Thread: Farmer lying about paper road?

Originally Posted by XR500

No, there's a big fuck off remote control steel gate 3m high right across the legal right of way. Well several years ago it was a legal right of way. Just looked it up now, and its been changed. Finishes at the steel gate. Skirts around through farmland now. Was there last week and certainly would involve climbing over multiple deer fences etc etc to follow the purple line.
You can see that they have managed to have the paper road changed (foreign owner, bottomless pockets I suggest), as several km down the road, there are the remains of actual roads in purple that service a couple of houses on the property.

Bottom line. People who buy properties with paper roads through them know this when they buy them. Its all in the LIM. Property will also be in diffferent titles, as they can't 'own' the paper road.

I have only walked down there in the last year or so.
Used to go in over Te Iringa.

Sent from my SM-J530Y using Tapatalk

[QUOTE=Sarvo;1245824]

Originally Posted by zimmer

Yes they were served with Trespass notice
But Court day - prosecution dropped the case

Piss poor lawyer? Hadn't done his research. Should never have got that far?

Originally Posted by Flyblown

@Stocky

I was involved in several lengthy battles about paper road access with landowners. This was not hunting related, it was minerals exploration on public land requiring logistical support and - for safety planning - means of access / egress should helicopters not be possible. My role was to negotiate legal access agreements with the landowners.

The only worthwhile advice I can give you is:

DOC are absolutely hopeless on this issue and don’t want a bar of it, most of the regional employees in the local office will avoid this argument like the plague. Most council employees we dealt with on this issue were equally useless. My experience working with DOC and council on this left me with a lifelong cynicism towards these public “servants”. However every now and again you do come across a good bastard, finding him or her is the difficult part.

Forcing the issue with the landowner requires Legal representation which should in all honesty be unnecessary. The existing precedent around the country is messy. Unless you are an international mining conglomerate (or similar) this is a very expensive and frustrating process. Sometimes it is enough to appear at the front door so lawyered up that your corner of the ring is clearly going to be far too tough to fight, and the landowner gives up before any dollars are spent. But other times the landowner will simply ignore you, knowing that your schedule of work is sufficiently urgent for you to probably find another way of doing something that doesn’t involve his land.

Some landowners can get really nasty. I have hands on experience of one particular family deliberately damaging vehicles and plant after one company (in extraneous circumstances) made the decision to go ahead and use farm tracks regardless of how landowners felt about it. You would be amazed how difficult it is to secure a prosecution in the circumstances, when everyone knows who did it, and here you have a case of equally disinterested Police, as well as DOC, and the council.

It’s an infernally annoying and long-standing issue in New Zealand and something that I wish could be sorted out once and for all.

I have found that by far the best approach is face-to-face, with a resolute determination not to lose your shit if you are provoked. With what you’ve told us so far of your background and experience I would say a face-to-face would be a worthwhile next step.

Yes. As I said you really need to weigh up if its worth the angst just for a bit of hunting access. Its almost bound to end in tears.

Originally Posted by Sarvo

Yes they were served with Trespass notice
But Court day - prosecution dropped the case

Originally Posted by zimmer

Piss poor lawyer? Hadn't done his research. Should never have got that far?

More likely they knew all along it would never hold up and were just doing it as a threat hoping the other party would back down?

Originally Posted by Tahr

Yes. As I said you really need to weigh up if its worth the angst just for a bit of hunting access. Its almost bound to end in tears.

Exactly
Its not worth the stress

I have made a point of having these 'Unformed legal roads' opened up. If there is a letter and request on file to the council then should a land owner make an application to have the road closed, this will be rejected. Only the council can remove padlocks from gates or request a gateway in a fence. The last one I worked on took about 6 or 7 months and a meeting with the Mayor where I asked why the roading staff were so slow in responding. If we do not make sure that they are used by the public then over time more and more will be lost.

You do realise that this scenario plays out very much along Government lines:

" We understand you wish to undertake in a lawful activity, but we are going to make it as difficult as buggery, so that you decide NOT to undertake a lawful activity".

