Palmerston North Public Meeting 22 October 2003

Sherwood Motor Inn, Featherston Street

7pm to 9pm

90 Attended

Commentary

· What is a river?

· You said that local solutions are the best solutions - are you suggesting that district plans have not achieved what they intended?

· `Muddled' terms of reference.

You are pretending that the core problem is one of waterways, but there is a far bigger problem.

Lament the fact that this is walking access alone, done to the disadvantage of a growing sector.

Ignore people that do horse trekking, mountain climbing.

Responsibility for those with disabilities.

Endorse access by other means other than walking.

· Applaud leadership.

Needs teeth/power.

Can see abuses of access.

· The Queen's Chain ethos is good but need an understanding of how landowners feel, i.e. deeming of the land.

· Suggestion of negotiated solutions is good, but nervous about using the legal road proposal as a currency to trade.

· All the years that this person has been fishing, never had any problem gaining access.

Policy that asks people for access, against the right to wander at will.

Worries that access to back country streams is being shut, would like to see this stopped.

Can go to a farmer and be asked to pay large sums of money.

But no problem in paying a small fee for the upkeep of tracks/roads.

· Regional councils are not playing the game, they should be held accountable.

· Should stop the ability to charge for access.

Reference to section 26zn of the Conservation Act - make it illegal to charge for freshwater fishing.

Amend section 26zl of the Act so that Fish and Game have the power to have the Minister close down that section of the river.

· Interested in protecting the river environment.

People do not realise how fragile that environment is, 4WD can upset the balance easily.

· Want a future of access for our children - rights that we believed that we had under the Queen's Chain concept.

· Want to see access - walk as of right along streams and through private land to get to streams.

Problems in the South Island.

Access without cost to the landowner.

Cost of signage etc in the hands of those wanting access.

The right to roam is malicious, unnecessary, and glad to see that few people want it.

· Worried about trespass laws.

Give landowner a lot in relation to land user.

But also want to give landowner power against real trespassers.

Want secure access.

It is a courtesy to negotiate to go through land with a vehicle/hunters.

· A lot of farms have incorporated paper roads, they have to be identified clearly.

· To create a new reserve/strip, have to take private land to do that.

How do you propose to compensate people for the loss of land?

· Is there a loss?

Still right to use that land, so no loss.

· In the Wairarapa, farm sizes are modest in terms of hectares.

Have been negotiating angler access for the past few months on the Ruamahunga River, where there is no Queen's Chain.

Reasonable angler access, provided by the riverbed without the requirement to go through/across private land.

Want to negotiate access from a road to a river, rather than through a farm.

No requirement to negotiate any further access as access is close enough.

Do not want access points too close together.

Excellent report.

· Cost of fencing, problem of weeds.

· Stream care.

Some areas are in transition between the city and rural landscapes.

Farmer wanted reserve along strip, but farmer who bought the property wanted to mow the grass to the edge of the stream.

Group needs to juggle considerations.

More accountability for territorial authorities.

· Satisfied with the report.

-  Need to pick up issues.

-  Sit down with Federated Farmers and settle the issue.

-  Exclusive capture in the central North Island.

-  Resources do not attach to the title of the land.

-  Get Jim Sutton to facilitate.

-  Cath Petrey - get a code of practice with real bite.

· These are valid comments.

-  But the farmer wants the right to say no.

-  500 people across land per year.

-  Want to be able to shut down farm and know who is on it.

-  People turn up at all hours of the night, with guns.

-  Remove vehicle access.

-  This will not stop at walking access.

· Because in isolated areas, have issues in relation to security, privacy.

· Do not want to go through an access agency.

· Should have the right to say no, without reason - if you give a reason, it opens the stage for an argument.

· Have hosted scouts, hunters, 4WD.

-  Know that people are coming, that responsible people are in charge.

-  Have to go to trouble to make preparations.

-  OSH does not interest the landowner because before that, still had a responsibility to those on land.

· What about public rights of way through bridle paths and short cuts.

-  Should be able to move from A to B.

-  Negotiate with landowner.

· Horror stories with trespassers - the undermining of property rights is not on.

· Fish and Game do not advocate the level of access that Shelley Dew Hopkins makes available.

-  The access provided on her farm is generous, more so than by what the report suggests.

-  Queen's Chain on her property for legitimate walking access.

-  Fish and Game are just looking at reasonable entitlement, thinks that her problems need to be fixed too.

-  A Keep Out sign would be legitimate.

· Need to clarify what constitutes a river.

· Do not want confusion between districts.

· Concerned regarding paper roads - meander through farmland.

-  Want to be able to say no at critical times.

-  Motorbike marks - concerned.

· Address the whole issue at once - guns, dogs?

· District council has been working through guidelines for access with Federated Farmers - no horses, hours of access, closed for public safety, lambing and calving.

· No access to some lakes for conservation purposes.

· Each community is working out the issues.

· Need an agency like the QEII Trust.

-  The subdivision trigger is slow in some places, but fast in others, like Feilding.

· Check titles.

· Extensive procedure to close the road.

· Perpetuating the myth of the Queen's Chain, when we do not have one.

· Practicality of esplanade reserves - pay considerable rates to the council.

· Concept to retire fences and plant with a buffer zone, but this could not mean easy access - who is going to pay for that work?

· Willows, weeds.

· The concept of walkways does not exist.

· Concerned that the people here are not those who will be causing trouble - those wandering about are not interested in fishing.

· Increasing access for legitimate users will increase access for undesirable types.

· Access for some may mean access for a lot more.

· Opening up access may mean for more honest eyes.

· Access creates more problems - people may ask once, then keep coming back and eventually steal stock, pick asparagus, remove hot water cylinder from hut.

· It is difficult to trust anyone, people generally end up abusing access.

· How is the Group proposing to pay for the recommendations?

· Uncertain on how things will be implemented.

· Farmers are the biggest rating base.

· Often the people wanting access are not the ratepayers in that area.

· Advocate negotiated settlements.

· Angler access was organised for the upper Manawatu River, with a superb response from negotiation.

· The Queen's Chain ethos is changing.

· There is merit in swapping unformed roads for better access, with varying circumstances to take into account.

· There are people `all over the show' wanting part of what landowners have.

· This is opening a can of worms - farming is a business.

· Access can be done as in the past, with goodwill.

· Property rights have a high price.

· Farmers work hard, they want to retain the use of their land.

· The present system has worked well.

· Pressure from individual property owners.

· It is a pity that this could affect people with a good access setup - allow people to drive onto private tracks for access, but do not mind as long as we know who they are.

· What is happening with New Zealand defence force land?

· OSH is used as a stick to beat people with to get everyone out.

· Need to look at the public land `above' the law.

· Here rivers are entrenched, they do not shift.

· We do not live in a utopian society.

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