These are not the same.
Method 1 is used to allow traffic to route between the 10.0.0.x network and the 30.0.0.x network. Without these routes no traffic could go between those 2 networks.
Method 2 is about controlling access between the 2 networks. But if you didn't have the routes you added in method 1 then the access-lists would make no difference ie. with only the access-lists and no routes there would be no communication between the subnets.
Think of like this. Routing (method 1) is used to allow communication between different networks. Without correct routing information routers cannot send traffic to the correct destination. So without setting up routing whether with static rouutes or a dynamic routing protocol you won't be able to communicate between the networks.
Once routing is setup you can then, optionally, restrict which subnets or devices on subnets can talk to other subnets or devices on other subnets. One of the ways to do this is to use access-lists. Note that even though you have allowed all ip in your access-lists it still makes no difference until you have setup routing.
In practice you wouldn't use the acls you have defined because they are redundant in your example ie. you are premitting everything so why bother with an acl.
Jon
