Greymouth Stakeholder Meeting 29 September 2003
Ashley Hotel, 74 Tasman Street, Greymouth
2pm to 4pm
11 Attended (Canoe Club, Federated Farmers, Fish and Game, Farm Forestry, Grey District Council)
General Commentary
· There are not the same pressures in the South Island regarding access.
· The bed of the Arahura River is Maori-owned, permission is required to use the river. Currently there are informal access arrangements.
· All landowners should expect to have the same rights, regardless of race and also expect that to be allowed to choose who enters their properties.
· There are access issues surrounding Mt Tarawera.
· Are councils going to sort out the issue of paper roads?
· Does the Queen's Chain have moveable strips?
· If the Government could buy the land required for access off landowners, then perhaps all of the related access problems would disappear, such as OSH requirements, etc.
· OSH is more likely to get stricter.
· Has the OSH-liability issue been partially resolved?
· Legislation could include the exemption of gazetted walkways.
· In most cases in the Greymouth area, access is allowed, there is respect for this here.
· It is illegal to charge for access.
· There are good landowner-user relationships on the West Coast, but land use is changing with commercialisation, changing population, increased pressures.
· Canoeists more often than not have to drive to access areas, but they appreciate that a small cost may be required to manage roads, as long as this charge is fair and reasonable.
· No one would disagree with a small fee for track maintenance.
· It is reasonable for people to be able to ask for permission, although they do not expect the right to roam, that would be too much.
· One view: DOC should be given paper roads and accessways to administer, no one else is capable of showing people where they are.
· People normally go to DOC first to find out about what land they can access.
· Another view: DOC has a poor access history, therefore it would not be the right organisation to manage this issue.
· A small percentage of the public gives the landowner problems, these are the kind of people that landowners would not want to educate, such as poachers.
_ Landowners would like to retain the right to say who goes over their land.
_ Farmers are being asked to give up a lot, whereas the land user does not have to give up anything.
· Information regarding points of access is not available to those who do not know where to go.
· Could the Walkways Commission be alienated from DOC?
Fish and Game (substantive submission in hard copy)
· The West Cost is unique, having major areas of public land but access through freehold or private land.
· Fishers have traditionally enjoyed good relationships with landowners.
· However, relationships are coming under pressure as changes in land use affect landowner-user traditions (e.g., industrialised, intensive farming, deer), there is a large rural shift in new landowners being non-locals (including foreigners).
· There were also comments regarding the Arahura River.
· The intent of the Queen's Chain is part of our heritage.
· There is a need for genuine outdoor recreation that is available for future generations.
· The report is long overdue!
· It is a flawed argument that landowners will lose their property rights, as water and fisheries are not attached to the title of the land.
· Some farmers will not fence off their section so that stock can access water margins, yet they refuse public access to this strip.
· It is important that farmers have a say as to who gets to go across their land.
· There may be access arrangements, but there are still cases of rubbish and cannabis being left behind.
· Farmers would like control, especially at lambing time, for example.
· Most genuine hunters and fishers do not mind walking to get access.
· There needs to be a block of the sale of access loophole, done quickly, especially in the North Island (see Sir Geoffrey Palmer's draft bill).
· An accountable and responsible Crown agency is required.
· Must signpost what already exists.
· Access without ownership is fine but it must not displace the existing Queen's Chain.
· What is the difference between a licence and a fee for access?
Federated Farmers
· The public has expectations, but so do farmers - to keep their rights to private freehold property.
· There is little belief that this should change.
· Farmers want to know who is on their land.
· There are risks associated with having people on their land: farming involves risks; fire risks; animal welfare; biosecurity; illegal practices; commercialisation; and the release of wild piglets and wallabies (i.e. pest animals).
· Greater access increases such risks.
· Information about access in New Zealand needs to be put in school curriculums.
· There is a need to have consequences for the actions of people.
· Under a code of conduct there should be consequences for peoples' actions, such as if someone breaks the rules, they should be fined.
· Outside properties or at access areas there could be a sign with the landowner's phone number and name on it.
· Most people carry a cell-phone with them when going fishing.
Canoe Club
· There are problems with landowners locking gates, where before there was a mutual agreement, there is now disagreement.
· There could be a trade-off between formed roads and paper roads.
· A body established to administer access should look at paper roads.
· Some could become walkways, others could be changed and the rest could be removed from the landowner with compensation if they are needed for access.
· The Turnbull River was in the national guidebook for kayaking, but it is not anymore, as access is now denied.
· There is a lucrative business guiding fishing and hunting parties (i.e., exclusive arrangements catering for overseas clients).
· People being denied access could talk to Federated Farmers and they can go to the individual farmers to see if they can sort out the dispute.
· Fish and Game could also place higher priority on certain areas.
· A new agency could take some workload off councils.
· A legally binding code of conduct could be introduced.
· It is of concern that it should come to this, but a code may be the only option.
· Benefits for farmers could include the right to close access for up to 28 days, which would be useful at times of lambing and calving and a right to keep dogs out.
· Paper roads could be given to landowners as compensation for the Queen's Chain.
· There must be consequences, hence an enforceable code.
· A continuous Queen's Chain would be better; with only a couple of access points required.
· An incomplete Queen's Chain means that more access points are required.
· This sets the precedent for the next 20-30 years.
· This will determine how far commercialisation will go.
Contact for Enquiries
Rural Affairs Coordinator
Sector Performance Policy
MAF Policy
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
PO Box 2526
Wellington
NEW ZEALAND
Phone: +64 4 894 0675
Fax: +64 4 4 894 0745
Contact this person
