A Dunedin man is disappointed at the Department of Conservation's lack of acceptance ''that they got it wrong'' following his successful complaint to the Ombudsman.
Chas Tanner complained over Doc's decision in 2013 to grant a concession increasing guided walker numbers on the Routeburn Track, which contravened the Mt Aspiring National Park Plan - a plan he had helped develop as a member of the Otago Conservation Board.
Ombudsman Ron Paterson released his opinion just before Christmas, saying Doc's decision was unreasonable and drove a ''horse and carriage through the plan''.
He called for Doc to consider making a public apology to Mr Tanner and review its processes for handling applications for concessions in national parks.
The department was to let him know its response by January 21. Yesterday, Doc released a statement saying it accepted the recommendations made by the Ombudsman regarding its decision to increase the daily limit of guided walkers on the track from 24 to 40.
Deputy director-general Doris Johnston said the process used to assess the application was both detailed and public and Doc viewed the difference between the rules of the Fiordland and Mt Aspiring park plans as an ''exceptional situation'' - a view not shared by the Ombudsman.
Doc acknowledged the need for a more consistent approach to deal with the policies outlined in national park plans and to clarify what constituted an ''exceptional situation'', she said.
As a result, Doc would be developing new guidelines for assessing ''exceptional circumstances'' with help from regional conservation boards, the New Zealand Conservation Authority and iwi.
''The value in the Ombudsman's ruling is in developing agreed positions in the future to deal with what constitutes `exceptional circumstances' within management plans and that is where Doc is focusing.''
Once finalised, the guidelines would be publicly available, she said.
It would not be revoking its decision to allow Routeburn Guided Walks the extra 16 guided walkers as the company went into the process in good faith and was meeting the terms of the concession that was granted.
''We have looked at the situation carefully and do not consider there is scope to intervene without evidence the activity is having significant adverse effects.''
If the company applied again when its concession ran out in 2032 it would be judged against plans and guidelines relevant at that time, she said.
Mr Tanner said the Ombudsman's opinion ''categorically indicated'' Doc had issued a concession when it should not have done.
''For all but the word, the concession was granted illegally.''
He called the personal apology by Ms Johnston ''superficial''.
The apology said she was ''sorry for the frustration you experienced'' as a member of the board.
''The apology in fact should have been directed at all parties who disagreed with the issue of the consent.''
Mr Tanner said he would be contacting Doc to express his surprise at its lack of acceptance it ''got it wrong''.
Federated Mountain Clubs (FMC) president Robin McNeill said it was excellent Doc had adopted the Ombudsman's recommendations, which would give certainty when similar decisions were made in the future.
