Hey guys was given this today from the Mountain Scene in Queenstown. Theres quite a back story to this one but shows you how the rights of the people of this country are being eroded due to big money, nepotism and incompetence by officials.
Im sure some of the people on this forum have been affected by the said landowner or have had similar experiences in regards to public access on the legal road in question. Im keen to hear from you if you have been affected by posting on this forum and hearing your opinions or stories
Whats more QLDC has been aware of this issue and have allowed the erection of a woolshed and considerable earthworks by the farmer as well as the erection of a fence thereby denying public access since 2005.
There is a public consultation process by council to close vehicle access to this road on Monday the 10th June. Legal opinion so far is that the bylaw QLDC are choosing to use to deny vehicle access is actually illegal and does not meet the threshold required to deny access. The public were only notified this was going to happen yesterday!
Further more this has been fast tracked by QLDC with shody technical reporting see below:
2.-ULR-MV-restriction-report-to-TP-Sub-Committee-meeting-10.6.19(2).pdf (870.3 KB)
Both Dan and myself will be making a submission in regards to this and I encourage other people to get involved or get in touch. This has wide ranging implications and stinks of corruption and non accountability of our elected officials
I can remember a landmarch up the north island in the mid 70s where the same thing went on you could not drive due to the terrain but we walked it cutting fences as we went. the farmer couldn’t do a thing about it because it was a legal road. we could have driven it by law as well. outcome was he had to put up markes to show where the road went and gates across the road where the fences were.
There is a valid case in point here and EVERYONE needs to get in behind each other to support the access via the paper roads. You MUST keep to them but and can use a GPS to do so.
The arsehole who is blocking you on the grounds that there is no vehicle access may well be right BUT it could pay to get GOOD legal advice on the removal of fences which BLOCK the EXACT location of the paper roads.
It has NOTHING to do with the Department of Constipation - I repeat NOTHING to do with them. DoC and his father might have come to an agreement re the fencing but DoC cannot give authority to fence across a paper road. It MUST have a gate to access and no charges for access applied.
Some time ago I was confronted by an official vehicle with a Chinese woman in it. She obviously was new to NZ but thought she would dictate to me regarding access along my track. She ORDERED my mother to leave the gate open for them (University vehicle) to access. Now that is bad and with me that is the end of the story - the only anwser is “Fuck off ****” However if people approach me re the paper road I just say that they can access my property via the farm track and I dont charge a cent. Only gutless bastards do that.
The bloke in question will be correct regarding some of the paper roads are inaccessible to vehicles. The one on my place is totally inaccessible as it crosses a swamp which cannot support the weight of even a bull dozer. In fact a tractor got bogged on the very edge of it last year.
It is also time that ALL New Zealanders regardless of interests got in behind each other to support each others interests - the following are ALL going to be lost completely - Access to the high country (Why do you think DoC are building formed walking tracks other than to conserve plants etc. It is to keep you to the straight and narrow but believe me within ten years ALL access to the high country will be controlled by the wealthy fuckwits who think they own YOUR country. Right to go gold panning - well ring a ding ding you have 18 or so public fossicking sites, ofteniles andmiles form your home. Back up until the late 1970s you could buy a five shilling (fifty cent) Miners Right and with it by hand means fossick for gold anywhere on State land. Well the bankers who control our government think they own ALL minerals and so to keep the peasants happy they allowed the public fossicking spots and other than that you have to pay a fortune for a claim and they dont make that easy.
Firearm ownership in ten years will be a thing of the past - hunting will be a thing of the past. The government do not want you to own firearms at all - Why? It has nothing to do with murders and massacres - they have an ulterior motive. The murders were only an excuse which they needed to get public sympathy and support to get rid of not only MSSA firearms but also YOUR great grandfathers pump action .22 as it is now a prohibited firearm! The legislation was ALREADY SITTING there waiting for the excuse. Does that mean the government WANTED the murders to introduce their new legislation to take the first step to take all firearms? What about wild game - there will be no need for hunting rifles because 1080 will take care of the wild game - as well as the keas!
It is up to you to be more proactive in how you go about protecting your rights. I do not suggest cutting the guys fence and disrupting him until he allows access free of charge along his tracks - charging you is unfair - the fuckwit doesnt deserve to be CARETAKER (not owner) of our high country. Keith has point but I see the fence cutting as a last resort but effective if need be.
In all the above I have wondered if a POWERFUL lobby group could not be formed to raise money to fight all the above and protect the rights of us all by taking legal action against councils and landowners who bar the rights to enter along paper roads.
The more I look at the South Island Independence Movement the more I think there is something in it. The Politicians seem to serve a sinister master. I have been lobbying amongst politicans and the replies are EXCUSES and they totally ignore any suggestions to mitigate or remedy situations. They have their agrenda and will stick to it unless good honest Kiwis stand firm.
QLDC will eventually be influenced by the wealthy land owners unless a firm hand is taken. They all piss in each others pockets. I do not believe in cutting locks or fences but at the same time I do not believe in arseholes denying access or charging.
Bugger me I sure can rave on - thats what happens when your retired and got nothing better to do but I am a strong advocate of New Zealand for good decent New Zealanders unlike the government and politicians who are traitors guilty of treason and dance to the tune of their bankers masters and kowtow to the tune of the wealthy!
I’ve been involved in similar disputes in the past…the whole reason that legal road corridors where mapped back in the day was to insure public access remains for all NZers,even in cases where the actual drivable track vears off the marked legal road corridor does not give the land owner the right to restrict this public access however NZ law in these cases are a grey area…is there any other public groups that have a vested interest in retaining this access…like hunters,4 x4 groups,hikers or mountain bikers?..maybe if there was a ground swell of public interest by other groups in retaining this access the council would be under public pressure to keep the access open…after all it is actually in most councils mandate to preserve public access where ever possible…also they’d be creating a health and safety issue if there was an accident and you had to walk out to get help…in our case we threatened the landowner with a 1000’s strong protest march along the legal road through his farm unless he unlocked all the gates from deer storkers,4 x4 club and iwi…he ended up selling that section of the farm to doc and is now public land…so public pressure is the key…good luck.
The Health and Safety issue onus is not on the Landowner nor the council. The reason for this is that the landowner does not own the land which is a designated paper road and is therefore not liable UNLESS he has placed obstacles to impede entry and access in which case any legal findings might well depend on who has the best lawyer! In other words OSH might prosecute the person who placed the obstacle but technicalities and other slick measures might fail the case.
Council is also not liable to maintain the paper road because that is exactly what they are - paper roads. They do not need to be maintained but access cannot be prevented as they constitute a ‘legal right of way’
If you cut the farmers fence then it does not necessarily mean that you have won. The court might find in favour of the farmer on a number of grounds. He was not given warning of intention would virtually ensure that the person who cut the fence lost heavily. If a group (strength in numbers) requested entry on multiple occasions then served notice to the council and landowner that they were cutting the fence on or after a certain date then any ensuing court case would in all probability find in favour of those who sought entry.
The fact of the matter is that 1) You ARE allowed access along paper roads 2) The land owner cannot deny access 3) You must keep on the paper road and not cross its unseen boundaries otherwise you are trespassing 4) If the landowner has fenced across it then he has to put a gate at each point the fence crosses the paper road or provide other alternative access - presumably his farm track 5) If he charges for that access along his track then he opens himself up to serious problems least of all being the right of those who seek entry to see that the fence is removed and a gate be installed there at his expense. By charging he also opens himself up to providing access for pecuniary gain or supplementing his income which is taxable AND also places him fair and square under OSH rules as he is providing access for commercial gain or as part of his business. This in turn means that if you have an accident then he is liable UNLESS he has given you a short induction course pointing out all pitfalls and points relative to safety, instructed you on your boundaries - that is what you can or cannot do and finally got you to sign an agreement that you have been informed of the the pitfalls and dangers. This agreement can also be accompanied with a waiver that you have accessed his property at your own risk and that he is not liable for abny mishap that might befall you - including getting eaten by the miraculous Black Panther than can get from Marlborough to Naseby overnight!.
