Cromwell Stakeholder Meeting 14 October 2003
Golden Gate Lodge, Barry Avenue
2pm to 4pm
20 Attended (High Country Federated Farmers, Otago Conservation Board, Farm Advisor, Farm Consultant, Queenstown District Council, South Island High Country Committee, Whakatipu Trails Trust, Forest and Bird)
Commentary
· When is a stream a stream?
- What is the minimum width?
- Quite a few streams in Central Otago over 3 metres wide do not have a Queen's Chain.
· There is an article in the Wanaka Sun last week about walking access.
- A small percentage of people abuse the system for others (e.g. dogs).
- More publicity is needed.
· There has been a large increase in the population not familiar with rural ways, education is needed (with regional/local variations in a code of conduct).
· A good way to educate people is to show them a practical model, take them out in the field.
- Need to identify good models in each district.
· Need regional strategies for (identifying) access - key places and concerns - this could be done by local councils?
· The impact of lifestyle blocks in the Central Otago landscape and settlement is leading to a sense of urgency.
· Need for local authorities to get their parks and reserves signage in order: where private and public land starts and stops.
- This is quite important because of tourism.
· Did the Group consider whether district plans would be useful?
· Would not want DOC as an access agency - it has been commercialising access.
· Who would pay for an agency?
· A contestable fund might not work - it can be difficult to get funding from it.
- Would prefer the tenure review model (through LINZ).
- An opposing view expressed - would not want LINZ because tenure review is not working well).
· The QEII model might work well - could sit over/assist local trusts/groups.
· Contestable funds are good for setting up capital, but not for maintenance.
· Need an organisation that can be operational.
· Identify what access is available now and then decide how to get new access arrangements.
· LINZ has a statutory duty to provide information - why hasn't it been challenged?
· Need to place responsibility on users of walkways for their maintenance (toilet facilities, rubbish).
· Could local information centres be brought into the loop?
· Losing access because it is unmarked and not legal.
· Diamond Lake example.
· User charges for maintaining walkways?
· Would there be a concern if landowners set up commercial ventures?
· Access issues are costly and require a lot of co-operation between local authorities and owners.
· Need a protocol that people will honour - a cultural challenge.
· Community and volunteers can only do so much.
- It would be useful to have templates (for rules etc) with room for regional variation.
- Need for easy access to funds.
· Need to remain alert to evolving changes in recreation, e.g., popularity of mountain bikes.
· `Interactive traveller': Tourism New Zealand needs to be brought into the discussion; care of the environment.
· Putting on environmental care code in rental cars etc.
· Liability for fires: Could there be an insurance policy for users that they could pay into?
- Income loss (Australian model).
· Need an overall body to see that access is obtained, marked and secured.
· If the right to roam were to be considered, it would need to be carefully managed.
· There are fewer problems now even with more visitors than New Zealanders; people stick to tracks; charge commercial trips (who are mostly New Zealanders).
- Should be an annual tax on visitors and those who use DOC huts.
· Issue a card for a fee to link into tracks etc (Jetboaters Association code?)
· Involve backpacking organisations.
· Should there be different rules for visitors (overseas tourists) compared to New Zealanders?
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
