PDA

View Full Version : Public vs private land - Access, the official guide



RedKLR650
1st October 2009, 08:48
Hi all,

Interesting item in yesterdays news about the government FINALLY going some way towards clarifying the public's rights over particular pieces of land. Looks look they will eventually have an online map covering all of NZ with ALL areas of public access clearly marked

Should save the old paper road issue too :-) :whistle:

http://www.3news.co.nz/Online-mapping-scheme-to-mark-public-and-private-land/tabid/423/articleID/123458/Default.aspx?ArticleID=123458

Cheers, Stu

cooneyr
1st October 2009, 11:47
Sounds good but I'm not convinced - yet. Read the herald story http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10600579

Looks like this online mapping is being prepared by the New Zealand Walking Access Commission (website here (http://www.walkingaccess.org.nz/)) so they may not get too excited about the paper roads etc that we like to play on. Also I suspect this will be a big job with all the research needed so dont hold your breath.

Lastly - keep an eye out for consultation oportunities cause we may have to fight to keep some of our favorite tracks open.

Cheers R

dino3310
1st October 2009, 16:27
Quote: The new scheme was outlined in a draft strategy out today and aims to stop meandering hunters, fishers and walkers from going where they are not welcome. :Quote.

so us meandering bikers are sweeeet then:2thumbsup

That looks like fun
1st October 2009, 17:29
You meander, :yawn: me I ride like the wind doug ;)
and now we wait :2thumbsup

JimO
1st October 2009, 19:59
actually i dont see any reason why people should have access to someone elses property

cooneyr
1st October 2009, 20:28
actually i dont see any reason why people should have access to someone elses property

Thats not the point of the project. It is to let people know where there is public land that they are allowed to use. Also it will provide farmers info (I'll bet its with the farmers permission) where you might need to get hold of the farmers for any reason. This is not about access to private land.

Cheers R

warewolf
1st October 2009, 20:34
actually i dont see any reason why people should have access to someone elses propertyEqually, I don't see any reason why people should be denied access to public property.

Monstaman
2nd October 2009, 07:33
Agree with this, we had a German grape grower in North Canterbury point a gun at us for being on a river bed on public land, he was angry saying it was his and told us to fuck off, turns out we were right and he got told off by the feds but we should not have to put up with that sort of shit end of story.

Do you know the legal definition of a fence requires it to keep stock in, it does not require them to keep humans out.

Far too long we have been locked out of paper roads, tracks etc so hoping this might go some way to doing something positive to clearing this up.

Coldrider
2nd October 2009, 09:21
It is only clarifying land available for public access, it is not changing the law of tresspass.

CookMySock
2nd October 2009, 10:06
I am always wary of changes such as this. Often when boundaries are clearly defined we lose more than we gain.

Consider for a second whether you would like the law to clarify it's position on lane-splitting? Probably not?

What about the recent document on procedures when group riding? Plenty of good ideas in it, but what if some bean counter thought so as well, and made a submission to parliament using it, specifically to address motorcycle road safety? Perhaps you think there would be no cause for them to do this? but there is...

Be careful asking the question that cannot be unanswered easily.

Steve

JimO
2nd October 2009, 11:21
Equally, I don't see any reason why people should be denied access to public property.

i do, especially if you have to cross my property to get there

Skinny_Birdman
2nd October 2009, 11:42
Thats not the point of the project. It is to let people know where there is public land that they are allowed to use. Also it will provide farmers info (I'll bet its with the farmers permission) where you might need to get hold of the farmers for any reason. This is not about access to private land.

Well said. Also remember that there is a pretty vast gulf between the ambition to take on a project like this, and the accomplishment of said ambition. Take for example the NZ Walkways Act initiative, which was dreamed up in the 1960's to create a walkway the length of the country. 2009 and we aren't there yet. Hopefully it will create some surveying work though, eh? :devil2:

Equally, I don't see any reason why people should be denied access to public property.
I can think of a few reasons. In the interests of defence and for H & S reasons would be two. A more relevant third reason might be if that public property is subject to a lease. If you rent a property your landlord can't allow his friends to wander freely across the property, and while there isn't an exact parallel with (for example) high country pastoral leases, the public don't, and never have enjoyed unfettered access to such areas, and I don't for a moment suppose that this is about to change.

