This page last modified 25 June 2002

Local Issues: Public Roads

Waiheke Island troubles

New Zealand Herald, January 11, 1993--
"...Loop Road is part of the tourist route running around the Hauraki Gulf island. The section that runs through Mr. Spencer's farm contains one of the most popular spots, the historic gun emplacements of Stony Batter.

Loop Road was built during the 1970s with the co-operation of local landowners. It was intended to be vested in public ownership but this process was not completed when Mr. Spencer bought the 650ha surrounding Stony Batter in 1980.

Discussions began amicably but became heated as Mr. Spencer made changes to the road. In 1986 he buried the road along Man O'War Bay, south of Stony Batter, and built a new road further inland away from his house. The then Waiheke County Council rebuilt the old road with a bulldozer.

The Auckland City Council, which has taken over the administration of the island, has challenged Mr. Spencer's roadblock with an appeal to the Planning Tribunal. The council claims that Mr. Spencer does not have the right to block the road. A separate High Court decision is expected to settle the ownership of the road."

New Zealand Herald, January 13, 1993--

Police warn public to leave roadblock

"Police legal experts say Waiheke Islanders do not have the right to try to unblock a disputed road near Man O'War Bay.
Inspector Kevin Glubb, of the Auckland regional police legal section, said yesterday that residents who attempted to dig away a large earth mound cutting off Loop Road ran the risk of being arrested for trespass.

Land title searches indicated that the millionaire businessman and landowner Mr. John Spencer has acted within the law in bulldozing the mound to prevent vehicular access.

"From the documentation, we believe that the land in question belongs to the company registered on the title, and the owner therefore had rights in relation to that land." On that basis, Mr. Spencer would be entitled to lay a complaint of trespass against protesters who took to the blockade with shovels and spades. "If the protesters are determined to remove the mound then we may be called in," said Mr. Glubb.

However, an easement governing pedestrian access meant members of the public could walk along the road to reach the historic Stony Batter gun emplacements and other crown land. The easement, granted in 1984, made no provision for vehicles.

But in spite of the police legal opinion, some aggrieved Waiheke residents have not ruled out the possibility of further efforts to clear the road.

One resident, Mr. Chris Brady, said last night: "There are some angry people on the island who may well want to try again to dig up the mound."

A "big dig" last weekend resulted in one man being arrested for allegedly driving his four-wheel-drive vehicle over the levelled mound.

The blockade was bulldozed back to its original size on Sunday.

Residents will converge on the mound at Cactus Bay this Saturday and walk to Man O'War Bay for a picnic and family activities.

Mr. Brady said several hundred people were likely to take part in the "great Waiheke land march," intended to "reclaim" the controversial road and bring its importance to the attention of as many islanders as possible."

Otago Daily Times, January 18, 1993

Protesters arrested

"Two men were arrested on Saturday during a good-natured protest march on Waiheke Island, near Auckland.

The two residents were trying to remove an earth mound from a road near Man O'War Bay. Police warned the pair several times before they were arrested and charged with trespass. They will appear in the Auckland District Court today.
The mound had been bulldozed into place in September on the orders of multi-millionaire businessman Mr. John Spencer, who owns the surrounding farmland."

Public Access, No. 2. March 1993

Kokako Road - 'Bridge to Nowhere' country

Ruapehu Press, November 24, 1992--
"...In the October issue of the NZ Wilderness Magazine Mr. John Flemming of Rotorua...wrote a letter to the editor complaining that Kokako Road...had been blocked by a local deer farmer's fence.

The owner of the farm is Gary Rawnsley, who operates Ruatiti Wilderness a wildlife safari park which is situated behind Raurimu.

Mr. Shaw (a Taumarunui Tramping Club member and Ruapehu District Councillor) said Mr. Rawnsley had constructed a small gate in the deer fence so trampers could get through and the only time he has refused permission to the tramping club is when he has a hunting party in...

...However, Ruapehu District Council Technical Services Director Bruce Dobson, said...that strictly speaking it is illegal to fence off a public road but hundreds of farmers had done it. "The issue is if people want to gain access. I have had correspondence from tramping clubs all around the country about this road. The Council has written to his solicitor about this and has pointed out Mr. Rawnsley has to get permission from the council to build the fence and he must have decent access through it. The gate he has installed is too small."

Although people can gain access through the fence, at the other end there is a bridge built by the former Waimarino Council. Mr. Rawnsley has produced a plan which shows the bridge is not on the legal road. But Mr. Dobson said a surveyor had looked at the plan and had said it would not stand up in court..."

Public Access, No. 2. March 1993

Otekaieke Pack Track

Otago Daily Times, December 4, 1992--

Disputed access stops horse treks

"A dispute over an historic "paper road" originally used by gold miners is causing strife in the Otekaieke community of the Waitaki Valley.

Mr. Terry King hoped this month to start horse treks from the Campbell Park homestead beside the Otekaieke River over to the Danseys Pass Hotel, using roads either formed or marked on cadastral maps.

However, two farm owners in the area, Mr. Mike Bayley, of Otekaieke Station, and Mr. Jess Stringer, of Kenmore, refused access on the grounds they hold freehold title over the land and they wished to have some control over commercial and leisure operations because of the effect these could have on their properties and management.

The dispute has caused tension between the two groups. Mr. King has been threatened with legal action, including a complaint of malicious damage for cutting a fence and installing a Taranaki gate, and he in turn has laid a complaint to gain access.

Mr. King wanted to use part of the formed and unformed Special School Road and the Otekaieke Bridle path, both of which are marked on Lands and Survey cadastral maps, to offer horse treks for tourists.

He also planned to use part of the Queen's Chain alongside the Otekaieke River. The Queen's Chain is a statutory requirement that guarantees public access along most rivers in New Zealand.

However, at least four fences on farm properties blocked access along the paper road, in some cases reaching as far as the river banks and bluffs to prevent access along the route for horses, he said.

The three-day horse treks would follow an historic route used by goldminers to get to and from the Danseys Pass and the old Kyeburn gold diggings.

