This page created 16 July 2003 / last modified 19 September 2003
Ps 090
Eyre Mountains
Southland Land District
Tenure review yet to be approved by Commissioner of Crown Lands
Back to...Ps 090 Mataura Valley
CROWN PASTORAL
LAND ACT 1998
MATAURA VALLEY TENURE
REVIEW
NOTICE OF PRELIMINARY PROPOSAL
Notice is given under Section 43 of the Crown Pastoral Land Act 1998 by the Commissioner of Crown Lands that he has put a preliminary proposal for tenure review to Christopher John Parker, David Francis Parker and Olive Robyn Parker as lessees of Mataura Valley pastoral lease:
Legal description of land
concerned:
Pastoral lease land: Part
Run 585 situated in Blocks XI, XIX, XXI, XXII, XXIII, XXV and
XXVI Eyre Survey District and Section 1 SO 12009 being all that
land contained in instrument of Title SL6C/383 (Southland Registry)
comprising 7851 hectares.
Freehold land: Sections 46 and 47 Block XXV Eyre SD being
all that land contained in instrument of Title SL 111/89 (Southland
Registry) comprising 23.9574 hectares.
General description of the proposal:
1. 3700 hectares (approximately) to be designated as land
to be restored to or retained in full Crown ownership and control
as conservation area under section 35 (2)(a)(i) Crown Pastoral
Land Act 1998.
2. 4175 hectares (approximately) to be designated as land to be
disposed of by freehold disposal to the holder (under section
35(3) Crown Pastoral Land Act 1998) subject to Part IVA Conservation
Act 1987, Section 11 Crown Minerals Act 1991 and the following
protective mechanisms pursuant to section 40(1)(b) Crown Pastoral
Land Act 1998:
Protective Mechanisms:
Two ROW easements to provide conservation management access
from the pastoral lease boundary adjacent to the Mataura River
bridge at Cainard Road to the proposed conservation area.
Further information including
a copy of the Plan and easement documents is available on request
from the Commissioner's contractor at the following address:
David Payton
Tenure Review Contract Manager,
Opus International Consultants Ltd,
Private Bag 1913, Dunedin.
Phone: (03) 474 8899; Fax (03) 474 8995.
Inspections: Any person wishing to inspect the property
is advised to contact the Commissioner's contractor in the first
instance at the above address.
Submissions: Any person or organisation may send a written
submission on the above proposal to the Commissioner of Crown
Lands, C/- Opus International Consultants Ltd at the above address.
All submissions are being collected and held by LINZ either directly or through its contractor.
Submitters should note that all written submissions may be made available, in full, by LINZ to its employees and contractor, the Department of Conservation and the public generally.
Closing date of submissions:
Written
submissions must be received no later than 19 September 2003.
SUMMARY OF THE PRELIMINARY PROPOSAL
FOR TENURE REVIEW OF
MATAURA VALLEY PASTORAL LEASE
UNDER THE CROWN PASTORAL LAND ACT 1998
JULY 2003
INDEX
1. Details of reviewable instrument
2. Proposal
3. Descriptions of proposed
designations
Appendix 1: Copy of Published Notice (19 July 2003)
Appendix 2: Plan
Appendix 3: Copy of Appurtenant Easements for Management Purposes
[not provided on this site]
1. Details of reviewable instrument
Lease Name: Mataura Valley Station
Lessee: Christopher John Parker (1/3 share), David Francis Parker
(1/3 share) and Olive Robyn Parker (1/3 share).
Location: Headwaters of the Mataura River, 10 kilometres west
of Kingston.
Land Registry Folio Ref: SL6C/383 (Southland Registry)
Legal Description as advised by LINZ Accredited Agent: Part Run
585 situated in Blocks XI, XIX, XXI, XXII, XXIII, XXV and XXVI
Eyre Survey District and Section 1 SO 12009.
Area: 7851 hectares
Term of Lease: 33 years from 1 July 1994
Freehold land:
Name of registered proprietor: Christopher John Parker (1/3 share),
David Francis Parker (1/3 share) and Olive Robyn Parker (1/3 share).
CT Ref: SL 111/99
Legal Description: Sections 46 and 47 Block XXV Eyre Survey District
Area: 23.9574 hectares
2. Proposal
Land held under reviewable instrument, in fee simple or unused
Crown land;
2.1 To be designated as land to be restored to or retained
in full Crown ownership and control as Conservation Area, (under
section 35 (2)(a)(i) Crown Pastoral Land Act 1998):
Area: approximately 3700 hectares (outlined in pink on
plan appended)
2.2 To be designated as land to be disposed of bv freehold
disposal to person specified (under section 35(3) Crown Pastoral
Land Act 1998) subject to protective mechanisms pursuant to section
40(1)(b) Crown Pastoral Land Act 1998:
Persons specified: Christopher John Parker (1/3 share),
David Francis Parker (1/3 share) and Olive Robyn Parker (1/3 share).