Skinny_Birdman
2nd October 2009, 11:45
Lastly - keep an eye out for consultation oportunities cause we may have to fight to keep some of our favorite tracks open.

I wonder what the High Country Accord will have to say when this does come out for public consultation. I bet they aren't thrilled about the prospect, and they are a reasonably grunty lobby group.

CookMySock
2nd October 2009, 12:01
It would be good if such a site would allow members of the public to register and get a good reputation from landowners ala trademe feedback. If problems were to be had, it would quickly become clear whether it was some individual, member of the public OR land owner. This way, land owners OR public would get warned in advance, depending on who pointed the shotgun etc.

I doubt land owners are interested in playing telephone receptionist to hourdes of people. Perhaps if folks could simply register on the site and state their intent to cross said private land, and then proceed. At least if there was some problem then there is a record of who was where and at what time.

Steve

cooneyr
2nd October 2009, 12:33
.....Consider for a second whether you would like the law to clarify it's position on lane-splitting? Probably not?.....

The law is quite clear on this - no undertaking i.e. on the LHS of a vehicle in the same lane as it. To lane split you are really actually over taking so make sure your on the LHS of the lane line if there is another lane to your right, that you are indicating. Done. Not so easy in practice however which is always the problem.


i do, especially if you have to cross my property to get there

Still not the point. This is why the farmers details would be provided, with their permission. If a peice of public land is land locked by private land then this mapping is not suggesting you have a right to cross the private land to get to it (which you don't). Simply they are telling you where it is and the details of the people to contact (if they want) to get there.


I wonder what the High Country Accord will have to say when this does come out for public consultation. I bet they aren't thrilled about the prospect, and they are a reasonably grunty lobby group.

Which is exactly why we have to get off our arses and make submissions as a user group if necessary.


It would be good if such a site would allow members of the public to register and get a good reputation from landowners ala trademe feedback. If problems were to be had, it would quickly become clear whether it was some individual, member of the public OR land owner. This way, land owners OR public would get warned in advance, depending on who pointed the shotgun etc.

I doubt land owners are interested in playing telephone receptionist to hourdes of people. Perhaps if folks could simply register on the site and state their intent to cross said private land, and then proceed. At least if there was some problem then there is a record of who was where and at what time.

Steve

Not sure I like either of those ideas. First becomes way too much of a he said she said game i.e. your an arogant prat so even though you were withing the law I give you bad rep and then you fight and say I was within the law and I dont like you give me bad rep etc etc. If everybody played nice this would work be we know this the real world and that don't happen.

Re the second idea this where farmers will get to opt out of having their details on the system to avoid this. It would not be appropriate at all for a biker etc to just leave a message and then just go for it. Case in point some of the unfenced paper roads that currently have young lambs on them. I've tried to get access to two such roads for this weekend but have been politely asked not (and I'm not) to by the farmers who were very appreciative of me ringing.

There is a Request for Proposal (closed now) for the online maping on the Walking Commision web site. I plan on reading this cause it should outline the scope of the online maping project and what the objectives/desired outcomes of it are.

Cheers R

Skinny_Birdman
2nd October 2009, 12:52
There is a Request for Proposal (closed now) for the online maping on the Walking Commision web site. I plan on reading this cause it should outline the scope of the online maping project and what the objectives/desired outcomes of it are.

Call me a moron, but I can't find their website. Can you point me to it, and specifically to this document? My interest is piqued.

cooneyr
2nd October 2009, 14:25
Call me a moron, but I can't find their website. Can you point me to it, and specifically to this document? My interest is piqued.

It is the http://www.walkingaccess.org.nz site. Look on the Latest News page for the Request for Proposal. Also there looks to be some interesting documents under the Publications section on unformed roads and public access along waterway margins. Probably the bit we should all read is the Draft Outdoor Access Code which is on the latest news page. Heaps of stuff to read on that site!

Cheers R

warewolf
2nd October 2009, 22:31
I can think of a few reasons.All valid reasons, but that's quite different to some bloke acting like a land baron and denying public access to (usually adjacent) public land simply because he doesn't want people there.

cooneyr
5th October 2009, 20:19
Had a read of the Request for Proposal (http://www.walkingaccess.org.nz/store/doc/RFP.pdf) and the most interesting bit is para 2.3, of Annex A which reads



The type of land that will be of particular relevance are formed and unformed legal roads and margins strips, esplanade reserves and strips, the various other forms of the "Queens Chain", public reserves, and other publicly owned land where the Crown or local authority responsible for the land is unlikely to oppose walking access.