He wrote to Mr. Bayley and Mr. Stringer several times, but had only one reply which was to refuse access for horse treks.
Mr. King was determined not to let the issue rest because, he said, there was an important point at stake -- public access to the Queen's Chain and legal roads.

"It is beautiful country with some quite spectacular scenery, but the public cannot get access."

Yesterday he took action under the 1981 Summary Proceedings Act, filing a complaint with the police that the farmers were obstructing a public way.

The Oamaru police senior sergeant, Mr. Max Moore, said that as far as the police were concerned the issue was a civil matter.
Neither Mr. Bayley nor Mr. Stringer wanted to comment on the situation."

The Timaru Herald, December 5, 1992--

Row could set legal precedent in NZ

"A row over access to public lands at Otekaieke in the Waitaki Valley has national implications, according to Bruce Mason, spokesman for Public Access New Zealand.

Mr. Mason said yesterday from Dunedin that the row could establish legal precedent if it got to court. To the best of his knowledge, an access case where a member of the public removed a barrier across marginal land alongside a river (the Queen's Chain) had not been heard before in New Zealand.

"Members of the public have removed barriers across paper roads, and the law has been firmly on their side but, I don't think we have had a case involving a barrier across the Queen's Chain."

Mr. Mason said rights of access were being regularly challenged in New Zealand, so the result of the Otekaieke row could have important implications...

...Oamaru police senior sergeant Max Moore has instructed his staff not to get involved. He claimed the argument between Mr. King and Messrs. Bayley and Stringer, was a civil case.

The police action has been strongly criticised by Mr. Mason. "The police, under the Summary Offences Act and the Crimes Act, have jurisdiction over all lands and public places. Marginal strips and paper roads are public places and for the police to refuse to act on a complaint of an unlawful barrier across those lands is a dereliction of duty," he said.

Oamaru Department of Conservation officer Dave Houston, said DOC was of the opinion that the disputed land was public so access could not be denied..."

Public Access, No. 2. March 1993

Otago Peninsula

Dunedin Star Weekender, January 24, 1993--

Walking tracks completed

"A huge effort has been put in over the past month by friends and members of the Otago Peninsula Walkers group to complete two new tracks on the Peninsula.

A final working party effort this past week has completed steps on the Bacon St extension -- a walking track from Highcliff Rd to Hoopers Inlet. Together with Ridge Rd to Sandfly Bay track completed late last year, it is now possible to walk from Sandfly Bay on one side of the Peninsula to Broad Bay on the other side, said Bruce Mason, OPW group convener.

Mr Mason estimated that over 40 person days of work had been invested in the tracks over the past month. Quite a number of people have been involved including help one day by city Councillor Sukhi Turner, he said.

Approval to develop the two tracks was granted by the Dunedin City Council in June 1992. Access to and development of these and other unformed public roads on private property have been the cause of on-going disputes between the OPW and Peninsula landowners."

Notes: Public roads are not on private property.
The OPW has successfully developed 12 walking tracks over unformed public roads during the last 2 years, greatly enhancing walking opportunities in Dunedin.

Public Access, No. 4. May 1994

Taylors Mistake - A legacy of civic dereliction

"Our glorious coast is part of our lives. Childhood holidays, adolescent discovery and old age's serene meditations are often set on beaches and rocky shores. James K. Baxter said that the yellow tree-lupin should be our national flower because most of us were conceived under them.

Public access to the foreshore is therefore a precious legal right. Its price, like that of all freedoms, is eternal vigilance. Our public lands--not just the coastline--are eyed covetously by many." David Round, The Press, July 29, 1993

Taylors Mistake is a highly valued recreational asset of Christchurch. It is an attractive, popular beach, enclosed by spectacular rocky headlands and close to the metropolitan area. It lies between the city suburb of Sumner and the Godley Head entrance to Lyttleton harbour. In addition to the attractions of the beach, Taylors Mistake provides access to a large area of public open space (Godley Heads Farm Park), and coastal walkways.

The foreshore (from low to high tide marks) is abutted by an unformed legal road. Behind the road at the beach is a recreation reserve. On a fine summer's day the beach and surrounds are crowded.

In spite of its proximity to a large city there is a strong element of isolation. As an enclosed and relatively small-scale environment, it is very vulnerable to physical and visual encroachment from development or private occupation. There are 48 baches at Taylors Mistake and adjoining bays squatting on legal road. Some of these baches have a history originating from the early 1900s. The scale of private encroachment is probably unmatched by any other location in New Zealand.

Taylors Mistake has become the scene of an intense tug-of-war between those who wish to secure their occupation of publicly owned shoreline, and others who want it returned to its prime status as public open space. For decades the debate has raged, with the Christchurch City Council alternatively siding one way then the other, depending on which interest holds sway at the time. Council's legal obligations over public lands, and to uphold public rights of use, have often taken back-stage as a consequence--a situation not uncommon among local authorities.

This has been a classic case of a battle over the commons, of conflict between public and private interest, and of local government equivocation on issues that have long been resolved in law. There are salutary lessons for the rest of New Zealand.

PANZ believes that physical detraction of the environment and degraded public recreational opportunities are plain to see and totally unacceptable. They are long overdue for permanent resolution.

Background to the dispute

1910: The Mayor of the Sumner Borough Council and a Councillor inspected Taylors Mistake and found ten or a dozen cave dwellings in use at that time (all these particular baches had been removed by 1976).

1911 onwards: Bach holders paid annual licence fees to the Borough Council.

1945 onwards: Christchurch City Council continued to issue or renew these licences in an ad hoc manner.

1968: Christchurch City promulgated the first review of its district scheme which included a provision for holiday cottages. After objections were received this provision was deleted.

1976: As a result of concerns about sewerage in the bay, and to give bach occupants time to find alternative accommodation, the City Council granted licences which authorised their continued occupation for a period of ten years to expire in 1986. The baches were to be then removed.The licences were signed by the bach holders (PANZ believes that the Council had no legal power to issue such licences over a public road).

