42nd / Fishers / Old Whanga Rd

[Oscar]

I understand that the slip has been cleared (a woman here at work went through in a 4WD recently - she says that they went all the way through....).

If you need a roof over your heads for Sunday night in New Plymouth give me a yell.

Want to meet up at Whangamomona pub for lunch on Sunday?

There were some nasty slips and a grumpy farmer on Fishers Track last time we were there.

[marks]

If you need a roof over your heads for Sunday night in New Plymouth give me a yell.

Want to meet up at Whangamomona pub for lunch on Sunday?

Hi Mike

thanks for the offer of accommodation. If we stay both nights in Taumaranui we get to go home on Monday via the 42nd (and or maybe fishers)

Without consulting my chief partner in crime - lunch sounds good. If we get to Whanga about 10.30 ish it would probably take a couple of hours to go to the bridge and back so around 1ish would probably work

There were some nasty slips and a grumpy farmer on Fishers Track last time we were there.

I think last time I went through a couple of the guys I was riding with got chewed out by some farmer type guy on a quad - maybe he has nothing better to do.

If we couldn't do fishers I don't think any tears would be shed - its not a patch on the 42nd or old whanga rd and both Steve and I have some unhappy memories of how slick that clay can get

[bart]

I think last time I went through a couple of the guys I was riding with got chewed out by some farmer type guy on a quad - maybe he has nothing better to do.

That prick had a go at me last time. I'd stopped to take a few photos, and he started having a go about trespassing, because I was a metre off the track. He had a go at some others about not being on road legal bikes (they were totally legal), which I thought was hypocritical considering he was on a non road legal quad, without a helmet.

He must've been having a bad day.

[Taz]

Curse you Bono, how dare you come to my country when there are fun rides like this happening.

Have fun guys, sounds like it is going to be a wicked ride.

Who's Bono?

[Oscar]

I think last time I went through a couple of the guys I was riding with got chewed out by some farmer type guy on a quad - maybe he has nothing better to do.

If we couldn't do fishers I don't think any tears would be shed - its not a patch on the 42nd or old whanga rd and both Steve and I have some unhappy memories of how slick that clay can get

Our guy was in there with his dogs and a fuck off big .308 or .3030 over his shoulder.

He was complaining about us using the track and said that the actual road went thru the bottom of the valley. He had also bulldozed a track above Fishers Track and was running drainage pipes off that onto our track, causing erosion.

[Phreaky Phil]

Need to have the track logged onto the GPS so if he reckons ya trespassing you can tell him (politely, if he's got a gun ) to

[Eddieb]

Need to have the track logged onto the GPS so if he reckons ya trespassing you can tell him (politely, if he's got a gun ) to

Fishers track, and the 42nd are both clearly marked on the Open GPS project maps, the data for that is sourced from LINZ.

If I overlay my Fishers Track tracklog over the free GPS map it matches over about 90-95% of the marked track, where it doesn't match is half a dozen small variations where it looks like the LINZ data doesn't account for the geography, e.g the tracklog zigs or zags where the GPS map track goes straight on

[Crisis management]

How about a complaint to DOC, if they are in charge of it, as it's a track well used by trampers and mountain bikers as well?

Edit:
Rang DOC at National park and the following is an overview:

It's a paper road officially owned by council, they (DOC, Council & police) are aware of the "issue" and there have been meetings to resolve the "issue".
The problem is (as Eddie aludes too) that a small part of the track is on his land (about 2 metres out) and he doesn't like anyone using it, the latest meeting held last week got the owner to agree to a land swap to resolve the issue but he changed his mind afterwards. Great!

Latest news is that there is someone (a relative of the owner) is demanding $10 to pass thru that part of the track and is sitting out there all day waiting for customers, there have been various responses from track users, some paying, some telling him to piss off etc. This bit is all a bit second hand "gossip" so the reality may vary a bit however, it is clear it is on the farmers land and he does have the right to control access to it.

Approach with caution I suggest.

[That looks like fun]

People have the right to use a paper road for walking, biking or any legitimate activity. It is the adjoining landowner’s responsibility to define the boundaries of their land, fence it, or otherwise signpost it to keep people off their property. If the landowner has already defined the boundaries and people continue to cross onto the property, the owner has recourse to the Trespass Act.

NOTE: Territorial authorities such as the Council are exempt from the provisions of the Fencing Act 1978 (i.e. the requirement to meet half the cost of fencing boundaries) where private land adjoins a public road.

