About May, 1999, I received a phone call from a Helen Pryor, saying she was going to Smithton, and wished to drop in on me on the way. She did so, with a companion, and they proceeded to tell me that there was now a draft management plan for some islands in Bass Strait, and that I would no longer be allowed to go to Albatross Island - ever. It was off limits to everyone except serious scientific researchers, ie. National Parks personnel.

This was the whole crux of the visit - there was no consultation - I was being TOLD that Albatross Island was never to be visited again by sea kayakers. (My comments on this visit were put on this website over a year ago).

Helen attempted to tell me that Albatross were sensitive birds, and could be disturbed by human visitation. I must confess that this really amused me, and I sat the two of them down in my lounge and proceeded to show them an ABC video about Albatross Island. This shows a National Parks officer (Nigel Brothers) crashing through the rookery, chasing albatross, and bringing them down with a rugby tackle. He then proceeds to jab needles in them, spray paint on them - he goes up to their nests and lifts out the baby chicks from underneath them - and the birds couldn't care less - THEY DON'T MOVE. These albatross are the least sensitive animals I have ever seen.

This video can be bought from the ABC, their phone number in Hobart is (03) 62353694. The video is titled "A Tale of Three Islands". Another excellent video about Albatross Island is available from Jeff Jennings, this even shows an albatross inquisitive enough to peck at the video camera lens. Jeff can be contacted at <jennings@vision.net.au>.

This original plan also said that Albatross Island could be easily accessed by sea kayak from King Island. (The original plan is on this website, and can be viewed from here). Can you imagine that? It's somewhere near 80km from King Island to Albatross Island - and this office wallah was trying to tell the world that paddling 80km in Bass Strait from King Island to Albatross Island it relatively easy.

Of course this latest version of the plan (October 2000) has deleted that piece of rubbish, but replaced it with another load of rubbish. It now claims that Albatross Island is a popular destination for sea kayakers. Let me try and list the sea kayakers who have landed on Albatross Island.

1981 Tony Gaiswinkler/Andrew Rust.
1987 Kay Beswick/Grant Hyland/Toby Clark/Jeff Jennings/Ian McDonald/Laurie Ford.
1993 Mick Verrier/Jeff Jennings.
1996 Jeff Jennings/Laurie Ford.
1998 Sue Shearman/Laurie Ford.
1999 Laurie Ford.

15 people in 19 years, that's not even an average of one a year - and the National Parks claim it is a popular destination. I'd hate to be running a tourist resort on the island. If that's popular, I'd hate to see an unpopular destination.

There may be the other odd sea kayaker who may have landed on Albatross Island unbeknown to me, but they would be few and far between. You have to land on very sharp rocks, in fact you have to jump over the side of your kayak into the water, and then try and climb the steep rocks, dragging your kayak, before the next big swell catches you. You need almost flat calm conditions to get there and land, consequently very very few kayakers ever attempt it.

There are only two sea kayak clubs in Tasmania. One is the Maatsuyker Canoe Club, the other is The Tasmanian Sea Canoeing Club. The Maatsuyker Canoe Club has about 10 members, the Tas Sea Canoeing Club has about 200. I challenge the National Parks to get a list of kayakers from the Tasmanian Sea Canoeing Club who have landed on Albatross Island. If it is a popular destination, then surely out of a club of 200 sea kayakers you would expect at least 100 would have been there. To my knowledge, ONE MEMBER OF THAT CLUB HAS BEEN THERE, I repeat - ONE MEMBER OUT OF 200.

WOULD YOU CALL THAT A POPULAR DESTINATION???

The draft plan lists 12 islands:

Low Islets.
Moriarty Rocks.
Foster Islands.
Tenth Island.
Judgement Rocks.
West Moncoeur Island.
Rodondo Island.
Reid rocks.
Black Pyramid Rock.
Albatross Island.
Penguin Islet.
Cat Island.

Does the draft plan say that Low Islets can be easily accessed by sea kayak - which it can be.
Does it say Moriarty Rocks can be easily accessed by sea kayak - which it can be.
Does it say Foster Islands can be easily accessed by sea kayak - which it can be.
Does it say Tenth Island can be easily accessed by sea kayak - which it can be.
Does it say West Moncoeur Island can be easily accessed by sea kayak - which it can be.
Does it say Rodondo Island can be easily accessed by sea kayak - which it can be.
Does it say Penguin Islet can be easily accessed by sea kayak - which it can be.
Does it say Cat Island can be easily accessed by sea kayak - which it can be.

