Dunedin Stakeholder Meeting No 1, 13 October 2003
Southern Cross Hotel, Cnr Princess and High Street
6 Attended (Deer Industry NZ, MAF Policy, Coastal Farmer [B&B/Farm Tourism], Maori Trust, Mayor, Clutha District Council, Maori Land Trust/Cathedral Caves Owner)
Commentary
· Local authorities need clear guidance about who they should consult with.
- A register database should be established, to indicate the people that local authorities need to talk to.
· Local Maori are in a difficult situation, as Ngai Tahu is attempting to represent them, whereas it should be Ngai Waitaha and Kati Mamoe.
· Reference to customary rights.
- There is a lack of clarity over iwi, hapu rights.
· There is also a concern in the farming sector about what organisations represent deer/sheep/beef/arable/forestry.
· There are issues surrounding democracy versus efficiency, in setting regulations and planning guidelines.
· A definitive agency that can settle disputes would be a sensible move.
- The agency would need to have sector representatives.
· An agency would need public funding and clear authority.
- A recognisable body.
- Maybe co-opt people or have consultative groups.
· Education?
- Concerned about education achieving a change in public attitudes.
· New activities (4WD, mountain biking) need to be taken into account.
· Greater clarity is needed over rights and responsibilities
· Should we look at the paper road issue?
- Some of these paper roads could be upgraded to walking tracks.
- Other paper roads could be re-surveyed and some removed if no longer appropriate.
· Anyone who is serious about walking through these areas will contact landowners.
· The paper road issue is opening up problems for some farms, when the paper roads are publicly notified.
· There is a general concern about removal of items from heritage sites.
- Opening up access has the potential to damage these sites (spiritual/cultural concerns).
· There is potential to use `silent files' for sites on council plans.
· Forestry plantations (with Forest Certification) are experiencing heritage losses.
- The companies have to notify the sites (as part of FSC).
· There are unique areas of Maori land that have been allocated to Maori in the South Island under various Acts (such as SILNA and the Middle Island Grants Act).
· Do not want uncontrolled access but some system to control entry.
· Need clear, fenced areas, not just marked.
- Fences enable a clear division.
- Rules may also need to be imposed.
· Raised the recent announcement by DOC about additional funding for tracks.
- Central government needs to put in the resources to create tracks.
- Local authorities do not have the capacity for this work.
- Through the Clutha District Council's sub-division process they have set up esplanade strips.
· Why should local government fund national tourism activities?
- For major tourist icons, tourists should be paying for access (honesty boxes do not work).
- Proper tracts bring certainty of access.
- Access cards may be appropriate.
- Do not want an agency that dominates the process or simply represents sector groups.
· There is a push by regional councils for riparian plantings - this would conflict with access strips.
· Why not expand the role of the Walkways Commission?
· Once you start creating walkways you then produce traffic congestion i.e., camper vans, camping sites and the need for toilets.
- The Group must consider the full cycle of tourism - what is its total cost?
- Who would police these areas?
· There will be an issue of sustainability for some of the new walkways.
· Support for the initiatives, this is a healthy process.
- Agree that the right to roam is not acceptable.
- Opportunities for trade-offs to open walkways and create continuous pathways.
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