Area: Approximately 4175 hectares (outlined in green on plan appended)
3. Description of proposed
designations
3.1 Land to be restored
to Crown control:
Total Area = 3700 ha
(approximately)
The proposal comprises the catchment of Mullocky Gully, and the
upper parts of Thompson and Pig Creeks that drain into the Mataura
River. These catchments lie to the north of the main ridge system
of the Eyre Mountains that separates the Mataura River catchment
from the Eyre Creek catchment. Also included is the small catchrnent
known as the Firewood Block that drains southwards into Eyre Creek
and contains the freehold areas that are also included in the
proposal. The area adjoins the Eyre Mountains Conservation Area
located along the pastoral lease western boundary, situated in
both the Mataura River and Eyre Creek catchments.
A wide range of ecosystems and landforms occur within the area,
varying from screes, rubble fields and rocky outcrops, fellfields,
alpine areas, tussocklands, wetlands, shrublands and beech forest.
The area contains predominantly natural landscapes of sign)ficant
inherent value in the upper portions of Pig and Thomson Creeks
and the entire Firewood Block. These values are representative
of the fragile erosion-scarred greywacke based landform of the
eastern Eyre Mountains.
There is a very high diversity both in communities and species
that are present.
Faunal values are considered to be very high in terms of habitat
and species diversity. Habitats of note are the alpine areas,
beech forest remnants, scree slopes and tall tussocklands in which
the presence of invertebrates and lizards are noted. At least
six species of lizards were recorded with exceptional abundance.
The two main catchments and Mullocky Gully are extremely important
for the conservation of threatened species of freshwater fish.
The latter catchment is sign)ficant for the presence of sympatric
distributions of roundhead and flathead galaxiids in association
with the alpine galaxiid.
3.2 To be designated as Crown land to be disposed of by freehold
disposal to Christopher John Parker (1/3 share), David Francis
Parker (1/3 share) and Olive Robyn Parker (1/3 share).
Total Area = 4175 ha (approximately)
This area comprises the balance of the pastoral lease that is
not included in the proposed Conservation Area. It contains a
substantial amount of Futtah Gully, the Lower Thomson and Pig
Creeks, and the northern face of the Razorback Ridge.
The land is predominantly Class Vl with small areas of Class V,
IV and VII.
The area includes a substantial homestead and other farm buildings
and is made up of a small area of flats with the balance being
improved and semi improved tussock hill country.
Two appurtenant easements are proposed for management purposes.
These easements provide for foot, horse or vehicle access for
management purposes, generally via existing farm access from the
boundary of the proposed freehold at the Mataura River bridge
to four entry points to the proposed conservation land. These
management access routes (shown on the appended plan as a-b, c-d,
e-f, f- g, g-h, g-i, fj, in-l, & mn) are via the marginal
strip of the Mataura River, Pig and Thompson Creeks, a spur of
Ewe Ridge running down to Pig Creek, the ridge separating Pig
and Thompson's Creek, and along Razorback Ridge to the upper reaches
of the Mataura River.
Public access to the conservation land is provided via the marginal
strip of the Mataura River, Pig and Thompson Creeks and the existing
public access easement from Cainard Road via Cainard Run to the
boundary of the existing conservation land at the "Bowels
of the Earth".
APPENDICES
1. Notice of Preliminary Proposal as advertised
2. Plan
3. Easement documents [not provided on this site]
[Available from LINZ web site]
Conservation resources report (pdf 4.02MB)
Proposed Designations report (pdf 744KB)
Due diligence report (pdf 807KB)
Fish and Game report (pdf 67KB)
Scoping report (pdf 890KB)
19 September 2003
Commissioner of Crown Lands
C/- Opus International
Dunedin
Fax (03) 474 8995
Submission on Mataura Valley Tenure Review Preliminary Proposal
Boundaries of proposed conservation area
We are generally happy with the boundaries of the proposed conservation area, however there may need to be slight amendments in the lower Pig and Thomson Creeks to ensure practical public access.
A round trip Pig Creek to tops and return via Thomson Creek, or vise versa, has potential for an interesting day tramp. This is the only real opportunity for recreational use of the proposed conservation area. Although there is probably no history of upland recreation on this property, that situation would apply to many places in the pastoral high country. Tenure review provides opportunity for recreation as yet unrealised. The Commissioner has a duty to ensure that public access to and enjoyment of the reviewed land is provided for, either present or future.
The lower Pig Creek eastern conservation area boundary traverses a hillside above? a ribbon of beech forest. The boundary should be up-slope of the beech with sufficient margin to enable ease of foot passage across and up the slope to gain the ridge crest. DOC's negotiation of access for "management purposes" up an existing track on a nearby ridge indicates that the proposed boundary is unsatisfactory for access. This must be rectified for public access.
The "northern" conservation area boundary in Pig Creek is up a prominent spur leading from the creek bed. The boundary fence should be located back from a steep escarpment overlooking the creek so as to ensure practical foot access.
We note that the Thomson Creek boundaries have been extended downstream to abut the existing marginal strip. It is good to see this provision. However we note that the creek is very incised in this reach and if the bed cannot be easily traversed on foot then the proposed conservation area boundaries should be located so as to permit ease of access along the hillsides.