1979: The City Council promulgated the second review of the District Scheme. Objections were lodged complaining that the second review did not adequately recognised and provide for the existing bach community. Those objections were disallowed and the objectors appealed to the Planning Tribunal.

1983: The Planning tribunal declined the objections and noted: "the legal status of the bach owners' occupancy is...a different matter altogether."

1986: The licences expire. The City Council resolves to allow baches to remain a further year to allow a holiday bach zone proposal to be considered.

1989: Scheme changes for the closure of the legal road (to become esplanade reserve) and the creation of a holiday bach zone are publicly notified.

1990 : The City Council resolves to adopt the recommendation of an independent commissioner to implement road closure and reservation but decline the bach zone. Bach owners lodge appeals with the Planning Tribunal.

1991: Before the appeals were heard, bach owners approached the City Council asking for mediation between the parties. The Council agreed to mediation and withdrew the plan changes (this denied supporters of the Council's 1990 decision to argue their case before the Tribunal).

1992: Complaint lodged with Ombudsman that the City Council's delay in requiring the removal of the baches is unreasonable. Ombudsman advises that as appeals are lodged with the Planning Tribunal he is precluded from investigating the complaint.

1992: Mediation proceeded but without the main objectors to the baches who declined involvement on the basis that any mediated outcome would necessarily involve a compromise of fundamental principal--that the appeals be dealt with by the Planning Tribunal first and that public land is not a negotiable commodity.

May 1993: The mediated solution involved the retention of 30 baches on the road (with freehold and leasehold offered), those baches with most impact removed, one relocated, and a new zone created for 17 new batches.

July 1993: The appeals against the proposed scheme changes were withdrawn.

July 1993: Council appoints an independent Hearings Commissioner to hear submissions on a proposed plan change to give effect to the mediated solution and make recommendations. A total of 1021 submissions received, 641 of which objected to the mediated solution and wanted the baches removed.

December 1993: The Commissioner rejects the "mediated solution" and recommends removal of all but three 'historic' baches from the foreshore. The Commissioner considered that "the requirements of sections 5, 6, 7, and 8 of the Resource Management Act are to be kept in mind as weighing various considerations appropriately, but differently in accordance with Parliament's instruction" (note our emphasis, and relevance to PANZ's concerns over the national coastal policy). The Commissioner concluded that a new bach development zone "would offend against a number of matters to be recognised and provided for as being of national importance." Such matters included "inappropriate use and development", detraction from public access, and being "the antithesis of the preservation of the natural character of the coastal environment."

December 1993: City Council adopts Commissioner's recommendations.

February 1994: Bach holders lodge appeal with Planning Tribunal against Council's decision--yet to be heard and determined.

It is crucial that the Christchurch City Council's latest decision stands. Otherwise a disastrous precedent would be set for privatising the Queen's Chain and the NZ coastline.

PANZ was pleased to provide assistance to the Save The Bay Campaign and complements those involved on their strenuous, professional, and public-spirited efforts. For those who wish to learn more about the conduct of the campaign, or offer assistance, contact:

Save The Bay Campaign, P O Box 13331, Christchurch
(major appeal costs are involved)

Taylors Mistake is said to be named after a Captain Taylor of the USA who mistook the bay for Lyttelton Harbour.

Public Access, No 4. May 1994

Papuni Road--Wairoa district

Gisborne Herald, March 30, 1994
By Sheridan Gundry

Recreational user groups in the region have gone to the public for support in their 30-year battle over access to part of Urewera National Park.

In a quarter page advertisement in the Gisborne Herald today four groups express their concern over the ban of access through Papuni Station to the Waitangi Falls and Ruakituri area. The region is used extensively by hunting, fishing, tramping, and other recreational user groups.

They plan to take action to define a legal unformed road to ensure that users have unrestricted access for all time.

The advertisement was placed by the Raukumara Urewera Hunting Club, Wairoa branch of the New Zealand Deerstalkers Association, Poverty Bay and East Coast Pighunters' Club, and the Gisborne Canoe and Tramping Club.

A request was earlier made (by the groups) for the access ban to be lifted but this was declined.

Raukumara Urewera Hunting Club spokesperson Brian Burgess said the group's patience had been stretched to the limit.
A public notice announcing Papuni's total ban on access some weeks ago was a disappointment and a bitter blow, he said. "When it became obvious that the agreement was not going to be finalised prior to Easter, Papuni were requested to allow access for two weeks including Easter. "As far as we are concerned their refusal to grant the one gesture of goodwill to fishermen, trampers and hunters was the last straw. In their paranoid attempts to keep total control over a situation, which legally they do not control, they have shot themselves in the foot".

"That one gesture of goodwill would have given the user groups the incentive to continue with the negotiations in the knowledge that Papuni management have at least some sympathies for the outdoor recreationists who appreciate and use that area," Mr. Burgess said.

The groups now hold little hope that the negotiations will be resolved.

The road through Papuni Station from the front entrance to the Lockwood house is a public road maintained by the Wairoa District Council. An unformed public road exists from the Lockwood house to Urewera National Park boundary and beyond.
Mr. Burgess said access to the park through Papuni Station during the past 30 years had been tenuous at times and not without acrimony.

During this time Wairoa District Council was aware of the access problems experienced by some members of the public, but did not take up its responsibility to ensure the public were not left at the end of a formed road, three kilometres short of their legal and rightful destination, the advertisement states.

The Lands and Survey Department and its successor the Department of Conservation, together with past and present boards governing the park has failed to bring about a lasting agreement within the 15 years of attempting to do so.

"The latest attempts to resolve the matter have now stretched out to 20 months of intensive deliberations. Although some parties believed the solution was within sight, the groups believed negotiations were far from finalised", Mr. Burgess said.

Matters came to a head around 1980 when Papuni placed a total ban on access. An on-site meeting at Papuni Station called by Lands and Survey and the National Park Board drew over 60 people to discuss the matter.

"As a result of the meeting an agreement over access was entered into and the historically-used track to Waitangi Falls was officially surveyed, benched and signposted at considerable cost to the taxpayer.

"That agreement was only for a five-year period and has never been renewed."

