages tends to occur in such circumstances. All businesses and Ski Patrol have radio telephone facilities similar to a land line. Facsimile works too. EFTPOS is useable. Mobile telephones may only work in highly localised areas. There are very few communication problems.

5.4 Utilities

5.4.1 Water and Water Supply

Water is supplied by a 900 m3 capacity dam situated on ephemeral Big Ben Creek upstream of NTAC within the Ski Slope. The catchment area for the dam is about 0∙405 km 2. The estimated potential inflow over a year is almost 250,000 m3 or 250 Megalitres, taking into account evaporation. All but one premise along the service roads are connected. While there is more than twice the ‘winter’ capacity (if full), on a few occasions the dam has been drained. Some lodges may leave some taps running to prevent water lines freezing; this uses extra water and impacts the sewerage treatment plant. An audit of village water use may identify some scope for more efficient use . Water for fire fighting could drain the dam.

Concern has been expressed about the volume of water stored, particularly during low rainfall periods. If demand increases, eg through further village development / use or snowmaking, more water storage will be needed. Snowmaking uses large flows, like 200 L / minute a snow-gun.

5.4.2 Electricity and Energy

Most energy is supplied by expensive diesel and gas. Five establishments commonly use ca $10,000 or more for gas and diesel annually. There are a few solar panels and small petrol generators. Gas is widely used for light, cooking and heating. Most electricity is diesel generated. Winter is not suitable to deliver fuel; environmental compromise is more likely than at other times.

Many have expressed a desire for grid electricity. The cost of petroleum fuels and probable carbon taxes provide an incentive for it. Snow-making would be much more feasible. A quote for full connection to the grid was $3,500,000 - $5,000,000 in 2008. The BLNPMP allows grid connection, subject to impact assessment, but comments it may be too expensive. The community is investigating grants and borrowing for grid connection.

5.4.3 Toilets (sewered)

All establishments on the lower ski slopes are sewered. The public toilet is near the car park in the public shelter. From the skifield it is a 300 m awkward walk for those in skiing boots, in a hurry or with children. Many suggest toilets at the immediate foot of the main skiing slopes near Ski Patrol and Bills Tow. There is no sewer line to the back slopes.

5.5 Snow Sports (‘winter’)

The commercial business, tens of metres from the car park, offers training to skiers and snow boarders. It lets and sells snow equipment and clothing and has a kiosk. It also repairs, fits and tunes equipment. Equipment hire is well patronised. Staff has limited accommodation in the building.

The business enables significant patronage and enjoyment of the Ski Slope. An on-site equipment outlet has the advantage that adjustments can be made as required. Ready access to energy foods and warm shelter is vital in a winter subalpine climate: not everyone arrives suitably clothed or provisioned. A few persons discard waste carelessly in spite of a waste bin at the kiosk and one outside.


5.5.1 Snow Activity Instruction (‘winter’)

Managing training from the current building is well accepted; it is close to equipment hire and the training area. Training is vital to any skifield, it enhances everyone’s safety and recreational enjoyment. Instructors, subject to 4.6.1 of the BLSDP, are based in Snow Sports. An area variously known as the ski school, beginner area or training area is set aside for instruction (Map 4). Although mostly of gentle slope it lacks a run-out, essential for the safety of struggling learners. The area has two rock outcrops and water can pool in the lowest part of the beginner - toboggan area. Sometimes non-trainees enter the training area. There is no area set aside for the public to learn to ski without commercial instruction.

5.6 Parks & Wildlife Service

PWS are the ‘managing authority’ for the skifield, inheriting some roles from the former BLSMA. Land use for commercial and private purposes is under PWS or Crown lease or licence. PWS are responsible for tracks (and their development), own three buildings on the Ski Slope (Snow Sports, Ski Patrol and a garage / workshop), some building maintenance material, snow fences and an oversnow vehicle, however PWS make very little direct use of the buildings or equipment. The patrol building has a very basic office for Ski Patrol-PWS use, which includes a telephone; room is limited. Managing authority staff currently makes occasional use of office space within the Ski Patrol building. The managing authority also maintains a workshop adjacent to Ski Patrol. The Snow Sports building is leased to the Snow Sports business.

5.7 Ski Patrol (‘winter’)

Ski Patrol’s role is the supply of advanced first aid and arranging casualty evacuation in skiing season to tow patrons and mountain staff within a defined area. Frequently patrol also cares for other visitors. Patrollers are qualified and practice to Australian Ski Patrol Association (ASPA) standards.

Ski Patrol is housed opposite the main skifield entry to allow fast access to the slopes. The building is ageing and contains asbestos which is labelled and monitored. Some recladding and double glazing occurred in 2008. The building has oversnow vehicle access for unloading non-ambulatory patients in any weather. There is a treatment room and waiting area. Multiple injuries frequently demand that the waiting area handles patients too. The area can be congested. Considerable safety equipment is kept in the building and many valuable items hang on walls.

On occasions having sufficient volunteers available can be difficult. Most patrollers need some storage. There is minor patroller accommodation, sometimes insufficient for demand. This was provided as a mezzanine until about 2003 when it became unavailable because the treatment room was expanded. Accommodated patrollers allow extended hours of first aid, frequently sought at weekends.

There is an adjacent shed for PWS and Ski Patrol needs. Ski Patrol stores some items, including a generator and oversnow vehicle in the garage. Most office items belong to Ski Patrol.

The ski patrol service at Ben Lomond is provided by volunteers on the weekends. The mid-week ski patrol service has historically been funded by Government, through PWS or the BLSMA.

Thes ski patrol building is owned by the PWS. PWS provides materials and labour in conjunction with ski patrol to maintain this building.

5.8 Accommodation within the Ski Slope

Snow Sports, Ski Patrol and Edelweiss lodge have accommodation within the foot of the Ski Slope. Summit huts are leased to clubs near the top of the Ski Slope, pre-date the Village lodges and are not sewered.


5.9 Service and Storage Buildings

There are three sheds for tow operations (Map 2), one for racing and that mentioned for PWS - Ski Patrol use. At the end of each season 30 - 40 spring boxes per T-bar and 30 – 70 stems with platters from each ‘poma’ are stored in tow sheds or at the back of the Ticket Office. Oversnow vehicles, lubricants, tow tools and equipment are also stored in the sheds. Fannies is the largest storage and workshop. Summit has a small workshop and could hold 2 x 1,500 litres of diesel.

5.10 Recreational Activities

The dominant visitors are beginner to intermediate skiers and snow boarders on day visits in weekends18 up to a few times a season. Another significant sector is the intermediate to advanced skiers and snow boarders who return most frequently, many of whom stay overnight up to several times a season. Many visit to toboggan or similar once or twice a season. For the rest of the year, though much longer, far fewer visit: they go for short walks, attend social working bees, socialise or drive to the end of the road, have a quick look then leave. Other recreational use of the slopes includes viewing activities, outdoor education, cross-country skiing, relaxing, snow play, natural feature interest and tubing (rare).

5.10.1 Tobogganing (‘winter’)

The popular activity occurs in several places, only some of which are on the Ski Slope. The designated area has the short bank beyond the main drain for the run-in. The drain was partly bridged in 2008 to minimise a potential hazard for visitors. Most of the toboggan area is prone to very thin snow, and much of it is littered with rock shards. There is no run-out and, when snow is fast (icy), some tobogganers reach the solid wooden fence at Snow Sports. Much of the non-run-in area has been groomed, but not shaped for tobogganing.

When snow is slow (soft) most tobogganers look elsewhere for steeper slopes, including some potentially unsafe places: ground with drops, boulders, ice and / or no run-out. This has lead to conflicts and accidents in the other areas. The main descents onto the Village Road are much used and many try faster longer runs, like south of Village and Giblin Tows and below Little Slalom north of Summit Tow.

5.10.2 Terrain Park (‘winter’)

There is considerable demand from snow boarders and some skiers. Snow boarders are up to about 40 %of patronage and could increase; they have been up to 65 % at Mt Mawson (Tasmania). Some terrain items were placed high up the Big Ben slope, but are hard to access. No tow or foot access serves it and parts are prone to thin snow. There is no half-pipe.

5.10.3 Snow Play (‘winter’)

Passive activity, like making snowmen, is not popular on the ski slopes. Effectively the play area is combined with tobogganing, although there are no signs indicating this. Visitors playing can be subject to fast moving toboggans which have neither steering nor brakes. Much of the snow play / toboggan area is prone to poor snow retention. Play occurs in several places, dominantly outside the Ski Slope on banks off the Village Street outside lodges. There is plenty of scope off the Ski Slope for passive snow activities.

5.10.4 Competitions, Races and Fun Days (‘winter’ mostly)

A small hut holds racing equipment. Each year a local committee conducts races and sometimes other amusements; they are well attended. Temporary poles are erected on snow for the course. Competitors

18 B Barlee, Year 2000 Report for the Ben Lomond Skifield Management Authority


race one at a time to minimise accidents. Accurate race timing is essential; a timing cable can be used, but a temporary one presents a hazard.

5.10.5 Cross-Country Skiing (‘winter’)

A limited amount is regularly done on the Slope without interfering with downhill skiing19. Most cross-country skiers pass through on the way elsewhere. A rare few practice telemarking on the downhill slopes; most use tows. After downhill-skiing hours there is no issue. The Ski Slope occupies the only skiable routes to Summit Pass and the Carr Villa Track; access is required during tow operations. The most used cross-country route is well marked and lies within the southern part of the Ski Slope (Map 3).

A former draft SSP included a cross country practice area in the Fannies - Big Ben area, just outside the downhill skiing area. No interest was shown in a practice area: very few persons ‘practice’ cross country skiing, rather they learn as they tour.

Cross-country skiing is affordable to more of the community. The poor state and siting of cross-country routes (no tracks or trails) may be the reason for relatively little cross-country skiing. This leads to less snow cover, hence less skiing. Improved routes or tracks would greatly enhance enjoyment of cross-country skiing in ‘winter’ and walking in ‘summer’. Tracks also facilitate skiing on less snow.

5.10.6 Jumps (‘winter’)

There are no formal jumps, however some, especially snow boarders, augment natural snow rises to form jumps. Occasionally jumps are sited where accidents would be inevitable. Unmarked jumps are a danger during fog. A separated area can offer a safer place for jumps.

5.10.9 Oversnow Vehicle Tours (‘winter’)

For a few years tours were successfully run. They passed through the lower (southern) Ski Slope to Little Hell. Commercial licensing costs and requirements relative to demand made the tours uneconomic. No-one operates tours nowadays, although there are requests.

5.11 Tow Use Activities (‘winter’)

The Northern Tasmanian Alpine Club (NTAC) completed the first tow, 30 Second Tow, in 1962. This made the front slopes the principle skiing area. Big Ben was the second tow installed and ran from 1966. The two tows probably occupied the best positions for slope utilisation and snow retention. Alpine Enterprises began moving tow operations to a commercial basis from 1972; it alone conducts tow operations now. In 2008 there were seven operational tows (Map 6). NTAC (operating as Tasmanian Ski Lifts) ceased tow operations in 2003.

The remaining seven tows have the capacity to cover most of the downhill slopes, but some are arguably in ‘second best’ positions because of former tows. Summit and Bass mix fast and slow skiers. Village Tow cuts the main Home Trail and the entire fall line on one side of Fannies, including a good run, and its offload coincides with the main Home Trail. Fannies cuts the home trails from Bills Tow.

5.11.1 Skiing and Snow Boarding Terrain

Most grooming has been superficial; rock obstacles abound and direct much of the skiing. Most of the skied slopes gradient ranges from very gentle (10%, beginner) to moderate (35 %, intermediate). There is virtually no expert or extreme terrain. Three tow tracks have a section in excess of 40% (22o). Tables 5.2 & 5.5 (Appendix 8) summarise the terrain available. Skiing is concentrated in a limited number of areas (Map 3).

19 The Ben Lomond Development Plan 1993 excludes cross country skiing from Zone B, the ski slope. The recent draft development plan (2006) does not expressly exclude the possibility.


Mapped pods20 appear larger than in practice. In average conditions most pods are a network of runs due to hazards and difficult terrain; for some pods very little of the potential area is skied. A few runs get most of the skiing. For example only 30 % of the southern Summit pod is skied in most conditions to avoid rocks, thin areas, bushes and drops.

In theory there is plenty of slope of gradient suited to beginners and novices: mostly the lower slopes from Summit to Bills, however most is unsuitable because higher level skills are needed to access it.

5.11.1.1 Hazards, Natural Obstacles and Risk Management21

Additional to rocks, bushes and bare areas are cliffs (map 3)22 and occasionally water and drainage channels which present holes or cause snow to break under a skier. Cliffs greatly reduce the area of a pod; two are partly cordoned (Normans Folly and Giblin Folly). Nearly all snow users complain of rock. The chief obstacles are the many rocks: Photographs 2 and 3 show rocky terrain even under good conditions. Natural items can present safety hazards in beginner areas and formed runs, like tow tracks and toboggan chutes.

In most other cases, the generic risks to skiers and others recreating on the ski slopes can be foreseen by both users and PWS. Given the nature of the ski slopes, there will always be a degree of risk that should be anticipated by users. In this context, users should not expect all runs to be highly groomed and developed for use by people of all skill levels.

In determining a risk management response, it should be recognised that individuals who choose to use the slopes are obliged to accept responsibility for many risks associated with their use. This is supported by the Civil Liability Act 2002 which attributes no liability where the risk is ‘obvious’ or results from participation in ‘dangerous recreational activities’. Similar legislation in NSW was tested recently at the NSW Court of Appeal in Jaber v Rockdale City Council 2008. The court found that the plaintiff had no case, because the risk of diving from a wharf was considered an ‘obvious risk’ and also a ‘dangerous recreational activity’.

The Act also offers provisions for protection of public authorities, recognising the ‘real world’ of finite budgets, large responsibilities and public good. Public authorities (eg PWS) are exempt from liability arising from the ‘materialisation’ of a risk associated with a recreational activity, for which a risk warning has been given (e.g. through signage and codes of use).

5.11.1.2 Skiing Runs18 (see also Map 3) On a good slope runs cannot be differentiated, they merge into a pod: this is rare for Ben Lomond. In average snow conditions each tow serves 2 - 7 significant runs. Some runs have parts less than two metres wide, but may have areas 25 m wide. A number of runs may share a broad area. For instance southern Summit Tow may have a broad skiable upper central area, then one narrow area through which the vast majority of skiers pass and an alternative very narrow run near Bass.

Narrow and thin areas of snow tend to control how much skiing is possible. Narrow areas concentrate snow loss due to skiing. Losing all snow along only 1% length of a run yields no run at all. Several runs are particularly prone to deterioration on mild or sunny days, especially where aspect favours solar heating.

Most skiers ski a particular area rather than continually criss-cross the slopes as feasible. Frequent skiing of ground favours its deterioration, particularly when snow is soft. This and limited width of concentrates snow wear soon leading to bare ground. This is a common reason for ski and snow board damage, when sub-emergent rock is struck. Accidents and damage tend to cause avoidance of a run. In turn other runs get more traffic and deteriorate. Experiences of this kind make patrons much less likely to return to the mountain until they are sure of much better snow.

20 Skiing pods are the two areas served by a tow: one on each side. Runs are the skiable routes down a slope. 21 Some natural obstacles are safety hazards: in beginner, loading and egress areas and along home trails, tow tracks, major skiing routes and toboggan and tubing areas.. 22 The main small cliffs are shown in Map 4 as orange with a brown line at the drop.


5.11.2 People

5.11.2.1 Skill Levels There is little formal data on skill. However relative popularities of services, tows and runs strongly indicate demand. Most skiers are beginners to low intermediates which is congruous with other skifields23. There are no expert ski runs; the best is but a few metres of advanced slope when snow is excellent. During fairly average snow there is very little terrain for advanced skiers and, sometimes, high intermediates. Most of the advanced terrain is at the top of slopes so suffers much wind scour, so is rarely skiable. The skew towards novice to low intermediate permits higher slope densities, more skiers per hectare (Table 5.1 of Appendix 8).

5.11.2.2 Skill Level Segregation Bass is the first tow novices use, most have yet to gain adequate control skills so are very accident prone. Summit Tow suits high intermediate and advanced skiers. Both tows are loaded from the area between them. The terrain and proximity forces some skiers from both tows to merge creating a considerable risk: fast moving persons, some barely able, descend Summit into stationary or slow, less able persons.

Other tows have reasonable segregation of skill levels. The hazard is the overly adventurous individual.

5.11.2.3 Skier Circulation The main access to the Ski Slope and beginner area is the two openings in front of Ski Patrol from which only Bass, Village and Summit Tows may be approached directly. All tows and slopes may be accessed directly or indirectly from Village or Summit Tows, however Village is the main feeder tow. The main access routes into and usual egresses from the skifield are shown in Map 3. The circulation of beginners and most novices is controlled by their limited skill and limited grooming (including tow tracks), which largely confines them to the front slopes. Circulation of most skiers above novice level is controlled by the tows operating, queue length, natural obstacles, hazards and snow cover.

The top offloads of three tows are inaccessible in most seasons which decreases the extent of circulation from the respective tows. Access may also vary according to wind and snow characteristics. West to southwest wind can result in fewer choosing to ski the back slopes. When very windy or very low patronage only one or two front tows may run.

A common major blockage to circulation has been Village Tow out of service, when stopped for over half an hour there is a strong tendency for the back slopes to become highly underutilised. Skiers on the back slopes can migrate to the front slopes but not the reverse and must eventually migrate for food, drink and toilet breaks. Long queues frustrate many and lead to some inappropriately trying the steep Summit Tow, which is only occasionally out of service. Summit Tow can prove too difficult; some fall off during the ascent. Many a person has had to be lead from Summit Tow or slope to safer ground to prevent an accident. This indicates a need for more novice and feeder capacity.

In absolute terms Village, Bills, Summit and Fannies may be the most popular. Village, Bass and Bills are the most popular tows relative to their capacities. Bass does not feed any other tow.

When snow is marginal the back slopes may have the only pleasantly skiable snow. Late morning to afternoon warming, with snow loss on the lower front slopes, can also favour the back slopes.

• The Lift Operator should have a plan in place to reasonably ensure customer access to the back slopes

While some may hesitate to cross tow lines, it is done safely and seems not to interfere with circulation. A potential risk is returning unretractable carriers. If necessary, retractable carriers or raising the return cable to keep carriers above head height in appropriate places could be used.

23 Eg: pps III-11, BC Guidelines and III-4, Plan for the Expansion & Improvement of Whitewater Ski Resort Ltd, 2002.


5.11.2.4 Crowding This can be an issue at some tows, ski hire and the tobogganing slope. When all functions well and tows run fast there is little problem but for the busiest 2 - 5 hours of a few days in most seasons except for Bass and Village Tows. Long queues have occurred due to breakdowns / decabling (5.11.2.3 & 5.11.4.2), slowly run tows and stoppages. Long queues at Bass and Village Tows can occur on moderately busy days and are a danger where there is through traffic. Queues have exceeded 50 metres on Village, Bass, Bills and Fannies. Some queuing during peak hours of peaks days is unlikely to be overcome by any viable tow company.

Crowding may occur near the decked Summit offload, Giblin summit and its penultimate offload when the egress is very rocky. Other slope crowding is rare. Equipment hire crowding is largely due to morning rushes, relatively limited space for fittings and other demands on staff. The occasional crowding of the tobogganing slope is usually caused by limited snow; it indicates a need for more suitable area or extra grooming.

• The egresses from the Summit and upper Giblin offloads should be groomed or surfaced to reduce rock exposures.

• When safe, tows where queues exceed 15 metres should be ran faster to help meet demand.

5.11.3 Slope Capacity (Terrain Capacity)

Slope capacity is a measure of the number of skiers an area can comfortably handle. The capacity is a function of steepness, skill level and accessible skiable area24. Skifield snow cover has been estimated by Faulkner (1986)25 and in recent years by Ski Patrol and by one of its members.

Tables 5.2 and 5.5 of Appendix 8 indicate typical slope capacities for common and excellent snow conditions of the last decade. The slope capacities range from about 450 to 770 persons respectively if Creek Tow is assumed not running, however skiing has occurred for slope capacities nearer 100. Snow wear frequently reduces capacity and enjoyment. A few hours skiing may cause numerous rocks to emerge in some areas, reducing a pod to a few runs. Standard methods for calculating capacities rely only on area and gradient of slopes26, so caution should be exercised in using the data provided: it is hard to provide accurate ski slope capacities for variable networks of mostly narrow skiable terrain which often increases the skill level required.

For very rare excellent snow the capacity rises to about 870 persons27 - when all tows carry patrons their full length, Creek Tow runs and cover is ≥ 95 %.

Because the most elevated areas of the skifield are rarely accessible they must be omitted from capacity calculations to achieve realistic figures. In addition many skiers voluntarily offload before reaching the elevated steep bouldery areas when there is good snow because of the high skill level required to descend. Tow and tow track problems may cause less skilled persons to not reach the areas assumed. Skifield capacity calculations should allow for this. At best a skifield capacity is a reasonable estimate.

If there were suitable tows the capacity could be raised to over 1,120 skiers for excellent conditions (Tables 5.5 & 8.10). This has been unrealistic most of the time. It is more important that available slopes match

24 Local adverse slope variations, barriers, natural obstacles and ease of returning to the tow of choice also influence the skiable area. Steeper areas suit higher skilled skiers. As skill level increases speed usually increases. To avoid collisions, the area required to safely ski increases (Table 5.1). The acceptable skier density for each skill level ranges greatly around the world. Tasmanians tolerate high densities compared to most places, so the densities used reflect Australian and Tasmanian acceptance. 25 Climatic Statistics - Ben Lomond Village 1981 - 1986, P Faulkner, 1986. 26 Gradient alone is assumed to dictate skill level, hence fixes acceptable skier densities per hectare (Table 7.1). Forced sharp turns in narrow or rock strewn runs also affect the skill required and can be very significant at Ben Lomond. 27 The accepted calculation method is pod based. It inherently assumes runs with a mixture of skill level gradients can be meaningfully separated into areas of different skill levels and multiplied by the proportion of skiable area. This can be flawed: eg. if a run requires more advanced skiing to get to the novice part of the run, the novice part is inaccessible to a novice, so effectively nil. It seems some prior capacity calculations were sums of the skill level components of individual pods irrespective of capacity to access them. Some areas cannot be skied as pods but only separate runs (less skiable area) except in excellent conditions. Some correction has been made for this based on local knowledge.


skier skill demand. Calculations show a shortfall in slope capacity for beginners because Creek Tow seldom operates. In 2008 other skill levels were reasonably catered for in so far as the mountain allows.


400 metres

BigBen

Village T-bar

30 Second Tow

Fannies Beginner

Map 6 ALL TOWS

Snow

Patro

l Wor

ksho

pTi

cket

Offi

ceR

ace

Hut

Rum

dood

le

(alternative)

North Possible future tow Existing tow Tow being removed


Villa

400 metres North

Big Ben

ge T-bar

30 Second Tow

Rx ± Plant ± Terrain

Rx = Rocks

All / Most Groomed

Loose Rx on Rock

Rock Protrusions

Plant Pruning

Surface Rocks

Plants & Rocks

Terrain & Rock

Intense Limited Grooming Type

Map 7 POSSIBLE SIGNIFICANT GROOMING INDICATIVE ONLY

Some indicated areas have grass, low heath or smooth rock which do not require much grooming beyond picking up occasional cobbles to boulders and possible bush pruning for runs and tow lines. Of areas which had significant grooming previously (a yellow background), some need improvement. In general, only ground actually used for activity may be groomed. Some intense grooming may be

needed for home trails, service routes, major and special runs (eg terrain park, tobogganing) and tow development. Cushion plant, sphagnum and pineapple grass may not be groomed.

Fannies Beginners

BigBen

Giblin

Bills Page 46 of 131 Ben Lomond National Park Ski Slope Plan April 2010

5.11.4.1 Tow Description In 2009 three tows are T-bars and four Poma-style (platters)28. All are surface tows so occupy scarce skiing terrain. This seems accepted. T-bars move about twice the rate of people. Appendix 8 gives the capacities.

Summit T-bar: suits only intermediate or better skiers; most ski the southern side, north is steeper; it is often not operated midweek afternoons. Loading is from the south, a few use the tow to access the back slopes.

Bass platter: suited to beginners and novices; skied more to the Summit side (north) from which it loads. The tow is run slowly.

Village platter: the top half of the slope is skied about evenly on both sides, skiing of the lower half is strongly biased to northern side due to rocks and north-side loading; it is the most popular back slope access tow and probably the most popular front slope tow.

Creek platter: suits beginners only; virtually only skied on its northern side, loads from the north. Tow is run slowly, but rarely operates as most of the area retains snow poorly.

Fannies T-bar: suited to intermediate or better skiers, is mostly run slowly; skiing is very heavily biased to its western side, a few ski the Milk Run, but little else to the east, loads from the west, used to access Bills Tow.

Bills T-bar: suits low intermediate or slightly better skiers; heavily skied on its eastern side with a significant proportion skiing the west, used to access Giblin Tow (west), loads from the east. The most popular tow of the back slopes; one of the most popular tows of the skifield

Giblin platter: suited to intermediate or better skiers; slightly more heavily skied to its east although there are occasions the west is slightly more popular, loads from the east and is usually run moderately slowly.

5.11.4.2 Condition and Suitability All tows are at least 15 years old, some 40. Since installation standards and requirements have changed. The tows are serviced and inspected annually. The tows were not designed for snow boarders who are about 40% of use now. Many snow boarders and some skiers find it hard to stay on a tow track where there is side slope, uneven ground or rock, so inadvertently pull sideways or fall. Platters suffer most from the consequences with frequent breakdowns. The breakdowns are dominantly cable detachments (derailments) and associated problems. This can lead to further problems and damage which promote further derailments. Generally speaking T-bars are less prone to derailment than platters, but not immune. In recent years there has been considerable disquiet from patrons regarding tow break downs / decabling; patronage has been lost.

