Thread: Kaimanawa Forest Park

I’m sorry Tahr, but your (as of late) increasing petulance and fist thumping doesn’t impress me. If a legal determination in court in required to establish ownership is what is required, then that is what must occur.

No amount of negotiation with a group who do not have legal ownership will result in an agreement that has any legal standing.

I have a problem with large trucks parking on the grass berm outside my place and rutting it so badly I cannot mow it. From what you seem to be suggesting, it will be okay if I fence it off so they cannot park there - even though I don’t own the land. What utter bollocks.

Originally Posted by Sauer

I’m sorry Tahr, but your (as of late) increasing petulance and fist thumping doesn’t impress me. If a legal determination in court in required to establish ownership is what is required, then that is what must occur.

No amount of negotiation with a group who do not have legal ownership will result in an agreement that has any legal standing.

I have a problem with large trucks parking on the grass berm outside my place and rutting it so badly I cannot mow it. From what you seem to be suggesting, it will be okay if I fence it off so they cannot park there - even though I don’t own the land. What utter bollocks.

Why do you need to go to Court. THE GIS maps, planning maps and LINZ records show it as road. if its a road under the LGA then the public have free right of access across it. End of Story.

Originally Posted by omark

Why do you need to go to Court. THE GIS maps, planning maps and LINZ records show it as road. if its a road under the LGA then the public have free right of access across it. End of Story.

also the Taupo District Council is I assume the road controlling Authority in this instance. The mayor is a good bloke. He should be able to shed some light on the matter from TDCs perspective.

Originally Posted by omark

also the Taupo District Council is I assume the road controlling Authority in this instance. The mayor is a good bloke. He should be able to shed some light on the matter from TDCs perspective.

I have had communication with a TDC Councillor and have recieved information that is in conflict with much of what we have come to understand to be true. I am awaiting a response to an email sent this morning. I will be back in touch with this councillor tomorrow morning.

Originally Posted by Dazzh

I have had communication with a TDC Councillor and have recieved information that is in conflict with much of what we have come to understand to be true. I am awaiting a response to an email sent this morning. I will be back in touch with this councillor tomorrow morning.

If that strip of "road" is not ratable then the TDC records are unlikely to be reliable as those records are only kept for rating purposes.
Also, has it been established that this piece of land is in fact legal road?

Originally Posted by omark

Why do you need to go to Court. THE GIS maps, planning maps and LINZ records show it as road. if its a road under the LGA then the public have free right of access across it. End of Story.

Opinions and interpretations seldom lead to "end of story" although they might add weight to an argument. What might appear to be black and white often becomes grey when opposing views are tabled.

Hopefully though some sort of access can be maintained.

I've got the original survey map in front of me, and it specifically says "Land taken". I also have the latest copy of the LINZ record which says the purpose is "Water development" .

Something that may bear clarifying is that prior to 1968 this land was part of the National Park. In 1968 there was essentially a simultaneous creation of the road, and the Trust blocks.
As separate pieces of land. That is, there are two Trust blocks, with a separate road between them.

I am still waiting on the Maori Land Court to reply.

Originally Posted by Ross Nolan

I've got the original survey map in front of me, and it specifically says "Land taken". I also have the latest copy of the LINZ record which says the purpose is "Water development" .

Something that may bear clarifying is that prior to 1968 this land was part of the National Park. In 1968 there was essentially a simultaneous creation of the road, and the Trust blocks.
As separate pieces of land. That is, there are two Trust blocks, with a separate road between them.

I am still waiting on the Maori Land Court to reply.

I am holding documents that back this up. Something of interest is the the original survey shows the road being 100 feet (30 meters wide). The latest deposited drawings show it as 25 meters.

Duplicate post

Duplicate post.

WTF is going on with the forum currently - the speed is so slow that people (and me) are accidentally double (or triple) posting thinking that the first hasn't gone through.

Originally Posted by Ross Nolan

Duplicate post.

WTF is going on with the forum currently - the speed is so slow that people (and me) are accidentally double (or triple) posting thinking that the first hasn't gone through.

Now now Mr Nolan, don't dis the forum or you may be gated.

Dont know about Waipakihi but Rangipo has had a lot of surveying done lately locating boundary pegs.

Add to Cigars,WAMS Property Information Map has those easements highlighted in black. First one down Rangipo Intake Rd is a triangle piece and the second is at the T intersection on sealed piece.

The Maori Land Court has just replied, as below. They misinterpreted the query, but the points are 1) this is Crown Land, and 2) there doesn't appear to be any agreement regarding any modification of the road.

Tēnā koe Ross

Regarding your enquiry, the gazette notice NZG50/1344, it’s one of those attached documents you sent us with the LINZ reference 830361.2, it indicates that the area that goes through the middle of the Rangipo North 7C block was taken by the Crown for the purpose of ‘the development of water power (Tongariro Power Scheme).

Without access to the M.O.W. 22306 (S.O. 27023) plan which the gazette notice quotes, I can only assume that the 19 acres 2 roods 19.1 perches stated in the gazette notice is the alignment that you can see going through the middle of 7C.

As to ownership of the road that goes over this easement, technically it belongs to the Crown (local government) since this easement is owned by the Crown and what is on it belongs to the Crown.

If it is determined that another entity such as the Rangipo North 7C Trust is claiming ownership of the road, this may not be correct. They may have built the road and laid out all the costs for the road construction however approval by the Crown would have needed to of been sought from the Crown first before the Trust built the road over the easement. This scenario would come about if the road was built after the area was set aside as an easement back in 1968.

If it is determined that the roadway was already in place before the easement was established then the Trust should have at least been given permission by the Crown to continue using the road. An arrangement that may be noted elsewhere on the LINZ record (we have nothing on our record other than a copy of the gazette notice) or is one that can be reached with both Trust and the Crown, if the Crown chooses to take that up with the Trust.

If the M.O.W. 22306 (S.O. 27023) plan verifies the 19 acres 2 roods 19.1 perches as being this alignment, then the information given above is correct.

I trust this helps to answer your questions.


This all seems pretty clear, and is in line with what I thought at the beginning. Everyone involved someone else had done the due diligence, or were just acting on what they knew, not what was actually the truth.

Might be time for a few people to reconsider their positions.

So, public access should be maintained then?