The other document that is interesting is the Draft National Strategy for Walking Access (http://www.walkingaccess.org.nz/store/doc/DraftNationalStrategy_160909.pdf) which has the following info on Page 5


Where it does not compromise walking access, usage may be extended by agreement to other forms of access, such as mountain-biking, off-road vehicles and hunting/carrying guns.

And the follow on page 8


There is an extensive amount of unformed legal road (estimated at 56,000 km) that provides potential access to the public through rural land. While these unformed legal roads have the same legal status as formed public roads, their diverse locations and topography means that some of them are not practical for walking access.

56000kms is one hell of a lot of unformed roads :woohoo:

And the follow on page 10

Over time the Commission plans to provide maps that will show the location of all free, certain, enduring, and practical walking access. In addition, the maps will show:
• routes on private property, including Māori land, that may be accessible on payment of a fee or are only available at stated times (for example, private walking tracks);
• public and private access and, where appropriate, the contact details or persons to call to gain access to these routes; and
• routes available for activities other than walking (for example, cycling, vehicles, dogs).

All in all this looks pretty positive but the time frames are going to be looooooong


Draft public access mapping database developed and piloted with two user groups by 30/12/10

Cheers R

Skinny_Birdman
6th October 2009, 07:30
Looks pretty positive but the time frames are going to be looooooong

Interesting stuff. I have the distinct feeling that this won't resolve the issues with adjoining landowners, albeit that it may help to place the public in a stronger legal position. The real unresolved issue in my mind is that a lot of the 56000km of paper road and marginal strips are a) very poorly defined and b) often very difficult to recognise. Only a week ago my boss happened upon a strip of unregistered Crown Land (a potential source of access) along a river in South Canterbury which isn't shown in the cadastral record (ie Landonline, Terraview and whatever people use in their GPS), and is almost impossible to see on the record copy of the Pastoral Lease. He had only spotted it because he is a very diligent surveyor, and had requested a copy of the previous lease, which showed the strip quite clearly. In this case the leaseholder could have been forgiven for thinking that no such strip existed. Is the company charged with executing this project going to examine every title and PL in the country, or are they going to look at Landonline and say "There's a road there, we'll check the title."

NordieBoy
6th October 2009, 08:04
Is the company charged with executing this project going to examine every title and PL in the country, or are they going to look at Landonline and say "There's a road there, we'll check the title."

Like the Tasman District Council.
They can't give a list of paper/public roads but can look them up for you if you give them names/coords.

cooneyr
6th October 2009, 10:11
...... Is the company charged with executing this project going to examine every title and PL in the country, or are they going to look at Landonline and say "There's a road there, we'll check the title."

Without being a surveyor and understanding much of this it would seem that the RFP is very quite on issues like this. Para 2.2 of the RFP hints at the level of research that is expected for the online mapping system.


The intention is to use existing public cadastral records that show public access and land properties in relation to standard 1:50 000 topographic mapping and imagery of physical terrain, such that the location and extent of areas over which the public of New Zealand have legal waling access can be readily ascertained

I'd suggest that they do not intend to go to anywhere near the level of detail that you suggest SkinnyB. I guess that this means that the public may not have access to the total ammount of land they potentially could. However if the Walking Commision can gaurentee that the public does have access to the land they identify (map) then it is bloody good step in the right direction. This system will fail miserably if they do not meet this requirement because it would be challanged in the courts and would become a farce.

Cheers R

Skinny_Birdman
6th October 2009, 10:52
However if the Walking Commision can gaurentee that the public does have access to the land they identify (map) then it is bloody good step in the right direction. This system will fail miserably if they do not meet this requirement because it would be challanged like made in the courts and would become a farce.

I think that pretty much sums up my concern. How will they guarantee access over paper roads in a way that will stand up in court? The Walkways Commission may not realise that this is a can of worms, and that it may be a case of physically delineating walkways (ie pegging them), or we will be in the same position we are now - relying on the goodwill of the adjoining landowners. As I have often noted before, you can't just download the cadastral record into your handheld GPS and wander out there, and be secure in the knowledge that you are on the paper road. There is just way too much uncertainty, and some landowners will have the knowledge and the coinage to challenge you.
Of course, this makes surveyors indispensible..... :woohoo: