Analysis of Written Submissions on the Report Walking Access in the New Zealand Outdoors
11 Additional Matters
Key points made in submissions
• Where there is reasonable demand, many submitters state that there should be responsible vehicle access.
• Some recreational submitters feel that carrying a gun and taking a dog should be allowed for access to hunting areas.
• A few recreational submitters consider that the terms of reference could also include bicycle and horse access.
• Some submitters state that public access should be limited to walking access only.
• Many landholder submitters state that permission must be sought for access other than walking access.
• Charging for access is not supported by many submitters, unless this charge relates only to actual services provided, the maintaining of tracks or accommodation.
• Many submitters raise concerns about the amount of land now under foreign ownership in New Zealand, relating it to the criteria of the Overseas Investment Commission for the sale of land.
Background from the report
The terms of reference invited the Group “to report on any other matters that related to access that appear to require consideration by the Minister”. Topics discussed include firearm use; bicycles, vehicles and animals; land management; fisheries management; Crown Pastoral Land Act; ad medium filum aquae rights; charging issues; the Overseas Investment Commission; and oceans policy. These points are pertinent, although not core to the access debate. Nevertheless, if addressed, they have the potential to improve access to New Zealand’s outdoors. (Page 96)
11.1 Vehicles
Responsible vehicle access, including the use of 4WD vehicles, should be further investigated, according to many submitters. Several submitters emphasise that the rights of vehicle access should be available to the physically impaired and the elderly who may not be able to reach the location through different means. The distance to be traveled to a location is a factor in considering vehicle access. Other submitters state that the gradual increase in 4WD use as outdoor recreation cannot be overlooked in a review of access in the New Zealand outdoors.
“Demographics show an increase in the numbers of elderly citizens, many of whom are partially physically disabled. Provision should be made by the Dept of Conservation for access to conservation land by mechanised means where practicable.”
“We want to see that the ‘rights of access to river, alpine and coastal areas’ be vigorously preserved so that as wide a section of the public as possible can enjoy such areas and that they do not become the domain of any one group in society.”
11.2 Firearms and dogs
Some submitters feel that access to hunting areas should allow for carrying a gun and taking a dog. These submitters perceived a decline in opportunities in carrying firearms both across private land to get to public land and onto private land. This is an issue that users believe requires clarification, as hunters feel that there should be provision for carrying unloaded firearms to hunt on public land.
Some submitters also hope that controlled dogs would be permitted on most public accessways.
“In many cases, the only access from road ends to forests is via a paper road or the like and if firearms are banned, then there is no practical way that deerstalking can continue.”
“We see a way forward could be that firearms can only be carried across land and not used on it without permission. They should always be in an unloaded condition with ammunition carried separate to the firearm. Dogs must either be in a vehicle or on a lead at all times until passage is completed.”
11.3 Bicycles and horses
A few submitters contend that bicycle access could be considered alongside pedestrian access. These submitters feel that much of the report is relevant to cyclists also. Future access provisions should cater for cyclists and horse riders where appropriate, state a few submitters. A few submitters note that tenure review could include provisions for bicycles, horses and vehicles. A submitter suggests that councils be directed to sort out road verges to allow foot and, where practical, horse access, within 10 years.
In general, most submitters who support access by means other than walking feel that New Zealanders are wanting more diverse recreational activities and to secure traditional activities such as hunting.
“At the public meeting there was interest from horse riders and cyclists to also improve their access opportunities where appropriate.”
“The walkway should include not only walkers but […] bikers, horse riders”.
11.4 Walking access only
According to some submitters, access should be limited to walking only. Many of these submitters are concerned about the potential threat to biosecurity and conservation values that bicycle and, in particular, horse and vehicle access may bring. A few submitters consider that irresponsible use of 4WD vehicles is causing problems in some areas, especially delicate coastal environments such as sand dunes.
“Stronger controls on motor vehicle access to riparian areas and the coast are essential to avoid environmental damage.”
“Right of access should be for unaccompanied foot traffic only and would not apply to dogs, horses, fire arms, bicycles and vehicles.”
