access to doc land

PRO4WD · Post by **PRO4WD** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 11:26 am

is it true that the christchurch combined organisation support an agenda/policy of access to doc land by permit only. maybe accessman would like to confirm.
pip. [/list][/list]

albundy · Post by **albundy** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 11:57 am

you will need to email access4wd AKA Paul Dolughey for that one.
Al

Ralfie · Post by **Ralfie** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 9:13 pm

Interesting topic that should have further input.

If true it could have serious ramifications for all land access for 4WDing.
I am surprised an organisation would want to support such a move as it will end up very expensive to get a permit for access as has past experience proved.

Azza · Post by **Azza** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 12:45 am

Ralfie wrote:I am surprised an organisation would want to support such a move as it will end up very expensive to get a permit for access as has past experience proved.

Maybe not, it could be like the local council offering access to beaches and such, no cost involved, you just need to fill in the paperwork.... guess it's so that they know who to sue when things go wrong

PRO4WD · Post by **PRO4WD** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 5:37 pm

maybe mr mcguire could answer then. members of chch clubs are entitled to know what position accessman has as their repesentative.

madaz068 · Post by **madaz068** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 12:17 am

I would suggest that if the members are not happy about this contact there access person

access4WD · Post by **access4WD** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 8:31 am

PRO4WD wrote::?: is it true that the christchurch combined organisation support an agenda/policy of access to doc land by permit only. maybe accessman would like to confirm.
pip. [/list][/list]

There is no such organisation as christchurch combined, I assume you refer to Combined 4WD Clubs Inc.
The answer is NO!
cheers
Paul

albundy · Post by **albundy** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 2:11 pm

Paul wrote:

The answer is NO!

Well that's the total opposite to what you said at the CLROC club meeting on Tuesday night. It is the opposite to what you have been saying for the last 18 months. There alot of disgruntled Club members ( clubs affilitated with Combined) that feel they are not being represented and/or are having the wool pulled over their eyes. I know this as they are approaching me and discussing the issues with me. This is yet another example of that. Wake up people, you are getting shafted well and trully. You may be able to continue having Club trips through club access permits, but forget it if you wish to run a private trip.
Al

madaz068 · Post by **madaz068** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 2:23 pm

If this is the case (and i have no reason to question it) Paul (access man for Combined) needs to stand up tell everyone, and also remember that he is not on a higher level and all members need to be told about the reviews DOC are doing.

People its important we all are involved with the CMS reviews not just 1 or 2 people. Remember also, only people that put in submissions are invitied to the review hearings. Only these people can talk.

I encourage every 4wder in NZ to put submissions in

Swaney · Post by **Swaney** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 2:24 pm

albundy wrote:Paul wrote:
The answer is NO!

Well that's the total opposite to what you said at the CLROC club meeting on Tuesday night. It is the opposite to what you have been saying for the last 18 months. There alot of disgruntled Club members ( clubs affilitated with Combined) that feel they are not being represented and/or are having the wool pulled over their eyes. I know this as they are approaching me and discussing the issues with me. This is yet another example of that. Wake up people, you are getting shafted well and trully. You may be able to continue having Club trips through club access permits, but forget it if you wish to run a private trip.
Al

Sounds like someone is telling porkies... :shock:

I would of thought the nominated rep is a pretty important position considering the amount of people he is portraying the view of... surely lies and false pretenses can not be tolerated from such a position???

For some reason to me the whole "club permit thing" stinks of money making and it just seems that we can no longer do what new zealanders love to do - go and play in our great big back yard.

now if he was lying (and im not saying he is) then how do you about change the rep?

there is 1 thing i despise more than lies and that is theft.. and it sounds like both of those things are happening to us... we being lied to so our right of access is stolen right from under our nose.

Steve_t647 · Post by **Steve_t647** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 3:31 pm

access4WD wrote:
PRO4WD wrote::?: is it true that the christchurch combined organisation support an agenda/policy of access to doc land by permit only. maybe accessman would like to confirm.
pip. [/list][/list]

There is no such organisation as christchurch combined, I assume you refer to Combined 4WD Clubs Inc.
The answer is NO!
cheers
Paul

This is incorrect from what I understand is said and written too! I believe your (combined) application to DOC on the west coast is for locked gates and access managed by Combined 4wd clubs, I have made my personal submission to DOC and recommend all to do the same, otherwise we will all be limited to where we can go. In this situation Access4wd and combined does not in any way represent me even tho I am a member of two affiliated club's.

From what I have heard there is a lot of closed door work being done with DOC to restrict numbers, group size's and group access, now if each club run's a trip or two that leaves very little chance anyone can as these numbers are very low compared to current usage levels.

