Thread: Farmer lying about paper road?

Yep. have to agree with Tim here.

Im a farmer and also someone who values public land access. The big issue of conflict for me that I see, is the lack of regulations and penalties for offences associated with mistreatment of public access.
If There was real consequence for mis use then the situation would be far better. Hell try being a rural landowner and getting a police officer on site in less than 2 hours on a good day. let alone at 2 am. Those of us with public land boundaries are put in shitty positions often enough that we just decide to minimise our risk in the most efficient way possible, and if that means someone contacts you who you dont know looking for access, then its most likely going to be a no.

A friend of mine who works at the local council told me that when the council receives an application to close a ULR, if there has been no public use or interest in that road recorded by the council, closure will be approved with the stroke of a pen and not need to be gazetted.

What is the importance and implication of the above ? In application the landowner, if they can bluff and exclude the public from using the section of public land that is the road (ULR), can at no cost convert a public asset to freehold title. So a 20mtr wide ULR stretching one kilometer is two hectares and will have a value of between $20,000 and $100,000 commonly. A form of legalised squatters rights / land grab.
This is land that was excluded from the original farm purchase but that they have occupied and earnt income off for years and can now sell with the property

Dont be fooled that this is a rare occurrence, and bs it is common now since Tenor Review.

A parallel would be a gang with HQ next to a council reserve in town occupying the reserve, fencing it off and applying to the council for the reserve to be added to their adjoining freehold title because the public havent used it for years

Originally Posted by timattalon

Just remember, legally you may have the right to access a paper road, but also legally he does not have to support, help or accept you using it. He is allowed to not like it, and he is allowed to discourage it or be unhelpful. It is not yet illegal to lie (god knows our politicians would never pass a law banning their favourite pastime....) And he has the right to disagree with you using it just as you have the right to disagree with him not liking it. This does not stop you having legal access, but it can make the difference between being a pleasant experience and one you would rather forget.

All I can say is there are reasons for these opinions on both sides. One guy I knew has stories of what he lost to people using the road (stock, property etc) that made me ashamed to be associated with hunters even though I knew almost all were not like that. (In fact I would say all because the ones that would do what he described might think they are hunters but they truly were not...) There are some absolute ratbags out there, and these seem to be the ones who are most frequent on paper roads where there are frosty receptions...

You are absolutely correct I guess I just think poorly of liers. (hence why I dislike most politicians) he may come around the next time I get in touch who knows but his lack of acceptance suggests he may give me issues in terms of vandalising my vehicle or trying to call the police on me due to his entitlement.
There are reasons for the opinions of both sides and I acknowledge them but only one is correct and moral. If ones livelihood is so solely relying on people not using land that one does not even own then maybe they need to improve their business. I too know some terrible stories including a friend of ours finding 2 cyclists with a big tent setup in his paddock. That after talking to them said that it was fine they could stay the night and to just take their rubbish the next morning. We'll they had shot a cow set the tent up over it to cover it until that night when evidently the cut the fence and used a chainsaw to break it down and take it away leaving the head, guts, and a poor butchered frame. He doesnt think all cyclist are poachers now which is how some farmers treat hunters.

Originally Posted by whanahuia

Yep. have to agree with Tim here.

Im a farmer and also someone who values public land access. The big issue of conflict for me that I see, is the lack of regulations and penalties for offences associated with mistreatment of public access.
If There was real consequence for mis use then the situation would be far better. Hell try being a rural landowner and getting a police officer on site in less than 2 hours on a good day. let alone at 2 am. Those of us with public land boundaries are put in shitty positions often enough that we just decide to minimise our risk in the most efficient way possible, and if that means someone contacts you who you dont know looking for access, then its most likely going to be a no.

I completely understand and it's niave to think public land nearby makes any difference at all. We have no public land around us except a lake. We still get poached of the road (a real road) we are well aware of the lack of concern by the police but have found saying spotlighting of houses is occurring usually helps. Although our best catch was someone poaching off the lake that we saw from the farm so took photos and video called the cops, drove to the boat jetty and took the keys out of ignition while they where loading up the boat with 2 fallow and a pig in the back.

I think you would find most hunters support better punishments for poachers and hate them as they are a huge part of the reason people struggle with issues like this. It's a joke those guys we caught in film got a trespass notice and that was it no seizure of boat, firearms, etc. But that's a seperate issue.

That is the weirdest livestock theft I've ever heard of.

I heard that the same thing happened here on Tuaropaki (Mokai)

Originally Posted by Stocky

I think you would find most hunters support better punishments for poachers and hate them as they are a huge part of the reason people struggle with issues like this. It's a joke those guys we caught in film got a trespass notice and that was it no seizure of boat, firearms, etc. But that's a seperate issue.