Without breakdowns Village Tow often struggles to meet demand, however Village Tow is often out of service due to derailments. Giblin Tow has also had extended periods out of service for similar reasons. Some modifications to a few pulley batteries to decrease decabling were trialled in 2007 and 2008. J-style hangers are to be trialled in 2009.

5.11.4.3 Tow Capacity Effective tow capacity is measured by Comfortable Carrying Capacity, CCC, explained in Table 5.6 of Appendix 8. For efficiency tow (CCC) and slope capacities should be fairly close (± 25 %), preferably with some spare tow capacity in case of stoppages or a need to rest areas of thin or soft snow. While Tables 5.3 - 5.5 provide realistic capacities, it must be emphasised that tow capacity at Ben Lomond depends on snow coverage, so can change almost daily. Frequently capacity is well short of what is installed (eg Creek may not run). Total Comfortable Carrying Capacity (Table 5.6) in the best of snow during 2003 - 2008 was just over 775 persons a day should all tows have run full length (Tables 5.3 & 5.4). This is a little below the slope capacity made available by the tows.

Some tows are usually run slowly; mainly Bass (beginners) and Fannies (novices), otherwise speed may vary with load and need adjustment. Creek Tow rarely runs. Under most conditions Summit, Fannies and Giblin tows do not carry skiers full length. Snow wear is a factor. (The latter three factors also reduce slope

28 A few persons refer to the tows at Ben Lomond as surface lifts and, occasionally, lifts.


capacity.) Feeder tows lower effective comfortable carrying capacity (CCC). Summit and Village are feeder tows. Missing carrying devices and breakdowns affect tow capacity. Some have been factored into Table 5.4 under ‘efficiency’, thus under fairly average conditions, tow capacity is near 450 - 600, but sometimes fewer.

Skifield (slope) capacity exceeds tow capacity by a few percent in most conditions. However patronage has not reached near skifield capacity for some years: skiers since 2003 have not reached 600 a day even for excellent snow29. Under most conditions patronage is about 25 - 100 week days and 50 - 350 weekends. However patronage has reached the effective tow operating capacity (CCC) on occasions because some tows were not operating to capacity (including significant downtime). The two main tow capacity deficits in 2008 were the front slopes tow capacity and beginner capacity. The problem probably could be overcome without extra tows by some more tow track grooming, maintaining track good conditions, tow improvements and some further rejuvenation as required, safely speeding up some tows, affixing missing / damaged carriers and snow fencing. Tow capacity could increase by about 115 assuming no lengthy stoppages.

5.11.4.4 Surfacing Surfacing provides protection for skiers, soil and vegetation in highly trafficked areas prone to thin snow. Most is used for loading, offloading, tow tracks and drains. Pale plastic mesh is used on some loading decks and carpet on a wooden offload. Two tow offloads have aging bristle mat on rock.

5.11.4.5 Tow Tracks (see also 5.11.4.2) Tow tracks should facilitate a smooth linear ride without having to steer around or catch on obstacles. Under good conditions this may happen, on average it does not. Icy conditions increase the skill level required to stay on track. Many a person has ‘involuntarily’ left a tow prematurely due to poor track conditions30. Many complaints have been reported.

Most tow tracks are native ground with decking over some particularly awkward spots, like sudden rises. Some tracks have significant side slope. Manual shovelling of snow is used to ameliorate some defects, however the shovelling cannot fix problems which return quickly. In some conditions tow tracks rapidly develop humps which are difficult to ski. More summer and winter grooming is needed to provide improved conditions and for safety.

5.11.4.6 Loading and Offloading All tows have fences, and some a wooden deck, to effect orderly queuing. A few decks have matting. In warmer weather most loading areas and their approaches scuff out (Village, Bass, Summit and sometimes Fannies and Bills). Some may develop puddles below the snow. All tows are entered from one side which biases slope use to that side, concentrating snow wear. The Fannies entry can have protruding rocks when snow is thin or soft. Bass and Village can have significant, but less hazardous, rock problems. Bills entry is awkward for many as the entry ramp slopes uphill initially. The offloads and egresses most prone to thin snow and scuffing are Summit, Bills and Giblin approaches to loading. All would benefit from surfacing.

5.11.4.7 Ski Tow Risk Assessment Breakdowns occur for reasons additional to patron difficulties. Old equipment increases the chance of problems and may threaten safety and the level of performance expected by patrons. Safety requirements have increased over time. Prevention is considered best practice nowadays. Decabling, however caused, is a threat to patron safety. To maximise tow performance, safety and customer satisfaction:

• Preseason checks and servicing of tows must continue, be to standard, and required actions fully completed shortly in advance of the skiing season.

• Tows should regularly be tested in skiing season to ensure they and their safety systems run well. • There should be a schedule of replacing each part of each tow prior to reaching its life expectancy.

An alternative is the replacement of all or most of a tow within the life expectancy of its existing ‘weakest’ part.

29 Checked with Mr E Williams, Tow Manager for Alpine Enterprises 30 Snow boarder based derailment is primarily due to side slope and undulations of tow tracks and the difficulty in steering uphill.


Figure 1 THROW OF SNOW VERSES SNOW FENCE PANEL SEPARATION

Snow fence

Effect of close panelling (low permeability - low throw)

Effect of more spaced panelling moderate permeability – long throw)

Snow


5.11.5 Snow Fences

The fences help establish skiable snow in poor snow-settling areas. There are about thirty permanent fences which vary in condition. Fences were variously established by commercial operators, authorities and volunteers. Map 5 shows the locations of most existing and proposed fences, with further work required to prioritise fence installations. All are wooden structures, most with tubular steel supports and foundation.

Some fences are not well designed for the purpose they serve. The panels are too close which greatly diminishes the throw of snow: a higher narrower band of snow gathers on the lea side, whereas panels separated sufficiently gather wider less steep snow which tends to be more skier friendly (Figure 1). A few fences are probably too low.

5.11.6 Summer Grooming (Slope Grooming) (see also 3.1, 3.4, 4.2.1.4 & 4.2.3.1)

This is also called slope grooming. Only the toboggan - beginner - Bass Tow area has had major grooming. Elsewhere pruning and hand relocation of rocks has occurred. Limited blasting and drilling has been used, mainly for tow and tow track development. The most recent blasting occurred in about 1994 and possibly 2003. There is considerable scope for rock grooming.

5.11.7 Winter Grooming (Snow Grooming)

There has not been mechanical winter grooming on Ben Lomond. Currently most of the area is unsuited to the use of a winter groomer because of rock and bush projections. The area suffers environmentally, safety-and enjoyment-wise as a result: groomed snow would prevent skiers and machines making ground contact.

5.11.8 Snow-Making

There is no snow-making, however studies in 200331 showed it to be technically feasible, except possibly in spring. More importantly it has become a potential way to offset the impacts of global warming, seasonal vagaries and snow wear. In mainland skifields many tens of millions of dollars have been invested and led to considerable economic benefits32.

31 Snowfield Engineering Pty Ltd, 2000: Report on Snow-Making for Ben Lomond Skifield Management Authority 32 Alpine Resorts Association, report on web


Figure 2

Permanent steel post with tying points Rubber or webbing (pulled tight) Strong Ties

EXAMPLE OF A SEASONALLY DISMANTLED AND REASSEMBLED FENCE (bracing may also be required)

Plan View

TEMPORARY FENCE FOR SHORT-TERM SNOW CATCHING This fence has webbing or wooden panels, three sections hook

together to form a stable unit. It can be sited when snow is forecast and removed when skiing next commences.

Figure 3

3.6 metres

INDICATIVE DIMENSIONS ONLY

Figure 4

Gal Steel Post (>30 mm Φ) sleeved into steel tube Treated Wooden Palings (4x1) Bearers (8x2) Height Max 2.4 m for 45 mm Φ with brace

STANDARD UNIT OF PERMANENT SNOW FENCE Height max 1.8 m for 30 mm Φ with bracing


6 Appreciation of Ski Slope Issues

6.1 Quality of the Ski Slope and Infrastructure (see also 8)

On average people are less tolerant of natural obstacles, poor infrastructure and awkward conditions than 20 or so years ago. The main improvements sought are to remedy: (i) rock protrusions and bushes in, and the narrowness of, ski runs, poorly groomed parts of tow tracks and egresses; (ii) aged or inadequate infrastructure and facilities; (iii) inappropriate run-outs for some activities and (iv) drainage lines.

6.2 Beginners and Novices

Good skifields throughout the world provide beginners and novices with very safe easy-to-learn-in environments. They are the future of any area and are a large minority at Ben Lomond who need more area in which to safely learn and recreate, preferably with easy-to-use transport (eg tow). Their area should be smooth, of gentle gradient and free of hazards; ie well groomed where necessary. Beginners whose needs are well met are far more likely to enjoy themselves, learn and return.

6.3 Grooming

All quality and successful Australian skifields have had considerable grooming. Many skifields have slope groomed, introduced snow-making and winter groomed because of the threat of global warming and a public desire for improved skiing conditions; in these fields it makes economic sense and is ‘best practice’. Most are determined to have viable skiing on less than 300 mm of snow. In contrast Ben Lomond skifield has been retarded greatly because of limited slope grooming. At Ben Lomond priority for grooming is minimising potentially hazardous obstacles and improving relatively high use areas and lower skill areas.

6.4 Affordability

Affordability is frequently cited by potential visitors as a reason for not using the area; this includes some who had previously visited regularly. Costs can be any to all of: travel, Parks Pass, equipment needs (hire or purchase), chains or bus, suitable clothing, tow tickets, food, accommodation and lodge membership. For the first skiing trip a family with one child would find it difficult to spend under $375 for a day. ABS figures in 2003 showed average Tasmanian income was about $200 per week or about 25 % less than for an average ‘mainlander’. If costs rise significantly visitors seek other, more affordable, recreation. There is a risk that custom may become too low to sustain services and most activities, let alone make improvements.

Compared to mainland skifields, Ben Lomond has limited skiing and poorer / variable conditions, facilities and services. Most visitors would expect this to be reflected in lower costs. To compete with resorts elsewhere, Ben Lomond needs to be good value for money. The community of interest should be cautious of over-investing in the ski slopes

Although commercial operators, PWS and others are pressured for improvements, changes need to be phased as resources allow. Affordability may constrain some potential improvements to only what is essential. Where an organisation is expected to outlay considerable money and effort it should be allowed at least sufficient time to regain its outlay and running costs.

New sources of grants, co-funding and in-kind help should be sought to maximise the opportunities for ski slopes improvements, associated rehabilitation and to maximise affordability.

6.5 Volunteers


The efforts of volunteers may go some way to compensate for resource shortfalls. There is plenty of suitable work. However, most volunteers too, have limits on resources: costs, time, what, when and how much they can do. Commercial operators, the Ben Lomond Committee in consultation with PWS should continue to identify opportunities to engage volunteers in ski slope management and establish simple agreements with volunteers to carry out tasks as best suit the volunteer.

6.6 Community and Management

The success of such a small skifield will rely on all parties working together, with good will and cooperation, to maximise efficiencies and opportunities. All parties must be solution-oriented, realistic and prepared to adapt to local circumstances, where appropriate.

There are many members of the Ben Lomond ‘community’ who are familiar with ski slope issues and others who have excellent knowledge and expertise pertinent to its management. Where possible, the managing authority should tap into the skills and experience of individuals and representative community groups.

The implementation of many supported ski slope improvements heavily relies on resourcing by commercial operators and volunteer assistance. However, there are actions from this SSP that will require a coordinated effort from all parties, including the managing authority (ie PWS) and community interest groups. An agreed yearly works schedule or plan should be developed by the relevant parties to maximise opportunities to fund and implement components of this plan in a timely and coordinated manner.

6.7 Demand Trends

The area was particularly popular with ‘Baby Boomers’, who, along with their parents, established the ‘modern skifield’ (tows, lodges, road and so on). They have aged, so far fewer visit the slopes. Now that Baby Boomer numbers can’t fall much more, a levelling out of numbers is likely provided customers are satisfied with what Ben Lomond offers. However, as younger persons have more outlets for recreation and entertainment the peak visitation of the early 1990’s will take more effort to achieve. The unreliability of snow, lack of grooming and paucity of other activities also impedes demand. A promoted ‘dry shoe’ walk would lift ‘summer’ visitation.

6.8 Tourism Potential

Many are unaware of the existence of Ben Lomond amid considerable competition for tourists elsewhere in Tasmania. Local marketing is very minimal and mostly aimed at skiers. However most facilities could be used all year around but few are aware of this. Potential visitors need to be made aware of and find that there are activities of interest to them available in a safe, fun and well catered for environment when wanted. The 1993 BLSDP encourages summer use.

6.9 Climate Change

Ben Lomond has a long history of highly variable snowfall. Several factors give rise to climate, one of which can be the greenhouse effect. The CSIRO reports that climate change should minimally affect Tasmania up to the year 204033. This is primarily because Tasmania is surrounded by ocean, so would experience warming at a slower rate than elsewhere. The north-east of Tasmania would experience warmer minimum temperatures in winter (within a magnitude of about 1o C by 2040) and an annual maximum temperature rise by 0.2-0.3 oC on Ben Lomond. Winter may have slightly more precipitation (1-2mm) and wind.

If all other climate factors were constant, the models for the accelerating greenhouse effect imply more significant changes that would have significant negative impact on the viability of the skifield just outside the

33 CSIRO, Hydro Tasmania and the Tasmanian Partnership for Advanced Computing report on climate change in Tasmania, 2006 CSIRO, Climate Change Projections for Australia (pdf), 2004


timeframes of this plan (ie increasing proportion of poor seasons). Development which would rely on more than 25 years of potential viability is uncertain of success.

Current information suggests a viable skifield becoming a little less profitable during the currency of this Plan. Developers and managers should review climate risks when planning changes and during the working life of their investments to help minimise adverse impacts.

If significant climate change is likely, planning for and adapting to it may be the only way to ensure visitors can have a good experience. Commercial success depends on this. Failure to adapt in a proactive way is likely to mean a poor skifield, loss of visitor experience and opportunity, diminishing profits and increased environmental stress.

Disease, pests and weeds may be facilitated or spread to new areas. Flora and fauna distribution would change: particularly plants reliant on coolness or snow cover to provide sufficient extended coolness and moisture. Cushion plants, sphagnum, pineapple grass and other wet area flora are probably most vulnerable. There may be little that could be done to remedy some changes, like drought and raised temperatures. At best the area could provide a refuge for lower altitude species seeking cooler climes.

• Relevant improvements shall be phased to facilitate affordability for most Tasmanians. • Ben Lomond interests should form an accountable representative group to locate and avail Ben

Lomond of potential resources and maximise potential efficiencies to better the ski slopes • BLC, PWS and likely volunteers should find ways to better harness volunteer help. • A three yearly survey of visitor and potential visitor issues in relation to the Ski Slope and associated

services shall be conducted to guide development (eg needs, priorities and timing). • PWS, lessees, licensees and other key interests should maintain an awareness of information from

reputable sources on climate change and global warming applicable to the ski slopes. When quality information is available they should understand the timing and likely impacts of holistic climate change within the skifield and consider it in decision making.

• Weed checks shall be conducted at least three yearly in frequented areas34

• PWS shall encourage continuation of, and actively engage with, a representative community based committee for Ben Lomond (eg. Ben Lomond Committee).

View down Summit Tow

Note: many loose rocks on the upper slope, bushes in the midfield & lower north slope & the well groomed area from Summit offload to the play area.

Photograph: F Foot

34 Persons undertaking weed surveys require appropriate skills as many weeds are difficult to detect when young or small when most can easily be removed.


7 Better Use ofThe Ski Slope

7.1 The Vision

Visitors to the Ben Lomond National Park Ski Slope will find a tidy, vibrant, well run, friendly and affordable skifield which allows for a variety of recreational activity in all seasons. Activities will be so enjoyable that visitors tell others. Grooming and infrastructure will minimise its impacts on visual quality and allow the area to be environmentally sustainable. Snow for recreation will be more reliable than it would otherwise be. The landscape, natural and heritage values will not have changed more than necessary to provide safe, good quality recreation, fun and experiences.

7.2.1 Development Assessment Framework (see also Appendix 5)

For each proposed activity all prevailing legislation, licences, standards, codes, good practices and guidelines (or their principles for better solutions) apply as appropriate. All proposals must be consistent with the BLNPMP, BLSDP and the SSP, including the Site Disturbance, Ski Slope Grooming, and Rehabilitation – Standards and Guidelines 1993 (PWS) where relevant. Where there is inconsistency between the prescriptions or recommendations of this Ski Slope Plan and the BLNPMP or BLSDP, the prescriptions of the BLNPMP or BLSDP prevail. Any development for which these may not apply, but which may be adverse to its environment, local values, sustainability and accessibility and affordability to the public, must be sympathetic to the relevant values. The PWS RAA (EIA) process should ensure this.

7.2.2 Other Parameters, Assumptions and Findings • the area is a unique visitor services / recreation zone and skiing slope • snow, associated experiences and values remain the dominant value visitors seek • during ‘winter’ there is competition for space and potential activity conflict: the small area requires

‘give and take’ to accommodate all • most visitors are beginner to intermediate skiers and snow boarders on day visits • tow configurations should match the skill levels of the market • relatively low patronage and perhaps wind probably make a practicable chairlift uneconomic in

200935

• T-bars move more persons and suit snow boarders better than current platters • optimal safety is required (rocks in ski-runs are a major hazard) • winter temperatures support snow making • the current dam cannot be relied on to supply significantly more water • a range of recreational activities is desirable, including for ‘summer’ • the major ‘summer’ value is easy walking • maximising and optimising skiable terrain are required • persons who do not ski, hire toboggans, etc… have a right to enjoy natural snow and play at no

added cost • visitor numbers will be similar to recent years, but may increase with better service and promotion • infrastructure and services must be commercially viable • activities and use of infrastructure and services must be affordable to most potential patrons • some tows need to perform more reliably • most tow tracks need improvement • duplex tows are not favoured where they cut runs • stable services routes are required to better care for the environment and infrastructure and allow

seasonal removal of some structures to improve ‘summer’ aesthetics

35 This Plan has no intrinsic problem with a chairlift, however a chairlift would be likely to cost well over $500,000 for a good second-hand lift and well over $100,000 to install. While one could be fortunate enough to buy for less, it would be hard to know how much of a problem is being bought. New chair lifts are $2,500,000+. Wind and ice would be significant problems. A stoppage of one ‘big’ tow is worse than a stoppage of one of two smaller tows.


• new ground disturbance is allowed for proposals supported in this Plan, subject to specific PWS approval:

• snow-making would be of benefit

7.3.1 Village - Slope Interface

Seasonal signs at all main accesses to the Ski Slope should designate the ski slopes, activity areas and service locations (Map 4). Ideally services should be near and below the main accesses to respective activity areas where practicable, similarly major activities areas should be above the main accesses where practicable.

7.3.2 Access

Map 4 shows access remains as per 2008 with extensions (7.3.7 & 7.3.8) to existing locked routes.

7.3.3 ‘Summer’ Walking Tracks (see 7.3.1 and 7.13.2.1 also)

To encourage summer use, while minimising environmental impact, an easy ‘dry shoe’ walking loop from NTAC via Legges Tor shall be constructed per Map 1. The track is also the service route to Giblin Tow (7.3.8), beyond there the track curves around Giblin Peak on natural benches to access the Tor area from the west. The track is preferably T136 to Giblin Tow or a little further, then T2 to Legges Tor. The subordinate Giblin Peak track is preferably narrow T2. From Legges Tor to Village Road the track may be narrow T2. Care shall be taken not to compromise the values of the Summit Huts. Track markers must suit snow and be low maintenance.

• A walking track loop from NTAC via Legges Tor to the Village Road corner, with a link to Giblin Peak shall be built. The track shall be ‘dry shoe’ grade to Legges Tor, T1 from NTAC to Giblin Tow or a little further and T2 to Legges Tor where practicable.

• Signs shall be installed for interpretation (features like geomorphology, huts, skiing and flora) and ‘summer’ to show the location of toilets, tracks, features and views.

7.3.4 ‘Winter’ Pedestrian Circulation

Foot and vehicle activities should be separated in time or place if practicable. All potentially conflicting activities shall be separated by similar cordoning or fences. Should activities be developed below Little Slalom, they should be cordoned from pedestrians and general skiing. If a tow or ‘conveyor’ (eg. ‘Magic Carpet’) were installed to run from Snow Sports towards Village Tow near the toboggan - ski school boundary, local access directly to the tow or conveyor for relevant persons would be supported.

7.3.5 Pedestrian Access over Downhill Skiing Slopes in Skiing Season

Written permission may be gained for specific purposes at specific times from PWS. Snow on the track from NTAC to below Giblin Chute should be compacted (eg. snow groomer) to facilitate snow-shoe walking, oversnow vehicle use and cross-country skiing. Compaction will encourage stray pedestrians to stay off the skiing slopes. If front slope snow prevents skiing there, the track may be used for easier access to the back slopes. Part of the proposed Legges Tor loop is outside the main skiing areas:

• A sign shall be installed for skiing season to show pedestrian routes, viewing and activity areas and toilets. ‘Winter’ walks should include the dam, the track linking NTAC and Snow Sports and the Village Road circuit.

• Pedestrians may use the northern part of the Legges Tor loop at any time of year.

7.3.6 Egress to Public Shelter and Arrival Area

36 W1, W2, T1, T2, T3, T4 and R are track grades defined by the Tasmanian Track Classification Scheme, 1994. The first are the easy highest grade tracks and the last the most difficult: R is a route.


Skiing between the main Ski Slopes and the car park, via the boardwalk between Snow Sports and the day shelter, should not be permitted. Ski access to the car park, via the route between Rumdoodle and Edelweiss, helps separate able skiers from pedestrians and gives more direct access to the carpark. Therefore, ski access via this route is supported (Maps 3 & 6). However, Edelweiss lodge partially obstructs direct access from the village / car park to the skifield.

• A safe direct ski access route, between the ski slopes and the visitor day shelter/car park, will be maintained and improved (ie. rationalise building locations, widen and delineate to separate different users) where opportunities arise.

7.3.7 Oversnow Vehicles (OSV) and Vehicle Access in Skiing Season (see also 7.13.2.1)

It is critical that oversnow vehicles travel where snow is sufficient to protect underlying ground. Passage over sodden snow should be avoided. This protects the vehicle, rider and the environment. There are some preferred routes when snow permits (Map 4). Preferred routes include all service roads, routes and tracks. The main preferred route passes below the bases of Bass and Village Tows then turns west (up) to the southern (back) slopes passing near Fannies workshop. A deck suited to snow vehicles should be placed over the drainage immediately inside the main skifield entry. Consideration should be given to fitting snow tracks to wheeled vehicles when required for use over snow.

During tow operations oversnow vehicle use on the downhill skiing slopes should be restricted to trained tow company employees, Ski Patrol and those helping in an emergency. Other use of the vehicles on the skiing slopes is preferred when tows are not operating. Snow groomers (OSV) are supported, but should be used when or where tows are not operating.

Oversnow vehicles must be registered, drivers shall be licensed and the drivers / vehicle, as appropriate, have a written Grant of Authority (permit) from PWS. Any OSV with a permit may use the service roads to NTAC and Snow Sports and the top of the car park. Where and when there is considerable pedestrian traffic, vehicle use should be minimal, except for aiding safety, emergencies and the good running of the skifield. BLC should consider whether basic training or induction for safe use of OSV’s should be developed and provided for private OSV users.

• Policy and Guidelines for oversnow vehicle use should be continually reviewed and improved, and are best made in consultation with users.

• All oversnow vehicle use shall be consistent with the PWS OSV Policy. • OSV use shall be permitted through a Grant of Authority for emergencies, tow servicing,

provisioning and staffing, gas deliveries and races which require their use. • For special events and persons with occasional need for OSV use, permission may be granted to

specific persons for specific purposes.

7.3.8 Vehicle Access in ‘Summer’

The service road to NTAC may have a service route extended to Giblin Tow, wide enough and to a standard which safely allows ‘summer’ use by light to medium weight machinery (eg ATV, RV37 , <12 tonne excavator) and ‘winter’ use by a snow groomer. The route shall be gated at NTAC and allow for a second dam (Map 4). The vehicle service route shall be part of the ‘summer’ walking loop to Legges Tor (7.3.3) and may be used for OSV’s and services conduits. A light vehicle service access to the Summit workshop, from the upper village road, is also supported where necessary.

Service routes should be constructed sensitively and, where practicable, disturbed ground shall be used38. New service routes shall be installed to minimise compromise to local hydrology and the water supply.

37 RV = road vehicle, ATV = all terrain vehicle and 4WD’s 38 There is considerable disturbed ground from NTAC to Giblin Tow (Photograph 4).


Service roads will generally not endure much traffic so need not meet normal road requirements39. A permeable coarse rock base or equivalent is recommended, avoiding or bridging intact cushion plant and sphagnum areas where practical. Impacted areas of the main Home Trail may also be made sufficiently durable for ‘summer’ use by light vehicles (eg. ATV). Planting stock for rehabilitation will need to be ready before construction starts. Some vehicle use on tow tracks may occur per 7.12.4.3.

It may be beneficial to install rock edging ‘flush’ with the road surface along the upper village road (ie between Snow Sports and Summt lift shed) to improve visual quality and better define the road edge.

All vehicle access to new service routes must be approved (written authority) by PWS for specific vehicles, purposes and intervals.

• A vehicle route able to sustain medium vehicle use (eg ATV, 4WD, ≤12 tonne excavator) from NTAC to Giblin Tow may be constructed. Intended services lines should be laid in the route during construction

• The preferred OSV route to Fannies may be improved where required to sustain light vehicle use (ie. ATV) in ‘summer’ and winter groomer and OSV use.

7.4 Communication (‘winter’)

7.4.1 Intramountain

A communication system shall be maintained by all parties operating mountain services for information transmission without undue delay. Each party is responsible for their part of the communication system. In emergencies all parties must cooperate to ensure messages promptly reach intended and relevant parties.

7.4.2 External

A means of communicating with emergency services, authorities and the public shall be maintained by all parties operating mountain services. In the days leading to and during the skiing season there should be regular communication of the status of snow, road and business operations to the public and relevant authorities. Reports should be accurate and cameras placed to convey a fair assessment of the front and back slopes. The cameras and associated hardware must not present a danger to anyone and should be attached to existing infrastructure.