11.5 Permission for non-walking access
Many landholder submitters grant non-walking access across private land to public land, or onto their property for activities such as horse riding, but state that permission must be sought. Of these submitters, some are concerned that if permission is not requested, the number of non-walking activities may result in a right to roam. Other submitters would like to know who is on their land and for what purpose, for farm management and safety reasons. Instances were noted in submissions on Chapter 6 of stock being shot, dogs worrying sheep and other instances of irresponsible non-walking access.
“We let hunters onto our land to shoot deer, pigs and goats but insist that they ask first.”
“One day a year – motorbikes have run of whole property. One day a year a mountain bike race is held here and on adjoining properties. Trampers, mountain bikers, shooters have access all year round except September/October (lambing), provided they contact me first. Anglermen have unrestricted access to river. Horse trekkers welcome.”
11.6 Charging issues
Many submitters who refer to charging for access support it on land only where the charge relates only to actual services provided, such as the maintenance of tracks or the provision of accommodation. User submissions on Chapter 6 note instances where users are required to purchase a key to open a locked gate, in particular for tracks on unformed roads. A few landholder submitters consider that accessways should adhere to a ‘user pays’ system, that rural ratepayers should not have to pay for the maintenance of access.
“[Would like to see] outlawing of charging exorbitant and arbitrary fees for use of access roads across private land to reach public land or rivers.”
“At present where farmers are exercising a degree of control over access (legally or otherwise) there is too much opportunity for commercial return at the expense of the general public and for favouritism.”
Most submitters find it unacceptable that there is charging for access to water, fisheries and wildlife, which do not attach to land title. A few submitters believe that landholders should not view access as an investment opportunity.
“While it is said to be illegal to sell hunting or fishing rights, access to the fishing or hunting is often denied or charged for at an exorbitant rate.”
“As long as land owners put in place a responsible balance of river use, to the avoidance of exclusive capture, I see no reason why they should be denied the opportunity to make money from their fortuitous locations.”
A few submitters note that DOC is able to charge for access onto public land and believe that DOC should not be allowed to charge concessions, unless the commercial activity will not interfere with conservation and private use. A few landholder submitters consider that if DOC can charge for this access, then they may themselves be justified in making a profit from access.
A few Maori submitters note that charging for access is a necessary part of gaining revenue for some parcels of land that are unable to be farmed. These submitters reserve their right to charge for access and consider that a right of the general public to access their land would remove this right.
“The Government proposals relate to access to such waterways along the banks of adjoining land. The fact that a general access right does not currently exist enables some of the […] Trusts to grant access rights and in some cases this can produce a significant income in respect of blocks which might otherwise be very low income producers. Granting public rights could have a serious financial impact on such blocks. This should not be countenanced.”
11.7 Overseas Investment Commission (OIC)
Considerable comment was received by submitters about the OIC giving insufficient consideration to access when allowing overseas purchase of land. Many submitters feel that the current criteria for allowing overseas investment are too lenient, with too many loopholes. Most submitters state that provision of public access must be a key factor in foreign investment. This could mean application of marginal strip provisions when coastal or riparian land is sold, or through other means mentioned by submitters. Some submitters suggest that public access to the coast and rivers should occur on the sale of land.
Some submitters recommend that the OIC be instructed not to approve foreign land sales that exploit natural resources or charge for access. Further, overseas purchasers of rural land must be made aware through education of customs regarding access and rural social conventions.
“The Overseas Investment Commission should not approve land sales where the proposed landholder or their plans for development, e.g. a hunting/fishing safari operation, would endanger public access values.”
“It could be a requirement of Overseas Investment Commission approvals that any waterways identified on private land be appropriately subject to a Queen’s Chain condition and that this be legalised as part of approval for sale processes.”
“Legislate that new land owners – especially foreign buyers – without our NZ philosophy about access, must provide Public Access to rivers and coasts.”
11.8 Ad medium filum aquae rights
A few submitters state that ad medium filum rights (AMF) should not continue to exist as they do not contribute to public access and seek to avoid overseas situations where individuals are prohibited from standing on certain banks and riverbeds.
One submitter suggests that AMF rights should not be deemed to exist after 20 years.
“As the Wainuiomata River is one of the few in New Zealand where the Land Titles include the bed of the river as part of the adjacent land, this would appear to be a historical anomaly. Perhaps, as part of this review, consideration should be given to bringing this river into line with other New Zealand rivers.”
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