Marginal strips
There is conflicting cadastral information as to the existence or status of marginal strips on the property.
While there is unambiguous information that marginal strips ex section 58 Land Act 1948 exist along the banks of the lower Pig and Thomson Creeks, and the south bank of the Mataura River to approximately mid-way between the Roberts Creek and the "Bowels of the Earth" Creek confluences, the reach further upstream is uncertain. SO 8291 (1972) depicts parallel boundaries for "CL reserved from sale under section 58 Land Act 1948", however SO 12009 (1994) has no such boundaries. It has a notation between arrows "Subject to S24 Conservation Act 1987 (Marginal Strip) upon disposition". The latter qualification implies that a marginal strip is yet to be established, contradicting SO 8291.
We wish to register our concern that DOSLI appears to have disestablished a s58 strip, and that this will have to be rectified during freeholding resulting from this tenure review. Given LINZ's current disinterest in marginal strip creation, it would be an act of faith to believe that a marginal strip will be created this time around. As part and parcel of this review we submit that marginal strips are created along all qualifying waterways where they do not currently exist, and existing fixed position strips be exchanged for new movable strips to ensure practical access.
We note that official reliance is being placed on existing fixed marginal strips for provision of access to the proposed conservation area. If these strips do not provide assured access due to river movement (highly likely along the Mataura), then alternative arrangements must be made. We reject absolutely LINZ's refusal to deal with marginal strips as part of tenure review. They are not doing their reputation any good by ignoring such obvious public need.
No public access provision has been made
Despite the securing of public access and enjoyment of reviewable land being an object of tenure review (section 24(c)(i) Crown Pastoral Land Act), no provision has been made in this review.
The official explanation for this is that "public access to the conservation land is provided via the marginal strip of the Mataura River, Pig and Thom[p]son Creeks and the existing public access easement from Cairnard Road via Cairnard Run to the boundary of the existing conservation land at the "Bowels of the Earth". Also the Submission and Drafting Instructions, p8, records that "public access to the conservation area is not part of this review, with existing access on adjoining properties or through marginal strip being sufficient" .
The marginal strips referred to are on the south bank of the Mataura, the Mataura Valley pastoral lease side. These are separated from the formed legal road on the north bank utalised by the lessee for access to the property by Crown land riverbed. There are no legal rights of public access across the riverbed (being a trespass under section 176 of the Land Act 1948). There are no statutory bars to LINZ flogging off the riverbed tomorrow if they so chose to do so. Therefore contrary to the official explanation there is no provision for public access to the reviewable land, let alone the portion proposed as conservation area, unless everyone is expected to climb over the mountain tops from Eyre Creek via an adjoining conservation area.
The "existing public access easement" (document 222640.1) is up the north bank of the Mataura from the end of the legal road, however this does not "secure public access" as required by the CPLA. Firstly Landcorp freehold and the Crown land river bed separates the easement from the Mataura Valley PL and any marginal strips leading to the conservation area. Secondly the terms of the easement only provides for "invitees" of DOC to use it and the easement may be closed at any time by agreement between the parties. Therefore there are no rights of public access and the privilege could be terminated at any time without public consultation. The terms of this easement are considerably worse than the easements normally arranged during tenure review to which we object to as not providing secure access. Therefore the official explanation, as made in the Summary of the Preliminary Proposal, lacks substance.
While there is a statutory duty to secure public access, there is no such duty to provide private access. Whilst LINZ and DOC have failed in their responsibility to the public, they are going out of their way to provide for private access for the lessee.
The Report on Consultation records that DOC is prepared to address lessee concerns about access from the Mataura River bridge (at the legal road end) and across marginal strips, as a direct result of tenure review proposals. They are arranging easements for this purpose. LINZ has also agreed to easements over creek beds (UCL) to provide this private access. If there were rights of access, as implicit in official dependence on such for public provision, there would be no need for LINZ to issue easements for the runholder. However the fact that easements are being arranged is proof of a lack of rights of access.
We don't deny the merit of arranging legal access for the runholder. However what this case illustrates is that while LINZ in particular refuses to take actions of benefit to the public, such as ensuring marginal strips are created and dealing with related adjoining access provisions, by using an excuse that such matters are beyond its jurisdiction under the Crown Pastoral Land Act, they have no compunction in taking action during tenure review of benefit to others under other enactments such as the Land Act. Similarly DOC has no difficulty in making arrangements under the Conservation Act directly related to tenure review, but outside of the "official" CPLA process.
Officials clearly have plenty of discretion to accommodate public needs during tenure review if they so wish. The partiality of LINZ and DOC in their dealings is reprehensible. This amounts to an abject failure to fulfil their public responsibilities.
We submit that the access objects of the CPLA have not been fulfilled by these proposals and the Preliminary Proposal must not proceed. Proposals that do secure public access and enjoyment of the reviewable land, either inside or outside of the provisions of the CPLA, should be prepared and submitters consulted on their adequacy before any draft Substantive Proposal is put to the holder.
Yours faithfully
Bruce Mason
Researcher and Co-Spokesman
PANZ Photographs