• Up to three new structures with cameras connected to the internet may be authorised within the Ski Slope to communicate snow conditions to the public.

• A person or entity should be formally responsible for the snow camera(s) and website and keep information current.

• Emergency services contact details should be made easily accessible on the ski slopes. PWS, BLC & Patrol shall liaise on this.

7.5 Utilities and Services Infrastructure

Sewerage and major footpaths are not desirable within the main downhill slopes. New or extended services and utilities for commercial use alone are the responsibility of the commercial entity(s). The service vehicle route of 7.3.8 may be used for services (eg electricity, communications, sewerage and water).

• PWS and commercial interests may share use and responsibility for infrastructure. The degree of responsibility is to accord with use by each entity and public use; PWS shall be responsible in proportion to its own plus public use.

7.5.1 Water and Water Supply

39 This is normal practice for other skifields such as Perisher; it also lessens aesthetic impacts: Perisher Blue Ski Resort – ski slope Master Plan. See Appendix A7 - A.4, 7.2 paragraphs 2 & 3. Helicopter use for ordinary servicing, maintenance and improvements severely compromises affordability.


The current dam holds about 0∙1% of the potential 250 - 300 Megalitres a year inflow. Unless there is snow-making or considerable increase in visitation or accommodation, there is no significant need for another dam (refer to 7.16). The current dam has drained on occasions, though this may largely be addressed through improved village water conservation measures and maintenance to avoid leaking plumbing. Supply volume may be increased by raising the wall a little or removing sediment. Sediment removal may gain only several percent more water. Water users should be encouraged to not drip taps (to prevent freezing) and collect water from roofed buildings. The quality of water intended for drinking should be monitored and appropriate action taken if unsuitable. Water quality testing / monitoring is required through the BLNPMP and should be included in any updated skifield development plan. Facilities and Infrastructure (eg. diesel engines, service routes) within dam catchments need to be carefully maintained and monitored to avoid contamination of drinking water.

7.5.2 Electricity

Grid electricity has the ability to greatly enhance prospects for the Ski Slope all year around. The cost of using energy and some maintenance would fall dramatically, some environmental and other concerns would also disappear (noise, fumes, potential fuel and oil spills and fire). Snow-making becomes much more affordable and would benefit the area greatly; it offers more predictable seasons. The BLNPMP and BLSDP allow for grid connection and the Ski Slope Plan must also respond to the potential for grid connection.

7.5.3 Toilets

Where possible, toilets need to be easily accessible year round. Toilets are currently available in the public shelter in the village but not closer to the ski slopes. The BLSDP 1993 recommended investigating whether additional public toilets could be incorporated in any upgraded Ski Patrol building. While water and sewer lines reach Ski Patrol and a public toilet attached to Ski Patrol would be easily accessible from the slopes, use by the public must not interfere with ski patrol operations. Construction of a new stand alone toilet building would be of low priority due to costs, limited space and potential impacts on circulation in the area.

• Signs shall clearly advise the location of public toilets. • As opportunities arise, investigate options for providing public access to toilets within existing or

redeveloped buildings, close to the ski slope run out area.

7.6 Snow Sports

The building may be improved to save energy and increase function. Public lockers may be installed (7.11.5) for, although the BLSDP says lockers will be included in the public shelter, this is unlikely. The hire and sales business may expand to cover acceptable new activities, including those identified in this Plan.

• Necessary additions to the Snow Sports building and deck for safety, public enjoyment and commercial amenity which meet relevant legislation and policy are supported.

7.6.2 Beginner Area, Ski School and Instruction (‘winter’)

A beginner area should be available for anyone under instruction, including those not hiring instructors. All persons should be on skis, snow boards or equivalent. The area must be smooth, of gentle slope, have a run-out, be free of hazards and be separated from interfering activity. A run-out, preferably permanent, can be made to solve the water and safety problem and stop learners heading downhill into the fence. Other snow users should be kept out, at least during training.

• The perimeter of the beginner / instruction area may be clearly delineated by a ‘soft’ seasonal fence which allows room for OSV’s and skiers to pass below tows

• The few remaining rock obstacles may be removed • A run-out may be constructed for the beginner area to improve safety; it may be grassed earth. • Drainage of potentially standing water may be facilitated.


• The vegetation should be improved for visual amenity and erosion prevention.

7.7 Parks & Wildlife Service

The original visitor day shelter plans included accommodation and office space for the managing authority, but limited funds constrained final construction. Managing authority staff currently makes occasional use of office space within the Ski Patrol building and the adjacent workshop.

• The managing authority will have continued access to the Ski Patrol building for office space and may incorporate additional space in any rebuilt or expanded Ski Patrol building.

7.8 Ski Patrol (‘winter’)

The Patrol remains heavily dependent on volunteers who undertake considerable training and travel at their own expense. The Patrol must be resourced to ensure effective operations.

The BLSDP1993 notes that, subject to funding, the existing Ski Patrol building will be upgraded, redesigned or extended as necessary to provide space for effective ski patrol operation. A replacement building with more space is likely to be needed and must have unimpeded access to the slopes, service roads and car park. The building(s) should meet all needs, including additional room for PWS, public space and amenity, extra accommodation and storage for patrollers and medical and rescue supplies. There must be a good view of the busy areas of the local slopes. The building’s footprint should be minimised (potentially through a second storey), but allow extra accommodation, treatment room, public waiting space and amenity. A redesign should avoid interfering with the view from Kunama.

In line with the Civil Liabilities Act 2002, Ski Patrol need not mark natural obstacles.

• The Ski Patrol building should be improved, consistent with the policies of the BLSDP 1993. • PWS shall continue to support the Ben Lomond Ski Patrol, particularly through provision of a

maintained ski patrol building.

7.8.1 Helicopter Evacuation

Helicopter evacuation could occur for severely injured or ill persons where saving time or a ‘soft ride’ is vital. An area close to Ski Patrol on a fairly flat area off the downhill slope should remain available. The main caveats are no interfering structures and loose material near that ground; including no overhead lines. There should be no glass and no loose material within distances advised by relevant authorities. Only the potential for an ice rink in the area is envisaged which need not interfere. Map 4 indicates a suitable area.

The area may remain unaltered or have subtle marks and anchor points for a cordon. A potable cordoning and marking kit could be kept by PWS / Ski Patrol.

• A suitable area along the service road north of Ski Patrol shall be reserved for emergency use.

7.9 Services Operating Hours (‘winter’)

Many complained about businesses being closed during advised and usual business hours. Some significant problems resulted. This Plan can only suggest the insertion of performance clauses in relevant leases and licences when the opportunity arises and new policy in the Development Plan:

• When licences for commercial operators are renewed and / or changes to infrastructure occur, include performance criteria with the aim of ensuring improved visitor services and reliable operating times.

7.10 Slope Accommodation


Ski Patrol and PWS may have additional accommodation space, should it be warranted, within a redesigned Ski Patrol building (refer 7.8).

Summit lodges are dealt with under 7.17

7.11 Recreational Activities

7.11.1 Designated Activity Areas and Guidelines

Map 4 shows areas designated for activities. All activities should be conducted with reasonable care for safety, the environment and local values: minimum impact advice and the national Alpine Code should be posted prominently in relevant public areas.

7.11.2 Tobogganing (‘winter’)

Tobogganers require fairly easy pedestrian access to a slope with good snow, glide, sufficiently steep run-in and safe run-out. A steeper run-in and gliding slope is required when snow is soft or slow.

Two options for the provision of a safe toboggan area have been identified in the development of this SSP:

• Option (1) Improve the current public play / toboggan area, providing raised sides, drainage (or further bridge wet areas), run-out(s) and potentially a longer or steeper run-in(s).

When shaping the toboggan run(s), up to 12.5o rotation of the northern boundary fence south about the north-west corner is allowed to enlarge the bottom of the beginner area. The toboggan run(s) may be groomed to shape and grassed, utilise a wooden structure or other approved baled material or a mixture of all. ‘Dendix’ or a similar snow-holding surface may be used in ski season. More than one run may be built side by side as part of one unit. A run may be narrow to facilitate major snow maintenance when warranted40. Given the limited resources of PWS, other commercial operators should be allowed to partly or wholly resource facility improvement.

• Option (2) Develop a natural snow holding chute north of Summit Tow and east of Little Slalom (see Map 4), groom as needed and include a run-out and facilitate access. A wooden structure may be used for the run-out. A fence and signs should delineate the area designated for tobogganers and discourage them wandering onto the main ski slopes. This option is considered more appropriate for development and management by a commercial operator.

Option 1 is in a poorer snow-holding area, but may be more affordable, have very limited environmental impact (much of the area is already heavily modified) and be easily accessible from the village. Option 2, where vegetation is largely unaltered, is subject to more assessment for potential environmental impacts and likely use, however the top left photograph of page 115 shows there need not be much grooming.

• Toboggans should only be hired when there is sufficient snow. • The managing authority (ie PWS) and commercial interests should work together to facilitate

Option 1. • A commercial operator may install a ‘conveyor’ (eg ‘Magic Carpet’) or other small tow to service

toboggan areas and charge a fee for use of the area. The tow should be multi-use if appropriate.

Toboggan runs onto the Village street are popular, but most are outside this SSP area and should be considered in any Village Site Plan or the BLSDP.

40 Maintenance may include the use of farmed snow or a snow-gun, see Snow-Making (7.16).


7.11.3 Snow Boarding (‘winter’)

Tows present problems for many snow boarders. Chair lifts that would cater well are probably uneconomic currently. A solution is to shape and compact snow per 7.12.4.3.

• Tow tracks and loading and offloading areas may be slope groomed and / or decked where necessary and shall have snow maintained when in use to ensure a smooth surface, without side-slope, which facilitates patrons remaining on track and prevents contact with rock or other material

• Tow egresses may be slope groomed. Operating tows shall have skiable snow at least five metres wide on their egress(es) to main skiable runs; the snow shall be sufficient to prevent patrons contacting other material.

7.11.3.1 Terrain Park (‘winter’) A terrain park needs a run-in, adequate slope and at least a few structures on which snow boarders and skiers may ride. The structures can be fixtures or removable. Snow fences will be needed. Any terrain park should be an integral part of the main skiing slopes with good access from a major tow and under the responsibly of an incorporated or commercial entity.

• A terrain park must avoid major runs • Flexibility in positioning terrain items should be consulted between the owner, tow company and

PWS

Two Options for the provision of a terrain park have been identified through this SSP:

Option (1) involves an up to 25 m wide strip of the ski slope near the 2009 Village Tow, with good access from the proposed Village Tow. The activity should not interfere with the main Home Trail, Milk Run or access to the back slopes from Summit Tow.

Option (2), if a pedestrian accessed terrain park is commercially viable/sufficiently patronised, a limited area below Little Slalom may be considered which does not interfere with other activities. The access path should be multi-purpose if a toboggan, tubing or jumping area(s) is present. The area(s) should be separated by barrier from the rest of the ski slopes, but may have an access from Summit Tow to expand use and improve viability.

Each option has advantages and disadvantages in regard to ease of access, conflict with other use, environmental impact and affordability. Option 2 may require a significant area of slope grooming.

• Work with interested parties to undertake a detailed assessment of terrain park options, particularly options identified in this SSP, including environmental impacts, affordability, commercial viability, access and potential conflicts with other users.

7.11.4 Snow Play (‘winter’)

It is preferred that part of the current play area remains available for play as it is adjacent the main footpath. A secondary area may be useful, like the relatively popular upper banks of lower Village Road, but are just outside the Ski Slope. Should the 2008 play area be groomed to provide tubing and / or toboggan runs, a separate general play area should be designated within the play area (Map 4).

• The designated snow play area shall be the southern part of the 2008 play / toboggan area • Should snow regularly become unavailable in the designated play area, signs directing persons to an

area of suitable reliable snow shall be allowed. The area should be protected from other use.

7.11.5 Competitions (‘winter’ mostly)

The racing hut may have a short loading ramp to facilitate moving equipment via oversnow vehicle. Racing cables (ie. electric sensor cable for timing purposes) placed on snow are obtrusive and unsafe. Cable of dull


colour placed under bushes and rocks may be desirable but would be subject to PWS approval and any applicable standards or codes. (Other cables exist on the slopes which are invisible by a few tens of metres.)

• Up to three permanent race timing cables are supported provided the cables and their locating markers present no danger to snow users.

7.11.6 Cross-Country Skiing (‘winter’)

The BLSDP1993 states that cross country skiing is permitted in all of the skifield, excluding ‘Management Zone B’ (the main ski slope). However, access to Summit Pass, Surprise Valley and beyond southern Giblin Peak via the Ski Slope is desirable; markers to the latter two areas are within the lower Ski Slope. Use of the Ski Slope by-cross country skiers also appears feasible under conditions where these activities do not interfere with use by downhill skiers utilising tows. A preferred X/C route down the downhill skiing area has been identified (Map 1).

• Cross-country skiing routes will generally not be developed on the downhill skiing slopes • The service route from NTAC to Giblin Tow may be groomed for cross-country skier enjoyment

and practice. A narrower groomed route for skiers may continue up to 150m west of Giblin Tow. • When the BLSDP is reviewed, permit cross-country skiing within the Ski Slopes under certain

conditions, particularly when tows are not operating, in areas outside of serviced ski runs, on the preferred downhill X/C route shown on Map 1, in the ‘beginner area’ near Snow Sports, south of back slope tow bases and up to 1535 m ASL directly below Giblin Chute.

• Subject to a review of the BLSDP, marking of a cross country ski route from the village road north towards Ben Bullen is supported. The route would be on or near the alignment of the proposed summer walking track, where a rough track / pad already partly exists.

7.11.7 Jumps (‘winter’)

A few have suggested a jumping and training area from Little Slalom. Obvious parts of structures should be removable outside of skiing season.

• Where effective risk management can demonstrated by proponent, jump(s) and / or training service may be permitted from Little Slalom or other approved locations.

• Provide information which allows skiers to understand risks associated with using jumps and to assess which jumps are within their skill level, eg difficulty rating systems and signs.

• A commercial or incorporated body must be responsible for the infrastructure, risk management and operational practices.

• The jumps should not be obvious out of skiing season or removable.

7.11.8 Walking (see 7.3.1, 7.3.3, 7.3.5, 7.3.8 & 7.13.2.1)

7.11.9 Tubing (‘winter’)

Tubing has similar slope demands to tobogganing, the difference being the use of inflated rubber annuli. Tubes are more apt to rotate as they descend, they are less steerable, can be harder to slow and have different speed and directional characteristics. Tobogganing and tubing are best separated to decrease the risk of collision.

Two options for the provision of a tubing area have been identified through this SSP (see Map 4):

Option (1) Formation of a smoothly groomed tubing run south of tobogganing runs in the current play area, between tobogganing and general play. Side walls and a run-out must be included to retain users within the run. Snow should be augmented when required.


Option (2) A natural snow holding chute near Little Slalom, groomed as needed, including walls41, run-out and facilitated access. An obvious barrier and signs must define the tubing area.

Option 1 is in a poorer snow-holding area, but may be more affordable, have less environmental impact (much of the area is already heavily modified) and be easily accessible form the village. Option 2 is proposed in an area where vegetation is largely unaltered. Option 2 would be subject to more assessment for potential environmental impacts and likely use, however the top left photograph of p115 indicates grooming could be minimal.

• Tubes should only be hired when there is sufficient snow. • The managing authority (eg PWS) and a commercial interests should work together to facilitate

Option 1. • A commercial operator may install a conveyor (eg ‘Magic Carpet’) or suitable small tow to service

the tube area (to be shared with tobogganing and other use(s) if appropriate) and charge a fee for use of the area.

7.11.10 Oversnow Vehicles Tours (‘winter’)

When snow is excellent it would be reasonable to run commercial tours to the Legges Tor area when tows are not operating. Tours otherwise must avoid the downhill skiing areas. Snow must be sufficiently firm and deep throughout the route to prevent ground contact, plant damage and bogging of the vehicles used. All significant ski runs must be avoided when there is a risk of adversely affecting the snow. Drivers must be able to demonstrate to PWS that they are suitably experienced and skilled. For safety and to prevent changing the character of the slopes, tours to Legges Tor would only run within the hour before tow operations start and during the hour and a half from 15 minutes after tows stop, to allow skiers to leave the slopes. Ideally no more than six vehicles should be on tour at any time.

• PWS may permit commercial oversnow vehicle tours in the Ski Slope area subject to minimising ski run damage.

7.11.11 Ice Skating (all year)

A skating rink is technically feasible and cheaper to operate than near sea level, particularly from grid power. It could provide an alternative activity when skiing is impossible or poor, any time of year. When not in use a rink may need covering to minimise ice irregularities. A relatively flat area at the foot of the Ski Slope, south of Snow Sports or north of Ski Patrol is acceptable. If a roof or weather-proof venue is wanted it should be in the Village and subject to the BLSDP or a Village Site Plan. The rink area could double for other activities, like tennis or mini-cricket. An ice skating facility would need to be commercially funded and managed and would be subject to environmental impact assessment.

• A commercially funded and managed ice skating facility is supported at the foot of the Ski Slope, subject to impact assessment.

7.11.12 Other Activities

Very short ice climbs exist at times on the ski slopes and do not interfere with other activities. This could continue but should not be detrimental to skiing or the environment.

• Ice climbing is supported but must not interfere with any other activity

A climbing wall is more suited to the Village area and would be subject to the BLSDP or a Village Site plan.

41 Walls can be temporary like snow compacted against acceptable baled vegetation.


7.11.13 Social (all year)

Day trip families and others need a convenient place near the main ski slope to hold equipment, clothing and food. Many visitors would like a simple viewing and / or eating area with shelter very close to the main ski slope. Those working or picnicking in ‘summer’ also need the facility. Tables and chairs should be maintained near Ski Patrol (for patrol use) and the deck of Snow Sports, a few more tables may be added near Snow Sports if required. A small windbreak for the Snow Sports area would enhance its use. Location map(s) should indicate the presence of the facility.

• Opportunities for the provision of lockers for public use near the ski slopes should be investigated. • Consideration shall be given to a windproof transparent wall and / or covered area, preferably near

Snow Sports.

7.11.14 Future Possibilities

The need to provide further attractions that are likely to increase appropriate use of the area out of ski season has been identified42. New activities and development should be aimed at making better use of what is present and be compatible with permitted activities and values of the area. New activities and / or associated service and infrastructure should be discussed with PWS, who shall liaise with key stakeholders and BLC43 where ever possible before deciding. PWS may approve other activities in the ski slopes where consistent with the objectives and policies of the SSP, BLSDP and BLNPMP.

42 Ben Lomond National Park Tourism Feasibility Study, 2006. 43 If BLC or the equivalent does not exist, form and consult a representative BL community group.


7.12 Tow Use Activities (‘winter’) Appendix 7 discusses tows verses lifts.

7.12.1.1 Skier Access to Tows Loading from both sides of most tows via a ╩ or T-shaped entry would give better access from more directions and better slope use by reducing the concentration of snow wear by spreading use over a greater area. Some localised rock grooming is needed. Winter grooming could then further improve access and protect the ground.

7.12.1.2 Skier Circulation Slope grooming is needed to facilitate major accesses and egresses of the skiing slopes (Maps 3 & 7):

• Downhill skiing trails shall allow for safe skiing and snow boarding at least three abreast.

7.12.2.1 Proposed Tow Rearrangement The commercial tow lift operator has previously proposed to replace Village platter with Fannies T-bar. The Village platter, or a T-bar if available economically, would be placed on the original Big Ben site. The proposed Village T-bar would be reoriented to, but short of, a few metres above the current lower Fannies offload (Map 6) so would not serve the summit area. However it is rare that the entire summit area has skiable snow. The change would overcome the chronic under capacity of Village Tow and decabling problems: a T-bar can move about twice the patrons per hour of a Poma-style tow and far fewer breakdowns are expected. Waiting time should be reduced greatly allowing more enjoyment of the ski slopes.

The first Village T-bar offload should provide more capacity for beginners. The proposed terminal offload would be on a broad exposed rock shoulder44 which suffers wind scour to the extent it may receive almost no snow. Wind can make progress to Fannies and Bills awkward. Entry into the Milk Run is rocky even in good snow (Photographs 2 & 3). Skiing west towards the rear slopes is not easy as some of it is slightly uphill and there are many exposed rocks in most snow conditions (same photographs). While a tow track can be side-boarded to retain snow, the exposed offload would require more than snow fencing to ensure a good offload with suitable egress in several directions. The agreed grooming associated with the proposal is decapitating or removing a few isolated protruding boulders, most near the lower half of the tow.

Not far beyond, and very close to, the intended alignment is the main Fannies offload and further along is the Big Ben slope; both hold snow well. Extending the proposed tow to Fannies or a little more would ensure good back slope access and save considerable ongoing cost and effort maintaining snow on the proposed offload. Grooming of rocks and several fences to facilitate access to the Milk Run and Bills Tow is strongly recommended. Thus tow extension or significant slope and winter grooming is warranted at a minimum.

To improve safety, as mentioned in this Plan, larger than usual offload(s) in the less sloped area(s) and clear signs are planned, the lift would run a little more slowly when appropriate, the tow track is to be better constructed and well maintained when in use.

7.12.2.2 Slope Capacity (Terrain Capacity) Noting caution about slope capacity accuracy for poor to average conditions, the total slope capacity would increase by over 50 skiers if Fannies Tow replaces Village Tow, and by about 100 - 150 for the front slopes. However back slope capacity would temporarily decrease by about 80 skiers with the removal of Fannies Tow. When Big Ben tow is installed, Tables 7.1 & 7.4 show a likely total slope capacity of 680 - 950.

If near fully utilised the much increased front slope capacity from the Village T-bar would cause much increased snow wear near loading, offloading and other high use areas in mild conditions, reducing the effective slope capacity. This makes the need for snow grooming a high priority.

Maximum slope capacity would be approached if all tows but Bass and Creek were T-bar equivalents (re capacity, reliability and patron suitability) and a double or triple chairlift introduced over the 30 Second line:

44 Many have expressed concern that the proposed Village T-bar does not reach Fannies although feasible, provision for extension is recommended to greatly increase the skiable area served and to facilitate akja use in emergencies.


slope capacity would be about 1120 for excellent conditions, Table 7.10. However, without significantly more patrons (income), snow-farming and / or grid power and snow-making, sufficient control of snow wear is probably not feasible or affordable so probably precludes the chairlift development until patronage rises.

7.12.2.3 Tow Capacities Effective tow capacity at Ben Lomond is also affected by variable snow cover: tows may not run full length. Tables 7.2 - 7.3 provide acceptable tow (CCC) and slope capacities for ‘average’ and ‘excellent’ snow conditions for the proposed tow rearrangements of 7.12.2.1. Tables 5.1 - 5.5 provide data for acceptable slope densities and 2008 tow and slope capacities.

To satisfy skiers and snow boarders, the capacities should cater for the most likely situations (‘average’) which is the intention of Table 7.2. Calculations are thus indicative, but reasonable, except for poor snow.

Total comfortable carrying capacity (tows) will temporarily decrease by about 35 - 40 skiers if Fannies Tow replaces Village Tow until a Big Ben tow is installed. The proposed tow rearrangement would not increase total tow capacity (CCC) unless the T-bar option (or an equivalent tow re CCC, reliability and patron suitability) for Big Ben is implemented. The front slopes terrain and tow capacities would increase while the back slopes capacities decrease. The resultant back slopes tow capacity shortfall is effectively about 80 (of 350 - 490) because Fannies (capacity 128) is usually run very slowly. This amounts to ≤ 25 % decrease in the usual tow capacity for the back slopes. Given more persons should reach the back slopes via Village T-bar, a replacement for Fannies should be expeditiously installed. Installing the available platter on the back slopes would reduce back slope comfortable tow capacity by 30 - 40 persons or about 15 %.

Making all tows T-bar equivalents (re CCC, reliability, safety and suitability to patrons), except perhaps Bass and Creek, can further improve tow capacity45. Tables 7.5 & 7.6 show acceptable capacity can be increased to about 683 for average and 797 for good conditions. While a possible further development of tow capacity could be installation of a chairlift along the former 30 Second line, the caveats of 7.12.2.2 & 7.12.3.1 apply. Skifield tow capacity with a double chair is about 875 for average conditions (eg Creek Tow not operating) and almost 1020 for excellent conditions (tows running full length and moderately fast).

7.12.3.1 Tow and Lift Improvement and Installation Principles This Plan has no objection to a chairlift in principle, they have advantages, however the usual costs strongly suggest a chairlift is inappropriate until patronage is sufficient to justify one. Another negative is that the stoppage of a large capacity lift can be worse than for one of two or more lower capacity tows. More than one offload may also be impracticable. If a chairlift is considered this Plan very strongly recommends (1) obtaining a fulsome history of the lift from all key perspectives unless new, (2) thorough investigation by knowledgeable and competent persons (3) an appropriate engineers report, including ice and wind considerations, (4) good evidence that the viable total costs to be recovered are no more than 2008 tow ticket prices + CPI, (5) detachable chairs to reduce ice problems and (6) the lift will not cause concentrations of skiers that uncontrollably degrade the quality of skiing, enjoyment and the environment. Only if a chair-lift meets the recommendations and is feasible, would it be preferred for the front slope.

When a tow is replaced, it should be by transport suited to the activities and carrying capacity it will serve. Except for Creek Tow, each new or replacement tow should have carrying capacity, safety, reliability, speed and patron suitability at least that of a good T-bar unless contra-indicated; this includes other than T-bar. Snow wear needs to be minimised by configuring tows to reduce skier concentrations where practicable.

Bass and Summit mix slow and hesitant beginner skiers with fast higher ability persons; for safety, skier separation around the Bass offload is recommended46.