But it’s not a separate issue mate. It’s the other side of the same coin.

Farmers see poachers, trespassers, vandals and thieves getting fuck all comeuppance, so what do you think that does to their attitudes?

We end up in a situation where there is no enforcement of law on either side of the problem, and some individuals decide to mete out their own forms of bush justice.

Originally Posted by Stocky

You are absolutely correct I guess I just think poorly of liers. (hence why I dislike most politicians) he may come around the next time I get in touch who knows but his lack of acceptance suggests he may give me issues in terms of vandalising my vehicle or trying to call the police on me due to his entitlement.
There are reasons for the opinions of both sides and I acknowledge them but only one is correct and moral. If ones livelihood is so solely relying on people not using land that one does not even own then maybe they need to improve their business. I too know some terrible stories including a friend of ours finding 2 cyclists with a big tent setup in his paddock. That after talking to them said that it was fine they could stay the night and to just take their rubbish the next morning. We'll they had shot a cow set the tent up over it to cover it until that night when evidently the cut the fence and used a chainsaw to break it down and take it away leaving the head, guts, and a poor butchered frame. He doesnt think all cyclist are poachers now which is how some farmers treat hunters.

I agree.

With some of the farmers I know / knew, it is not once or twice...it is almost every other weekend and an ongoing challenge hence their view, be it distorted or not....

Originally Posted by Moa Hunter

A friend of mine who works at the local council told me that when the council receives an application to close a ULR, if there has been no public use or interest in that road recorded by the council, closure will be approved with the stroke of a pen and not need to be gazetted.

What is the importance and implication of the above ? In application the landowner, if they can bluff and exclude the public from using the section of public land that is the road (ULR), can at no cost convert a public asset to freehold title. So a 20mtr wide ULR stretching one kilometer is two hectares and will have a value of between $20,000 and $100,000 commonly. A form of legalised squatters rights / land grab.
This is land that was excluded from the original farm purchase but that they have occupied and earnt income off for years and can now sell with the property

Dont be fooled that this is a rare occurrence, and bs it is common now since Tenor Review.

A parallel would be a gang with HQ next to a council reserve in town occupying the reserve, fencing it off and applying to the council for the reserve to be added to their adjoining freehold title because the public havent used it for years

I have to disagree with the parallel you have drawn here. In the cases I know of it would be more like having a public walkway / cycle lane beside your property, and burglars using it to access your property to steal your stuff, or motorcyclists using it as a skid pad on a Saturday night. But with one difference - you would be responsible for maintenance of the walkway and NOT the council......

Or in your example if it was not a gang next to the reserve, but instead it was your place, and every weekend you had to spend a couple hours mowing the grass there and picking up all the rubbish and carcasses left there...Sure it is council land, but they dont do anything. As I mentioned before, we have a fairly substantial paper road next to us and the neighbouring properties. The developer offered to landscape it into a birdlane / reserve as part of the subdivision, but while the council was not against the idea in principle, the roading division liked it as it meant it was no longer responsible for it (it did no maintenance anyway so it was no skin off their nose), Parks division objected vigourously against it as it would then have to maintain it as a reserve with no additional funding so it was declined and was left as a paper road. Apart from the local farmer mowing it twice a year for hay,that is all. It receives no attention from the council unless it is pointed out that it is becoming a fire risk. The local residents including myself, now mow it themselves just to keep it from becoming a fire risk or source of pestilence and so people can walk it if they desire. To give you and idea, when I first called to enquire about who is responsible for the paper road, the council replied "The land owner whose fence it is inside, is responsible as they get the use of it. But the developer was not ALLOWED to put the fences around the paper road and it is OUTSIDE of our fence. To give you an idea of size, this paper road is 300m long, and for the most part, about 10m wide with a narrow pinch point that is about 3 feet wide not far from the main road where it starts meaning it is a reasonable piece of land to be mowing.......especially when we cannot use it for anything else...Oh and the real kicker....I can build a structure within 2 metres of my boundary EXCEPT from the road frontage which has a 10 metre setback.....and the BACK of my section has the same 10m set back as the paper road counts as "road" in the consents division so if I want to make a garden shed I dont need a building consent due to its small size, but I do need a resource consent because I want to put within 10m of my back fence.....

Originally Posted by timattalon

I have to disagree with the parallel you have drawn here. In the cases I know of it would be more like having a public walkway / cycle lane beside your property, and burglars using it to access your property to steal your stuff, or motorcyclists using it as a skid pad on a Saturday night. But with one difference - you would be responsible for maintenance of the walkway and NOT the council......

