Analysis of Written Submissions on the Report Walking Access in the New Zealand Outdoors
2 The Characteristics of Access
Key points made in submissions
• The chapter on the characteristics of access generated significant comment. Many submitters consider that New Zealand has a unique legacy of freedom of access to the outdoors that needs to be protected for future generations.
• Most landholder submitters state that the traditional social convention of the public requesting permission for access onto private land still works well but many user submitters, and some landholders, consider that restrictions on access are becoming more frequent.
• Both landholder and user submitters agree that intensification of, and changes in, land use can result in restricted access.
• Many submitters are concerned that changes in land ownership and foreign ownership are causing access issues for all New Zealanders.
• Some landholder submitters feel that the urban public’s connection to and knowledge of rural New Zealand has been lost.
• A few landholder submitters believe that there is increasing pressure for access from urban New Zealanders and around peri-urban areas.
Background from the report
There are quite differing views within New Zealand society on whether there is currently a crisis with regard to public access to the foreshore, lakes, rivers, the bush and mountains. Based on all that the Group has seen, heard and read, it believes that the face of public access in New Zealand is undergoing change and being increasingly restricted, to the detriment of many New Zealanders seeking access and those who support the concept of open access. The social conventions that have provided the platform for obtaining public access from landholders are under increasing stress. (Page 5)
2.1 Heritage of freedom of access to the outdoors
A large number of responses were received on this Chapter. Many submitters refer to the way of life in New Zealand of access to the outdoors and to natural resources and the need to protect this for future generations. Submitters also consider that walking access is a critical element in the character of the nation, combined with a diverse natural environment that sets New Zealand apart from the rest of the world. This is particularly the feeling of anglers.
“[T]he concept of free access is the cornerstone of what New Zealand is all about, not only for New Zealanders but also for visitors. Clean waterways with easy access is part of what New Zealand is renowned for, it’s certainly part of the reason I love to live here. I hope my children and grandchildren will look back and thank us for protecting their rights of access.”
“As a New Zealander I am proud of and enjoy our wonderful environment. I believe it is the birthright of all Kiwis to have access to and care for it.”
“We must maintain our popular expectation of unrestricted access to and along our waterways. A point almost unique to New Zealand.”
Overseas visitors also acknowledge the unique nature of New Zealand’s outdoors and the need to protect it in perpetuity.
“During my days of fishing in New Zealand I have been struck by the excellent access to streams and rivers (I fish primarily in Southland). I have also been very please with the welcome I have received from farmers and landholders I have asked for access. I have never been turned down. I have however found sections of rivers that were inaccessible due to posting. In each case these postings have been on or near fishing lodges. There is no question for me that traveling to New Zealand centers on good access to streams and rivers. No matter how good the fishing is I won’t travel to New Zealand to fish unless I have good access to the streams […] I’m reaching the age where access will no longer affect me, but I feel it is crucial that my grandchildren and the grandchildren of all New Zealanders have the same access I have enjoyed.”
2.2 Requesting permission – a traditional social convention
Most landholder submitters state that the traditional social convention of the public requesting permission for access onto private land works well. In their view, this “outdoor etiquette” forms the basis for goodwill that has been a long-standing part of the landholder – user relationship. Individuals such as anglers and hunters seeking access onto private land value the connection that they have with landholders, which can involve several generations of a family recreating in a particular location over time.
“[T]he current arrangements for obtaining access to private land have worked well in almost all areas. There is at present a willingness of land owners to allow access to responsible people”.
“I can only recall 2 occasions when access has been refused onto private land. Genuine requests from responsible people to landholders for reasonable access are almost always met with cheerful permission and often advice and assistance. For this I am grateful”.
It is the new generation of users, according to some, that does not always understand the need to request permission. In addition, goodwill can be further eroded as landholders incur costs when permission is abused or when irresponsible behaviour occurs on their properties. Chapter 6 covers landholders’ and users’ concerns in greater detail.
Some landholder submitters themselves recognise that access for recreational users is being restricted.
“I find that more and more landholders are trying to deny access through their land on these tracks and roads to areas of DOC estate. I object to locked gates on legal roads. Some landholders are stating that these roads are closed and refusing access. Most of these roads have been formed and used by the early settlers. They have since been abandoned but are still clearly visible.”
“The current situation is not perfect, but works OK most of the time. The problem is that public access, whether through new owners or changing attitudes of present owners, is being restricted in a number of situations where access used to be freely given. This is particularly acute in the SI high country where some new owners are denying tramping access in well known and scenic areas […] I see both sides – I am a regular tramper, and occasionally hear the stories of arbitrary denial of access in situations where access would be harmless. This does not help farming’s image.”