Desirable characteristics / policies for future tows are: • All new and rearranged tows shall serve the maximum skiable area reasonable

45 Placing a T-bar on Giblin is more awkward than for other existing tow sites. 46 A ‘soft’ brightly coloured cordon should be maintained immediately above both sides the Bass offload for at least 20 m in a shallow inverted V to deflect skiers from above. To aid the descent of Summit for skiers preferring better snow near Bass, a ramp off the small cliff north of the top of Bass is recommended.


• Except for special purpose tows (toboggan, beginners, tubing, etc…) all new and rearranged tows shall provide the maximum vertical ascent reasonable.

• All tows shall have their loading and offloading in areas of good snow collection or the areas shall have adequate snow fences and / or access for a winter groomer

• Where practicable and reasonable tows shall have multiple offloads to cater for a range of skill levels • Tows shall not be sited on good runs • Tows shall be sited to minimise mixing very different skill levels • In so far as practicable tows shall be positioned to meet visitor skill demand • Duplexes are not favoured: if they are used where they cut runs, there must be a compelling

advantage and two-sided entries • Existing tow lines are preferred for future tows and lifts

7.12.3.2 Specific Tow Improvements Given the constraints and assumptions for user satisfaction, the following tow configuration is supported under this plan:

• Bills T-bar tow track groomed and / or decked to have no side slope and more snow fencing to improve snow on the offload area and egresses (High Priority)

• a T-bar (or equivalent) from the 2008 Village Tow base to near the lower Fannies offload with offloads at about 1485 m ASL and 1530 m ASL47. (Carrying patrons beyond 1530 ASL is ill-advised if a lift were placed on the former 30 Second Tow.) (High Priority)

• loading from both sides of all tows except Summit and Creek (Medium Priority) • a T-bar or equivalent on a former Big Ben line with snow fencing to west and northwest to improve

snow on the offload and egresses (a fast reliable ‘singles’ tow is acceptable as a short-term solution) (High Priority)

• Giblin Tow high offload may be improved (Medium Priority), and tow capacity increased when warranted (Low Priority)

• a protective barrier45 should be installed immediately above the Bass offload to redirect descending skiers; facilitating more use of southern Bass area is also recommended (The expense of moving Bass Tow now is considered unwarranted) (High Priority)

• minor grooming and ramp off the small cliff north of Bass48, 45 to facilitate descent of Summit away from Bass and decrease wear of the Summit chute area. (Appendix 7c provides a better solution should further tow development be warranted) (High Priority)

• a beginner tow may be installed along the lower Fannies site (Map 6)49 (as needed) • If snow grooming permits use, Creek Tow may be extended to feed slightly beyond Fannies.” (as

needed / practicable)

If there are problems with winter grooming overcoming snow wear near the loading areas of the front slopes a slow hand-line tow may be used to disperse skiers before feeding them to the main tows. A hand tow should be very near horizontal and may not occupy more than 40 % of the distance to an adjacent tow.

Some other activities may be served by small tows or equivalent:

• the hand tow (eg Mighty Mite), conveyor (eg Magic Carpet) or similar of 7.11.12 & 7.11.9 may be used near the Beginner Area50, it may be portable

• a portable tow to access good skiing which is not served by other tows • Creek Tow may be removed for use elsewhere51 or remain • a small tow / conveyer for options (2) tubing and tobogganing areas is supported if warranted

47 If the A E Village T-bar is built as proposed, this plan will allow a small re-alignment and extension of it to halfway between Fannies and Big Ben at the foot of the summit boulder field (Map 4) to better cover back slope access. 48 The ramp need only involve some of the cliff and minimises grooming requirements; ramp hand-railing may be required 49 The tow should end below the Home Trail, beginners may need transport there via service route 50 A Magic Carpet from Snow Sports along the toboggan - beginner area border towards Village Tow could serve beginners, tobogganing, tubing, staff and perhaps others 51 See Appendix 7 “Ski Lifts or Tows”. Choices may be top of Fannies (advanced), bottom of Fannies (beginners) or just above the new Village tow to allow skiing of a frequently snow-filled gully from the summit block (if a 30 Second lift were not present); if Village Tow not moved to Big Ben, Creek may be used in lieu.


Tables 7.5 & 7.6 show the likely acceptable tow capacities (as CCC), and Table 7.8 the slope capacities for converting tows to T-bar carrying-equivalents. While slope capacity remains between 680 and 950, the tow CCC increases to between 683 and 800+ persons (cf. 539 and 680). When short-term demand is particularly high, tow capacity can be increased economically and safely by speeding up most tows (within design speed). Thus more carrying capacity can be achieved on existing tow lines.

In mild weather or when snow is thin, some terrain may only last short intervals until snow wear or melt has its way52. Because of this there is a strong argument for some tow (and slope) overcapacity in the form of extra tows to allow areas to rest from skiing. (This is done weekdays from about mid-season when demand permits: a tow is closed and another opened to reduce the effects of snow wear on mild days.) Without that overcapacity there is a risk of no skiing sooner. However, there are very significant costs to improving, rearranging and purchasing tows. The degree of overcapacity is a commercial decision. This Plan can only allow for reasonable overcapacity that maintains affordability to customers.

Ultimately priority must be the most effective means of reliably improving enjoyment in average snow conditions at reasonable cost after considering that if patrons become frustrated or can’t afford skiing, patronage falls and viability fades.

Tows diminish skiable terrain, thus chairlifts must be considered if there were an imperative for a carrying capacity of significantly more than about 700. Appendix 7 & Tables 7.7, 7.9 & 7.10 indicate what could be achieved with a chairlift. Total slope capacity could be increased to 750 - 1120 (570 - 770 in 2008) with a total tow capacity (CCC) of 790 - 1100 (470 - 770 in 2008), snow permitting. Too large a capacity chairlift, like a quadruple, especially on the front slopes, could so concentrate snow wear that for loading, offloading, rises and narrow parts of runs snow would disappear quickly and close the slopes. Precautions to prevent this would be part of development. If the development were unaffordable to patrons or could not ensure overcoming daily snow wear, capping skier and snow boarder numbers may be required for some conditions.

• The effective tow capacity of Ben Lomond should not increase significantly beyond about 800 persons without demonstrating that snow wear is controllable, the tow service is viable and tow ticket prices affordable.

• The managing authority should encourage upgrading and renewing of and improvements to tows to enhance reliability, safety and enjoyment.

• Consideration should be given to some self-loading of some tows53.

7.12.3.3 Future Climate and Tows Given this Plan is for 25 years and climate and user trends are uncertain, some allowance must be made for unforeseeable changes in trend or conditions. Should snowfall decrease to a level which threatens the viability of tow and other services, Appendix 7 suggests possible ways to improve the viability. These options would require additional approval from the managing authority.

In the unlikely event that skier and snow boarder demands increase sufficiently and snowfall is acceptable chairlift(s) (Appendix 7) and their caveats (7.12.2.2 & 7.12.3.1) should be considered.

7.12.3.4 Facilitating Tow Capacity and Safety Loading, offloading, egresses and tow tracks need to be easy to use, otherwise tow capacity can be lowered and patrons frustrated. On T-bars an errant patron can bring down themself and their T-companion and cause injury. Winter grooming is required. Loading and offloading is covered in 7.12.4.1 - .2 and tow tracks in 7.12.4.3, however patrons should be encouraged to rapidly move from offloading areas. A few more snow fences would improve carrying capacity. Actions are encouraged which minimise derailing / decabling.

All tows age, get damaged and break down so need care and maintenance. Old tows need more attention. If not looked after tows present a risk to patrons. Standards change. Improvements, preseason servicing

52 Snow scuff already limits slope and tow capacity and enjoyment on occasions. After hours to days of skiing the lower front slopes frequently have numerous emerging rocks. Snow grooming cannot overcome this on steep rocky slopes like Summit. 53 Tow operators would be safer, freer to deal with accidents, snow groom locally, observe errant behaviour and take action. For safety there would have to be more than sufficient horizontal loading area of the right height relative to the carriers (T’s, platters, etc.).


and testing of tows needs to be completed shortly in advance of each skiing season. Removing the many T’s, spring boxes and platters to minimise exposure problems, for servicing and improving ‘summer’ aesthetics is essential. Spring boxes are heavy and many. This requires motorised transport to suitable storage and workshops. Up to 2009 there was no option but the use of unprotected ground. Due to natural obstacles some ground is necessarily frequented, resulting in route development and some erosion. To protect the environment, the medium weight service route and a light vehicle service from the main ski slope route per 7.3.8 is strongly recommended (Map 4). The routes should join near Fannies.

7.12.4 Ground Surfacing

Artificial surfacing can protect vegetation and soil from damage by skiers. In some areas, rocks present a significant natural obstacle on the ski slopes, can damage valuable skis and snow boards and diminish enjoyment. Once slope grooming is achieved, the preference is also winter grooming, secondly snow fences and thirdly surfaces to protect plants or skiers and improve enjoyment. For open drains surfacing is required and may be a deck or pipe.

Maintaining snow (winter grooming) can be impracticable in high traffic areas when mild, sunny, windy or no night freezing occurs. Where snow grooming cannot, or fences do not, sufficiently aid snow cover, protective surfacing should be considered. Some surfaces can be used to help catch or key snow, like ‘Dendix’. Surfaces should be pale to reflect the sun’s heat. Such surfaces do not blend into the scenery in ‘summer’ and should be removed outside the ski season.

Suitable laid turf may be successful, including on trafficked bare rock, but may need replacing from time to time. Camouflaging natural fibre carpet, in and through which vegetation may grow, may be advantageous in heavy use areas (ie off loading ramps): it can successfully prevent the erosion of steeper ground. Soil or humic litter could be added under or over it. It may be preferable to use snow fences in a few areas, like the main Summit offload.

Baled plant material which cannot propagate or introduce disease, or a synthetic alternative, may be valuable (with snow on top) to help form tubing and toboggan chutes, terrain park items, some jumps and the like. It reduces the need for slope grooming. Out of season it may be used to help soil loss mitigation, revegetation, erosion control, trap silt and stop frost heave.

• The installation and maintenance of all artificial ground surfacing and snow holding devices, permanent or temporary, will require a written authority from the managing authority (ie PWS)

• Approved protective artificial ground surfacing will be supported in highly trafficked areas, like loading and offloading environs and tow tracks and, for safety reasons, on rock in bottle necks of runs.

• Artificial surfacing may only be permanent if not visible from frequented summer walking routes, the village area or areas where the visitors gather. All temporary surfacing54 must be removed as soon as possible after closure of ski tows for the season.

• Where there is low environmental risk, the managing authority will support trialling new surfacing materials (eg. bales, carpet) in a limited area for a fixed period, with a view to approving its general use on the ski slopes. The use of such surfaces will focus on areas of expansive bare rock / soil and other difficult areas to improve snow adhesion.

7.12.4.1 Decking and Tow Adjuncts cf 7.13.2.2, 7.12.5.1 Wooden decks are appropriate for highly trafficked areas like loading and offloading environs, tow tracks and drainage, and over drainage channels in moderate use areas. For all these, where practicable, decks are preferred to large scale slope grooming as they can be removed to leave a natural landscape, unchanged drainage patterns and are usually cheaper. Decking can be visually obtrusive and staining to blend better with local natural colours should be implemented where no adverse environmental or safety impact. Another means to help maintain tow tracks is boards placed on their edge (side-boards) to prevent snow sloughing and wind scour. The boards may be as extensive as desirable, but should be no higher than 200 mm unless required.

54 This may exclude most decks.


• Wooden decks may be used for loading and offloading environs, tow tracks, drains and other significant water hazards like puddling and breakthrough areas.

• Decks must be built to the appropriate building code to allow safe use by pedestrians, ‘summer’ service vehicles and slope grooming machinery (if desired) and deck colour should blend with the slope environment where safe to do so.

• Snow fences and side-boards up to 450 mm high may be used along tow tracks to help maintain cover, for safety and reasonable skier comfort. The boards should be kept to 200mm where practicable and neither structure may block runs.

• Where safety is not put at risk, staining of wooden structures to better blend in with the environment should be undertaken.

7.12.4.2 Obstacle Bridging There are areas where bridging would improve a bottleneck and considerably improve skiing. Of most benefit would be bridging the small cliff north of uppermost Bass which blocks a potential major Summit run to most skiers. A suitable ramp which meets relevant codes (ie. high winter visibility balustrading) would allow snow to collect on it and remove the drop; more skiable terrain would result. The structure need not involve significant ground disturbance. Bearers on solid rock, otherwise foundations, and rock bolts could hold the deck. The alternative is terrain grooming - relatively major earthworks. For aesthetics, part of the structure could be removed postseason.

• Drops up to 2∙5 metres may be bridged on potential major runs not exceeding high intermediate level on Summit, Giblin Folly and Normans Folly.

7.12.4.3 Tow Tracks (see also 7.11.3, 7.12.3.1, 7.12.4.1 -.4 & above) Good tow tracks provide snow boarder and skier safety and enjoyment and allow rapid improvement of deteriorating surfaces. In ‘summer’ and ‘winter’ access is also needed along all permanent tow lines for inspections and maintenance, but is impeded. ‘Summer’ access suited to light or small ATV use would provide ease of maintenance. In ‘winter’ access to all areas needing repairs would be greatly enhanced and safer, and winter grooming would become possible. Parts of some tracks frequently need attention for safety, to keep snow boarders and skiers where required and reduce derailments: problems could be addressed rapidly and economically whenever required.

In order to winter groom tow tracks, they need to be sufficiently wide and free from obstruction to prevent groomer damage. Snow on tow tracks could be gently dished to improve safety and help patrons stay on track. Side-boards may be needed. Tow tracks may have winching points installed to aid groomer use.

Steep tow track sections need to be particularly safe and easy to ski. Ideally tow track gradient should not exceed 40 %. Tow track width should be ≥ 1∙5 m for doubles carriers and ≥ 1∙2 metres for singles carriers,meet or exceed the specification of the tow manufacturer, Workplace Standards or the Canadian Code whichever most benefits users.

Most tow tracks have a minority of ground which needs slope grooming (or decking). It may require some localised terrain modification (earth or rock removal and / or depressions filled with earth or rock). In some instances an excavator or loader may be required for the work; some tow tracks may be improved to facilitate the access of light to medium machines (eg ‘Dingo’) to where needed and for slope grooming (7.13.2.5). Only tow tracks and loading and offloading areas for permanent tows may be terrain groomed.

In general no more tow track than necessary should be slope groomed. Drainage runnels should not be slope groomed; decking or extra snow is preferred where required. See 7.13 for summer (slope) grooming. Where there is ground adjacent a tow track which is suitable for ‘summer’ vehicle use and tow servicing and if the sole purpose of local grooming would be ‘summer’ tow servicing the tow track should not be groomed. Priority should be given to improving tow tracks on which snow boarders and skiers have the most difficulty.


• All new and rearranged tows shall have tow tracks without side slope and free of protrusions at least 1∙5 m wide for paired passengers and 1.2 m wide for single passengers55.

• Existing tow tracks may be similarly widened • Appropriate parts of tow tracks may be summer groomed and / or decked to allow light work-

vehicle56 access in ‘summer’ along tows and facilitate use of a snow groomer and OSV’s in ‘winter’. When tows are being run relatively fast it is important to facilitate easy movement from queue to tow track:

• For each tow the final ten metres of approach and first five metres of tow track shall be horizontal or slightly downhill; from final queuing point to track the surface should be wide and of gentle angle.

55 1∙2 metres width for singles carriers is also acceptable for snow boarder safety56 Narrow vehicle here means small excavators or vehicles like ‘Dingo’, ‘Bobcat’ or quad bike with trailer. Approvals for use of service vehicles on tow tracks and service paths, etc. should be included with relevant vehicle permits.


7.12.5 Snow Collection and Wind

Ben Lomond can suffer high wind and subzero temperatures which allow snow to blow through the area with little of it settling. 2008 had at least two events of about 300 mm of snow lost due to this. The most practical and economic way to retain such snow is fences sited to collect snow in their lee (snow-farming). Snow can be moved (winter grooming) when and where needed or fences sited to have snow collect where needed.

7.12.5.1 Snow Fences57 and other Collection Devices (see also 7.16, point 8 and 7.12.4.1) Permanent and temporary fences are very useful in marginal skifields. 30-odd permanent fences exist at Ben Lomond, Map 5 shows the locations of most existing and proposed fences. All have wooden panels; some too close which diminishes the throw of snow (Figure 1). Very close panels tend to gather a high narrow band of snow, whereas panels separated sufficiently gather wider less steep snow which tends to be more skier friendly. In the past, other devices such as rope netting and tyres have been used to collect and stabilise snow.

Weather and local conditions alter the effectiveness of a fence. Where characteristics for effectiveness is in doubt, a temporary structure to trial height, panel spacing and positioning should be used before establishing a permanent fence. It may require more than one season.

Temporary fences can be erected pre-season, during it or a pause in tow operations when snow is expected and removed before operations restart. Temporary structures can be totally removable or have permanent anchor points. Temporary fencing is useful where it would be an obstacle to skiers: while an area is closed (eg overnight) a fence can be very useful when snow is expected (Figure 3), plastic webbing may also be used for this. Where a fence would be an unacceptable obstacle snow grooming or snow-making is preferred.

To diminish aesthetic impacts in ‘summer’ Figure 3 shows a preferred style of seasonal fence for permanent positions. Removable bands or panels are stretched between poles. The attachment poles may or may not be removable. Permanent poles stop impacts caused by looking for anchor holes and clearing blocked holes. Figures 2 - 4 give examples of permanent and temporary structures. Note that bracing is not shown; fences higher than about 1 metre probably require it.

The major problems for seasonal structures at Ben Lomond are the lack of environmentally sound service routes and the ongoing costs of erection and retrieval. Seasonal temporary fences should be (1) very near service roads / routes and bedrock exposures directly accessible from service routes or (2) easily and reliably accessed using oversnow vehicles. Unfortunately for (2) environmentally sound oversnow retrieval and placement is impossible in early snow, thin snow and when weather rapidly destroys suitable snow -often the way a season ends.

• Existing fences should be repaired or gradually altered to meet a standard design. • Ideally fences should be close to right angles to prevailing winds, parallel to skiing direction, obvious

if a hazard and not block runs. Where practicable bracing should not be on the skied side. • New fences shall be constructed to wind load codes and shall have a professionally built appearance. • Major snow farming fences should be seasonal58. • Installation and maintenance of snow fences, or any other snow capture or stabilisation device, is the

responsibility of the relevant proponent and will require a written authority from the managing authority.

Some recommended areas for snow fences are given in Map 5; positions are indicative.

7.12.5.2 Snow Covers Covers can protect valuable and high use snow from the effects of rain. Farmed snow, snow from snow-guns, formed toboggan and tubing runs and loading areas may be covered. Covers must be well secured when in use, not create a nuisance in wind and be removed after the rain has safely passed.

57 A snow corral is an area bounded by two or more snow fences arranged to store snow, referred to in 7.16 58 The seasonal dismantling may depend on establishing the service route to Giblin Tow.


• The use of temporary covers to protect valuable snow and formed activity runs from rain is supported.

7.12.5.3 Wind Protection Loading and offloading areas exposed to strong wind may have a protective fence to reduce accidents.

7.12.6 Night Skiing

Lights attached to existing equipment and infrastructure may facilitate public skiing provided hazards are sufficiently visible, electrical standards are met and Ski Patrol is amenable. The skiing slope should not exceed high intermediate. Cordoning may be used to improve safety. Night skiing should not occur in fog.

• Night skiing is supported when and where safety is reasonable, electricity may be used to facilitate it.

7.12.7 Workshops, Storage, Generator Sheds & Garaging

Many items need to be housed securely near where they may be required. The BLSDP1993 prohibits extensions to existing workshop (ie. for service, storage and maintenance) buildings (eg. Big Ben, Fannies, Summit) outside Management Zone A (village area) but may allow redevelopment within the footprint of existing storage sheds. However new workshop facilities are allowed within Management Zone A (village area) or within 50 m of the boundary of Management Zone B (primary downhill skiing area) and Management Zone A (village area).

If a snow groomer or snow making equipment is introduced onto the ski slopes, an additional storage shed may be required. Any future revision of the BLSDP should consider whether its prescriptions, in regard to permissible development locations, need amending to facilitate provision of a storage shed for snow grooming or making equipment.

New tow bases (ie. to protect motor, drive and fuel) may be built on the Ski Slopes subject to assessment and approvals.

All areas where fuel, oils or other toxic chemicals are stored should be bunded to current standards or better; Australian skifield best practice is preferred. Smaller items should have spillage trays or bins to protect the environment.

• A storage shed for snow grooming and snow-making equipment may be built within the footprint of existing sheds, the footprint of the former Big Ben tow base, or otherwise in locations supported under the BLSDP.

• New sheds should meet any visual or development guidelines set out in the BLSDP. • No materials or equipment will be stored outside any sheds, except a small quantity of unobtrusive

material safely hung off the ground against sheds or under existing structures • No storage of materials (other than in sheds) is permitted on the ski slopes, except during

construction of approved structures. Construction materials will not be stored on the ski slopes during the ski season.

• All use, storage and handling of all dangerous goods and hazardous substances (ie diesel) in the Ski Slope will accord with all legislation, standards and codes. Relevant parties will use documented emergency procedures to respond to spills and emergencies, and will report any incidents to the managing authority and as per the relevant legislation. In addition, all stores of liquid hazardous substances and dangerous goods (ie diesel), including liquids held in lift engines, must be adequately bunded to capture any spill.

• Where bunding is inadequate only quantities of fuel, oil and toxic substances required for immediate use may be stored in areas draining to the drinking water supply dam.

7.13 Summer Grooming (Slope or Terrain Grooming)


7.13.1.1 General Appreciation Summer grooming is the modification of rock, soil or vegetation. It is used to improve safety, amenity and skiability of a slope, install services and facilities and reduce obstacles. Summer grooming is a prerequisite for snow grooming, snow-making, beginner areas and good tow tracks at Ben Lomond.

The main types of grooming are selective rock removal, selective plant removal and terrain grooming:

1. Rock removal includes removal or relocation of stones through to boulders and sharp rock and breaking to blasting off rock protrusions. Rock should be reserved for local use by storing at natural boulder piles or in depressions in accordance with grooming approval. The rock may be used to fill depressions, for drains, walls, service routes / roads and tracks.

2. Pruning and slashing of bushy vegetation can remove obstacles and improve skiing quality. Plant cuttings should be reserved for local ground protection. In some case bushes are better replaced by grass or herb species (eg per paragraphs 4 of 7.14 and 3 of 4.2.1.3).

3. Terrain grooming is removal of ground rises and the filling of hollows. The aim is an even area, usually of grasses and low alpine herbs. Modifying a large amount of rock usually requires blasting. This type of slope grooming is focussed on areas of high skier traffic and dedicated beginner areas.

Some advantages of slope grooming are: natural obstacle removal / reduction (eg see footnote to 5.11.1.1) skiing on thinner / less snow extended skiing seasons cost-effective winter grooming and snow-making better drainage / snow retention better beginner experiences protection of the environment (eg drainage control, erosion mitigation and soil stabilisation)

The main potential disadvantages of slope grooming: adverse water movement and erosion changed landscape / visual quality impacts on cultural and natural values

Rehabilitation of disturbed vegetation, soil and water movement must always be an integral part of slope grooming. Some rehabilitation has been poorly executed on Ben Lomond in the past, yet in areas more sensitive than Ben Lomond rehabilitation is very successful. Ben Lomond has particular challenges for rehabilitation with alpine vegetation being extremely slow to re-establish once disturbed. In comparison with mainland ski fields, Ben Lomond has less fertile soil, less snow cover over winter (ie leading to greater frost heave) and greater grazing pressure. Many of the potential environmental risks of grooming can be overcome by careful site and other study to plan appropriate grooming and remediation. Excellent guidelines59, willingness and commitment have lead to successful rehabilitation in other skifields and are strongly recommended. Proper preparation and resourcing before grooming implementation is essential.

7.13.1.2 Ben Lomond Skiing on Ben Lomond has suffered because of insufficient grooming. Poor snow seasons have not been able to be offset by grooming and snowmaking, as elsewhere in Australia, so patronage has been lost to other recreation and groomed skifields.

Most broad exposures of rock and many clusters of large boulders and boulder fields would require too much effort and cost to groom significantly, even though limited remediation would be required. Some small ridges are amenable to the removal of protrusions. Appropriately qualified persons shall perform blasting. Superficial rocks and boulders are plentiful and fairly easy to deal with. Most grooming is likely to be superficial rock removal and bush pruning. Soil may need rapid attention to avoid further impact60.

59 Perisher Blue has an excellent document detailing all aspects of grooming. PWS (Tas) has a set of guidelines. 60 Ben Lomond suffers a few areas of bad erosion due to heavy machinery passage some decades ago operating without constraints and no follow up remediation. Some erosion was caused by more recent vehicle use because of the lack of a service road: rain and thaw were seen to promote erosion shortly after several passes on soft wet ground.


Impacts requiring prompt attention must be kept within the capacity, including resourcing of ongoing follow up maintenance, to provide the necessary attention.

7.13.1.2.1 Rock Removal and Bush Pruning (selective grooming) Significant work could be done by hand, including removing surface rocks and stones. However, a machine would be required for heavy rocks and to remove, transport, place, wall, stack or bury rock in many areas. A machine may assist handwork. A small excavator like a ‘Dingo’ or ‘Bobcat’ is preferred where it is capable of the works required. There are many areas where bedrock exposures will assist machines to move with minimal impact, though some form of ground protection may be required where intermittent soil and vegetation is traversed. Access may also be gained via tow tracks (7.12.4.3), wide boards and other items to prevent unwanted impacts61. The areas and routes for movement of machines should be identified in slope grooming plans and similar works. Consideration needs to be given to the use or disposal of fragmented rock that may create a potential hazard.

Where removal of rock exposes soil, these areas must be stabilised immediately, and rehabilitated with vegetation as appropriate. Where rocks are removed by hand, the resulting area of exposed soil is likely to be limited. Simple solutions should be developed and approved for easily stabilising and encouraging revegetation of these limited areas.