The law is the law is the law. Its lawful to walk/ride/drive a public road. Yes, I know most do not lend themselves to this approach, as lots of them are just lines on a map with scant regard to topography and vegetation. For others they are perfectly navigable by foot/horse/vehicle.

For some its a matter of making a point. For some its the shortest legal way to access OUR public land. Yes, there are ratbags that make it difficult for the rest of us, but ratbags will do whatever they wish to do whether theres a paper road there or not

For anyone wondering about 'Stockys' character, I can personally vouch for him being an exemplary young man with perfect manners. Therefore I do not believe that there would have been anything amiss with his approach to the farmer.

I wonder how many of these entitled arrogant cockies who block access across a "paper road" will take responsibility if someone using this access (with or without their permission) gets injured by say the farmers dog, or charged and hurt by a bull, or even get hit by a farm vehicle? I bet they would run for the hills and claim none of their business it happened on public land.

a] paper roads = councill docs got f all to do with it
b]if he has a problem then fence the paper road off from his land thru to where it ends.
that he can do
but blockin denying vehicular access on a PAPER ROAD to where it ends is illegal unless dangerous existing conditions are involved.
if it was just for walking accesss itd be called a walking track not a fuckin ROAD

Originally Posted by mimms2

For anyone wondering about "Moa Hunters" character... I can personally vouch that his total number of sucessful moa hunts is zero,
therefore he's unlikely to be a problem if you let him on or across your property.

Not completely true, I did 'hunt out' a very large Moa Femur in South Canterbury, which is now a prized possession

Originally Posted by gsp follower

a] paper roads = councill docs got f all to do with it
b]if he has a problem then fence the paper road off from his land thru to where it ends.
that he can do
but blockin denying vehicular access on a PAPER ROAD to where it ends is illegal unless dangerous existing conditions are involved.
if it was just for walking accesss itd be called a walking track not a fuckin ROAD

@GSP not quite. It may be called a paper road, but that does not mean it has to have vehicular access even possible. We have one along our boundary and it runs from the nearby road about 600 metres up behind a row of houses to a dead end. No public land at the end (possibly could call it a public cul de sac or cresent?) While it is wide at one end, it narrows down to a pinch point about 3 feet wide not far from the beginning and opens back up. No one looks after it officially so the neighbouring properties allow the local cocky to mow it for hay during summer. It certainly cannot be driven on. And I know of another that while it is designated a paper road, it is unable to be driven on as the grassy bit between the "tyre ruts" has fully mature pine trees in it so has clearly not been driven on for several decades at the very least...

um yes it does only dangerous topography or dangerous conditions that prevail can prevent vehicular access

What status do unformed legal roads have?
ULRs are no different in law from formed roads. Almost all have a nominal width of 20 metres, implying that they can be used by vehicles. The public have the right to use them on foot, on horse, or in vehicles without hindrance from the adjoining landholder or anyone else.
However, users of these roads must consider others, including adjoining landholders and their property. The general rules of the road apply and territorial authorities have powers to manage the roads.

ULRs may be unsuitable for vehicle use and even for walking, because of the topography that they traverse.

Originally Posted by timattalon

@GSP not quite. It may be called a paper road, but that does not mean it has to have vehicular access even possible. We have one along our boundary and it runs from the nearby road about 600 metres up behind a row of houses to a dead end. No public land at the end (possibly could call it a public cul de sac or cresent?) While it is wide at one end, it narrows down to a pinch point about 3 feet wide not far from the beginning and opens back up. No one looks after it officially so the neighbouring properties allow the local cocky to mow it for hay during summer. It certainly cannot be driven on. And I know of another that while it is designated a paper road, it is unable to be driven on as the grassy bit between the "tyre ruts" has fully mature pine trees in it so has clearly not been driven on for several decades at the very least...

Go cut the trees down for firewood

@Stocky I’d maybe have another yarn to the cocky and say do you want me going in by myself for a hunt or do you want me organising a forum hunting trip in there via chopper with 6+ blokes! And tonging up his so called pseudo private “Public block”