As it is I discourage hunters to access state land along the paper road bordering my property because its a fucking pain for them trying to stomp through the swampy parts so if they ask I give them access along my track providing no firearm is loaded or discharged in my property and no gold fossicking occurs in my property.
Many land owners fence off access then hope no one ever causes waves. I think it is time for the public to identify paper roads and have legislation passed that there be a gate at every fence in the paper road OR access be provided by the landowner AT NO CHARGE providing they keep to the farm track and do not leave it. I do know of one case where some younger smart arses gave the fingers to a landowner when they TOLD him they were going to access the paper road regardless and then got bogged down hopelessly. No local farmer would assist them and they had to walk miles then pay considerably to get towed out after damaging their vehicle. When I spoke to the farmer about it later he said that they had been uppitty to him, told him their rights and that he couldnt do a thing and then just went for it. He also told me that if they had come and been decent and asked then he would have let them access to where they wanted to go along his tracks. So it all works two ways.
Some farmers are also reluctant to allow access due to the draconian rules of OSH (Offalized Shitheads and Hitlerites) and that is hardly the farmers fault.
In the case of the farmer fencing off the paper road then charging people to access his farm track - I would pull the fucking fence right out of the ground one dark winters night and cut the wires irreparably. People like him can be described in four letters - those letters are utnc
Yes in some cases like this it would be best to simply erect and double fence both sides of the paper road with double gates either side so farmer can easily move stock around and establish a clear boundary of where public can go and where you are trespassing,provides assurances to both parties,many landowner have to adopt this approach because of risk and liability issues from OSH as you pointed out Lammerlaw ,unfortunately this is the world we live in!!
In our case the landowner locked gates on paper road leading to an area of great public cultural,historical and natural importance then charged(and still is) $365 per year for a key!! Key holders (landowners mates) harassed people walking the route to and I personally was told if I was to return I would find a bullet waiting for me with my name on it!! Once the hard liner access supporters heard about this they gas axed all the steel gates and lock boxes into small pieces and made pretty sculptures in the landowners honor…so these things can escalate very quickly…I ended up helping organize a round the table meeting between the landowner,DOC,Council,iwi,deer stalkers,4 x 4 clubs and a agreement of sorts was established.Don’t under estimate the power of public pressure!!!
The person who even suggested using a firearm against you should have been immediately reported and his firearm licence revoked. Public pressure? Your joking Mal - the public are by and large fucking gutless - where is the ‘public pressure’ to ensure gold fossicking rights??? To get a return of the Miners Right? Where is the public pressure to reverse the insane new firearm legislation which even prohibits a black powder 1866 Winchester? Where is the Public pressure to make these foreign unct bastards who own some of our high country properties allowing access?
Yes I know all about charging for keys - it IS fair that he gives his mates preferential treatment - dont we all? All key holders to my place are friends or people who showed me kindness, kindness which I have reciprocated. My family whitebaited the same spot since the year dot - before Europeans arrived - but now the fucking landowner charges $100 per year for a key and access.I despise scum like that…leeches, parasites, Amoebas, Parameciums and bloodsucking vampires. My own gate has a lock - and a security camera discretely hidden. The entire lock and keys cost around $600 - each key is $20 or more. People who like going to my place regularly for reasons like tramping or hunting get a key given to them AT MY COST. I see it as being good to allow honest decent people access as it discourages poachers. I give poachers ONE warning then next time I am prepared to involve the Police which means loss of firearm licence - I am loathe to do that to anyone. I do however have to call it quits somewhere as my place is now at saturation point so if someone wants access then they pay a substantial fee to borrow the key and get a 100 percent refund if it is returned. The reason for that is a couple of people borrowed keys to my old lock, including a Police officer, and then lost the key - conveniently - including the Police Officer.