Pruning of large bushes to just above ground level is supported where there is good ground cover by other vegetation (eg. grasses, trailing plants) , but roots and soil must not be disturbed (see 7.13.1.2 also). Bushes should not be pruned in unfrequented skiing areas. Heath should be slashed no lower than 12∙5 cm fromthe ground to ensure frost protection and soil conservation of areas slashed. Maps 3 & 7 indicate areas where grooming may be applicable.

7.13.1.2.2 Terrain Modification Terrain modification should be focussed on hazards, tow tracks, loading and unloading areas, significant ski-run bottlenecks and obstacles. However, most loading areas do not require terrain modification. Broadscale terrain modification is considered unwarranted with the exception of two small parts the beginner slope, highly trafficked corridors within 50 m of loading areas and 25 metres of offloads and the existing play / toboggan area. Tow tracks and parts of major home trails may require localised work. Drainage work requiring slope modification may be required.

7.13.1.2.3 General Grooming Recommendations Maps 3 & 7 indicate the areas where grooming may occur. Map 7 does not infer all of each area must be groomed: e.g. some of the former Big Ben and 30 Second areas need only be groomed if the respective tow is installed.

• All slope grooming proposals or works must comply with the Standards and Guidelines: Site Disturbance, Ski Slope Grooming, and Rehabilitation (1993) and other applicable legislation, plans and guidelines, including preparation of slope grooming plans. However, techniques which may lead to better outcomes than the prevailing guidelines and standards should be assessed and permitted for trial where appropriate

• Slope grooming may only occur for runs accessible from ‘permanent’ tows. • Removing the top of protruding rock is generally preferred over excavation when practicable • Broadscale removal and breaking of surface stones and boulders, followed by appropriate

rehabilitation, is supported for popular skiing runs (part of ‘selective grooming’, may include local blasting where appropriate)

• Within a 30 metre wide area on significant runs, ski ‘corridors’ may be more extensively groomed to allow winter grooming or to remove obstacles and skiing bottlenecks

• Where required, shrub pruning should occur without disturbing soil and low plants, like grass (to retain maximum intact vegetation).

• New special runs like tubing and toboggan chutes, not on disturbed ground, should follow natural hollows where practicable so as to minimise need for grooming

61 In some cases a larger excavator may exert less ground pressure than small machine; this should be considered too.


• The amount and type of grooming per season must be limited to that for which the initial stabilisation and rehabilitation can be achieved, and overall grooming staged to ensure manageable remediation.

• Priority for grooming should be given (in following order) to: hazards beginner areas significant obstacles tow tracks toboggan and tubing site(s) bottlenecks areas where thin snow predominates significant runs and potential runs areas which significantly improve enjoyment

Appendix 11 lists some specific slope grooming priorities.

7.13.1.3 Existing BLSA Grooming Proposal The Ben Lomond Ski Association produced a comprehensive slope grooming proposal (Ski Fields - Slope Grooming Working Manual 1999 - 2001) only some of which has been implemented. The PWS impact assessment process and pro formas have changed since the proposal was developed. Therefore it is recommended that the proposal be revamped in line with the SSP and existing standards and guidelines, and a new application submitted to gain approval. It would be advantageous for commercial interests to help resource any further applications.

• The BLSA grooming proposal of 1999 - 2000 should be reviewed, consistent with standards and guidelines, and submitted for PWS approval through the RAA process.

7.13.2.1 Vehicle Routes Stable vehicle service routes may be constructed for light and medium weight machinery (7.3.7 - 7.3.8) and should, in so far as practicable, follow disturbed ground (Photograph 4). Standard road construction is unnecessary and should be avoided due to potential impacts on hydrology/drainage and visual quality. For example the use of coarse rock62 for service routes might use no more excavation than essential.

• Agreed service routes, ‘home trails’ and preferred oversnow vehicle routes may have surfaces of sufficient width slope groomed smooth to facilitate snow grooming of popular runs and beginner, novice and loading areas.

7.13.2.2 Development and Improvement of Tow Tracks (see 7.12.4.3)

7.13.2.3 Foundations To minimise adverse environmental impacts, scars and rehabilitation expenses when removed, it is recommended that where practicable fixtures should be placed on solid rock or previously disturbed ground. Piers are preferred to bulky footings. Ground which tends to collect water or has species like sphagnum moss, cushion plants or pineapple grass should be avoided. If use is essential, the minimum number of smallest holes which meet requirements should be used. The rest of the ground must be protected from damage and water flow minimally affected.

7.13.2.4 Larger Infrastructure Sheds should be treated much as for ‘foundations’ where practicable, ie minimum foot print of new disturbance. Items like tubing, tobogganing and beginner runs, an ice skating rink and dam need a relatively extensive foot print and are excepted. The disturbed area should be kept to the minimum. Items requiring extensive ground disturbance should be placed, where practicable, on ground of less than 25% slope unlesson stable rock. For new work involving ground disturbance, rock, disturbed or eroded ground is preferred where practicable; drainage runnels and soaks should be avoided, decking may be used to protect such areas.

62 Eg 75 - 100 mm clean rock, some local soil on top, surface close to current ground level to minimise water redirection.


7.13.2.5 Drainage This is used to remove water which deteriorates skiable snow (safety) and control water movement which may promote erosion or alter plant communities. Drains should be of low gradient and have erosion-proof walls and base. Where there are not drains or stable natural drainage, water-bars should be used to slow, disperse or redirect water where necessary. In some situations coarse rock may be used to maintain dispersed drainage; eg a service route or track. An environmental impact assessment will identify the appropriate method(s). Consideration should also be given to filling unnatural depressions which adversely channel water, ie wheel ruts / ground compression leading to erosion some distance away.

Surface and possibly subsoil drainage works is required near the base of Summit Tow and the lower part of the beginner - toboggan area. Some drainage works are recommended in Appendix 11, more drainage works may be required. Drains should fully exit the slopes and pedestrian and vehicle areas.

• A hydrological survey is recommended to identify drainage needs. • Where open drains and channels present a hazard to skiers, they shall be covered • Where practicable and desirable drainage shall be designed to minimise impact on hydrology and

adjacent natural systems.

7.13.3 Machinery for Summer Grooming

An appropriate machine for the job with the least potential to impact on soils and vegetation should always be used. ATV or small to medium excavators (ie ‘Dingo’, ≤12 tonne) (see 7.13.2.5 also) are preferred over larger excavators, unless it can be demonstrated a larger machine will have less ground impact.

In areas where heavy lifting is required and unacceptable impacts from ground vehicles cannot be prevented or reasonably rehabilitated, the use of a helicopter should be considered63.

Where ever possible, machines should traverse rock to minimise impacts on soils and plants. Machines operating above the level of the back slopes tow bases, ca 1500 m, must always operate on rock, stable service routes or installed ground protection.

Turning or ‘screwing around’ of the machine’s tracks on vulnerable ground should be addressed in an RAA. Where traversing soil or vegetation, protection should be placed over it: the greater the slope and pressure exerted the greater the likely impact.

• Summer grooming machinery for the rear slopes and upper front slopes should be limited to medium and light weight vehicles on stable rock, service routes or suitable tow tracks.

• Except on stable rock(s), heavy earth moving machinery shall be restricted to slopes of no more than 25% to reduce the potential for major erosion.

• If grooming demonstrates no unacceptable impacts occur near 25% gradient, consideration shouldbe given to 30% gradient, and similarly 35% gradient, but no steeper.

7.14 Rehabilitation (see also 4.2.1.3, 7.12.4, 7.13.1.2, 7.13.2.2, 7.13.2.7 and Appendix 6)

Rehabilitation includes control of water movement, slope stabilisation, soil placement, revegetation, protection and nurture of an area until stable. Rehabilitation is needed for most summer grooming, remediation of former accesses and most new and removed developments. Rehabilitation need not mean

63 the ‘carbon foot print’ of helicopters should also be considered.


preventing or reversing changes to vegetation, soil, water or viewscape64 (see also 7.3.7), but should proceed according to best practice principles and guidelines65.

While principles, guidelines and standards can determine desired outcomes for rehabilitation, it is difficult to prescribe detailed techniques which will succeed in every situation. Informed trialling of techniques, followed by careful monitoring, should be encouraged and is likely to contribute to successful rehabilitation.

Frost heave is a major problem in some of the area. Reseeding in situ with natives has failed or is failing in many areas and, alone, is too slow to establish a cover which resists frost heave or erosion in thaw conditions. The absence of water-bars has exacerbated the latter. Some rehabilitation with turf has been quite successful at Ben Lomond after intense grooming by a 20 tonne excavator near the former 30 Second Tow.

To ensure quick soil cover, revegetation should incorporate the use of exotic species with local native grasses and herbs. Some native grasses are preferred because native species are the long term protection from adverse impacts as the exotics used should not propagate, but slowly give way to native species. In areas susceptible to frost heave suitable native species which form dense resilient herbfields should be a component of revegetation. Most natives also provide a vegetation cover less susceptible to skier wear. Volunteers may assist in the collection, storage and propagation of suitable local species.

The advantage of appropriate exotics is that they grow faster and good vegetation cover can be established at lower altitude ready for use. Rapid installation of good cover is critical to prevent frost and erosion problems and greatly reduces adverse effects by herbivores. Natural fibre ‘carpet’, in and through which vegetation may grow, may be advantageous where ground is steep, prone to adverse water flow or frost heave. Humic litter also helps stop frost heave. Securing of rehabilitation matting / material in situ is strongly recommended. This encompasses the precautionary approach, sustainability and limits of acceptable change. Note the Site Disturbance, Ski Slope Grooming and Rehabilitation 1993 require a percentage of all rehabilitation works to use local provenance species66

• All rehabilitation works will be consistent with the Site Disturbance, Ski Slope Grooming and Rehabilitation 1993.

• The use of economic pre-established vegetation mats of non-local plant, humic and / or soil materials which do not regenerate or create disease threats to local native species shall be allowed. Preferably the mats contain some local species. Treatment of humic and soil materials may be used.

• Active revegetation or stabilisation of disturbed ground, including exposed soil from rock removal, should occur as soon as practicable after significant disturbance(s). New plants and seeds shall be protected from frost heave, erosion, animals, and, if applicable, vehicles until sustainably revegetated.

• Ground susceptible to significant erosion during one rain event must be protected from erosion before the next rain is likely.

• Silt traps should be considered where appropriate. • All rehabilitation shall be monitored regularly to ensure its effectiveness. • All required slope grooming and rehabilitation for the benefit of commercial operators is the

responsibility of the commercial operators. Others may assist. • Where required, plant watering must be planned and implemented as appropriate (7.16). • Hazardous and / or eroded channels should be covered, lined or filled and revegetated. • Remediation works must be planned to have long term sustainability.

Appendix 6 has more guidelines and some areas where rehabilitation should occur, Appendix 11 drainage.

64 To reverse change may adversely affect the desired qualities and may be at odds with environmentally sustainable development principles. The need to achieve a sensible balance between conflicting environmental objectives is widely accepted in environmental policy and practice at international, national and state levels in best practice guidelines - Perisher Blue Master Plan Appendices which cover rehabilitation. 65 Solutions used elsewhere should not apply automatically or necessarily fully because of the smallness, differences and characteristics of Ben Lomond. While particular solutions might be rejected, thought, innovation and effort can produce great local solutions, so should be strongly encouraged and trialled. 66 Narrow areas adjacent healthy native vegetation requiring rehabilitation should not be required to contain local provenance native species where the native species will eventually invade.


7.15 Winter Grooming (Snow Grooming) (See 7.12.4.3 and 7.12.7 too)

Winter grooming is the moving of snow to improve cover and usually includes compaction of the snow. Most Australian skifields groom daily and many could not survive without it. Grooming has been reported to improve snow seasons by as much as 40 % for mainland skifields. Ben Lomond suffers extensive snow wear and little can be done about it without a snow groomer. Often some visitors cease recreating due to poor snow cover in critical places.

The chief forms of grooming are movers (tracked), cutters (tiller) and compactors (roller). Trailers may be used to transport snow. Ordinary snowmobiles fitted with detachable snow carrying and grooming implements or a mini-groomer help, but have limited use. Tracked prime movers are less likely to cause environmental problems than other OSV’s as the wide tracks apply much less ground pressure. However, snow groomers are very prone to damage by rock and vegetation so smooth surfaces, free of projections of damaging material, are required where used.

Winter grooming should include tow tracks, service routes, home trails, ski runs, beginner area and racing routes. Snow may be moved from fences or snow-making areas to improve runs. This improves skier safety and enjoyment and extends the length of seasons. Compacted snow lasts longer.

Wherever there is evidence of ground or plant contact, use of a groomer must cease immediately, except to retrace over sufficiently thick snow. A groomer that places or pushes sufficient snow ahead of it to prevent ground contact is acceptable. Refer to 7.12.7 in regard to storage of grooming equipment.

• Snow grooming with suitable vehicles and equipment is supported. • A winter groomer may not be used where and when there is a significant risk penetrating snow / ice

to cause environmental damage. • All main skier circulation routes should have snow groomed / maintained to sufficient depth and

width that skiing may occur safely without encountering underlying ground or plants.

7.16 Snow-Making (see also 7.12.7, photograph of snow-gun use after 3.4 on page 21)

When cold enough snow making may be the only way to guarantee snow. Although expensive, it is widely used throughout Australia and the rest of the world to ensure a predictable start to and bridge potential breaks in a season. It has proven very profitable to most resorts where used. Artificially made snow has the advantage that it sticks well to the ground and natural snow sticks well to it. It would benefit all businesses, lodges and visitors associated with snow at Ben Lomond. Surfaces must be very smooth to minimise the depth and expense required. In most areas 150 - 250 mm of snow is sufficient for skiing, a little thinner is viable when snow is very firm. Snow-guns can be portable for ease of covering more area.

An investigation of snow-making in 200067demonstrated that snow-making is technically feasible, with most nights reaching the required conditions between mid-June and late-August. However, formal trialling of snow-making is yet to be forwarded by commercial operators. Artificial snow should only be used in popular areas on well drained smooth ground which is not steep. Summer grooming is a prerequisite where ground is not smooth.

Snow-making is energy and water hungry. Limited energy and water availability means only limited areas could be covered. Ideal areas are a beginner tow (Bass) and run, toboggan and tubing runs and busy areas prone to snow wear, like loading and offloading areas. Application to few bottlenecks may be worthwhile. Snow farming and transport of the snow to where required is cheaper so should be the primary source of snow when available.

Should Ben Lomond be connected to the State electricity grid, snow making would be far more economical and might revive the skifield by allowing better cover and guarantee a season. Even so the cost and a low customer base probably preclude widespread use of snow making. More beginner and novice runs and fairly

67 Snowfield Engineering Pty Ltd, 2000. Report on Snow-Making for Ben Lomond Skifield Management Authority


busy thin areas around the foot of slopes are likely to be the only bigger areas where snow making is affordable. Tops ups could be taken elsewhere.

There are additives which increase the efficiency of converting water to snow. Energy use is lowered, the viable conversion temperature is increased and the snow conversion rate increased. Most snow-making additives are unlikely to have any significant impact on the environment, however evidence of this, per point 4 of 2.3.4 of the BLSDP 1993, is required before additives are permitted.

Snowmaking could help offset the effects of climate change on species which need extended cool damp conditions. The plumbing to snow-guns could be used for watering revegetating areas.

• Snowmaking, with the exception of the trial allowed in the following, may be approved following an environmental impact assessment that addresses affordability, viability, noise, and impacts on waterways. The managing authority will set the terms of reference for the assessment in liaison with the proponent / operator. Any approvals will include conditions concerning performance standards and monitoring based on the assessment.

• Snowmaking will be limited to one gun equivalent not exceeding 225 L / min until a sufficient water supply is available.

• One gun equivalent is supported for trialling purposes to a maximum of three years prior to a commitment (permanent fixtures not required). Any trials will including detailed water flow monitoring and reporting to the managing authority and must not threaten the Village water supply. Portable and temporary equipment may be used, but shall not impair visitor safety.

• Snowmaking is the responsibility of relevant commercial operators. • Snowmaking shall use equipment at least as efficient as that identified in the BLSMA Report on

Snow-Making. • The highest priority should be a high-use beginner tow and run, front slope loading and access, a

small beginner training area and a toboggan or tubing run. • Snow corrals (fenced areas) may be erected to store the man-made snow; these may be sited where

snow and other fences are permitted, close to tow towers and loading areas or below rocky areas which bar skier access. Snow corrals shall not present a hazard to skiers.

• Snow may also be stored as skiable mounds over ground prone to thin snow.

7.16.1 Water for Snow-Making

There is potential to capture and store over 250,000 m3 (250 Megalitres) of water a year on the ski slopes taking into account evaporation68. This is more than enough for snow-making. A turkey nest dam69

upstream of the current dam has been suggested for snow-making, but it is very likely that it would be drained quickly in drier periods or sustained subzero temperatures. To hold all the water needed for a season’s snow-making the shallowness of the Big Ben Creek basin implies a relatively large dam would be needed which would be expensive and the relatively large area of inundation would yield an obvious shoreline when water level dropped. All statutory requirements for dam construction and water use under the Water Management Act 1999 will need to be met, including a Dam Works Permit and water licence.

Recycling is an affordable way to augment water from a modest dam. Drainage from the front slopes can be configured to collect into a large tank(s) and / or sump (adequate for settling) to replenish the dam (recycling). To reduce heating, the water should be collected at as high an altitude as practicable (close to Snow Sports) and may be slowly pumped to the new dam or tank for ambient or spray cooling. Gravity feeding to snow gun pumps is then possible. Any new dam should be configured to prevent recycled water entering the current dam. Any tracks or service roads must be sited to avoid the potential dam. Plumbing would need to be well buried, in disturbed ground where feasible.

• The maximum daily intake of new water (unrecycled) for snowmaking should be limited to 500 m3

(0∙5 ML or 500,000 L) per day for the first week70, there after 2 ML maximum per week for up to a

68 Bureau of Meteorology: average rainfall is a little over 1200 mm; the above allows a generous 600 mm evaporation. 69 A turkey nest dam is like a well in a water course. 70 3∙5 ML equates to reservoir of approximate dimensions 35 m square averaging 3 m deep. 25 mm or one inch of rain in the catchment would produce about three times this.


total of six weeks per season unless it can be shown that there is no compromise to other water values.

The initial 500 m3 allows a meaningful start to snow-making, while the 6 x 200 m3 allow substantial top ups and other use while redirecting under 2 % of the annual flow locally.

• Provided legal requirements are met, a dam, tank(s), sump, water-taking, reticulation and up to five snow-gun equivalents (not exceeding 225 L / min each) for snow-making are supported; these, the legal requirements and licencing are the responsibility of the proponents / commercial operators.

• If a snow-making system proves acceptable, the associated dam must be no larger than necessary taking into account reasonable water recycling, and no dimension of ponded water shall exceed 50 metres.

• Plumbing is supported in the lower skifield, but permanent plumbing must not be above the skifield surface.

• Portable plumbing may be used to connect to permanent lines to minimise ground disturbance. • For safety reasons, portable or mobile plumbing which puts skiers or others at risk are not allowed

during tow operations, except in unskiable or cordoned areas. • Snow-making fixtures shall be placed adjacent to or onto existing structures or within rock areas

inaccessible to skiers at any time. The lattermost should be dissembled for ‘summer’.

7.17 Historic Heritage

While no formal assessment has been undertaken, the five huts or ‘Summit lodges’ and the old poles of the Carr Villa Track may have historic value. All sites are associated with skiing, by far the most significant factor in the area’s history. Appendix 12 lists huts and other items requiring further research71. Until then none should undergo work that may impact on their heritage values.

The BLSDP1993 notes that Summit lodges that do not have historic heritage significance may be removed from the ski slopes if the current lessee allows their lease to lapse or breaches lease conditions. Transfer of any such leases is prohibited. The BLNPMP 1998 permits the continued use of unsewered lodges by the present lease or licence holder in accordance with the conditions of the lease or licence but do not permit transfer or continuation beyond the current holder if they remain unsewered or otherwise unable to meet contemporary standards of sewage treatment in environmentally sensitive areas.

No alterations, refurbishment or extensions are to be made to lodges without the managing authority’s approval.

• All infrastructure, structures, features and archaeological sites associated with the development of skiing at Ben Lomond shall be systematically assessed for significance under the Burra Charter. Huts found to be of significance should be nominated for registration on the Tasmanian Heritage Register.

• A Conservation Plan should be established to maintain identified heritage and values. • Any works which may impact on historic (or other) values shall be carried out in accordance with

the Burra Charter and / or subsequent Conservation Plan.

7.18 Promotion

When significant elements of this Plan are achieved which improve the diversity, reliability and satisfaction for visitors, considerable effort should be given to marketing what is available72. More fun days and some based on activities other than skiing could contribute greatly by widening interest and participation.

• As improvements and more infrastructure and services are put in place to cater for recreational activities commercial interests, PWS and BLC shall market them.

71 From notes of J Lyngcoln of Historic Heritage Section of PWS. 72 Consideration could be given to personal safety needs, guidelines for on-mountain advertising, sponsorship, infrastructure, services and events in promotional material.


7.19 Licences and Leases

In order to be able to fulfil many of the recommendations of this plan and other requirements, leases, licences and relevant other agreements should be for a long enough term, and saleable within that term, to warrant the costs of improvements and development and, if applicable, reasonably ensure commercial viability.

7.20 Précis of Main Activity Actions

To improve enjoyment and viability of the winter skifield, Ben Lomond needs: • summer grooming, especially of rocks • economical means for ease of servicing which do not degrade the environment • snow farming and winter grooming or, better, grid power connection and significant snow-making

starting weeks before ski season • a defined and reliable start to winter activities and • heavy promotion and week day incentives.

To improve enjoyment and viability of the summer skifield: • picnic facilities / relaxation / rest / viewing sites and interpretation • easy walking tracks of half hour to 4 hour duration with interpretation and • heavy promotion.


8 Good Operational Practices73

Good practices care for people, the environment and the efficient running of the skifield. Much of this is covered elsewhere in this Plan. The two main safety aspects are staff OH&S and visitor safety.

8.1 Staff Safety

The staff of the various businesses shall conform to workplace safety rules, regulations, other pertinent legislation and good manufacturer advice. Staff who frequent the area should know what to do in emergencies, who to contact, how to operate fire equipment, relevant safety systems and obtain medical attention. ‘Winter’ staff should be made aware of hypothermia prevention When in the field away from other persons, winter and ski season staff should have 2-way communication Relevant staff should be aware of and practice good hygiene practices

8.2.1 Public Safety, General Staff Actions

Those working with items which may expose the public to danger must be suitably trained to ensure safe and capable use of the items. Where pertinent, training must include familiarity with relevant safety systems and / or public safety issues. Relevant safety of equipment for public use must be checked before issue / use to ensure good working order. If any part does not meet specification or fails to perform appropriately the equipment should not be used until fully functioning. The public should be protected from significant non-natural hazards Tower padding (uphill side of tow towers where slope exceeds 300 or 45 % gradient) should comply with the Canadian code. Inexperienced patrons should be briefed on tow use. At the end of each skiing day Ski Patrol shall sweep the skiable part(s) of their area of responsibility. BLC, Police, Ski Patrol & PWS shall develop an S&R protocol for Ski Patrol absence.

8.2.2 Signs

While the relevant part of the Civil Liabilities Act Act (Dec 2002) prevails signs should state that all ski slope snow recreation is a “dangerous recreational activity”74 or similar and consistent with the managing authority’s hazard sign system. Significant non-natural hazards shall be signed appropriately.

8.2.3 Fog

To minimise the likelihood of colliding with non-natural objects, contrasting colour (eg black or brilliant orange) should be used. Visually conspicuous markers shall be maintained along the foot of the back slope to mark the route back to the car park.

8.2.4 Safety Codes

The prevailing national snow safety program shall be adopted and posted in prominent positions of busy areas so that patrons can easily read it. Sites should include tow loading areas, day shelter, Snow Sports, NTAC, the entry to Village Road, the main footpath and Ski Patrol.

73 Many of the practices are carried out, but are not required. 74 “dangerous recreational activity” is a term used in the Civil Liabilities Act of Dec 2002. A recreation considered dangerous greatly reduces the liability of those facilitating the recreation.


8.2.5 Drinking Water

Potable water shall be available to the public, businesses and Ski Patrol at all times. Specifications of BLSDP and testing should occur to verify sufficiency and potability. A quality verification schedule with appropriate action for non-potable water should be inserted into amendments to and future Development Plans.

8.2.6 Shelter

• There shall be shelter from the weather and a toilet open to the public at all times of the year.

8.3 Care of Environment 75

8.3.1 Monitoring and Prevention (see also 4.2.1.3, 4.2.4 and Appendix 6)

Although the area is not pristine the quality of water leaving it should be high as it is used for drinking locally and well downstream. The main potential threat is erosion; fuel, lubricant and leachate threats exist too. When the walking track loop to Legges Tor is implemented toileting may become the greatest threat to potable water.

• Local drinking water quality should be checked at least annually, including when flow is low.

8.3.2 Waste

Signs should be placed where appropriate to inform visitors how to dispose of materials responsibly and relevant aspects of minimum impact use. Entry booth pamphlets should also provide useful information on PWS policy.

8.3.3 End of Season (see also 4.2.4.2)

There are some disused items in awkward places on the ski slopes. Some stored materials against some buildings are unsightly. A range of materials for capturing snow have been left on the ski slope out of season including tyres, rope netting and matting. Often litter can be found on the ski slopes after the snow melts. A significant clean up is warranted.

At the end of each skiing season there should be a thorough tidying of the ski slopes by removing and appropriately storing or disposing of markers, waste, seasonal structures and unsightly items. This includes around built structures: unsightly items should be out of view. The chief seasonal items are temporary winter hazard markers, removable tow hangars, some winter only signs, front slope removable fence cordoning and most temporary snow fences. Other seasonal items which are out of view / hard to see from the Day Shelter to Ski Patrol, the main walking track and much visited ‘summer’ areas need not be removed. Possible periodic removal and re-installation of infrastructure should be tempered by the potential for degradation where there is not an impact-proof surface or access, or there is other potential for environmental degradation. Cost may also influence what can be seasonal. Where RAA’s are required, they should consider the above and impacts.