Read that bit of legislation to him then start looking for the fence

Then throw this at him
Where a gate is erected across a road under subsection (1) of this section, a board with the words "Public Road" legibly painted in letters of not less than 75 millimetres in height shall be fixed upon each side of the gate and at all times maintained thereon by the person authorised to erect the gate, or at whose cost it has been agreed that the gate shall be erected and maintained.

[Crisis management]

or otherwise signpost it to keep people off their property.

Possibly depends on how you interprete "signpost", a bloke showing you a line in the dirt and explaining it clearly may be enough........?

Good info to take with you as long as you are prepared for an arguement (and outnumber him).

[That looks like fun]

He was complaining about us using the track and said that the actual road went thru the bottom of the valley. He had also bulldozed a track above Fishers Track and was running drainage pipes off that onto our track, causing erosion.

A.10 Offences

Statute Law
"Section 357 Local Government Act 1974. Penalties for damage to roads--(1) Every person commits an offence who, not being authorised by the council or by or under any Act,--
(a) Encroaches on a road by making or erecting any building, fence, ditch, or other obstacle or work of any kind upon, over, or under the road, or by planting any tree or shrub thereon; or
(b) Places or leaves on a road, any timber, earth, stones, or other thing; or
(c) Digs up, removes, or alters in any way the soil or surface or scarp of a road; or
(d) Damages or, except with the consent of the council, removes or alters any gate or cattle stop lawfully erected across any road; or
(e) Allows any water, tailings, or sludge, or any filthy or noisome matter, to flow from any building or land in his occupation on to a road; or
(f) Wilfully or negligently causes or allows any oil, or any liquid harmful to sealed or paved road surfaces or likely to create a danger to vehicles on such surfaces, to escape on to any road having a sealed or paved surface; or
(g) Causes or permits any timber or other heavy material, not being wholly raised above the ground on wheels, to be dragged on a road; or
(h) Causes or negligently allows any retaining wall, foundation wall, or fence erected on any land, or any batter or slope of earth, or any building, erection, material, or thing, to give way or fall so as to damage or obstruct a road; or
(i) Digs up or removes any stone, gravel, sand, or other material from a river bed within 50 metres of a bridge or ford on any road or any dam on which a road is constructed; or
(j) Does or causes or permits to be done any act whatsoever by which any damage is caused to a road or any work or thing in, on, or under the same--
and is liable to a fine not exceeding $200 and, where the offence is a continuing one, to a further fine not exceeding $20 for every day on which the offence has continued and may be ordered to pay the cost incurred by the council in removing any such encroachment, obstruction, or matter, or in repairing any damage caused as aforesaid:
Provided that no fine shall be imposed unless the information is laid by authority of the council or by an officer thereof.
(2) The Council shall not authorise or suffer any encroachment on a road if the encroachment would or might interfere with or in any way obstruct the right of the Crown, or of any person so authorised by any Act, to construct, place, maintain, alter, remove, or otherwise deal with any electric wires, telephone wires, telegraph wires, pneumatic tubes, or gas pipes on, over, or under the road, except with the prior written consent of the Minister of the Crown, the person, or principal administration officer of the body, who or which is responsible for any such services or utilities."

Take note of section e

[young1]

Hi Mike

Without consulting my chief partner in crime - lunch sounds good. If we get to Whanga about 10.30 ish it would probably take a couple of hours to go to the bridge and back so around 1ish would probably work



I

Sorry Mark I need to be back in New Plymouth by 3.30pm so might leave it for now and do our own thing on Sunday. Have a good ride!

[That looks like fun]

Possibly depends on how you interprete "signpost", a bloke showing you a line in the dirt and explaining it clearly may be enough........?

Good info to take with you as long as you are prepared for an arguement (and outnumber him).

It is the adjoining landowner’s responsibility to define the boundaries of their land

It clearly says who is responsible for ensuring I don't stray onto there land. If I happen to do so they are more than welcome to give me accurate information as to where the road runs.

If you out number the guy and win round one don't forget he will be there for round two when some other poor sucker comes scootering along

Negotiation is always preferable to confrontation. However there are some (on both sides) who don't negotiate well. That is why we have laws so that when negotiation fails a clear binding decision can be made.

[Crisis management]

If you out number the guy and win round one don't forget he will be there for round two when some other poor sucker comes scootering along

Negotiation is always preferable to confrontation.

I agree completely with you here, there are no winners once it starts to become a fight, my previous comments were more tonque in cheek than to be taken seriously.

[That looks like fun]

I agree completely with you here, there are no winners once it starts to become a fight, my previous comments were more tonque in cheek than to be taken seriously.

I noticed when you kissed me your more of a lover than a fighter