Land owners should treat the public as they want to be treated - simple!
In the case of the people you know gas axing locks etc - that is a behaviour I do not condone and never will. To me they are smart arses - there are legal ways around things and had they been caught then they would have been done in court like a hot breakfast.
Today things are more risky for the public - the government WANT you to gas axe locks, they want you to do all these things - why? Because the Government kowtow to wealthy arseholes and want any excuse to further suppress your rights and my rights. So gas axing and other nefarious games will actually lead to loss of even more rights. I have just handled the preliminary legal matters for a friend who infringed in the most innocent way - he now has no gun licence and no guns. Everything has to be done by common sense, the letter of the law and logical reasoning. No threats to the land owners but rather to suggest that things could get costly for him legally if he doesnt allow access free of charge, one way or another. I do not believe that any landowner could get away with charging $365 for access along a paper road - over private property yes but not paper road - even then hes an arsehole. As for the prick who threatens firearms - let him try it with me! He would either have to carry out his threat or forever lose his firearm licence. What did you do about it?
It actually created some good leverage on my part,I was able to help organize this round table meeting and get an agreement by all parties,apply pressure in the background rather than rattling the cage for all to see…yes NZ public are pretty gutless and don’t like to make a fuss…but it can be quite amazing what can be achieved if you can gain public support from interested groups…landowner rang me from his deathbed and promised to donate southern coastal block onto DOC…which he did…securing access for all NZer’s…I however never went back there, I promised my wife.
Yep govt is doing a good job at turning us otherwise law abiding citizens into partaking in unlawful acts…as I clean my semi auto while smoking a joint…lol…fight on brothers!!
Some points of arguement for Monday’s submission hearing…
-Vehicle access has previously been given for many years without incident or impact to the environment.
-Small scale (hobby)gold mining (dredging) in this area is in itself a recreational activity and not for substantial commercial gain.
-Its actually the councils mandate to promote outdoor recreational activities not restrict them!!
(its in their 10 year plan!)
-Recreational mining is enjoyed by many different individuals (not just Dan)has historical and cultural significance and denying vehicle access will mean that this activity will have to cease indefinitely.
Just my thoughts
I can’t believe what you are writing here lawndog. This is utterly BS. You are spreading lies We have not been conducting commercial tours for more than 7 years. Be careful what sort of further comments you make about this because this is defamation what you are writing here.
Just to make things clear here. We conducted tours on Ben Lomond station between 2007 and 2012 and yes, those tours were of “commercial” nature but we never charged $10,000 as what lawndog claims in his post. Since 2012 we run the business dredgeNZ but the company name is still GOLDRUSH TOURS & SUPPLIES LTD even though we don’t run tours any longer.
The trip in February 2019 was of private nature and John Foster tried to charge us $55 a night per person so you are right as far as this is concerned lawndog. But we were going to camp on Mt Creighton land for two weeks and paying $4,620 for crossing the 1.2km of privately owned farm track is a bit steep don’t you think?
Just recently we were approached by a person who wanted to go to our claim and use his pan for an afternoon. We were more than happy to give him permission so he could go in with his kids. We did not charge 1 Cent!
He recently got back to us and sent us a picture of what he got that afternoon.
The reason why we went to the council to help us enforce our legal rights of accessing Moke creek has nothing got to do with us not being able or willing to contribute to the upkeep of 1.2km of private road. No, it has got to do with standing up for our rights that get eroded away more and more in our daily life and to stand up against somebody who is trying to charge extortionate fees because he thinks he can.
If you believe that this is your view too, make a submission to the QLDC by next Monday morning 8am. Do it from your computer and request a read/delivery receipt when emailing it to the below address. It was only yesterday that the council sent us this:
“You can submit a written statement to the meeting. Can you please email your statement to Stacey Harris stacey.Harris@qldc.govt.nz so she can table it at the meeting.