• The managing authority will work with key stakeholders to ensure that all redundant and discarded materials are removed from the ski slopes in a timely manner.

• Installation of new infrastructure and maintenance of infrastructure which requires vehicle (including aircraft) support can only be undertaken where the vehicle has a permit / grant of authority. All seasonal materials and infrastructure will be removed as soon as practical after the snow season.

75 Many environmental monitoring requirements and procedures are set out in the Ski Slope Grooming and Rehabilitation Standards and Guidelines and updates. All development on the slopes should be subject to the guidelines, prevailing legislation, appropriate environmental requirements (local government, State and Commonwealth) and, as applicable, Building and Development Works Standards and Guidelines. As with any guidelines, more appropriate solutions are allowed where local parameters and issues need to be accounted for.


The managing authority may require applicants to maintain an inventory of temporary / season materials.

8.4 Maintenance

There shall be a regular audit of buildings, facilities, drains, paths, bridges and roads for functionality, capacity / demand and hazards. Prevailing codes and legislation must be considered. Recommended repairs and improvements should be implemented as appropriate by the relevant manager, owner, licencee or lessee.

Left: Upper play / toboggan area: thinning snow & short run-in Right: Below Little Slalom area: many humps over bushes under snow


9 Monitoring and Performance Periodic reviews of ecological, social and economic outcomes should be determined and action taken if key outcomes are not being achieved; performance indicators are suggested below. It should be noted that the realisation of some outcomes may be delayed where seasonal factors intervene adversely.

9.1 Ecological Performance Indicators

EPI1 = the percentage of eroding and eroded ground has decreased

EPI2 = the total hydrocarbon content of water in Big Ben Creek near the dam meets drinking water standards

EPI3 = an ongoing weed monitoring program exists, any weeds present identified and removed

EPI4 = an ongoing disease monitoring program exists, any disease present identified and controlled

EPI5 = there is no immanent threat to the significant botanical features Podocarpus lawrencei and Hymenophyllum petalatum

9.2 Social Performance Indicators Probably the issues of most social concern are queuing, access to good snow for non-skiing activities and services opening on time. On a year to year basis useful measurements could be:

SPI1 = the percentage of ‘winter’ and ‘summer’ activity visitors who are satisfied with provision for their activity has increased

SPI2 = the percentage of persons finding waiting for a service too long has decreased

SPI3 = a two season sign system has been implemented showing the position of facilities, services and features.

SPI4 = a ‘dry shoe’ track from the Village to Legges Tor or other nearby features has been developed

SPI5 = non-snow users in ‘winter’ are more satisfied with their visit

9.3 Economic Performance Indicators On a year to year basis useful measurements could be:

BPI1 = the percentage of visitors who believe they are getting value for money has increased

BPI2 = visitor satisfaction with facilities and services provided by commercial operators has increased

BPI3 = the percentage of visitors who intend to return and use a business service has increased

BPI4 = more of this Plan has been implemented76

BPI5 = prices have not risen beyond CPI

76 eg tow changes, terrain park, snow-making / trial, groomed major runs, improved beginner area


Appendices

Appendix 1 Abbreviations & Acronyms

Acronyms Document, Item or Organisation

AE Alpine Enterprises AS Australian Standard ATV all terrain vehicle BL Ben Lomond BLC (BLVC) Ben Lomond Committee (Ben Lomond Village Committee) BLNPMP, BLMP Ben Lomond National Park Management Plan BLNPP Ben Lomond National Park (Management) Plan BLSAC Ben Lomond Skifield Advisory Council BLSDP Ben Lomond Skifield Development Plan (1993) BLSDP 2006 Ben Lomond Skifield Development Plan (2006) - draft BLSMA Ben Lomond Skifield Management Authority BLSP Ben Lomond Ski Patrol BLVC Ben Lomond Village Committee CISA Creek Inn Staff Accommodation (a building) D/H downhill skiing DP development plan DPIPWE Department of Primary Industries and Water DPIPWEE Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment DTPHA Department of Tourism, Parks Heritage and the Arts EIA environmental impact assessment EMP environmental management plan FTBC Federation of Tasmanian Bushwalking Clubs MP management plan NCB Nature Conservation Branch (of DPIPWEE to DTPHA) NPWS, Parks National Parks & Wildlife Service or Parks & Wildlife Service NRM Natural Resources Management NTAC Northern Tasmanian Alpine Club OSV oversnow vehicle PWS National Parks & Wildlife Service RSF Reserves Standards Framework SS Snow Sports SSP Ski Slope Plan TCS Tasmanian Track Classification Scheme X/C cross-country skiing

Appendix 2 Relevant Service Providers in 2008 Parks & Wildlife Service management of area Alpine Enterprises tows owner and operator Ben Lomond Ski Patrol patrol services during tow operations, first and second aid Snow Sports equipment sales and rental, snow activity training, snacks Creek Inn commercial accommodation, food and beverages Lodges and Huts accommodation for members and guests Mc Dermott’s Coaches transport to and from end of road Ben Lomond Committee representation of organisations present on Ben Lomond


Appendix 3 References

Barley, B. 2000. Year 2000 report for the Ben Lomond Skifield Management Authority. Unpublished.

Ben Lomond Skifield Advisory Council. 1994. Ben Lomond Ski Slope Plan (proposed draft for consideration of the BLSAC). Unpublished.

CSIRO, Hydro Tasmania and the Tasmanian Partnership for Advanced Computing, 2006. Report on Climate Change in Tasmania

CSIRO, 2004. Climate Change Projections for Australia.

Davidson, N. 1979. Alpine Revegetation Trials at Mt. Mawson (Mt. Field National Park). NPWS, Tasmania.

Davey, Andrew 2007. Rearrangement of Two Ski Tows at Ben Lomond Skifield, Alpine Enterprises RAA submission.

Davey, Andrew 2008. Notes on Ben Lomond Committee Meeting Suggestions for Ski Slope Plan, Oct 18 2008. Unpublished, circulated to BLC.

Davies, John. 1989. Plant Communities of the Ben Lomond Plateau, Occasional Paper No 1, Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery, Launceston , Tasmania.

Davies, John. 1990. Vegetation Survey of the Ben Lomond Ski Area, Vegetation, Land & Soil Management Information Service.

Dept. Primary Industries Water and Environment (DPIPWEE). 2001. Proposed Environmental Management Goals For Tasmanian Surface Waters Tamar Estuary And North Esk Catchments – Public Discussion Paper.

Dept. Primary Industries and Water (DPIPWE). 2007. Natural Values Report No 19380 (from Natural Values Atlas)

DPWH. 1992. Ben Lomond National Park Skifield Development Area – Draft Ski Slope Plan. Tasmania.

Faulkner, P.S. 1986. The Winter Climate of Ben Lomond, unpublished (DPIPWEE library).

Good, Roger 2006. The Australian Alpine Rehabilitation Manual, Australian Alpine Liaison Committee.

Group Work (Bob Campbell & Linda Jones), 2006. Ben Lomond National Park Tourism Feasibility Study

Graham-Higgs, Nick Sept 1992. Draft Ski Slope Plan, Parks & Wildlife, Tasmania

Groupwork. 2005. Ben Lomond National Park Tourism Feasibility Study. Tasmania.

Harvey, Richard 1994. Draft Ski Slope Plan, Parks & Wildlife, Tasmania

Hennessy, K. Whetton, P. Smith, I. Bathols, J. Hutchinson, M. Sharples, J. 2003. The impact of climate change on snow conditions in mainland Australia, CSIRO.

Margules & Partners Pty Ltd. 1990. Ben Lomond Skifield Development Plan. Margules & Partners Pty Ltd.


National Parks and Reserve Management Act 2002.

Nature Conservation Act 2002.

NSW National Parks & Wildlife Service. 2003. Kosciuszko, Your Park – Your Plan (Discussion Paper 4, Sustainable Use – Ski Resorts), NSW.

Perisher Blue Ltd. 2002. Perisher Blue Ski Resort – Ski Slope Master Plan. Perisher Blue Ltd., Perisher Valley, NSW.

Parks & Wildlife Service, Forestry Tasmania and Dept Primary Industries, Water & Environment. 2003. Tasmanian Reserve Management Code of Practice, Dept Tourism, Parks, Heritage & the Arts, Hobart.

Parks & Wildlife Service (DELM). 1993. Ben Lomond Skifield Development Plan. Tasmania.

Parks & Wildlife Service (DELM). 1993. Standards and Guidelines: Site Disturbance, Ski Slope Grooming, and Rehabilitation. Tasmania.

Parks & Wildlife Service (DELM). 1994. Tasmanian Walking Track Classification Scheme of Vol1: Walking Track Management Strategy for the Tasmanian World Heritage Area. Tasmania. (+ updates)

Parks & Wildlife Service (DPIPWEE). 1998. Ben Lomond National Park Management Plan. Tasmania.

Parks and Wildlife Service (DTPHA). 2004. Ben Lomond Skifield Development Plan Review – Key Issues Paper 2004

Parks and Wildlife Service (DTPHA). 2003. The Reserves Standards Framework, Tasmania.

Dept Primary Industries, Water & Environment and Forestry Tasmania. 2004. Washdown Guidelines, Edition 1, Tasmania.

Parks & Wildlife Service (DPIPWE). 2006. Draft Snowfield Development Plan. Tasmania.

Parks & Wildlife Service (DPIPWE). 2007. Reserves Activity Assessment Report, 6 / 9 / 2007 (off data base, for Ben Lomond skifield grid references)

Snowfield Engineering Pty Ltd, 2000. Report on Snow-Making for Ben Lomond Skifield Management Authority, Jindabyne

State of Victoria (DSE). 2003. Alpine Resorts 2020 – draft strategy. State of Victoria.

Sutton, R Dec 1992. Draft Ski Slope Plan, Parks & Wildlife, Tasmania.

For lists of vascular plants of the Ben Lomond Skifield: J Davies 1990, BLP 1998 and draft BLSDP 2006


Appendix 4 Ski Slope Management Setting

National Parks & Reserves Management Act 2002

Parks & Wildlife Service

Ben Lomond National Park Management Plan 1998

Skifield Development Area

Zone

Natural Zone

Skifield Development Plan

Ski Slope Plan Standards & Guidelines*

Site Plans

Environmental Impact Assessment

(RAA)

* includes Ben Lomond National Park “Site Disturbance, Ski Slope Grooming and Rehabilitation”

Left: mostly wet area, on Home Trail, suffers frost heave Middle: runnel peat eroded due to past practices Right: summer route to Giblin Tow. Stabilisation is recommended for the above to prevent further deterioration and reverse the depicted runnel erosion.


Appendix 5 Planning Documents, Legislation and Codes

Relevant Planning Documents The main controlling Document is the “Ben Lomond National Park Management Plan” 1998, under which comes the “Ben Lomond Skifield Development Plan” 1993 and under this the Ski Slope Plan. In addition there are other controlling documents and processes for various activities: “Site Disturbance, Ski Slope Grooming and Rehabilitation: Standards and Guidelines” 1993 and updates, Snowfield Development Guidelines 2005 and “Environmental Impact Assessment” process, also updated periodically. All activities should also comply with relevant industry codes, legislation and local government rules.

Statutes and State Policies National Parks and Reserves Management Act 2002 Nature Conservation Act 2002 Ben Lomond Skifield Management Authority Act + amendments Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994 Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 Environment and Heritage Legislation Amendment Act 2003 Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995 Threatened Species Protection Act 1995 Water Management Act 1999 Crown Lands Act 1976 Aboriginal Relics Act 1975 Local Government (Building and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1993 Building Act 2000 State Policy on Water Quality Management 1997 Environmental Protection Policies – including Noise Policy, Air Quality Policy Wastewater Management Guidelines 2001 Building Regulations 2004 Plumbing Regulations 2004 Civil Liabilities Act 2002

Statutory Plans Ben Lomond National Park Management Plan 1998 Ben Lomond Skifield Development Plan 1993(relies on Management Plan) Northern Midlands Council planning scheme

Codes Tasmanian Reserve Management Code of Practice 2003 Building Code of Australia Tasmanian Plumbing Code, DIER, 1994

Australian Standards and Guidelines AS 1940 - 1993 The Storage and Handling of Flammable and Combustible Liquids AS 2156 - Walking Tracks: Classification and Signage AS 4332 – 1995 The Storage and Handling of Flammable and Combustible Liquids AS4332 – 1995 The Storage and Handling of Gases in Cylinders AS 5667.1 - 1998 Water Quality Sampling Australian Drinking Water Guidelines

Other Relevant Items, Guidelines and Standards Crown Lease and Licence Conditions (Tasmania) BLNP Skifield Development Area: Site Disturbance, Ski Slope Grooming and Rehabilitation: Standards and Guidelines 1993 Washdown Guidelines 2004 (DPIPWEE & FT) Snowfield Development Guidelines 2005 (PWS, Tasmania) PWS Standard Operating Procedures: Hazards Signage


PWS Public Management Policy Draft Ben Lomond Snowfield Development Plan 2006 Kusciusko NP Skifield Guidelines 2007


Appendix 6 Environment Notes

Values, Environmental Impact Assessment and Conservation ski slope situations for which particular Values may not need another survey because of existing surveys and consideration here are: Flora: already disturbed sites, development on bedrock, work effecting only specific common species77 and where already surveyed (revegetation of soil is still a must), Fauna: already disturbed sites, all downhill slopes (mostly covered in Plan); may be needed for changes in untouched areas more than 50 m north of Summit Tow to Legges Tor, more than 75 m west of Giblin Tow or within 5 m of Big Ben Creek and southwards) Visual: Partly covered in this Plan, minimise contrasts to natural terrain (not needed if decreasing or maintaining current impacts). Soils: specific items covered in this Plan (erosion prevention is still a must) Drainage: where there is no chance of significantly altering the prevailing drainage or hydrology or no possible significant adverse impact from altering drainage Viewfields: covered for most items (not to adversely / unacceptably obstruct views; of moderate significance given what is present and needed for snow activities and shelter) Aboriginal Heritage: no issue, but if artefact found need to stop relevant work to assess nature of find Recreation: those permitted by this Plan Traditional Use: included in activities permitted by this Plan Environmental Quality: when following the advice of this Plan (cite relevant SSP text in EIA), a survey may be needed for noise, potential leaks and emissions if potentially significant Aesthetics (out of placedness): as covered by this Plan Weeds and Disease: as covered by this Plan and guidelines (cite relevant texts and guidelines) (potentially harmful weeds and disease must not to be introduced)

That a value may not require further survey in no way dismisses the need to mitigate impacts. This Plan and PWS document many constraints and guidelines which must be heeded. Where an impact may be acceptable within the ski slopes, it most likely is not outside the Ski Slope. All adverse impacts should be contained within the ski slopes where practicable. (Controlling viewfields and aesthetics may be impracticable on occasions.)

Erosion Locations, some needing rehabilitation: Original Big Ben line erosion gully about two third upslope Prior used vehicle access from NTAC area almost to Big Ben shed Areas around Fannies shed Parts of Home Trail towards Creek Tow Very small area south of intended new Village Tow (mild) Some tow loading and offloading areas Area between Currawong - Kunama - Ski Patrol and upper Village Road Much of main entry area below Bass Tow Much of the toboggan - beginner area where broadscale groomed Area near former start of Creek Tow

Guideline Suggestions

In Australian skifields, if there is a need for fertiliser to ‘kickstart’ plant rehabilitation a slow release organic fertiliser is preferred, like Dynamic Lifter. This should be permitted where rehabilitation is otherwise poor or would be significantly more expensive.

Ground Compaction by Vehicles

Ground compacted by traffic may lead to water preferentially following some of the depressions created; this may lead to erosion. As there may be a need to transport over unconstructed routes, inspections

77 eg pruning limited to specific common species, with species identifying photographs confirmed by botanist


should be made before and after for new depressions likely to adversely alter the flow of water. If such depressions occur, they must be remedied as soon as practicable as part of the development

Rehabilitation 78

Future ski slope developments must be guided by well designed and documented proposals which include a program of monitoring the impacts of the developments (and the rehabilitation) and documentation of the condition of the relevant area prior to development.

The following principles should be applied to any development proposed on the ski slopes: 1. Establish and maintain adequate ground cover to prevent soil erosion and stabilise disturbed areas. 2. Water-bar where necessary to prevent erosion 3. Avoid having eroding verges to drains; the full wall of outside curves and the base of major drains shall

be erosion resistant. 4. Minimise unacceptable visual impact of developments, especially for snow-free periods. 5. Avoid subsidence of material used to fill depressions. Subsidence may lead to puddles. 6. Stabilise excavated material, avoid heaped, irregular, unconsolidated and unstable surfaces. 7. Require stockpiling of removed soil segregated into its major horizons (litter, peat, topsoil, mineral, …)

and for reuse in the area. This includes removal of soil over depressions where rocks are to be buried: less top soil may be required to cover the buried rock in which case excess soil can be used elsewhere on the mountain.

8. Respread topsoil or / and organic or humic litter (without disease transmissible to local native species) over subsoil to maximise revegetation prospects in any area of slope development.

Visual Impact

Colour Where practicable colours should be encouraged which blend in with the environment, however other factors also prevail: eg safety and serviceability. Bright orange to red is required to mark hazards; most is removed at the end of skiing season. Man-made infrastructure needs to be as visible as possible in case of white out when skiing. Black contrasts best and is most suited to limiting ice where it is not wanted, such as tow towers.

Materials Materials and structures should be durable, safe, meet building codes, suit their purpose, not pollute the environment, and where practicable, blend in with the environment.

Waste and temporary items should be removed from the slopes once their purpose has been fulfilled. The exceptions may be temporary and experimental snow fences which prove their worth or are yet to be adequately tested. Temporary exception may be granted where removal may lead to environmental damage.

Form and Silhouette Shapes which contrast with the sky-line should be avoided. This is impracticable for some ski-associated structures like tows, fences and operator shelters, however the structures ought to be no more prominent or higher than is required to meet the proposed purpose. Structures like workshops, machinery and storage sheds should have low profile and be sited where less prominent.

Where practicable and not needed, isolated buildings should be avoided. A few appropriate buildings near each other look less out of place.

• If the transmitter near Legges Tor is unused or becomes unused the relevant owner should be asked to have it removed.

78 Solutions used elsewhere should not apply automatically or fully because of the smallness, differences and characteristics of Ben Lomond. While particular solutions might be rejected, thought, innovation and effort can produce effective local solutions, so should be strongly encouraged and trialled.


Appendix 7 Ski Lifts and Tows, Potential Scenarii and Arrangements

Lifts: above surface ride Advantages

No upslope traffic cutting across runs Can move more persons per hour per unit (if quad or better) Potential to move purely pedestrians (no skis or snow boards) No tow track / grooming required, can pass over any kind of terrain No need to maintain a snow covered tow track Suited to snow boarders

Disadvantages Very expensive to install79* More expensive than tows to maintain and operate Need good patronage all week for a few months each year to cover capital & running costs More exposed due to elevation above ground - more likely not to operate in wind A large percentage of service is lost during stoppages if few lifts service a slope Not easy to have multiple offloads or adjust to variable snow* Much harder to remove patrons during stoppages Larger negative aesthetic / visual impact

While lifts would better serve snow boarders and skiers, their expense makes them commercially unviable given current and foreseeable numbers of customers. However should a beneficent entity be prepared to install a good quality lift in excellent working order it could be the preferred transport means. Should that eventuate a review of this Ski Slope Plan must occur.

Up to three lifts would be preferred, however two, one in the vicinity of the former 30 Second Tow and another near the former Big Ben Tow would cover most of the skied slope with Bass (or lower Village), Bills and Giblin remaining. Relatively easy egress from ’30 Second Lift’ to both the current Summit and Fannies areas would be a priority as parts of the summit area seldom collect skiable snow.

Tows: an on-surface ride Advantages

Far less expensive to install (already installed) Less exposed Low percentage of service is lost during stoppages if more tows service a slope Cheaper operational costs (apart from tow track) Can be more choosy which units to not operate when poor patronage or snow Can have lower concentration of snow wear

Disadvantages Cut across runs, potentially less safe* Tend to move fewer persons per hour per unit Can only move skiers or snow boarders Need to build and maintain a snow covered tow track - ongoing labour costs Poma-styles do not suit beginner to intermediate snow boarders, yielding many stoppages* More units require proportionally more persons to operate

Duplex Tows: two tows sharing the same cable supporting At best they halve the space and time in which to cross a tow because of two lots of skiers travel

the same route, the effect is two separate skifields; Much more significant skifield circulation problems arise even if both tows run at the same speed

with carriers abreast; this not always possible More time is required to pass across the tow line.

79 *The key criteria for Ben Lomond are underlined. As there seem no incidents related to crossing tows at Ben Lomond, tows crossing runs may be unimportant. Replacing pomas with T-bars with well groomed tracks overcomes most problems snow boarders suffer


Ski Tows - Potential Scenarii a) Future resourcing much as now

Limited money for new major infrastructure, hence mostly maintaining, some up grading and possibly rearranging current infrastructure to best suit circumstances = this Plan

b) Less to insufficient resourcing and / or snow decreasing over the next 25 years Better use of infrastructure to suit dwindling income and snow with some staged removals

c) Significantly more resourcing and improvement / better snow An entity may be interested in other uses of the greater area, so financial return from skiers is not

critical, but the entity is prepared to ensure snow activities are well catered for.

b) Insufficient Resourcing or Snow to Sustain the Current Tow Service Should demand or need for tow use become insufficient to sustain the tow service, the tow and other companies risk becoming commercially unviable. In this case rationalisation and some changes may need to occur to help maintain viability, for example: 1 - only using the more economical tows 2 - non-operation or / and removal and sale of less popular and rarely used tows 3 - running fewer tows faster 4 - loading tows further upslope 5 - use of more snow fencing 6 - reduced hours or days of service: eg Friday to Monday plus booked days for sufficiently large groups 7 - reduction of less vital costs, like oversnow vehicles and some overheads, 8 - very active gaining of special purpose resources 9 - more use of volunteers

c) Further Tow Arrangements if Snow Permits (Also see end of Lifts in this Appendix) If demand and snow were to warrant chairlifting, the following should be considered:

• a chairlift on / close to the 30 Second line (and the proposed Village Tow not loaded beyond 1525 ASL80) and winter groom around the loading station

• remove Bass and make the proposed Village T-bar the beginners to low intermediate tow, groom the lower area

• Small tow or Magic Carpet-like conveyance from Snow Sports along the border of training and toboggan areas towards base of Village Tow (with room for oversnow vehicles to pass)81

and / or: • when Summit reaches the end of its useful life consider upgrading 30 Second to a triple or quad (if

not already) and forming a good egress to uppermost Summit. • a beginner tow could be placed on the gentle lower slopes of Summit below Little Slalom82 with a 20

m shallow inverted V cordon at its top to deflect skiers descending onto the beginner area.

Cross-country skiing terrain

80 Retaining Village beyond 1525 m ASL allows for downtime elsewhere. 81 To serve tobogganers, tubers, ski school and tow users. 82 Skiers may still use the northern slopes of Summit but are turned away from novices at Little Slalom. Up to 25 m pod width just north of the tow could be groomed for novices.


Appendix 8 Slope and Tow Capacity Data

Table 5.1 SKIER SKILL DEMAND ON SLOPE83

Skier Ability Skier Vertical Slope Gradient Skier Density*#

Demand* m / day percent number / hectare

Beginner 580 10 - 15 135 Novice 1360 15 - 25 100 Low Intermediate 2010 25 - 35 80 Intermediate 2580 30 - 40 70 High Intermediate 3070 35 - 45 55 Advanced 3250 45 - 60 40 Expert 3600+ over 60 30

*The data can only be approximate, depending on the classification system, skier perspectives, terrain hazards and limited opportunities to practice skiing in Tasmania. It is assumed (1) vertical demand is relatively low because the runs are short and

the tows slow and (2) acceptable skier density is high due to the relative novelty, limited runs and no alternative skifield. # The skier densities accepted in Australia are about 4 - 7 times those of some Canadian resorts.

Table 5.2 2008 SLOPE CAPACITY* BY SKILL LEVEL (Numbers of skiers who can comfortably ski runs accessible by tow)

Skier Ability Slope % Mtn Area Potentially Available if Useable

Usual Maximum Useable Area

Average Useable Area

Skiers Very Good Snow

Skiers Av Snow

Beginner 10 - 15 0.29+ / .625 0.25+ 40+ 33.75 Novice 15 - 25 2.4 1.82 240 182 Low Intermediate 25 - 35 3.35 2.45 268 196 Intermediate* 30 - 40 1.05 0.80 73.5 56 High Intermediate 35 - 45 2.3 1.65 126.5 90.75 Advanced 45 - 60 0.55 0.28 22 11.2 Expert over 60 0 0 0 0 Total 21.5 9.94 7.25 770 570 *The above data can only be approximate, depending on snow conditions, classification system, skier perspectives, terrain hazards and limited opportunities for skiing in Tasmania; see also footnote 22 on pod calculations. Some ‘intermediate’ slope is included in ‘high’ and ‘low intermediate’ for some complex areas.

Left: Eastern side of lower Bills Tow where mostly well groomed Right: Fannies - Big Ben Area, note the unevenness of some ground

83 Ministry of Tourism, British Columbia, March 2006: All Season Resorts Guidelines, Mountain Resorts part 4 and Margulles 1990, Graham-Higgs 1992 who used Farwell’s figures and former British Columbia Guidelines.


30

25

20

15

10

5

0 %

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Figure 5.1 Approximate Skier / Boarder Skill Distribution

* There are no expert runs available at Ben Lomond.

Beginner Novice Low Inter Intermed High Inter Advanced Expert*

Figure 5.2 Approx. Skill Distribution on Slopes Accessible from 2008 Tows

# The upper stripped shading shows the apparent skill distribution for excellent snow (when Creek Tow runs):

novice would decrease by about the same.