Mr. Burgess said it was DOC's responsibility to ensure on-going public access to the popular public asset.

Meanwhile, pighunters believed impositions were being forced on them by Papuni with regard to pig dogs. They felt they were being singled out unfairly, particularly as there were already strict controls on anyone hunting with dogs in the national park...

Gisborne Herald, April 4, 1994

DOC backs Papuni over access row

Department of Conservation regional conservator Peter Williamson is disappointed by "inflammatory statements" made by hunting and tramping clubs last week regarding the controversial Papuni Station route to Te Urewera National Park.

Mr. Williamson said that through the goodwill of the station owners, access to the park had been allowed over a long period after the expiry of a previous easement. This was despite concerns over "unnatural stock losses and disturbance".

DOC had a good working relationship with Papuni Station owners, he said. The owners were keen to ensure public access had minimal impact on farming operations...Using the existence of the unformed legal road to try to enforce conditions on the Papuni owners was both unreasonable and unhelpful, Mr. Williamson said.

(Raukumara Urewera Hunting Club spokesman) Brian Burgess believed the majority should not suffer for the minority's behaviour. "We, as responsible members of the public, we will not be held to ransom because of the few. Rather than put blanket controls and inconveniences on the public at large, those who such behaviour affects should put more effort into having an example made of the few individuals causing problems," Mr. Burgess said.

Proposed grant of a right of way (5 April 1994) between Papuni Station (Grantor) and DOC as Grantee. Conditions include--

foot access only.
only DOC dogs permitted, on a leash, with prior notice to Papuni Station, with right of refusal.
all persons using the ROW to notify Papuni of name and address beforehand or to sign a visitors book.
any hunters using the ROW for access to produce on demand by Papuni Station their hunting permit for the national park.
the ROW to be terminated in the event that the legal road is formed or clearly marked for foot or vehicular access. DOC required to have regard to the expressed wish of Papuni Station not to have the legal road defined on the ground for encouragement of public access.

Public Access, No. 4. May 1994

Kokako Road--Ruapehu district

Kokako Road is an old bridle track between Ruatiti Stream and Upper Retaruke in the headwaters of the Wanganui. There is a variety of interesting terrain and scenery on-route, making it potentially very attractive for tramping and horse riding.

A couple of years ago an adjoining landowner put deer fences across the road. As a result of protests the Ruapehu District Council approved the installation of "trampers' gates" after it decided to "allow" only pedestrian use. However horse riders also wish to use the road. Those who enter this 'private wilderness' are observed by security cameras.

PANZ has inspected the road and believes that both the Council and the landowner concerned are legally liable for "appreciable interferences" with the public right of passage (see page 14). We believe that Council has exceeded its powers by limiting use to pedestrians only. The "trampers' gates" do not meet legal requirements. PANZ has advised the council of these matters and, despite a local petition asking for the fences to be removed, the obstructions remain. The Council has the power it needs to remove them, given the will to do so.

Public Access, No. 4. May 1994

Rangitata Terrace Road--Ashburton district
Crusade to open public roads keeps on going

High Country Herald, November 3, 1993

When Ruapuna farmer Ivan McKeown set off for an evening's fishing in December 1991 he didn't realise he would enter into a battle that would still be running today.

It was the locked gate on Rangitata Terrace Road--a public road through private land--that started the ball of red tape rolling. Nine months and an Ombudsman's inquiry later, the Ashburton District Council hung "public road" signs on gates across the road and the padlocks were removed.

But the fisherman's fight for access did not end there--although at times he wished it had. "I had to take a break from it for a while--it started to get me down. I think it's pretty important this sort of thing--we are all entitled to our access."

Two days of travelling around Mid-Canterbury revealed some 40 roads, leading either to rivers or the sea, to which access was unclear. He was not interested in the roads literally going nowhere, only those which people could use for recreation. "One lot of owners said people came down all the time, turned around and went back the other way. "These people were hoping to get to the sea but they couldn't." Had the legal requirement of identifying roads been met, those who turned back would have known they had the right to access beyond the gate concerned.

Mr. McKeown agrees that he shouldn't have to crusade to get public roads identified but says if he doesn't, then other recreational users will suffer. "There are fences and trees across them (public roads) and even one with a private property notice on it--there were new ones being put up all the time." None (of the 40) had public road signs on them. "The council should comply with the law and see the obstructions removed or put a style [up] so people can get through--and public road signs so we know it is a road.

"I like going out on the beach, walking around, fishing or just using the Queen's Chain--it is sort of sacred to me."
A map with the offending roads has been sent to the Ashburton District Council via councillor Bev Tasker who says the matter will be raised as the district plan gets thrashed out. She is also keen to sort out which roads have access to valuable recreational areas and then, quietly work with the landowners concerned to arrange for clearly identified access.

Meanwhile Mr. McKeown just hopes that one day he and others will be able to take rightful passage along public roads into areas where everyone can enjoy the great outdoors.

Public Access, No. 4. May 1994

Otago Peninsula roads

Much has been achieved on the Otago Peninsula during the last four years in opening up unformed legal roads for public use. Considerable heat and friction was generated in the process, by application of 'the law of highways' by a determined group of walkers.

On a fine weekend hundreds of people are now using a network of approximately 20 well marked walking tracks that were either the direct result of the labours of the Otago Peninsula Walkers, or the result of political pressure by them on the Dunedin City Council.

A year after cessation of hostilities most people are wondering what all the fuss was about. Dunedin City now has a major recreational facility on its doorstep and civilisation has not yet ended, despite earlier predictions to that effect.

The events on the Otago Peninsula are worthy of much fuller treatment, being a significant part of New Zealand's recreation history. A full account will be published in the future. In the meantime the following account in a farmers' paper, with our commentary, gives an insight of the arguments and problems that were faced and overcome.

Paper lines let townies loose on Otago land

By Neal Wallace. The New Zealand Farmer, April 27,1994
For 150 years they were lines drawn on a map by Otago's founding fathers in a 19th century Edinburgh office.
But now those lines, legally constituted roads and boundaries, are causing problems for Otago Peninsula landowners.

Walking enthusiast and public rights campaigner Bruce Mason, Dunedin, forced Dunedin City Council to open a number of the roads for freedom walkers. Critics say his actions have polarised and hardened attitudes counter-productive to public access.
Mason says there was a lack of walking opportunities. Those that existed were confined to walking tracks opened by the Otago Peninsula Trust, informal agreements without security.

Landowners say the first they knew of the opening of many of these paper roads were signs pointing to tracks on their land. Portobello farmer Ron Cross says the roading network is historic and has no place today. Allans Beach farmer Des Neill says when the Otago Peninsula was settled there were small holdings everywhere which required access.

As New Zealand becomes more urbanised and city dwellers demand access over private farmland for walking and tramping, events of the last three years on the Otago Peninsula are likely to be repeated elsewhere.

Legally, Bruce Mason was within his rights even though the law took no account that many paper roads crossed cliffs and in one case 14 fence lines.

A landowner could even be forced to remove fences and obstacles blocking a paper road, says Dunedin City Council roading manager Peter Morton. "Any farmer with a fixed fenceline or structure on a legal road line which prevents someone walking on a legal road has a potential problem."

Des Neill says Bruce Mason tried to change access to a right rather than a privilege...

Well-used tracks to many of the area's highlights such as Lover's Leap, Allans Beach, Soldiers Monument and Harbour Cone were closed and people were forced to take longer, less direct routes.

"I understand people want to walk to places but they were never restricted," says Portobello farmer Ron Cross. The new unrestricted access is largely unpoliced and farmers say it has given less desirable people unhindered movement over property, to snoop around farm buildings.

Ron Cross is under no illusions that public access pressure groups cut their teeth on the scrap with Otago Peninsula landowners and their attention will turn to gaining access in other areas. "What happened on the Otago Peninsula could happen elsewhere in New Zealand."

Large legal fees block farmers seeking to close paper roads
There is little point in farmers taking action to legally close paper roads crossing their farms, says Dunedin City Council roading manager Peter Morton.

"If farmers do have paper roads on their property they shouldn't do anything unless they have a problem." If there is a problem he urges both parties to discuss the matter. To try and close roads, says Mr. Morton, is a public process which could end up in a Planning Planning Tribunal, incurring expensive legal fees.

The law is weighted in favour of the general public if someone wants to open a paper road. All obstacles on a road, from vegetation to fences and stock yards, should be cleared and Mr. Morton says this can be demanded if a road is to be reopened.
"Farmers are on poor legal grounds as people have a right to pass and repass on legal roads."

There was nothing illegal in Bruce Mason and his group opening legally constituted roads on the Otago Peninsula, says Mr. Morton, but many roads had not been surveyed and existed only on maps.

"There is no benefit to ratepayers in knowing where paper roads are generally. It is not as issue they need to know about," he says.

Farmer pays the bill
To Otago Peninsula farmer Eddie Lyttle the situation was black and white. Access to the historic soldiers' monument at Highcliff had been granted across his family's land for the last 50 years.

But when Bruce Mason and his Peninsula Walkers' group tried to open a paper road though his property to the monument things started to get ugly. It is an example of the supercharged emotion, polarised attitudes and the way not to solve such issues.
But Mr. Lyttle felt he had no choice. "Bruce Mason found a paper road with legal access to it (41 peg road) and demanded it be opened," says Mr. Lyttle. "That 900mm wide access is over steep rocks and is impractical as it goes to the corner of the rock (monument) yet the steps are around the corner on our private property."

The 41 peg road followed Mr. Lyttle's boundary and if access was pushed to its limit would result in Mr. Lyttle losing an 8m strip of land and his neighbour a 12m strip. Mr. Mason's group wanted access to the monument from Ocean Grove and back out on to the Highcliff Road via the access granted by the Lyttle family.

Then things did get ugly. Negotiations started to falter, stiles were built and fences on the Lyttle property crossing 41 peg were cut, allowing stock to destroy a woodlot.

Mr. Lyttle says he was forced to shut off access to the monument for a year. "It was good enough for Peninsula Walkers to feel they had a legal right to cut fences and erect stiles, so I had the legal right to insist they use the legal track to the monument".
Today, tempers have eased and access to the monument is open again but the Lyttles have had the expense of fencing 41 peg road.

PANZ Commentary
1. The '41 peg' road goes within 80m of the monument. A registered right of way over Lyttle's land (the '900mm wide access') then legally should provide public foot access to the monument.
2. There was no question of Lyttle or his neighbour losing grazing over the road. The Peninsula Walkers wanted grazing to continue to keep the grass down. Unlike his neighbour, Lyttle decided to fence his boundary with the road, and was not forced to do so by the Walkers or the Dunedin City Council. This electrified fence unlawfully obstructed the right of way.
3. The Peninsula Walkers offered, at their expense, to erect pedestrian gates in fencing Lyttle had across the 41 peg road--the offer was rejected.
4. Electric wires across the road were insulated by the Walkers, but the insulation was removed. The wires were then cut.
5. Styles were then erected through the remaining non-electric fencing. These were damaged and Lyttle was warned that any further damage would result in removal of his fencing. The stiles were repaired by the Walkers and remain in place.
6. The legal ROW to the monument is still obstructed. Lyttle has provided longer, alternative access across his property to the monument. Negotiations by the city council to have this access formalised have reached an impass. Lyttle wants 50 cents per person who crosses his land. This would cost the Council at least $27,000 for the first 25 years. Councillors have asked their staff to investigate shifting the monument!
7. Meanwhile public use of the '41 peg road' continues to grow and people are wondering why they cannot hop across 80 metres of gentle paddock to reach the monument as they are legally entitled to.

Intending farm buyer beware-Onus on landowners to know boundaries
Demand for access to public land is going to increase, says Dunedin's Bruce Mason, a researcher and spokesman for Public Access NZ.

This is likely to force the opening of more paper roads for public use but it places an onus on landowners to know what they own, he says. "Let the buyer beware."

He says Otago Peninsula farmers are not receptive to the idea of opening walking tracks, to the point of paranoia in some cases, and that was why he bulldozed the issue through. "The point is they are not the owners of roads yet they constantly insist they are, with the right of veto."

He is saddened by the way the battle became personal, which included violence and death threats, but says better leadership from the Dunedin City Council could have defused the situation.

He says the Christchurch City Council has a walking network on the Port Hills and the Southland District Council has a policy that gives the public the right of passage on paper roads (Correction: the Southland policy recognises, not "gives", a right of passage).

There is little doubt, says Mr. Mason, public demand will see paper roads reopened elsewhere in the country, which landowners will have to accommodate. "It could be as simple as putting a gate in a fence or changing management, for example, at lambing.
"Just because a road is disused doesn't mean it will continue to be disused."

Letter to Editor
Your feature of April 27 on the issue of so-called 'paper' roads on the Otago Peninsula contains many errors and myths. I comment here on the most extravagant claims--

Myth number one
The concept of "paper roads". In the context of the Otago Peninsula, and most of New Zealand, there are no such legal entities, only public (legal) roads, formed or unformed. See section 315 Local Government Act 1974.

Myth number two
"Unformed roads were drawn on a map by Otago's founding fathers in a 19th century Edinburgh office", and, "many roads had not been surveyed and exist only on maps." I have inspected all the official survey records of the approximately 20 roads concerned. All were prepared locally and deposited in the Otago Survey Office. Only one of them was found to be unsurveyed. In any event they don't need to be surveyed to be legal, just properly dedicated.

Myth number three
"Many paper roads cross cliffs". This is a flow-on myth from the 'planned in Edinburgh' myth. Only one of the tracks opened up over legal roads crosses a steep rock outcrop, most of the rest follow old bridle or cart tracks. The early surveyors traversed most of them, and recorded the fact in their field books.

Myth number four
"Bruce Mason tried to change access to a right rather than a privilege." As you report the public already have the right to pass and repass along public roads, how can your statement possibly be true? The adjoining landowners want public rights of access replaced by a privilege at their pleasure--the reverse of what you state.

Monster myth number five
" 'Paper roads' are not publicly-owned but cross private land". You repeatedly state that the roads are on private land. This is completely untrue--on dedication, the land (usually 20 metres wide), vests in the ownership of the district council (subject to the public's common law rights of use). The continual 'theft' of public property by the use of your loose language has been the hallmark of this debate. Until farming interests (and district councils) distinguish between public and private property, and recognise that the former belongs to everyone, the conflicts will continue.

Bruce Mason, Otago Peninsula Walkers

Public Access, No. 4. May 1994

Wairarapa 'WATERS'

Last year PANZ Trustee Bruce Mason was invited by the Wairarapa Access to Earth, River and Sea Society (WATERS) to inspect access problems on the Tora coast and on rivers in South Wairarapa. A preliminary inspection of survey plans revealed a poor provision of the Queen's Chain along rivers, but a reasonable provision of public roads giving access to rivers and the coast.

Alarmingly the situation on the ground was markedly worse than the plans indicated. Except for where main roads cross rivers, it is almost impossible for the public to reach most rivers. Many public roads, both formed and unformed, are obstructed either by locked gates or fences. The overall impression was one of exclusion--by fences and 'keep out' signs, including one setting charges for access to the Ruamahanga River.

Along the South Wairarapa coast at Tora the situation was a little better with some public reserves along the shore. Again the prevailing impression was one of exclusion--by kilometres of electric fencing between the coastal road and the beach, often only a few metres apart. There was little apparent benefit for stock management from much of this fencing. Bruce was shown the scene of bitter conflicts over the use of an unformed section of road leading to the coast where a commercial fisherman had his boat and livelihood smashed up one night as it was left unguarded on the Queen's Chain (see 'The fishy tale of Barry Guthrie'). A gate normally locked on this road was unlocked on the day--word apparently got out of the PANZ representative's impending visit!

It became clear what is generating most of the access problems along the Wairarapa coast. There is big money to be made, not just from fishing, but from landowners controlling and levying commercial fishers' access to the sea. The rights of the general public has suffered as a consequence. There are also a large number of unemployed people, mainly Maori, collecting agar along the shore. Their presence is not appreciated by all the local farmers, who, it is alleged, resent the invasion and have persuaded the District Council to impose two-week camping limits. The Council has gone further by proposing total bans on camping in reserves, and toll gates on roads.

Fishermen and campers accuse the Council and local farmers of trying to hijack the coast "to screw revenue out of visitors making a living out of coastal industries".

The only bright spot on the coast has been the recent establishment of many kilometres of esplanade reserve along the shoreline of White Rock Station, filling in a major gap in the Queen's Chain. This reserve resulted from a subdivision application under the Resource Management Act prior to its reserves provisions being knee-capped by the National government. It is most unlikely such an improvement to public access will be repeated.

One of the most disturbing aspects of the Wairarapa access situation is the record of the local authorities and the Department of Conservation on access matters. It appears that these authorities see themselves more as protectors of established private interests than as trustees of the public assets under their control. Inspection of extensive records on a number of cases reveal a pattern of officials and Councillors confusing landowners' private interests, being beyond their jurisdiction, with their legal responsibilities. The inevitable results are 'trade-off's' using public lands and rights as expendable chattels in the interest of reaching "compromise" and protecting agency "relationships" with farmers. Invariably it is the public's few existing rights that are being 'compromised' as a result.

For the last 6 years WATERS has been making representations and petitions to the South Wairarapa District Council, and its predecessor the Featherson County Council, to have locked gates and fences removed from across public roads. All its representations, backed by a substantial body of local opinion, have come to nought. It has even offered to meet survey costs to have roads defined. The County Council obtained its own legal advice which confirmed that the public has a right of unimpeded access over 'paper' roads, but still failed to act.

Previous Minister of Lands Peter Tapsell took an interest in the obstructed road access to the Ruamahanga River--again without any impact on the Council. The farmer concerned continues to deny, through obstructing fencing, access along this portion of Glenmorven Road except for payment of a fee to use his private road, part of which traverses the legal road. Mr. Tapsell described this action as "seeming to be illegal".

After WATERS showed an interest in progress in implementing a 1983 Lands and Survey agreement to create a recreation reserve at Te Oroi Bay, which depends on an unformed road for access, the new Department of Conservation renegotiated the agreement to provide a markedly inferior alternative. This was a swampy addition to another previously agreed reserve to the north, which, unlike Te Oroi Bay, is unsuitable for camping and boat launching. The department cited fisherman Barry Guthrie exercising his rights of passage along the road to Te Oroi Bay, to avoid paying an access charge to the local farmer, as "a problem", and cause for reneging on the earlier agreed reserve. DOC's local manager recorded that it is "completely reasonable" for farmers to request such fees from commercial fishers.

It was separately reported that one property was charging $50,000 a year from one fishing concern with a number of boats.

If you are interested in supporting WATERS, their address is-- c/-Bush House, Bidwells Cutting Road, R D 1, Greytown.

TENDER
FISHING ACCESS TO COAST
Tenders are invited for the right for commercial fishing boat access to a prominent Wairarapa beach for the period April 1, 1993 to March 31, 1994.
Tenders close at the offices of:
Eastwood & Partners,
Chartered Accountants,
P O Box 450, Masterton at 4.00pm on Friday
March 5, 1993.
Highest or any tender not necessarily accepted.

The fishy tale of Barry Guthrie

For 23 years cray and wet fisherman Barry Guthrie launched his boat from private farm land through the wild surf at Little Oroi, south of Tora. In "consideration for launching" he did road maintenance and helped with docking on the farm.

In February 1988 the farmers demanded 18 crayfish per day and $100 per week in the off-season. Guthrie calculated this would cost him $45,000 per year. He refused to pay and was served a trespass notice, denying him access to his leased boat for nearly three months, causing a loss of $60,000 in income.

He engaged a surveyor to locate an unformed road leading to a marginal strip at Te Oroi Bay which he opened up as alternative access to the sea. Te Oroi is one of very few bays and natural launching sites on the rugged south Wairarapa coast. The District Council reprimanded Guthrie for some minor earthworks on the road.

Sometime later a deep trench was bulldozed across the road preventing access to his relocated boat.

One night in February 1991 more than $25,000 of wilful damage was done to his boat, trailer, and bulldozer. Equipment was also stolen. The dozer was used to smash the hull of the boat, before it in turn was wrecked. Guthrie rebuilt the boat at Featherson and two days before completion, in May 1991, the uninsured craft was gutted in an early morning arson attack.

Guthrie, with a young family of four to support, faced bankruptcy over debts and mortgages of $60,000. Guthrie's wife received anonymous threats that they would "do her and bury her" if Guthrie continued fishing. Similar threats were received by the owner of the boat.

Barry Guthrie became bankrupt in 1993 and may loose his house this year.

Public Access, No. 5. November 1994

Road stopping opposed

Guardian, Motueka, July 18, 1994
The Nelson Conservation Board has opposed a proposal to stop part of a legal road in Honeymoon Bay, Kaiteriteri.

"The unformed legal road gives access along the sea. It is public property, part of the Queens Chain, and should be kept for public uses said Board Chairman, Bill Winstanley.

The Tasman District Council has advertised its intention to stop part of the public road. The stopped portion is intended to become the property of Mr. J F S Baldwin.

"The Council have no reason to support the road stopping", said Mr. Winstanley. "Our enquiries revealed it was because a building had been extended onto the legal road".

"That is a reason for removing the building, rather than for stopping the road," he said. "This is a clear message from the Council that it is alright to encroach on public land, and I do not agree with that view".

Mr. Winstanley went on to say. "I can see a major advantage to Mr. Baldwin in obtaining private ownership of a prime piece of public land, but there is no public advantage, only public loss".
Objections to the proposal close[d] on 12 August 1994.

Public Access, No. 6. August 1995

Road closure leads to threats of legal action

Southland Times, May 13, 1995
Alexandra -- The Southland District Council decision to close the Garston-Nevis Road has upset recreation groups and prompted threats of legal action from Public Access New Zealand.

The council closed the road from Garston to the Central Otago District boundary on May 1. It will remain closed to all public users until October 13. Runholders on adjacent land and people with council permission were exempt.

Public Access NZ spokesman Bruce Mason, of Dunedin, said the group might sue the Southland District Council if it locked the gates. "It's total abuse of the Local Government Act," he said. "In the Act there is provision for temporarily closing the roads to different classes of vehicles. The Southland District Council is discriminating by closing it to different classes of users.

In 1990 Mr. Mason was involved in a test case against the Central Otago District Council when it tried to close the Shingle Creek-Waikaia Bush Road over the Old Man Range. The case was abandoned after the council decided to reopen the road halfway through the case. "I'd find it hard to believe the Southland District Council is not aware of that (case)," Mr. Mason said.

Meanwhile, sparks of protest have also been flying from recreation groups.

Central Otago tramping and four-wheel-drive clubs say it is unfair of the council to close the road from May 1 to October 13.
Central Otago Four-wheel Drive Club president Reid Gare said he also doubted the Southland District Council had the right to close the road.

More than 200 vehicles a day were counted on the road last summer, Mr. Gare said. "The end administered by the Central Otago District Council had $120,000 spent on it recently and it's a darn good road. It's annoying another council has now gone and done that (close it)," Mr. Gare said.

The four-wheel-drive club will discuss the issue on Tuesday night and it is likely to submit a formal protest to the Southland District Council.

Central Otago Tramping Club executive member Jeff Bryant said it was annoyed at the principle. Roads should be closed only when necessary and not as early as May 1, Mr. Bryant said. The tramping club also plans protesting the council's decision.
Southland District Council officials were unavailable for comment yesterday.

Public Access, No. 6. August 1995

Park users unanimous in vote

Gisborne Herald, May 18, 1995
Local people who regularly use the Urewera National Park are against any proposal to use the true right bank of the Ruakituri River for access, according to a public meeting in Gisborne this week.

