Masterton Public Meeting 17 October 2003
Masterton District Council, 64 Chappell Street
4pm to 6pm
40 Attended
Commentary
· New Zealanders have been losing their connection with the land over the past 40 years.
- But ownership of the fish etc has not changed and still belongs to the people.
- Access can be an emotive issue.
- There should be fair and reasonable access for anglers and hunters to the resources for which they pay a licence fee.
- There needs to be a middle ground.
- A code is welcomed, to respect privacy.
- The report and strategy are welcomed, good to mention the role of education.
- Public land needs identification.
· How would DOC intend to deal with stock disruption, rubbish, unlocked gates etc on John Acland's land?
- There needs to be a claw back on the agency if someone causes problems (e.g. disease).
· A lot of problems identified are worst case scenarios and can be managed around all people.
- Putting bulls in where people are going is a protest action.
- All the people of New Zealand are protected under the Maori version of the Treaty of Waitangi.
· A farmer gets a lot of rubbish on his land, so he locked an access gate, which worked well.
- What is meant by riparian rights?
- DOC land is landlocked by the farmer's land and the farmer has never stopped access to DOC land.
- What are the farmer's rights when paper roads have been washed away?
- The farmer stops vehicles and 4WD, but not mountain bikes or walkers, this is the only way to educate people.
- Need to spend money to get stock back.
· An angler states that he has not been refused access by a landowner when asking for permission, but he has also rescued stock from streams.
- If you ask, you shall receive.
- The issue cuts both ways, both sides need to be reasonable.
- Understands the needs of farmers.
- A code of conduct is a good idea.
- There should be `abuser pays' oversight by groups.
- Recognises that costs are involved.
- The majority of people should not be disadvantaged.
- What is presented by the report is a reasonable way forward.
- The bottom line is that the country should be involved.
· Things have changed, to give rights and privileges without responsibilities is not acceptable.
- Federated Farmers insists on the right to say `no' - costs etc imposed by legislation, such as the Fencing Act.
- Not prepared to give access unless liability is removed.
- 116 cases of problems of access is not a large amount.
- There have been 142 cases of rural fires over 2 years (24 cases in 2002), where the `lighter' of the fires was not known.
· The Wairarapa Coastal Strategy has an excellent section on access - this needs to be looked at.
- Work constructively from where we are now.
· Ignorant people are a minority.
- The Mt Holdsworth Lodge area is used by 60-80 000 people per annum.
- It is very rare to find rubbish, yet there is now only rubbish bin.
· Trouble with pig hunters.
- Farmers are conservation-minded, will let you access land, are proud of it.
- There is a need to work together to get a better solution than what we had in the past and work on proposals for the future.
· Problems do not seem to relate to walkers, mainly vehicles, guns and dogs.
- What are the emerging views?
· The report is very good.
- Can people use high country access easements with a gun and dog?
- Is there a code of practice with the New Brunswick model?
- Keen to see a strict code of practice with a statutory basis, all groups want this.
· Would like to see a law as in Tasmania that human faeces cannot be left in the open, attracting an instant fine of $200 (avoid disease issues).
· We are lucky in New Zealand because the best hunting and fishing has been on private land.
- Owners regulate the resource numbers.
- Do not see a lot of problems with the current situation.
- There are a lot of good existing walks.
· OSH problems and liability affect access and stop people from granting access.
- Recreationalists are keen to see this situation changed.
- Need negotiation about how to deal with private land rights and public access rights.
· The report is very good.
- People in the future should be able to walk along a beach without any problems.
- How can people find the landowner?
- Supports the Queen's Chain.
- Ordinary people want to walk on the beach, it is part of our heritage.
· Signs could be used to identify farmers.
- There should not be any liability if it is not the fault of the farmer.
· Landownership comes with certain rights.
- Supports the ethos of the Queen's Chain and its extension by subdivision.
- To require an easement across land is a taking of a right.
- Has a fundamental problem with the report.
- Accepts different rights with certain Maori situations but sees problems if Maori are treated differently.
- Allows controlled access at certain times on their terms.
- Esplanade reserve is eroding into the sea.
- More public land here than anywhere else in the world, DOC land is available.
- Huge biosecurity risks for their business.
- Access should not be mandated.
- No problems with access agency/strategy but not mandated.
- Favours the subdivision trigger.
· Does the whole coast have to be opened up?
· Anglers and hunters only want access to the public resource, not any private land.
· The subject is `much ado about nothing'.
- Do not mandate.
- New Zealand `loves bureaucracy'.
- The access agency is a `waste of time'.
- Be realistic about the outcome of a code of conduct and/or agency.
- Start with the Crown forests etc and better indicate routes there and upgrade those facilities.
- You cannot get a solution beyond good human relations.
- Can use the local councils to help, start with parks.
- Opposes separate treatment of Maori land.
- Bad publicity is the best comeback on the issue.
· How many unformed legal roads exist that give access to beaches etc?
- They are not maintained.
· If you want people on side then you cannot force them.
- Negotiate access, not legislation that can erode private property rights.
· Has anyone given any consideration to the management of riparian areas if stock is taken off them?
· Proposals are the thin edge of the wedge.
- Like the work done so far.
- Problems with the size of the `stream' and what it will be.
- Agrees with negotiation approach.
- Start on what we have now and do not work on new bits.
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