Beginner# Novice Low Inter Intermed High Inter Advanced Expert*

Per

cent

age

of A

ll Sk

iers

& S

now

Boa

rder

s P

erce

ntag

e of

All

Skie

rs &

Sno

w B

oard

ers


-

Table 5.3 MAXIMUM CARRYING CAPACITIES in 2008 for absolute maximum skiable tow length (rare) and good tow speeds

(comfortable number of skiers per tow)

Tow Type Nominal Slope Difficulty

Best Height Gain

Wtd VTM for Skillx

Tow Max Persons / hour

Usual Max Hours

Effic iency

CCCy Terrain Capacity

Snow Good Av.

Summit T-bar High Int 88 3080 1000 7 0∙90 180 92 70 Bass Platter Novice 17 992 350 7 0∙70 38 74 56 Village Platter Low Int 45 1530 475 7 0∙75 88 109 76 Creek Platter Novice 22 580 350 6∙5 0∙75 78 (45) 0 Fannies T-bar Intermed 72 2232 900 6 0∙9 157 130 90 Bills T-bar Low Int 49.5 1696 984 6 0∙85 154 194 151 Giblin Platter High Int 59 2559 550 6 0∙80 68 171 129

Total 686 770 572 If Creek Tow runs, total 764 815 572

x VTM = vertical transport metres y CCC = comfortable carrying capacity see Table 5.6 for explanation Slope Capacity = Terrain Capacity

0

50

100

150

200

CCC (tow)

Slope Capacity

Summit Bass Village Creek Fannies Bills Giblin

Figure 5.3: Comfortable Tow Capacity compared to Slope Capacity for Excellent Snow eg Summit has a high tow capacity while Bass and Giblin have a low tow capacity relative to slope.

Left: Ben Lomond about 1974 Right: Helicopter medical evacuation


-

Table 5.4 AVERAGE CARRYING CAPACITIES in 2008 for most usual skiable tow length + tow speed

Tow Type Nominal Av Slope Difficulty

Height Gain

VTMx Tow Max Persons / hour

Usual Max Hours

Effic iency

CCCy Terrain Capacity Snow Good Av.

Summit T-bar High Int 70 3080 1000 7 0∙85 136 92 70 Bass Platter Novice 17 992 350 7 0∙70 29 74 56 Village Platter Low Int 45 1530 475 7 0∙65 64 109 76 Creek Platter Novice 22 580 0 0 0∙75 0 - -Fannies T-bar Int 44 2232 900 6 0∙70 75 130 90 Bills T-bar Low Int 49 1696 984 6 0∙80 136 194 151 Giblin Platter High Int 41 2559 550 5 0∙775 34 171 129

Total 474 770 572 x VTM = vertical transport metres y CCC = comfortable carrying capacity see Table 5.6 for explanation

0

50

100

150

200

CCC (tow), Av Snow

Slope Cap. Exc.

Slope Cap. Av.

Summit Bass Village Creek Fannies Bil ls Giblin

Figure 5.4a: Comfortable Tow Capacity for Average Snow compared to Slope Capacities For average snow Summit Tow capacity (CCC) is much higher than the terrain capacity. For Giblin Tow CCC is much lower than its terrain capacity for most snow. Three tows have a reasonably close match to the slopes they serve.

0 50

100 150 200

Summit Bass Village Creek Fannies Bil ls Giblin

CCC (tow)

Slope Capacity

Figure 5.4b: Comfortable Tow Capacity compared to Slope Capacity for Average Snow


- -

Table 5.5 2008 SLOPE CAPACITY FOR SKIING & SNOW BOARDING, BY TOW (Numbers of skiers who can comfortably ski runs accessible by tow)

Lift Skill Usual Max* Skiable Area (ha)

Average Skiable Area (ha)

Density Max No of Skiers very good snow

Max No of Skiers average snow

Summit Advanced 0.10 0.08 40 4.0 3.2 High Inter 1.60 1.20 55 88.0 66.0

92 70 Bass Beginner 0.29 0.25 135 39.2 33.75

Novice 0.35 0.22 100 35.0 22.0 74 56

Village Low Inter 0.30 0.20 80 24.0 16.0 Novice 0.85 0.60 100 85.0 60.0

109 76 Creek Beginner 0 (0.335) 0 135 0 0

0 0 Fannies Advanced 0.10 0.05 40 4.0 2.0

High Inter 0.25 0.10 55 13.8 5.5 Low Inter 1.40 1.025 80 112.0 82

130 90 Bills High Inter 0.10 0.05 55 5.5 2.75

Low Int 0.85 0.60 80 68.0 48 Novice 1.20 1.00 100 120.0 100

194 151 Giblin Advanced 0.35 0.20 40 14.0 8.0

High Inter 0.35 0.30 55 19.3 16.5 Intermediate 1.05 0.80 70 73.5 56.0 Low Inter 0.80 0.60 80 64.0 48.0

171 129 TOTAL 9.94 7.265 769.2 569.7 If Superb Conditions +1.65 +100.75

11.6 870

Capacity 15 years ago 19.67 14.21 1073.8

Wet area of Home Trail and preferred OSV route recommended for attention


-

Table 5.6 COMFORTABLE CARRYING CAPACITY (tow capacity)

The effective capacity of a tow, the number of patrons best served by it, is referred to in ski resort planning as the Comfortable Carrying Capacity or CCC. Calculation of CCC takes into account the number of vertical metres a skier wishes to ski (vertical demand) in an hour or a day and the number of vertical metres a tow will transport the skier (vertical supply) in an hour or a day.

Vertical demand and vertical supply are expressed as vertical transport metres (VTM) per hour or per day. VTM* demand parameters for skiers vary with skier skill classifications (based on statistics). For calculating the CCC of a given terrain pod a weighted average VTM parameter is used to account for the varying skill levels of the skiers who will use the pod (Table 5.1).

VTM supply is a function of the vertical rise of the tow and its hourly (or daily) capacity to carry persons, adjusted by a tow loading efficiency factor. VTM supply and demand factors yield the CCC of a tow in accordance with the CCC equation: CCC = Tow Vertical Rise (m) x Tow Capacity (PPH) x Tow Hours of Operation x Tow Loading Efficiency

Weighted average vertical demand / skiers / day VTM

The design (or theoretical) tow capacity: the number of skiers or persons transported per hour (PPH) with no misloading, stops or slowdowns. PPH is determined by the number of passengers per carrier and the time interval between carriers, the equation is: PPH = 3600 x P

t

The efficiency factor takes into account missing carriers, misleads, stops and slowdowns.

Estimated capacity is the design capacity x efficiency factor.

VTM / hr is vertical transport metres per hour. A vertical transport metre is one skier elevated one metre vertically, the equation is: VTM / hr = VR x Actual Capacity

Vertical rise is taken from a contour map of the area.

*Low end VTM’s were used as Tasmanian tows are slow compared to modern lifts.

Table 7.1 SLOPE CAPACITY FOR PROPOSED TOWS REARRANGEMENT84

(Numbers of skiers who can comfortably ski terrain accessible by tow)

Skier Ability Slope % Area Potentially Available if Useable



No of Skiers Good Snow

No of Skiers Av Snow

Beginner 10 - 15 0.29 0.25 39.15 33.75 Novice 15 - 25 1.875 1.47 187.5 147 Low Intermediate 25 - 35 2.45 1.825 196 146 Intermediate* 30 - 40 3.95 2.55 276.5 178.5 High Intermediate 35 - 45 4.1 3.00 225.5 165 Advanced 45 - 60 0.60 0.28 24 11.2 Expert over 60 0 0 0 0 Total 21.5 13.3 9.38 949 682 The above data can only be approximate; it depends on snow conditions, classification system, skier perspectives, terrain hazards and effects of limited opportunities for skiing in Tasmania. Some ‘intermediate’ is included in ‘high’ and ‘low intermediate’ for some areas.

84 The proposed rearrangement is Fannies T-bar replacing Village Poma and Village Poma placed along the original Big Ben alignment


-

-

Table 7.2 AVERAGE CAPACITIES FOR PROPOSED TOW REARRANGEMENT for more usual skiable tow lengths + tow speeds

This table gives the reasonable minimum tow capacity as CCC Tow Type Nominal

Slope Difficulty

Height Gain

VTM Tow Capacity / hour

Usual Max Hours

Effic iency

CCC Slope Capacities for Snow Good Av

Summit T-bar High Int 78.5 3080 1000 7 0∙85 152 92 70 Bass Platter Novice 17 992 350 7 0∙70 29 74 56 Nvillage T-bar Low Int 68 2251 900 7 0∙8 152 286 184 Creek Platter Novice 22 580 0 0 0∙75 0 (45) 0 New BB Platter Int 59 2632 400 5 0.775 35 131 93 Bills T-bar Low Int 49 1697 984 6 0∙80 136 194 151 Giblin Platter High Int 41 2559 550 5 0∙775 34 171 129

Total 539 948 683

Table 7.3 BEST CAPACITIES FOR PROPOSED TOWS REARRANGEMENT for maximum skiable tow lengths + tow speeds


Slope Difficulty

Height Gain

VTM Tow Capacity / hour

Usual Max Hours

Effic iency


Summit T-bar High Int 89 3080 1000 7 0∙85 172 92 70 Bass Platter Novice 17 992 350 7 0∙75 36 74 56 Nvillage T-bar Low Int 68 2251 900 7 0∙82585 155 286 184 Creek Platter Novice 22 580 0 0 0∙75 68 45 0 New BB Platter Int 59 2632 400 6 0.775 41 131 93 Bills T-bar Low Int 49.5 1697 984 6.5 0∙85 159 194 151 Giblin Platter High Int 60 2559 550 5 0∙775 49 171 129

Total 680 948 683

Summit Bass Village Creek Big Ben Bills Giblin

300

Tow Capacity / CCC

Slope, Good Snow

Summit Bass Village Creek New BB Bills Giblin

Slope, Av Snow 250 200 150 100 50 0

Figure 7.1: Tow Capacity for Average Snow vs. Slope Capacity for Proposed Tow Rearrangement

85 The CCC efficiency of Village T-bar may be significantly less when back slope tows are open.


-

-

-

-

Table 7.4 SLOPE CAPACITY FOR PROPOSED TOWS REARRANGEMENT

Lift Skill Usual Max* Skiable Area (ha)


Density Max Skiable Capacity

Average Skiable Capacity


92 70 Bass Beginner 0.29 0.25 135 39.2 33.75

Novice 0.35 0.22 100 35.0 22.0 74 56

New Beginner incl. below incl. below 135 (+10) (+7) Village Novice 0.325 0.275 100 32.5 27.5

Low Intermed 0.8 0.6 80 64 48 Intermediate 1.1 0.45 70 77 31.5 High Intermed 2.05 1.45 55 112.3 79.75

285.8 184.25 Creek Beginner (0.335) 0 135 (45) 0

0 0 New Big Intermediate 1.80 1.30 70 126 91 Ben Advanced 0.15 0.05 6.0 5.2 2

131.2 93 Bills High Inter 0.10 0.05 55 5.5 2.75

Low Int 0.85 0.60 80 68.0 48 Novice 1.20 1.00 100 120.0 100

194 151 Giblin Advanced 0.35 0.20 40 14.0 8.0

High Inter 0.35 0.30 55 19.3 16.5 Int 1.05 0.80 70 73.5 56.0 Low Inter 0.80 0.60 80 64.0 48.0

171 129 TOTAL 13.445 9.39 948 683

Table 7.5 AVERAGE CARRYING CAPACITIES FOR MORE T BAR EQUIVALENTS for more usual skiable tow length and speed


Slope Difficulty

Height Gain

Wtd Nom VTM

Tow Capacity / hour

Usual Max Hours

Effic iency


Summit T-bar High Int 78.5 3080 1000 7 0∙85 152 92 70 Bass Platter Novice 17 992 400 7 0∙70 30 74 56 Nvillage T-bar Low Int 68 2251 900 7 0∙8 152 285 184 Creek Platter Novice 22 580 400 0 0∙75 0 45 0 BigB T T-bar Int 60 2632 900 6 0.85 105 131 93 Bills T-bar Low I / N 49 1697 984 6 0∙85 145 194 151 Giblin T-bar High Int 60 2559 850 6 0∙825 99 171 129

Total 683 948 683

Table 7.6 BEST CAPACITIES FOR MORE T BAR EQUIVALENTS best skiable tow length and running well, good snow

This table gives the reasonable tow capacity as CCC Tow Type Nominal Height Wtd Tow Usual Effic CCC Slope


-

-

Slope Gain Nom Capacity Max iency Capacities Difficulty VTM / hour Hours for Snow

Good Av Summit T-bar High Int 89 3080 1000 7 0∙85 172 92 70 Bass Platter Novice 17 992 400 7 0∙75 36 74 56 Nvillage T-bar Low Int 68.5 2251 900 7 0∙825 158 286 184 Creek Platter Novice 22 580 400 6 0∙75 68 45 0 BigB T T-bar Int 60 2632 900 6 0.85 105 131 93 Bills T-bar Low I / N 49.5 1697 984 6.5 0∙85 159 194 151 Giblin T-bar High Int 60 2559 850 6 0∙825 99 171 129

Total 797 948+ 683

300

250

200

150

100

50

0 Tow Capacity / CCC

Slope, Good Snow

Slope, Av Snow

Summit Bass Village New New BB Bills Giblin Beginner

Figure 7.2: Tow Capacity for Average Snow vs. Slope Capacity for more T-Bar Equivalents

Table 7.7 CAPACITIES FOR MORE T BAR EQUIVALENTS ± A CHAIR best skiable tow length and running well, good snow

This table gives the reasonable minimum tow capacity Tow Type Nominal

Slope Difficulty

Height Gain

Wtd Nom VTM

Tow Capacity / hour

Usual Max Hours

Effic iency


Summit T-bar High Int 89 3080 1000 7 0∙85 172 92 70 Bass Platter Novice 17 992 400 7 0∙75 36 74 56 30 Sec 2 Chair High Int 99 2876 1000 6.5 0.85 190 258 112 Nvillage T-bar Low Int 51 2251 900 7 0∙8 114 158 119 Creek Platter Novice 22 580 400 6 0∙75 68 45 0 Bfannies* ? T-bar Begin 14 816 400 / 900 6 0∙80 33 / 74 41 39 BigB T T-bar Int 60 2632 900 6 0.85 105 131 93 Bills T-bar Low I/N 49.5 1697 984 6.5 0∙85 159 194 151 Giblin T-bar High Int 60 2559 850 6 0∙825 99 171 129

Total 976 / 1017 1120 769 If 3 chair for 30 Second, total CCC becomes 1102

*Bfannies = beginner tow at / very close to Fannies position


-Table 7.8 SLOPE CAPACITY BY TOW FOR MORE T BAR EQUIVALENTS Lift Skill Usu. Max*

Skiable Area (ha)





92 70 Bass Beginner 0.29 0.25 135 39.2 33.75

Novice 0.35 0.22 100 35.0 22.0 74 56

New Beginner incl. below incl. below 135 (+10) (+7) Village Novice 0.325 0.275 100 32.5 27.5

Low Intermed 0.8 0.6 80 64 48 Intermediate 1.1 0.45 70 77 31.5 High Intermed 2.05 1.45 55 112.3 79.75

285.8 184.25 Creek Beginner (0.335) 0 135 (45) 0

0 0 Beginners Beginner 0.23 0.22 135 31 29.7 at Fannies Novice 0.10 0.0925 100 10 9.3

41 39 New Big Intermediate 1.80 1.30 70 126 91 Ben T Advanced 0.15 0.05 40 5.2 2

131.2 93 Bills High Inter 0.10 0.05 55 5.5 2.75

Low Intermed 0.85 0.60 80 68.0 48 Novice 1.20 1.00 100 120.0 100

194 151 Giblin Advanced 0.35 0.20 40 14.0 8.0

High Inter 0.35 0.30 55 19.3 16.5 Intermediate 1.05 0.80 70 73.5 56.0 Low Inter 0.80 0.60 80 64.0 48.0

171 129 TOTAL 13.445 9.39 989 722

Total without Fannies Beginners 948 683


Figure 7.3 Approx Skill Distribution if More T-bar Equivalents ± Chair 30

25

20

15

10

5

0 % Beginner Novice Low Inter Intermed High Inter Advanced Expert*


Per

cent

age

of A

ll Sk

iers

& S

now

Boa

rder

s

Table 7.9 SLOPE CAPACITY FOR MORE T BAR EQUIVALENTS ± CHAIR BY SKILL LEVEL

Skier Ability Slope % Area Potentially Available if Useable



Skiers Good Snow

Skiers Av Snow

-

Beginner Novice Low Intermediate Intermediate* High Intermediate Advanced Expert Total

10 - 15 15 - 25 25 - 35 30 - 40 35 - 45 45 - 60 over 60

21.5

0.52 /.855 0.47+ 72++ 63+ 1.975 1.58 195 158 2.45 1.825 198+ 146+ 5.375 3.10 376- 217-4.35 2.90 239 159 1.00 0.58 40 23.2 0 0 0 0 13.3 9.38 1119 767

The above data can only be approximate, depending on snow conditions, classification system, skier perspectives, terrain hazards and limited opportunities for skiing in Tasmania. Some ‘intermediate’ is included in ‘high’ and ‘low intermediate’ for some areas.


-Table 7.10 SLOPE CAPACITY BY TOW FOR MORE T BAR EQUIVALENTS ± A CHAIR Lift Skill Usu. Max*

Skiable Area (ha)





92 70 Bass Beginner 0.29 0.25 135 39.2 33.75

Novice 0.35 0.22 100 35.0 22.0 74 56

30 Sec.^ Advanced 0.40 0.25 40 16 10 High Inter 1.95 1.10 55 107.25 60.5 Intermediate 1.925 0.59 70 134.75 41.3

258 111.8 Shorter Beginner incl. below incl. below 135 (+10) (+7) Village Novice 0.325 0.275 100 32.5 27.5

Low Intermed 0.8 0.625 80 64 50 Intermediate 0.6 0.40 70 42 28 High Intermed 0.35 0.25 55 19.3 13.75

158 117.25 Creek Beginner (0.335) 0 135 0 0

0 0 Fannies Beginner 0.23 0.22 135 31 29.7 Beginner Novice 0.10 0.0925 100 10 9.3

41 39 0 0

New Big Intermediate 1.80 1.30 70 126 91 Ben Advanced 0.15 0.05 40 5.2 2

131.2 93 Bills High Inter 0.10 0.05 55 5.5 2.75

Low Int 0.85 0.60 80 68.0 48 Novice 1.20 1.00 100 120.0 100

194 151 Giblin Advanced 0.35 0.20 40 14.0 8.0

High Inter 0.35 0.30 55 19.3 16.5 Int 1.05 0.80 70 73.5 56.0 Low Inter 0.80 0.60 80 64.0 48.0

171 129 TOTAL 13.445 9.39 1119.5 769 ^Overlap of Village subtracted from 30 Second


Appendix 9 Some Acceptable ‘Summer’ Activities for The Ski Slope Area

Walking and bushwalking Climbing Ice skating Education (outdoor recreation, various natural sciences, …) Botany, botanical exploration Photography Conferences and fora in a natural setting Studying flora, fauna, geology, geomorphology, etc… in a natural setting Social events in a natural setting Retreats Heritage tours / walks Environmental and natural system surveys, studies, monitoring, protection and remediation Life style change centre away from urban and suburban challenges (as a club?)

Mountain biking beyond the existing service roads appears to be strongly favoured by some and strongly disfavoured by, possibly, slightly fewer. It is rejected on any new routes or tracks in the Ski Slope.

Appendix 10 Snow Fences

Snow Collection and Fence Characteristics The use of wind barriers allows snow to collect on the leeside. Barriers can be bushes, trees, rocks, hay bales, fences, plastic webbing, rubber / plastic tapes (between posts), etc… Low permeability barriers (very little air passing through) tend to cause a short throw of snow, while moderately permeable barriers allow a longer throw of snow (Figure 1). Short throw tends to allow most of the snow to build up against the barrier: high and be steep sided. This is due to eddying creating scour closer the leeside of the barrier. Sufficient airflow through the barrier supports laminar flow yielding a long throw of snow, which tends to be flatter, wider and less steep. Long throw fences tend to eventually collect more snow.

There is no such thing as an ideal barrier for all situations. Wind direction and speed, temperature, snow density (wetness / heaviness) and terrain also control how much snow falls where. There is an Australian Standard for the design of structures subject to wind.

Some Suggested Areas for Snow Fence West and northwest side of Top of Bills (to cover offload and skier dispersal) Rock ridge west of T3 of Bills (to facilitate far better access to good snow bowls lower on Bills to Giblin side) Immediate west of Normans Folly on rock hump (better access towards Big Ben) Offload of new Village (to cover offload and skier dispersal) Just above boundary of service road from ski school towards ski field entry West side of upper Big Ben West to west-southwest side of proposed terrain park Westsouthwest of Bass near new Village Tow (to aid covering shallow broad shoulder very prone to scuffing) Major collection area: Long snow fences up to 2∙5 m high may be constructed near the service road from the dam to Giblin Towto farm snow for winter grooming. The fences are ideally oriented northwest-southeast. Other areas may be acceptable but should be agreed by discussion between user representatives and PWS. When a service road to Giblin is completed the long fences must be removed for ‘summer’.


Appendix 11 Some Slope Grooming and Drainage Recommendations

High Priority Slope Grooming Areas (cf Map 7)

Ski School and Toboggan area Tow Lines / tracks All bottlenecks in popular runs Upper Big Ben area (once tow committed to) Bass to Summit area Upper New Village, broad offload area to Milk Run and to Fannies slope South of lower current Village Tow Home Trail(s) Preferred Oversnow vehicle routes Rock tops and shoulders both sides of Bass out to adjacent tows All snow-making areas and access to areas of likely snow use Snow farming areas and access to the areas of likely snow use More reliably skiable route from Bills to high as feasible on Giblin Summit Offload Fill holes / dips along Summit tow track, slightly widen track where adjacent holes, divert water where snow prone to undermining

Intermediate Priority Grooming Areas

East and west of current Fannies area towers 2 – 4 (selected rock tops) North side of lower Summit North side exits from uppermost Summit bowl South side high Summit offload to access back slope and steep front descent Rocks near tower 3 and fences of Bills to facilitate entry into snow bowls Easy route from top of Bills to upper middle Giblin slopes New area for tubing, toboggan and / or jumping below Little Slalom Rock and boulders on rock shield of Big Ben area when tow committed to

Low Priority Grooming Areas

Jutting boulders in wider parts of significant runs

Some Drainage Recommendations

• Improved drainage is required for: Lower Summit around start of loading area Lower Ski School area into Toboggan area An area prone to wetness just above the level of Village tower 1 towards Bass Area topside of fences north of Creek tow The fairly flat low area of the Home Trail between Lunchtime rocks and Creek Tow Just above the crest of Home Trail / OSV route Main drainage channel

• Covering, piping or bridging is required for: the drain immediately inside the main skifield entry and towards Bass and to the north of lower Bass above the loading area an area prone to wetness just above Village tower 1 level towards Bass entry to Bills Tow main drainage channel in activity areas


Appendix 12 Heritage, Summit Huts

The huts have heritage value given the period in which most were constructed and their relationship to the development of the mountain. Below are areas that need further research to give a definitive statement on the heritage value:

• Historic significance - it was the beginning of the development of recreational skiing in the north of the State

• Social significance – continuity of use over a significant period from their construction to present day • Cultural landscapes – the placement of the huts in the context of the mountain landscape and the

use of the mountain as a ski field • Aesthetic significance – a number of the huts and their outbuildings have an aesthetic appeal that

requires research on how they compare to others in Tasmania and their rarity across the country • Uniqueness - the placement of some huts in the context of the mountain landscape, water supply,

how they compare to others in Tasmania and their rarity.

The huts and features that should be subject to further investigation are: • Dumitchmill Hut • Zermatt • High Dudgeon • McWigs & out building • Ben Bothie & out building • Ben Bullen • The Kremlin (Summit Hut) • The pole lines • The stone shelter • The stone pad

Once the significance of the huts is established it is recommended they be nominated for registration on the Tasmanian Heritage Register. This would give the huts some protection under the Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995. Until then the huts should not undergo any works that may impact on their heritage values.


Appendix 13 Potential Management Matters for the Next 25 Years

New and Increased Safety, Environmental, Social and Energy Requirements and Responsibilities legislation (eg more asbestos regulation) good practices codes (eg OH&S, fire, toxic substances - mostly unpredictable) much less use of petroleum products, travel much more expensive, helicopter use unaffordable and carbon constraints effects on Lease / Licence Renewals and Conditions possible performance criteria; new expertice and resources may be required

Changed Justifications for Resources in A Highly Competitive Environment different resourcing justifications may be needed to respond to changing public and government priorities and expectations. new skills required

Feral Flora and Fauna, Possible Disease Outbreak or Ecological Disaster weed infestation, pests causing significant changes in values major toxic leak, no potable water

Climate Change Effects most not yet accurately predictable in time, type and severity; some covered above

Major Infrastructure Loss / Disrepair urgent remediation may be required possible liability for commercial losses

Demise of A Key Ski Slope Business may have flow-on to other interests urgent action may be required opportunity to review licence conditions

New Demands and Activities (unpredictable) and / or More Visitors New

new licences, agreements and / or codes of practice opportunities and benefits may be available more costs and resources possibly needed boundary / zoning redefinition; unlikely but possible86

need to consider threats, benefits and the public interest More Visitors

more income, but may stretch resources and services Grid power flow-on effects

more all-year-around use possibly more day to day management presence needed connection of sewerage treatment plant to grid

Appendix 14 Ideas for Resourcing

Money and other resources are relatively scarce because Ben Lomond is small, marginal and in a State of low population and lower income than average for Australians. Each major interest at Ben Lomond is much limited by this. The area is fairly expensive to run. Until its demise BLSMA then PWS put considerable

86 There may be a request that the most ‘used’ area(s) of the skifield have its national park status modified to allow more ease of appropriate development and servicing. In this respect a trade off with commercial interests may be beneficial. Perhaps effective performance criteria could ensure the key values of the area are conserved, that commercial interests carry out their plans and their patrons are better served and reasonably safe.


effort into the area, but PWS may not be able to sustain it. Critical to the future success of the area is sufficient resourcing to achieve at least essential improvements.

