Gisborne Public Meeting 09 October 2003

Gisborne Cosmopolitan Club, 190 Derby Street

7pm to 9pm

50 Attended

Commentary

· Where you have a boundary that is likely to move, what is the situation if there is a building in the way when the river moves?

    Who has right of way here?

    Are there any precedents?

· Please explain `embrace the ethos of the Queen's Chain'.

· Wasn't the Queen's Chain originally set up for transportation?

· Did the Group find that the myth of the Queen's Chain is widely held and a source of comfort to New Zealanders?

· Confusion - you are trying to interpret a 19th century edict with a 21st century requirement.

· What are you saying when you refer to `reduction of traditional access opportunities'?

· Are people confusing a privilege with a right?

· Concerned about what will happen after consultation, have concluded that you are going to create a new agency.

· We seem to be steering towards a long-term negotiated/compensated solution.

· Farmers here are against the right to roam.

· Most people understand that major rivers have access obligations.

    -  How do you define the size of waterways?

    -  Can we take it that a waterway would have to lead somewhere?

· The RMA interpretation does not provide surety, refers to 3 metre banks in flood.

· Federated Mountain Clubs does not want to wander at will, PANZ likewise.

    -  Happy with negotiation.

· There is so much confusion on where the Queen's Chain is and isn't, so are you going to clearly identify where it actually is?

    -  Will it be mapped and signposted?

· Is it correct that the majority of Maori land does not have the Queen's Chain attached?

· Concerned about AMF rights.

· Can you get river access without the Queen's Chain?

· The Queen's Chain is a myth embodied by Kiwis.

    -  Part of being a Kiwi is that we do not have to pay to go to a river and fish or to go to the beach.

· Hope that codes of conduct will be enforced by legislation.

    -  If creating rights on one hand, people should have the right to enforce certain behaviours.

· Do not like `defined responsibilities' under a code of conduct.

    -  It needs to be stronger.

· Just as a landowner can be penalised for denying access, it should cut both ways.

· Have you had any submissions from tourists?

    -  Foreigners can turn up on the land and they may have no clue.

    -  This could potentially become a bigger problem.

· It is crazy to form policy ideas when people are not sure about what the access situation is.

    -  Need better information on what can be accessed and what not.

    -  The system is working at the moment, based on goodwill.

· LINZ was great for sorting the problem of mapping out, but now it is gone.

    -  There is a charge to do it through council surveyors.

    -  Is LINZ listening or ignoring the problems?

    -  This is government information, so it should be provided by the Government.

· Crown land now with marginal strips is not being shown on maps.

· The access issue has been downgraded.

· What is a priority?

    -  Puzzled, cannot see where problems are.

    -  It is variable.

· Surely people should have a right to say who is on their property?

· Would the access be fenced, posted or signed?

· Will you be paying compensation in return for land?

· There will not be a requirement for blanket access to streams?

· Problem with strangers on land, want to be compensated.

· The user pays for access.

· Need to put walkways in for easier access where access exists.

· Would you have to negotiate around a gorge that you cannot get access to?

· Have you looked at esplanade reserves on the foreshore?

· Pressure for recreation is increasing.

· Simple access to information is the main point.

· Discussion around the backcountry and its rives.

    -  Point made that the landowner has rights.

    -  A good host, but it is different when a mess is left.

    -  Increasing pressure on areas.

    -  The days are long gone when there were one or two anglers on the river.

· Ideally access would be marked on a topography map, so people would not have to go back again.

· There is diminished accessibility to rivers for anglers.

    -  Concerned about exclusive capture.

    -  Land is being maintained for overseas investors.

    -  Reference to Geoffrey Palmer's bill to close the access loophole.

    -  Land he used to guide 20 years ago, he now cannot get into.

    -  Look at payment for access.

    -  What is the Group doing on the Mohaka River issue?

· Would money go to landowners or operators?

· Does land ownership extend to trout or is it regarded as a public resource?

· Part of the experience is the way of getting to the land and if there are several ways.

· Open the Queen's Chain to all waterways.

    -  Federated Farmers is opposed to the Queen's Chain on all waterways.

    -  Throw out the Trespass Act.

    -  If people cannot cross land, they will walk up the river.

    -  Getting to public land is a key issue.

· There could be a problem that an enshrined right to access will push confrontation where there is currently none.

    -  Alienation could occur.

Previous PageTable Of ContentsNext Page

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

 




Biosecurity New Zealand Web Site