Over 100 people, representing about 14 user groups, voted unanimously in support of the true left bank being used as the preferred access route, said user group spokesman Brian Burgess.

There was also a strong call that the legal unformed road through Papuni Station should never be resumed or closed with only one person voting against a motion to this effect.

The meeting was overwhelmingly against any move away from the preferred left bank access route on the grounds of safety.
They would accept the true right bank proposal only if two new bridges were provided to remove the risk of people making risky river crossings.

There was a majority call for continued negotiations with Papuni Station owners for their approval to allow access via the true left bank.

The meeting proved to be a highly worthwhile exercise, said Mr. Burgess. Many local users had not been aware of a public meeting being held at the War Memorial Hall in Wairoa on Saturday morning. Local users were being urged to attend the 10am meeting to ensure their views were represented.

Public Access, No. 6. August 1995

Council to provide public access

The Press, April 5, 1995
The Christchurch City Council will provide public foot access to a controversial section of the Heathcote River bank that has been occupied by adjacent residents.

The move follows involvement by the Ombudsman, and a legal opinion that the Council is obliged to make access across two drains.

An unformed public road passes along the riverbank between Riverlaw Terrace and Aynsley Terrace, but the area is bounded by steep-sided drains which are difficult to cross.

Residents of the seven properties in the area have treated the riverbank as part of their gardens for many years, and have previously opposed council plans to bridge the drains and create a path.

A petition was presented to the council by Deryck Morse last year saying the drains were a dangerous obstruction to public right of way.

The Ombudsman was brought into the argument at the request of a council staff member, Ken Sibly, frustrated at lack of progress. As a result of correspondence with the Ombudsman, the council sought a legal opinion from its office solicitor, Peter Mitchell.

Mr. Mitchell, in his opinion given at the Spreydon-Heathcote Community board meeting yesterday, said the existence of the two drains without provision for bridges constituted a "public nuisance" because they were "an appreciable interference with people using the paper road".

The council had a legal obligation to provide bridges, and to remove pampas grass by the eastern drain, he said.

A resident, Jennie Hamilton, said the residents had no argument with the legal opinion. They were concerned the area was a sensitive flood plain, and was so soft even the residents avoided walking on it in winter. "We're very concerned at protecting this land and keeping it as an attractive area that the public enjoys."

Mr. Mitchell said that, although the council had a clear obligation to provide the bridges, it needed to continue discussions with residents to determine the permanent development of the area.

Public Access, No 10. October 1998

Christchurch council appeals road-reform ruling

The Press, October 2, 1998

The Christchurch City Council has taken its case over government road reform to the Court of Appeal.

The council applied to the High Court in May for a declaration that the proposal of a Government working party that roads be commercialised would extinguish or alter people's rights of access.

The High Court last month struck out the application, as requested by the Ministry of Transport, on the ground that the proposal was intended for public discussion and was not Government policy.

The council discussed a report on the case on September 23 and decided to appeal. Counsel for the council, Tom Weston, lodged the appeal on September 25, stating as a ground that the High Court's judgment was "wrong in law".

The chairman of the strategy and resources committee, Cr David Close, said the legal and social issues of road reform were of such importance that the council wished the courts to make a declaration on citizens' rights so the Government would have to take them into account before making decisions.

Council legal services manager Peter Mitchell said the question of the cost of the appeal would be considered when amounts were known.

A critic of the council's stand on road-reform proposals, Mark Kunnen, said the High Court's decision was a learned one. He slammed the decision to spend more ratepayers' money on it.

Public Access, No 10. October 1998

The end of the paper road

NZ Herald, September 19, 1998

Throughout the country, there are many kilometres of what are known as "paper" roads--lines on maps denoting proposed roads.

Many of these lines have been there for years, the land bought for roads but, as time has passed, all thought of construction gone.

Waipa District Council in the Waikato is surveying its strips; some dating back to the 1880s, intending to offer them to owners of the land they cross or adjoin.

The council prefers to sell--aggregating the strips into buyers' existing titles--but admits some might prefer to lease.

At the moment, most of the land reserved for roading is used by farmers. "They're getting value out of land they don't own and don't pay a lease for or even rates on," says a council spokesman.

The council has commissioned surveys and preparation of legal plans, and says the sell off could take five years to complete.

Some paper roads go along gullies which have low land value, others cross prime dairy land worth up to $20,000 a hectare.

The council estimates it has about 150 roads that never were, nor will be--from 50m long and involving little more than 500 sq m, to 3.2km long and 6.4ha.

"Their value will range from a few hundred dollars to perhaps $100,000," says the spokesman.

Some will be of a shape or size to suit residential use and will be sold on the open market as sections. --Ric Oram

Local Issues: Public Roads

Directory

(by local authority areas, north to south)

Auckland

Waipa district

Ruapehu district

Wairoa district

South Wairarapa district

Tasman district

Buller district

Westland district

Christchurch

Ashburton district

Waitaki district

Dunedin

Southland district

Court of Appeal decision welcomed

Anglers create own access way

Advertisement: Road for Sale

Council declines bach extension

Waiheke Island troubles

Police warn public to leave roadblock

Protesters arrested

Kokako Road - 'Bridge to Nowhere' country

Otekaieke Pack Track

Disputed access stops horse treks

Row could set legal precedent in NZ

Otago Peninsula

Walking tracks completed

Taylors Mistake - A legacy of civic dereliction

Background to the dispute

Papuni Road--Wairoa district

DOC backs Papuni over access row

Kokako Road--Ruapehu district

Rangitata Terrace Road--Ashburton district Crusade to open public roads keeps on going

Otago Peninsula roads

Paper lines let townies loose on Otago land

Wairarapa 'WATERS'

The fishy tale of Barry Guthrie

Road stopping opposed

Road closure leads to threats of legal action

Park users unanimous in vote

Council to provide public access

Christchurch council appeals road-reform ruling

The end of the paper road

Public Access New Zealand, P.O.Box 17, Dunedin, New Zealand

Rangitata Terrace Road--Ashburton district
Crusade to open public roads keeps on going