| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 59225 | 2005-06-25 05:27:00 | public access across private land Bill | mark c (247) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 366940 | 2005-06-25 05:27:00 | I think this is daft . I 've just got home after a raging arguement with three others all in support of it . I own a lifestyle block and I don't want people wandering around on my property casting their villianous peepers over my goods . Others argued it's only designated walkways to get to parks lakes rivers coast etc . , but can't say I have ever felt restricted like this in NZ . We are lucky to have so much public land and DOC does an excellent job with walkways etc . So what's the big deal? It's only getting people outraged and seems at least strategically incompetent to bring this whole issue up now . How many people are frustrated that they can't get to a beach, river etc because some meany farmer won't let them cross their land? One person said it's the same old story the landed gentry dumping on the peasants and stealing their 'commons' . Tripe . And compensation "MAY" be avalable the govt . says . (I'm a labout voter so don't take this as an anti-govt post) "May be" . Struth galore, farming is a business and I have friends who are farmers and they work to build up their assets like anyone else, and who wants a bit of your business sliced off and then 'maybe' get compensation for it? Makes me spit tacks . "Can't go within fifty meters of a house or 20 from a building . " No way . Traditionally in the country in NZ there is stuff lying around everywhere and tanks, troughs, culverts, pipes fences gates machinery, gear that you might want to leave overnight to finish a job the next day and who knows what might happen to it . Got to make sure it's 20 meters from the designate walkway? Impractical and political suicide to haul up this can of worms and chuck it all around the room . And other firends of mine staunchly labour are all for it against the 'monopolistic' selfish farmers who won't 'share' their land with rest of the population but wow you tickle an apple on one of their trees and out come the dogs . Pisses me off from a great height . Be interested to hear other's views but really don't want to hear "Oh this wretched govt / helengrad" sort of moan either . . . . . . . . . . . . m |
mark c (247) | ||
| 366941 | 2005-06-25 05:49:00 | I haven't read the fine details of the bill, only what has been the headline news and 2 second sound-bites etc., but the bill does seem a bit sweeping and draconian. I say that as a keen tramper by the way. There is a lot of public land that is locked away behing private land, and that is what should have been specifically targetted. If access to public land or to a special heritage site is not involved then there is absolutely no reason why there should be public access on and through private land. Indeed the ordinary Joe public would have no reason or want to go wandering over farmland unless the object was to get to public land. It also has to be remembered that since the Berryman affair, accesses that used to be reasonably easy to get permission for, have in many cases all but vanished. The Landowners reason.... 'OSH'. Then we have had the situation of Maori land settlements with associated denial of rights of access, and/or charging access fees to get to public land. Then we also have the 'problem' of commercial tourism. We are seeing the building of 'lodges' for rich overseas tourists on private land, and using the private land as access to public land, with the 'ordinary' :) New Zealander being prevented from accessing that public land. It is complex, and I don't think the present government has properly tackled the problem, which is a very real problem,in the right way. |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 366942 | 2005-06-25 06:13:00 | Private land is private land. That's why it's called "Private". I wish do-gooder politicians would spend more time rectifying important issues instead of trying to change things that don't need changing. "Get orf me land!", I say. |
manicminer (4219) | ||
| 366943 | 2005-06-25 06:19:00 | Private land is private land. That's why it's called "Private". I wish do-gooder politicians would spend more time rectifying important issues instead of trying to change things that don't need changing. "Get orf me land!", I say. i wonder how well the politicians would take it if we went tramping across their land under this bill |
Edward (31) | ||
| 366944 | 2005-06-25 06:29:00 | Are you allowed to walk through someone elses back yard (in a city) to get to a park on the other side? No. Why should you be allowed to walk through someone's farm to get to public land. What makes farmer's land any different to anyone else's land - it's rightfully theirs, and they should have every say in who through their property. And when it really comes down to it, if you ask a farmer for permission, they're more than likely to let you walk through their paddocks to get to the public river anyway. |
somebody (208) | ||
| 366945 | 2005-06-25 06:44:00 | if you ask a farmer for permission, they're more than likely to let you walk through their paddocks to get to the public river anyway. That's been my experience too, and the farmers I have spoken to about this have all said they want to retain the right over who goes through their land. And none of them have ever refused anybody. (But then it's only the ones with honest intentions who are going to face up to your door.) And the the big bogie as pointed out above is OSH. What provisions have been made in the act for this? I would hope that this has been very carefully considered. Farmer leaves a batten on the path, person trips over it, breaks neck, farmer prosecuted/sued to death. Who needs it? Why not leave well enough alone? Geez can't we all get to the beach when we want to? It's just causing huge and unnecessary divisions. :yuck: |
mark c (247) | ||
| 366946 | 2005-06-25 07:23:00 | if you let people access of private land then who is going to enforce what they go over and what they do?........noone will. it will simply give every theif, pocher and drug grower legit access. also all farmers have a huge list of OSH regs to adhear to, however no person is going to know or go apply the osh rules when walking over the farmers land and the farmer will most likly be held resposible for any mishaps. its typical PC goverment in action, make a bunch of rules they can't enforce which lets joy public get away with anything they like. if they want public access fence an access way off to it. somehow i don't see the goverment forking out the $$$ for that. personally.....i do a lot of shooting on farms. you imagen the "fun" of someone accidently walking into the line of fire who never told the farmer they where going over the land. |
tweak'e (69) | ||
| 366947 | 2005-06-25 08:39:00 | I wouldn't want anyone walking on my land without my permission. The risks of someone getting injured and being held responsible are just too great. I hate the way society is heading at the moment. | Jeremy (1197) | ||
| 366948 | 2005-06-25 08:48:00 | None of which recognises that we all hold the land in trust for each other and succeeding generations. Noone owns land - they just hold it for a time. Remember - private property is theft. :D |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 366949 | 2005-06-25 09:26:00 | None of which recognises that we all hold the land in trust for each other and succeeding generations. No one owns land - they just hold it for a time. Remember - private property is theft. :D And taking tax by force isn't? This is Terry's lot behind this and is the price we must pay to the socialist oppressors. :yuck: |
Cicero (40) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 | |||||