Also, the agenda item is now available online: https://www.qldc.govt.nz/council-online/council-documents/agendas-and-minutes/traffic-and-parking-subcommittee/10-june-2019/”
After reading the above I think the charges are exhorbitant and I also think that the COUNCIL should maintain the track/road and access should be free. In the circumstances I could not blame people for cutting the fence if charges are being made. As for charging $55 per night camping fee - its just a greedy landowner wanting more. In situations like this where the area is popular the government should annex the road/track into State ownership, put in a couple of low profile DoC camping sites with basic ammenities and then do a trade off by closing the paper road as long as alternative access is available to where the paper road leads.
As for Dan having to pay $4.620 to cross 1.2kms of land - thats poor - very poor. Any sod who tries to charge like that does not deserve to own or should I say ‘caretake’ the land.
If it is leasehold I think legal action could achieve free access if enough money was put into the legal costs and the argument was sensible and logical. Is the land ‘Fee Simple’ or leasehold? If it is leasehold then what is the lease for, the conditions of the lease?
as far as I am aware most of it is still leasehold and from what we have been told the Ben Lomond Station lessees have signed a renewal of their lease under the condition that they allow public access. As you were able to read in the MS article they have always obliged to give public access on foot which is great but it doesn’t help us much if we have to drive in a few times with our gear.
The leasehold agreement might be only for purposes relating to farming in which case he has no leg to stand on regarding charging for camping or making money out of the legitimate activities. Those legitimate activities would not cover hunting but could cover camping on public land - marginal or esplanade land - along the river bank.
It now appears to me that most of the land is Fee SImple - which means as close to freehold as you can get in NZ. this means that the land owner can charge whatever he likes and it is up to his decency, sense of honour and integrity as to whether he makes money out of others or is decent enough to allow free passage. Remember that there are many fuckwits and scum sucking arseholes who leave gates open, throw stuff about, shoot at sheep, cattle, sheds and private property and these amoebas spoil it for you all.
The remedy is for council or state to negotiate with him the upkeep of his road in exchange for free passage and the right to enter without charge. At this point I think Moke Creek has a marginal strip and the land owner CANNOT make you pay to camp there.
Get into them , let nothing slide I still remember how the walking access commission was formed it was a plan B after attempts were made to allow better access to crown land country wide , that failed when federated farmers opposed it & farmers cried foul over disruption to farming practices , so what we have here is someone trying to double dip !! these roads need to be fought over Tooth & Nail im currently having the exact problem though in my case the council are supportive , once this stuff takes a hold there’s no going back , hopefully various tramping , fwd clubs have been informed ? fish & game would be another one.
And something else to consider for those not to worried about the unformed road with the view of just using the private farm track would be look at what else is going on around the country with foreign ownership , all of a sudden the only access up there could just well be that unformed road.
There are a lot of problems need remedying - firearm rights, high country and river access, 1080, mining rights, foreign ownership. It is actually time that good Kiwis formed a STRONG ‘union’ to protect the rights of ALL New Zealanders and to get rid of politicians who feather their own nests and dance at the end of their puppet strings pulled by the foreign bankers who think they own this country.
finally we have a comment from daniel himself , i will retract my comment as i have been threatened with legal action from daniel for defamation . It now appears he has clarified his position on here , and now everyone can see what his position is and make a proper judgement in their own minds . In no way is this an apology to him as im not judging either party.
lammerlaw i think the land is leasehold
i think it is a central govt issue , but to them its a waste of time for the amount achieved . after that its up to the courts to make a precedent. there is a legal side to paper roads they can be absorbed into the property they are on for a nominal sum, maybe if its 99year lease they cant till its freeholded . that will be soon if there is a title swap with doc. the other thing is that there will be doc access sometime so what your all fighting for will come available in all likelihood. The ones who spoil it for all have done the damage in the early 80s but i think as soon as that property owner went there in early 80s he shut up access