A wide variety of resources are potentially available: (1) volunteer labour, skill and expertice (including Greencorps), (2) commercial interest, expertice and finance, (3) some lodge resources, (4) State government funding and grants, (5) Commonwealth funding and grants, (6) community groups resources, (7) Northern Midland Council, (8) special benefactors, (9) Tas Community Fund, (10) Landcare, (11) Natural Resource Management, (12) Sport & Recreation, (13) employment and / or training schemes, (14) PWS resources, (15) other DPIPWE resources, (16) funds set up for environmental research and improvement, (17) funds to care for water-catchments, (18) joint commercial investments, (19) social / environment interest groups, (20) sponsors, (21) Northern Tasmania Development, (22) Tourism Tasmania, (23) various joint efforts, etc…. Special purpose money and other aid are often available for environment and tourism. Some resources are available to suitable groups but not authorities like PWS. The Education Department, particular schools, some clubs and other organisations may wish to help as a trade-off for some kind of alpine campus or preferred access.

Sharing of resources can mitigate costs to some extent. The challenges of Ben Lomond may only be met through close and constructive relationships between individuals, PWS, commercial operators and clubs.

PWS has indicated that it would like more community participation in ski slope development and management. Conversely others want more cooperation from or with PWS. It is in everyone’s interest to cooperate and find ways to minimise each others costs. Each party has access to things another wants. PWS has access to natural and cultural information and good office facilities, others have access to labour and expertice and others some funds at their disposal. Synergies can be had with buildings, infrastructure and equipment; eg shared uses, multi-use and shared ownership.

Good communication is critical for building relationships between interest groups, securing support for plans and strategies and strengthening the skifield’s position in the market.

It is recommended that Ben Lomond interests (including PWS) form a representative accountable interest group to find and avail Ben Lomond of potential resources and synergies87. The group should decide what it and willing subgroups can be responsible for, allocate resources and provide reasonable deadlines. One task would be, when ready, to market new activities. Subgroups could strike agreements with PWS, the above body or others to do specific jobs without supervision. The agreement would give the parameters; free training could be given if needed.

The Ben Lomond Committee, businesses and PWS should cooperate more to achieve on-ground works which better matches the benefit volunteers seek to gain. This helps stimulate volunteer interest which has flagged at times.

In the absence of agreements on resourcing the following Principles apply: Item to Resource Usual Responsible Entity Developments benefiting a narrow sector or Proponent(s) or for commercial gain Commercial enterprise Management PWS or agreed sub-entity for specific tasks Developments of wide interest PWS (± helpers) Agreed tasks Agreement signatory(s)

87 Some resources are only available to entities separate to government; incorporation allows more resource opportunities


Top Left: Little Slalom area showing possible toboggan / tubing terrain park / jumps runs (mainly using rocky chutes). Mid Top: Main drainage channel; a minority boarded, the rest open, some parts can overflow. Top Right: Many rocks, some too large to remove by hand in the Creek - Home Trails - OSV route area. Lower Left: view of front Slope between Bass and Summit Tow; red box around small cliff for which ramp suggested and green line shows the main descent run from main Summit Tow offload. Note the many bushes (orites and scoparia) and rocks on the slope. Lower Middle: Bellendena in flower, common on slopes. Lower Right: Highest dwelling in Tasmania “Zermatt”.


Photographs show the terrain of Back Slopes (Giblin to Fannies at top). Many areas have rock able to take machinery without impact Access routes are critical, especially on lower slopes or where vegetation. Lower left and right show lower parts of Bills and Big Ben respectively. Bottom middle shows example of piled rock requiring machine asistance to remove to improve safety. Centre left shows ground typical of summit areas, some is more like bottom middle.


Appendix 15 Summary of Main Actions & Recommendations for the Ben Lomond Ski Slope

Many of the actions proposed can only occur if there is resourcing for them and pre-requisite actions have been carried out. For instance there may be great demand for a terrain park, snow-making and tubing areas, but if no entity is willing to invest they will not occur. This and unknowns in weather / ski season success, commercial interest, government resourcing, volunteer and other support and visitor demands mean that flexibility in priorities must occur. Priority is generally based on relative importance and the need to undertake some actions before others. An ongoing high priority will be ensuring viability of the skifield is not unreasonably diminished by a recommended action. Some less likely, but supported, items are omitted from the Action Table. The table is but a short summary of the Plan.

Action For What / Extent Why Responsibility* Priority

Ecology Facilitate ID of critical ecological processes and possible threats, plan for and control threats;

To maintain natural values PWS, DPIPWE P3

Weeds & Disease Annual weed and disease monitoring; removal or control. Those introduced by known entity

To maintain natural values PWS, DPIPWE ± volunteers Relevant Entity

P2 P2 - P3#

Erosion Control & Rehabilitation Service Routes

New Works

Survey for and rehabilitation of erosion areas; water bars. Construct service routes and tracks, preferably on degraded ground

New developments

Improve aesthetics, stop further erosion, maintain water quality and minimise degrading intact ground

PWS ± volunteers.

PWS (walks component), commercial operator (new service routes) Relevant

Developer ± ?

P1

P1 - P2

P1 at time Construct Service Access

Service route suiting light to medium weight vehicles from NTAC to Giblin Tow, subordinate accesses along tow tracks and main Home Trail (+ suit winter groomer); max. use of degraded ground. Services preferably laid in route. Vehicle access limited to servicing, grooming and emergencies.

For tow servicing / safety, to stop erosion, maintain water quality, maximise affordability.

Commercial operators / service providers ± volunteers. PWS (limited width walking track component)

P1

Revegetation Facilitation

Willowherb

Facilitate use of economic pre-established vegetation mats based on exotics not able to threaten BL by regeneration or disease, preferably with some local vegetation species: Revegetate problem areas -New developments -Locate the Epilobium willisii specimen near Bass Tow if exists and local protection if needed.

For effective rehabilitation and erosion control

To maintain natural values, biodiversity

PWS, DPIPWE ± volunteers

Same or Developer Relevant Developer PWS, DPIPWE ± volunteers.

P1

P1 - P3 P1 at time P2

Drainage Study Survey / study hydrology and prepare strategy to appropriately control water

To maintain natural values and facilitate enjoyable skiing

PWS P1

Drainage Works

Cover Drains

Better diversion of water from wet and high melt - high traffic areas where commercial benefit (eg training area and skiing areas); same re public areas Where frequented open drains and channels present a danger to skiers; skier + OSV crossing just inside main skifield entry

To protect vegetation, prevent erosion, provide better skier enjoyment and retain affordability Safety, to protect drain, vegetation, provide better skier enjoyment

Relevant commercial providers ± volunteers; PWS ± volunteers Relevant providers ± volunteers

P2 - P4

P2 - P4 P1

* ± to be read as: “with the # depends on


help of”, but not responsible

weed threat

Action For What / Extent Why Responsibility* Priority Waste

Ski Season only Material

Spare Materials

Ensure that all redundant materials are removed from the ski slopes in a timely manner. Inform visitors to dispose of own materials responsibly, MIB: signs, entry information.

Remove all seasonal materials and infrastructure as soon as practical after the snow season. A maintained inventory of temporary/season materials may be required.

If not needed for active work store out of sight under cover or in a shed to have no adverse impact or remove

Improves aesthetics and hygiene, helps maintain natural values

Establish and maintain visual aesthetics

Establish and maintain visual aesthetics

Relevant owner + PWS

PWS

Each relevant party / owner

Each relevant party / owner

P1 - P2

P1

P2, ongoing

P1, ongoing

Toilet Access Public toilets will be accessible year round.

Signs shall clearly advise the location of public toilets

Maintain hygiene, water quality and visitor comfort.

PWS

PWS

P1 - ongoing

P1 Toilet near main skifield entry

May be included in any revitalised Ski Patrol building; As opportunities arise, investigate options for providing additional public toilets within existing or redeveloped buildings, close to the ski slope run out area.

Convenience, safety for persons on slopes Willing entity + PWS P4

SnowCam Up to three cameras to communicate conditions to the public. Safety, ensure recreation values met Entity designated by BLC P1-P3 ‘Winter’ Visitor Safety

‘Snow Safe’ posters and signs. Annual competition ± entertaining demonstration(s). /Cooperate when difficulties

To improve safety and enjoyment and environmental behaviour.

PWS, Ski Patrol, Trainers commercial operators /all

P1, P4, /P1 at time

Interpretation and Signs

Two season sign(s) / map(s) to orient and inform of activities, views, services, heritage and natural features, their loci, safety and MIB; signs for good operational practices may be erected as appropriate

To make visitors feel welcome, the area, access and appreciate what is available

PWS ± BLC;

relevant commercial operators + PWS

P1;

P2

Meeting Visitor Expectations

A three yearly survey of visitor and potential visitor trends and issues, modify actions accordingly

To improve service delivery and guide development and timing

PWS ± comm. ops. ± BLC

P3 ongoing

Amenity Snow Sports Tables & Chairs

Outdoor Relaxing Lockers

Improvements + additions to Snow Sports building and deck sufficient to meet requirements for safety, public and staff amenity and enjoyment (weather-proof lockers, fire escapes, table and chairs and limited simple shelter) are supported. Improve bench-seats of Snow Sports deck. Maintain table(s) and seats near Ski Patrol, off OSV route, and Snow Sports. The availability of lockers for public use near the ski slopes should be investigated and encouraged (see also BLSDP)

Safety, to meet expected service delivery and a general visitor need

Safety, allows enjoyment by non-skiers, meets a general visitor need To meet an expected service, safety and security

Commercial Operators, PWS

Existing: PWS More: interested others Interested Entity ± PWS

P2

P1

P3

Circuit Track Easy ‘dry shoe’ walk + interpretation to Legges Tor which avoids main downhill skiing area, Giblin side track; maximise synergy with

Much in demand, non-snow / ‘summer’ visitors uncatered for; conserve underfoot

PWS ± interested parties P1, P2


service route environment

* ± to be read as: “with the help of”, but not responsible


Action For What / Extent Why Responsibility* Priority Oversnow Vehicles (OSV’s)

When practicable service and preferred routes (with essential grooming and drainage) shall be used by OSV’s; Develop and implement guidelines for use. Consider developing basic training for safe use of OSV’s.

Safety, facilitate transport of staff and equipment, retain natural values; OH&S

All OSV drivers;

PWS-BLC ± comm. ops. BLC ± BLSP

P1;

ongoing P2

Slope Grooming

(Summer Grooming) (Terrain Grooming)

Priorities are hazards, popular / potentially popular runs, low skill areas. D/H runs & trails to allow skiing or boarding at least three abreast. Staged rock removal and breaking (stone, cobbles to boulders and projections) and plant pruning supported; prefer removal of protruding rock rather than excavate. Prune without disturbing soil and maximise intact vegetation preferred. Terrain modification to improve tow tracks, offloading, loading and egress, smooth beginner and novice areas, existing & potential major runs (incl. tobogganing, tubing and jumping) + to facilitate winter groomer use and drainage. New special runs like tubing and tobogganing on undisturbed ground should use natural hollows to minimise grooming.

Safety, remove bottlenecks, improve skiing runs, reduce tow breakdowns, allow skiing on less snow + skier + snow boarder enjoyment while retaining affordability

Relevant Proponent P1-P5

Rehabilitation Rehabilitation of disturbed soil is a must where needed. Grooming in any one time shall not exceed the capacity for proper and timely rehabilitation. Where plant cover is reduced / removed it must be protected / replaced before the next substantial rain if appropriate.

Sustainability, retain maximum of local / surrounding environment as was, minimise values changes

P1 when relevant

Snow Grooming A winter groomer, small groomer / adapted snowmobile and grooming equipment are supported. The machines may transport,

Safety, protect vegetation, provide better skier enjoyment and retain affordability

Relevant service provider (eg Comm. Operator)

P2

(Winter Grooming) shape and compact snow. To protect equipment, reduce aesthetic A shed for groomers and their equipment is supported, subject to conditions.

intrusion Relevant service provider P2

Snow Protection The use of temporary covers to protect stored and valuable snow and designated activity runs from rain is supported.

Optimise affordability and amenity Relevant snow ‘owner’ P2-P4

Snow Fences Use for skiing areas prone to wind scour, fast melting or snow scuff and to farm or store snow; where practicable and readily accessible by vehicle, fences should be removable (except anchor points). Some fence loci are recommended in Plan. Long high seasonal fences for farming may be used south of the Giblin -Fannies area. Fences should be maintained or removed

For safety, improve recreation values, to protect vegetation and provide better skier enjoyment by a most affordable means

Relevant fence owner or service provider ± volunteers; for all additional fences, the commercial beneficiary

P1 for any new tow; P1 - P4

ongoing * ± to be read as: “with the help of” but not responsible


Action For What / Extent Why Responsibility* Priority Water Quality Ensure pollutants do not threaten water values:

develop EMP’s and implement; appropriately bund toxic liquids. Maintain environmental values and drinking water (PEV’s)

PWS and Commercial Operators;

P1

More Drinking Water

Remove sediment from current dam or raise wall a little to increase supply

To meet water demand when needed, affordability

PWS + Users + NMC; P4, P1 if needed

Snow-Making Equipment at least as efficient as BLSMA identified; subject to water, energy & affordability constraints: without water supplementation only one ≤ 225 L / min gun equivalent.Priority is beginner & novice areas, front slope loading areas, high use areas of gradient less than 25 % below 1505 metres and atoboggan or tubing run or other popular activity which uses limited snow. Patching of other bare and thin areas + small special purpose areas is supported. Snow corrals to store snow are supported. Environmentally safe snow-making additives supported / DP

Alternative when snow is poor or limited, provide better skier enjoyment, protect vegetation; prevent excessive water taking,

To maximise efficiency and viability

Relevant snow activity provider(s) (commercial operator, association or other)

P3-P4

New Dam Evaluate water needs, economics and the effect on Big Ben Creek to ensure viability - if OK and licence/permit obtained: a dam ≤ 50 m diameter, taking into account recycling and likely water use may be built.

To maintain ecology and ensure viability Primarily for snow-making, to meet water demand

Relevant consumer(s) or their supply authority (approval) if directly relevant

P3-P5 only if snow-making

Training Area The perimeter may be clearly defined to minimise others moving Safety Relevant commercial P1 Modification

(Beginner Area, Ski

through, drainage may be improved, a run-out should be constructed; if essential may rotate eastern end of toboggan boundary fence ≤ 12.5o south. The few remaining rock obstacles

operator PWS: may need lease change for viability re

P3, P3

School) may be removed. The area may be used to teach cross-country and other activities by trainers.

Better amenity use improvement costs P2

Beginner Tow at Fannies

If beginner capacity is not sufficient a short tow may be installed along the lower Fannies to miss Home Trail

To overcome shortage of tow capacity for beginners; uses impacted ground

Commercial operator P2 when needed

Toboggan / Tubing / Separate tobogganing, tubing & play. Slope grooming (smooth, Safety: current area not always suitable. PWS ± any relevant service P2-P4 Snow Play Area drains, run-in, sides and run-out), tow and snow grooming

supported for tobogganing and tubing. May rotate boundary to increase Beginner Area. Structure to facilitate run-ins allowed; snow-holding surface may be used in ski season. Toboggans &

Improve snow play area function. provider (eg commercial operator)

tubes only hireable if snow sufficient. P1

Small tow allowed with fee charged for use; tow may be multipurpose: tobogganers, tubers and beginners. Other play to be in the southern part of 2008 area

Tow: relevant service provider(s)

P4


Action For What / Extent Why Responsibility* Priority Terrain Park An up 15 m wide strip near the upper Village Tow may be used,

but not interfere with main Home Trail or Milk Run.

If a pedestrian accessed park would be sufficiently used, an area below Little Slalom is supported. The access path shall be multipurpose: toboggan, tubing, jump or / & terrain park.

To meet demand Relevant commercial or incorporated interest(s).

P2

P4

Racing 3 timing cables may be installed safely and inconspicuously To meet demand BLSA or BLC P1-P2 Jumps Where risk management can demonstrate jump(s) are safe and /

or training service may be permitted near Little Slalom or other approved locations. The jumps should not be obvious out of skiing season or removable.

To meet demand, if proven

To retain aesthetics

Relevant commercial or incorporated interest(s).

P4, P2 if good demand

Cross-Country Skiing (X/C)

When the BLSDP is reviewed, consider allowing cross-country skiing within the downhill ski slopes under certain conditions: eg when tows are not operating, areas outside of serviced ski runs, on the proposed service route from NTAC to Giblin Tow, the preferred downhill X/C route shown on Map 1, in the ‘beginner area’ near Snow Sports, south of back slope tow bases and up to 1535 m ASL directly below Giblin Chute.

The service route from NTAC to Giblin Tow may be groomed for cross-country skier enjoyment and practice.

Subject to a review of the BLSDP, marking of a cross country ski route from the village road north towards Ben Bullen is supported. The route would be on or near the alignment of a proposed summer walking track, where a rough track / pad partly exists.

To reflect traditional use and improve enjoyment.

Foster use of a groomed X/C track

PWS (signs)

PWS (markers + signs)

P1

P2

P2

P2

P1

P2 P3

Night Recreation In patrolled well lit runs in an area free of major hazards. Night tobogganing or tubing in one safe area is supported subject to good lighting and patrol on duty.

Provide better skier enjoyment, safety Relevant service provider Relevant service provider

P2 P3

Ice Skating A skating facility is supported at the foot of the ski slope; near Snow Sports - Creek Inn preferred, if not in Village.

Increases public amenity over more of year, amenity when snow unskiable

Commercial or incorporated interest(s).

P4

Small Tows / Transport

Small tows or conveyors (eg Magic Carpet) may be used: in / near Beginners Training Area, ideally from Snow Sports along Toboggan Area border towards Village Tow to serve trainees, tobogganing, tubing and staff and possibly others.

A small conveyance for each of tubing and tobogganing A portable tow for runs not serviced by other tows

Amenity to enhance patron enjoyment and maximise runs per unit time.

Appropriate service provider(s)

Relevant commercial or incorporated interest(s).

P3

P4


P3 Skier Protection Should install a ‘soft’ protective barrier immediately above the

Bass offload to redirect descending skiers (Appendix 7c provides a better solution if further tow development)

Safety Tow service provider ± BLSP

P1-P2



Action For What / Extent Why Responsibility* Priority Ground Surfacing The use of protective surfacing (eg snow, wood, suitable carpet) is

supported in highly trafficked areas (eg loading, tow tracks, offloads, egresses, limited number of bottlenecks on potentially, major runs), subject to PWS written authority and SSP conditions.

Improved public enjoyment and safety and protection of soils and plants

Tow company ± volunteers P1 - P3

Tow Tracks Tow tracks should be summer groomed and / or decked where needed to remove side-slope, allow the use of a winter groomer and prevent patrons catching edges, winter grooming is supported; summer grooming vehicles allowed where low impact. See also ‘Construct Service Access’

Safety, to stop derails and other damage, reduce downtime, improve boarder / skier enjoyment

Relevant service provider P1-P2 P2-P3

P3

Tow Loading Loading from both sides of tows is permitted and encouraged Reduces snow wear, safety Tow service provider P2 - P3 Small Cliffs in Popular Runs

Minor slope grooming and ramp supported to bridge drop / facilitate redirection of skiers nearer Summit. Part of Normans and Giblin Folly may have improvement. Max. height for ramps 2.5 m; most of structure seasonally removed

Safety, major Summit run bottleneck adjacent, reduces concentrated snow wear, greatly minimises grooming

or interested others ± volunteers

P3

P4

Village T-bar Tow The removal of Fannies Tow and installation of a T-bar equivalent from the current Village Tow base to between the current lower Fannies offload and 25 m higher is permitted. Extending the proposed Village T-bar equivalent close to Fannies or a little more is recommended / allowed. Multiple offloads permitted, including for beginners (ca 1485 m ASL). Fencing and other items are supported to improve snow holding and skiability near 1535 - 1538 m ASL Caveats apply if a 30 Second Tow is installed.

To overcome front slope under-capacity

Retain ease of access to back slopes, safety

Safety and amenity: rock shoulder prone to severe scour

Relevant tow service provider (eg commercial Operator)

P1

P1, P2

Big Ben Tow After Fannies is removed, re-install a tow on a former Big Ben alignment; prefer T-bar eq. capacity and reliability; improvement of the tow track; failing a suitable T-bar equivalent the former Village Tow may be installed. A T-bar, equivalent or better may be installed later. Snow fences near the offload and egresses are supported.

To meet demand shortfall, impacted former tow so minimal grooming, particularly good snow area

To ensure skiable snow.

Tow service provider P2, P1 if Fannies removed

P1 when tow Ski Patrol A new or upgraded building is permitted (per BLSDP) to provide

sufficient room for equipment, patient treatment, waiting area and amenity, services, security and accommodation in the same locus; must be able to maintain national standards and reasonable patient expectations, a possible PWS and public ‘annex’ included.

Maintain national standards, meet patient expectations and proper care of equipment and patrollers. Building old and aging, fewer patrollers are lodge members so may need accommodation

PWS + volunteer help + funds grants

P3 - P2



Action For What / Extent Why Responsibility* Priority Exclusion Area / Helicopter Emergencies

An emergency plan shall be developed to include a reserved area for landing a helicopter near Ski Patrol. An emergency Plan shall be developed for the area

Safety, to handle some major emergencies

Safety, to handle emergencies

PWS + BLSP

PWS, BLC + BLSP

P3

P3 Communications All key entities are to maintain ability for immediate mutual

communication and with emergency services Safety, emergency help and coordination of staff and information

Each responsible entity P1 ongoing

Fixed Historic A program to identify and conserve items of significance, those To assess and maintain cultural and PWS + owner support P2, Heritage worthy of preservation and any repair / stabilisation needed (in

line with legislation) shall be carried out and the conservation measures implemented. Any required heritage nomination / listing shall be forwarded

historic heritage and related values Owners

P3

Owners + PWS support P3 Historic and Social Heritage

Encourage the research, gathering of oral history, photographs and other historic items which could be lost into one publicly accessible entity

Maintain cultural and historic heritage BLC, community, history preservation entity, with PWS support

P2 - P4

P3 Community and PWS shall maintain a management group, preferably containing To make good use of local expertise and PWS, BLC + community P1 + ongoing Management persons with ski slope experience, who shall pro-actively liaise potential synergies

with key interests on all relevant issues. The BL community shall maintain a group representative of interested parties able to liaise with PWS and disseminate information to their constituents

P1 + ongoing

Affordability An accountable representative group formed to locate and avail Good use of local expertise & potential BLC + community ± PWS P1, ongoing Resourcing BL of potential resources to better the skifield.

Support reasonable proposals & resource-seeking applications synergy, maintain social & other values Demonstrate proposals may occur

PWS P1 at time

Synergy Maximise potential efficiencies where and when reasonable: To facilitate best value for resources and All parties, perhaps some P1, ongoing Personnel & encourage sharing (eg multipurpose use, ownership, responsibility, effort, affordable recreation, enjoyable PWS facilitation Material expertise, human resources and promotion), local innovation,

minimise duplication. Phase changes as affordable.

visits and increase potential visitor base

Volunteers Identify opportunities to engage volunteers in ski slope improvement and management, through the PWS volunteer program or other appropriate means. Volunteers should be

To make good use of personnel resources and potential synergies, facilitate affordable recreation and appreciation of effort;

BLC + PWS + commercial operators ± interested others

P1

strongly encouraged and supported. Interested Party(s) + PWS P1 * ± to be read as: “with the help of”, but not responsible


Action For What / Extent Why Responsibility* Priority Promotion and As genuinely significant improvements, services and infrastructure Too few are aware of opportunities at Ben Commercial interests, PWS P2 after Information are in place for recreational activities commercial interests, PWS

and BLC shall market them. (Brochures / information updated after significant changes)

Lomond, especially out of ski season, to halt visitor decline, maintain viability of area

and BLC as pertinent improvement s occur

Climate Change When relevant quality information is available, key interests should understand the likely impacts of holistic climate change in the skifield and consider it in decisions.

To help maintain natural, social & recreational values, business viability & acceptance of necessary precautions.

PWS + community ± effected / interested parties

Ongoing

Reviews Water Quality

Service Performance

Licence & Lease Review

Storage

Groomer Shed

Snow Sports building & deck

Cross-Country Skiing

Plans, Policy, Licenses, Leases, Agreements Test water March + late skiing season (if skiing) - BLSDP

Insert performance criteria into lease/licenses to ensure improvements to service. All skifield services should operate as advertised / advised when skiable and safe; reasonable minimum service hours.

Leases, Licences and relevant other Agreements should be for a long enough term, and saleable within that term, to warrant / encourage the costs of improvements, development and remediation to reasonably ensure commercially viability.

Consider minimal functional addition if new codes, OH&S, legislation, accepted new popular activities, safety or Plan amendments compel more storage, preferably on the lower side of the service routes or roads and /or onto or very near existing sheds.

Review potential locations for winter snow groomer, subject to BLFDP requirements.

Consider additions and changes to meet new codes, OH&S, legislation, accepted new popular activities, safety, Plan amendments, public enjoyment or commercial amenity.

See Cross-Country Skiing above

Maintain natural, recreational and social values, safety; improve management, services and skifield image;

To meet public expectations based on advertised information

Retain business viability and acceptance of necessary precautions when significant expenditure required.

To be able to comply with legal requirements and for safety, reasonable amenity and environmental protection

To protect equipment which improves skiing amenity / recreational values

As above, improve social and recreational values, meet recreation needs

PWS + stakeholders ± BLC

PWS in liaison with provider


PWS (for amendment), relevant proponent for shed


PWS (amendment), relevant proponent for shed

P1 P2, P1 if L. Tor track

P2, P1 at expiry P1

P1

P2 if needed

P1 if needed

P2 if needed

P1

* ± read as: “with the help of”, but not responsible


Although some may only be prostrate on Ben Lomond, other possible woody plants are: Phebalum montanum Richea sprengeloides Epacris serpyllipholia and Lissanthe montana.


ContaCt Details parks and Wildlife po Box 46 kings Meadows 7249 ph 6336 5312 fax 6344 8109