Or in your example if it was not a gang next to the reserve, but instead it was your place, and every weekend you had to spend a couple hours mowing the grass there and picking up all the rubbish and carcasses left there...Sure it is council land, but they dont do anything. As I mentioned before, we have a fairly substantial paper road next to us and the neighbouring properties. The developer offered to landscape it into a birdlane / reserve as part of the subdivision, but while the council was not against the idea in principle, the roading division liked it as it meant it was no longer responsible for it (it did no maintenance anyway so it was no skin off their nose), Parks division objected vigourously against it as it would then have to maintain it as a reserve with no additional funding so it was declined and was left as a paper road. Apart from the local farmer mowing it twice a year for hay,that is all. It receives no attention from the council unless it is pointed out that it is becoming a fire risk. The local residents including myself, now mow it themselves just to keep it from becoming a fire risk or source of pestilence and so people can walk it if they desire. To give you and idea, when I first called to enquire about who is responsible for the paper road, the council replied "The land owner whose fence it is inside, is responsible as they get the use of it. But the developer was not ALLOWED to put the fences around the paper road and it is OUTSIDE of our fence. To give you an idea of size, this paper road is 300m long, and for the most part, about 10m wide with a narrow pinch point that is about 3 feet wide not far from the main road where it starts meaning it is a reasonable piece of land to be mowing.......especially when we cannot use it for anything else...Oh and the real kicker....I can build a structure within 2 metres of my boundary EXCEPT from the road frontage which has a 10 metre setback.....and the BACK of my section has the same 10m set back as the paper road counts as "road" in the consents division so if I want to make a garden shed I dont need a building consent due to its small size, but I do need a resource consent because I want to put within 10m of my back fence.....

Are you quite sure that next to your property is a ULR or is it just a parcel of council land designated to roading ? The standard for a road is a minimum 'chain' or 66 feet - 20 metres. Your parcel is only 10 metres tapering to 1 metre so cannot be a road as such only an access right of way or sum such. Fence it off, park Harleys on it and patrol it with gang members and see how much the public use it. Then you can apply to the council to 'take it over' for them

Originally Posted by BRADS

Again Tahr best post in this thread.
And most people that posted seem to wonder why farmers won't let them through but read the responses.
We have a fairly heavily used paper road through our farm that a few forum people use regularly, yes the gates locked thats because if you slide of the track in your car and die its on us, but your welcome to walk it anytime,
No the council has never maintained it thats all the farmer.
The other fact that no one's caught onto is often the "paper" road on a topo map is actually miles from the actual paper road something some of you should keep in mind, some paper roads have also been swapped with Doc for access around boundaries after bulldozing and maintenance all at the cost to the farmers.
The hate on farmers here recently is hard to take and yet you wonder why you can't get onto farms.....

Sent from my SM-G986B using Tapatalk

Can you explain the bold bit for me please @BRADS ?

Originally Posted by Maxx

Can you explain the bold bit for me please @BRADS ?

Someone slides off a paper road and dies, they didn't die on your land. They died on a public road (OK, they might end up on your land, having slid off public land...just like 50% of current road accidents)

Someone slides off one of your farm tracks, but wasn't permitted to be there: HSAW Act 2015 does not apply to the incident.

I fully understand farmer's reticence re permitting the public to cross their land, but it boils down to: A paper road is not their land. End of story.

Originally Posted by Moa Hunter

Are you quite sure that next to your property is a ULR or is it just a parcel of council land designated to roading ? The standard for a road is a minimum 'chain' or 66 feet - 20 metres. Your parcel is only 10 metres tapering to 1 metre so cannot be a road as such only an access right of way or sum such. Fence it off, park Harleys on it and patrol it with gang members and see how much the public use it. Then you can apply to the council to 'take it over' for them

Definitely a paper road. And I would not leave a Harley parked where public has access (or thinks it ihas access...) as it would be gone 5 minutes later...

Originally Posted by BRADS

Again Tahr best post in this thread.
And most people that posted seem to wonder why farmers won't let them through but read the responses.
We have a fairly heavily used paper road through our farm that a few forum people use regularly, yes the gates locked thats because if you slide of the track in your car and die its on us, but your welcome to walk it anytime,
No the council has never maintained it thats all the farmer.
The other fact that no one's caught onto is often the "paper" road on a topo map is actually miles from the actual paper road something some of you should keep in mind, some paper roads have also been swapped with Doc for access around boundaries after bulldozing and maintenance all at the cost to the farmers.
The hate on farmers here recently is hard to take and yet you wonder why you can't get onto farms.....

Sent from my SM-G986B using Tapatalk

nobodies haten on farmers just expectin them to follow the rules like the rest of us.
isnt that fed farmers catch cry to one law for all

Originally Posted by 7mmwsm

Ask him what the rates are like for his hunting concession on DOC land (purely because you are thinking of applying for a similar concession, wink wink).
See if the paper road exists after that.

20 maybe 30 dollars my experience.