Most user submitters state that restrictions on access onto private land are becoming more frequent. There are different reasons suggested for this, including the increased number of absentee or multiple owners (which makes it difficult to request permission), changes in land ownership, land use change and the growing number of smaller lifestyle blocks.
“In general I have experienced very pleasant relations with land owners and lease holders. However, over the past ten or more years I have experienced a greater reluctance on the part of some land holders or lease holders to permit access to trout waters within their leasehold (or freehold) land.”
2.3 Changes in land use
Restricted access can be the result of intensification in land use, state both landholder and user submitters. Diversification away from traditional land uses to viticulture, deer farming and cropping, for example, has been necessary for some landholders to seek further income. In other cases there has been an increase in the number of rural businesses such as retreats, garden tours and walkways.
“[C]ommercial pressures on land usage and natural resources are creating increasing conflict between landholders and outdoors recreationists.”
“I am now less enthusiastic about inviting strangers onto our land for the following reasons: our land use has had to become more intensive and we now run bulls and grow avocados […]”.
Many user submitters refer to landholders utilising adjacent public resources for commercial gain. There is a steady trend of tourists who pay for exclusive access to hunting and fishing (Chapter 6 covers exclusive capture in greater detail). Submitters assert that this is an increasing concern where game farms or safari-type farms/clubs are established, blocking access to publicly-owned conservation land behind. Rural tourism may also extend to ventures around sites of cultural significance and activity.
“His first statement was that we were trespassing on private property and had no right to be there. He informed us that this was his river and that as such was part of his livelihood as he derived income from it that helped pay the mortgage. If I wanted to fish it I had to pay for the privilege, and line up with the guides who had priority”.
2.4 Changes in land ownership
Changes in land ownership are considered by many submitters to be causing access issues for all New Zealanders. New owners, in particular foreign landholders and landholders with an urban affinity, bring with them different access traditions and concepts of property ownership. This may result in access being denied where in the past it was regularly made available upon request. Different expectations regarding access contribute to the loss of goodwill relationships and mean that access is uncertain upon land transfer.
“Areas I have hunted for over 30 years are slowly being closed to recreational hunters. I rang seven property owners recently along one range in the central South Island, to see if I could hunt big game, all said ‘no’. Some of these properties I had been given access to in the past, but as ownership changed, so did the access.”
“[O]wners of private land, and particularly foreign owners, have increasingly appropriated for themselves and for private profit, hunting and fishing rights on public land by denying any practical access to the public.”
2.5 Urban and rural private land
The urban public’s connection to, and understanding of, rural New Zealand has been lost as the urban population base grows, according to some landholder submitters. A few user submitters also note that family ties with the rural community are breaking down, especially as some rural areas depopulate. The rural area may be seen as a place for recreation only, rather than a working environment and the general public today does not always belong to recreational groups who maintain formal or informal codes of conduct. There may not necessarily be the same linkages with a specific landholder as was the norm in the past.
“In the past a large part of the New Zealand population lived in or has family who lived in rural New Zealand. In these circumstances the public both had knowledge of where they could go and how to behave. As the New Zealand population has moved to the cities this connection has been lost.”
“With a more urban population, a lot of the etiquette that should be used when in the great outdoors is being lost.”
A few landholder submitters believe that there is increasing pressure for access from urban New Zealanders and around peri-urban areas. This pressure is augmented as distance is no longer a barrier to recreation due to factors such as more disposable income and better cars. Considerable time may be spent managing access on a farm.
“This peninsular [South Kaipara Head] is both remote yet within easy access to urban Auckland. Increasing pressure of people […] can be extremely threatening to our local people.”
“The [Auckland] region currently has a population of 1.2 million people. Latest projections indicate that the region’s population will increase 36 per cent by 2021 to 1.65 million. There will also be significant changes in the make-up of the population. Associated with these changes will be further urban expansion and intensification. As housing density increases, Aucklanders will tend to have less private open space. This will place a greater need and demand on public access to public open space.”
“[U]rban encroachment adjacent to Whitford forest in Auckland where intensive urbanisation adjacent to it may be incompatible with the noise, transport, and hours of operation of commercial forestry. Regulation including RMA and increasingly OSH legislation constrains forestry operations in such situations. Conversion of unprofitable forest to an alternative land use, including lifestyle subdivision, may lead to changed expectations with respect to access.”
Contact for Enquiries
Mark Neeson
Manager, Land and Water Policy
Pastoral House
25 The Terrace
PO Box 2526, Wellington
Phone: +64 894 0703
Fax: +64 4 894 0745
