- Rural Landowner Concerns
- Impact on forest/farming practices
- Biosecurity
- Potential habitat/environmental degradation
- Provision of facilities
- Personal safety
- Security and theft
- Fire risk
- Health and safety
Concerns in Access
Rural Landowner Concerns
Many landowner participants indicate that they allow access and enjoy interaction with recreationalists as well as feeling a sense of pride associated with public enjoyment of their land. However, participants perceive that more opportunity for access will result in greater risks and problems for landowners. It is of concern that the public, especially the younger generation and new migrants, do not understand the rural code of ethics and the importance of maintaining the traditional landowner-recreationalist relationship. Several participants indicate that landusers may not know how to behave around stock or when to avoid them, (e.g., at lambing and calving, general stock disturbance, leaving gates open). According to participants, a small percentage of the population abuses access rights, appearing to reduce recreational opportunities for genuine landusers.
Impact on forest/farming practices
Landowner participants stated that they might decline or limit access for practical reasons, such as farm management, during different seasons and depending on the type of land use. Participants considered that the management of small blocks of land in particular could be affected by increased access.
Often landowners may be required to assist when a recreationalist gets into difficulties on the property. Landowner participants state that a farm is a business and a workplace that sometimes must be closed from access. Facilitating public access can involve expense, time and effort that can interfere with practical farm management.
Biosecurity
The biosecurity risks caused by human faeces being inadequately disposed of is of great concern to many participants. Faeces deposited on land can wash into water sources or be consumed by animals, transferring diseases.
Participants are concerned that vehicle movement across land can compromise conservation values and facilitate the spread of disease and weeds. It was noted that as 4WD use is increasing, this is a real concern. Exhaust emissions from vehicles are considered a fire danger during periods of drought.
Unvaccinated dogs may also cause a biosecurity threat to properties. A participant mentions that members of the public have released pest animals such as wild piglets and wallabies onto land.
Potential habitat/environmental degradation
Several participants see that further access will increase the potential for environmental degradation as well as the threat to kai moana. Participants mention that members of the public feel that they have a right to harvest and note that foreigners in particular may pillage the resource. Access could also destroy the natural values along some areas of the coastline.
Provision of facilities
Landowner participants are uncertain who will have to pay for the provision of services associated with access, such as toilets, running water and rubbish bins (as well as rubbish collection). Members of the public may abuse toilet facilities or even ignore them and there is a concern that this will become a more pressing problem as access increases.
These participants feel that the users of walkways should have more responsibility for their maintenance, including weed management.
Personal safety
Landowner participants are keen to emphasise that farms are typically isolated, which can make rural women and children, in particular, vulnerable. Landowners often have to deal with unknown individuals on their property who may appear at any time of the day or night requesting access. Participants would like assurance that there will be no right of access close to houses. Fear of encounters and lack of trust can result in access being denied.
Security and theft
Participants mention instances of stock and property theft as well as vandalism. Cannabis growing on land is the most frequently mentioned problem, particularly in relation to extensive properties. Landowners state that insurance costs are rising as the risks go up, which is another reason to deny public access to private property.
Fire risk
Participants are concerned that liability for fires on rural property is the responsibility of the landowner when they may not know who caused the fire. During periods of extreme fire risk forestry companies may restrict access and landowners would like to ensure that this right would remain. A participant notes that many pine plantations are not insured due to the increasing cost to insure rural property. Participants are unsure of their liability under the Forest and Rural Fires Act.
Health and safety
Many landowner participants are uncertain of what their obligations are currently under the HSEA. Participants perceive that their liabilities for recreational users are unfair and that they should be reversed. Landowners feel that they must be wary of whom they grant access to as a commercial farm has now been redefined by the HSEA as a workplace. A participant also states that there is potential for the activity of recreationalists to have a negative impact on farm workers.
Contact for Enquiries
Rural Affairs Coordinator
Sector Performance Policy
MAF Policy
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
PO Box 2526
Wellington
NEW ZEALAND
Phone: +64 4 894 0675
Fax: +64 4 4 894 0745
Contact this person