OH NO!!! For some reason they only suggest that Albatross Island is a popular destination for sea kayakers - despite it being very easy to prove this a lie.

Why has the author singled out Albatross island for special mention? Because this whole Bass Strait Island Reserve plan is just an attempt by one person in the National Parks with a bee in his bonnet about Albatross, to keep sea kayakers away from his pets.

Incidentally, now that they are going to put Albatross Island under their "protection", I am quite fearful for the birds' future well-being. In 1981 gannets were breeding on Cat Island, although only a couple of dozen pairs. These were then burnt to death by a "controlled burn" by the National Parks, that got out of control. In Tasmania, the National Parks are well known for out of control "controlled burns", the latest one being only a few months ago - in fact I think there may still be an ongoing inquiry into it. They regularly seem to burn out huge areas of Tasmania; and I can remember paddling to Tasman Island about 1979, only to find the whole island ablaze - with yet another controlled burn that got away.

We should keep in mind that people in the National Parks are public servants, the same as in the tax office, or centrelink - or any other Govt Dept where their main job seems to be to put obstacles in your way when you want to do something quite reasonable.
They seem to go out of their way to find some remote regulation that forbids that activity. This appears to be another example. Albatross are not threatened in any way. The numbers show that this colony is increasing in leaps and bounds, and has been for years - since it was decimated by sealers in the remote past. THE ONLY REASON THAT IT IS GETTING "PROTECTION" UNDER THIS PLAN IS BECAUSE IT  HAS ONLY THREE BREEDING HABITATS. It wouldn't matter if there were 20 million birds on this island - it would still be listed as vulnerable because of this artificial definition.

And look at the definition of the requirements to get a permit to visit the island.(point 4, appendix 1)
"Can adequately justify the need to visit the reserve."
Wouldn't a public servant have fun with that?

The original draft document said that you could land if human life was at risk - which meant that if you were near the island and suddenly had a case of sea sickness or hypothermia, or some other illness - you could land. They seem to have carefully omitted this statement in the latest copy - but I'm quite sure the law of the sea will still let you land if life is in danger. It will be rather interesting to see how many life threatening situations occur over the next few years.

Just as an aside, but to do with life threatening situations. In Tasmania there is a FIRE ACT. This act states that if life is threatened and a fire would alleviate the situation - such as hypothermia for instance - then you can light a fire. My information is that this Act overrides the National Parks Act, and that fires can be lit in 'fuel stove only areas' if necessary. And I must say that when a sea kayaker gets ashore after a gruelling paddle, soaked to the skin for many hours, they quite often find that they are so cold that they cannot do up buttons on their shirts, and must be very close to hypothermic. A sure case for a fire in my book, no matter where you are.

I said I was quite fearful for the Albatrosses safety now that National Parks are putting it under their protection. Let me tell you another couple of stories about islands in Bass Strait, a lot of them are leased from the Govt for grazing sheep and cattle.

Some years ago one of the lessees of a small island near Clark Island discovered some fishermen had landed, and messed about with his property. He took them to task in no small way. This island used to be free of rabbits. Shortly after that incident, rabbits appeared on the island - and the story circulating is that it was a pay-back to the lessee.

Another island just off Flinders Island is used for sheep grazing. It was free of Tasmanian Devils. I now understand that Devils have been "introduced".

It is an unfortunate fact of life that people do this sort of thing without any regard of the consequences, just to hit back at people that they see as restricting their freedom. It would be absolutely devastating if these people took it into their heads to introduce Devils, or a breeding pair of rats, or rabbits, to Albatross Island - just to hit out at the National Parks. And the way the National Parks are locking up more and more of Tasmania is making them distinctly unpopular among a lot of the Tasmania population.

The only other contact I have had with the National Parks about Albatross Island, was from one Anni McCuaig - she was going to set up a meeting between me and Nigel Brothers, or one of the other albatross researchers. This meeting never eventuated.
No doubt I'll catch up with them on Albatross Island in the near future.
Laurie Ford, November 2000.