:!:

You have a voice say something or put up with whatever rules and limitations and gates are installed :!:

EDIT:

Access4wd does do a lot of work for the 4wd community but I do not believe from what I understand they are proposing for it to be acceptable workable or even enforceable, there needs to be wider discussion within the associated clubs and wider community.

Swaney · Post by **Swaney** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 3:40 pm

Can we have an email Addy & PO Box number of the place / person we are to write to be put at the top of a topic and posted as sticky in the access section?

If even 10% of the people who watch this forum wrote a simple 1 paragraph letter stating that by limiting access to permits is not acceptable as it limits our right to access public land then surely that could carry some weight if there was enough letter /emails to support it?

We could even have a pre-written letter that each person who agrees with the content prints, signs then posts along to the appropriate person / government department

Or i guess we could sit here and watch it happen and then complain once the gates are installed.

This one really has me vexed.

madaz068 · Post by **madaz068** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 3:45 pm

Hi Swaney,

Here are the details for putting a submissions in,

All Submissions need to be in by 4:30pm Friday 5th October to:
Draft West COast CMS Review, DOC, Private Bag 701, Hokitika 7842, or email your submission to westcoastcms@doc.govt.nz.

The NZFWDA encourages all 4wders to put a submission in.

If you are in CHCH pop into 4wd Accessories on 174b Montreal St, they have copies of the Doc info pack and also the CD. There is useful information on both of these.

Here is the thread link also http://www.offroadexpress.co.nz/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=7016

42nd · Post by **42nd** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 4:03 pm

I get quite annoyed when i hear people making accusations about some one who is trying to represent our sport, it is very easy to sit back and slag some one off, don't we all think it would be better for these people to offer to pitch in and help out, they will probably then find out ,it aint that easy! To be realistic, you aint gunna get it all your own way.

DaveM · Post by **DaveM** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 4:35 pm

42nd wrote:I get quite annoyed when i hear people making accusations about some one who is trying to represent our sport, it is very easy to sit back and slag some one off, don't we all think it would be better for these people to offer to pitch in and help out, they will probably then find out ,it aint that easy! To be realistic, you aint gunna get it all your own way.

I get annoyed with people posting under topics such as this without so much as an introduction.

From what I have gathered, if the person(s) representing 4wding are pushing for there to be access to DOC land by permit only, then why the hell would I pitch in and help?

keen4x4 · Post by **keen4x4** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 4:47 pm

42nd wrote:I get quite annoyed when i hear people making accusations about some one who is trying to represent our sport, it is very easy to sit back and slag some one off, don't we all think it would be better for these people to offer to pitch in and help out, they will probably then find out ,it aint that easy! To be realistic, you aint gunna get it all your own way.

The Combined 4WD Clubs Inc is was suppose to represent it's supported clubs/members but it seems to me that members may have been miss represented. It could be a time for a change in a leadership that is pro-active. i.e. template submissions should have been provided to member ship sometime ago. If the Combine has done this before it should have been very easy to do so.

DaveM · Post by **DaveM** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 4:54 pm

Could people posting please introduce themselves, or are people not keen to voice their opinions on matters such as these using their real names?

DieselBoy · Post by **DieselBoy** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 7:03 pm

Just some of the thousand or so watchers coming out of the wood work there Dave

Creepy when you think about all the crap we post :lol:

I reckon if getting permits is going to be anything like the one we just got, then its definatly a cause for concern.

We recently applied for a permit to take a group of three 4x4s into an area next year.

The permits come back saying we are allowed access through the gate between 8:30 and 9:30am on the Saturday morning and can't get through the gate at the other end until between 4:30 and 5:30pm the following monday.

Also, we are only allowed to take one vehicle.

Theres no way we would be going with just one vehicle, and with a 6hr drive to get there, unless you do a late night or early morning mission, your screwed.

What a farkin useless exercise that was. Not pleased :evil:

Would not be good if the rest of the country was locked up like that would it :shock:

Steve_t647 · Post by **Steve_t647** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 7:14 pm

As they are drivers if they were managing it I am sure the rules would be better, the difference is they look at the club membership and numbers on their trips to judge numbers.

Combined are trying and good on them but I think they have got this issue wrong, they are not making their plan public and not saying what has been written even to club members.

Because of this I have put in my own submission but it will affect me less as I am a member of two affiliated clubs.

madaz068 · Post by **madaz068** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 7:38 pm

I have to ask Steve, but shouldn't they publish the submission to the club members? Alot of people will want to send in a submission but have no idea where to start and what to write.

I know that alot of the combined members have contacted me in the last two weeks with concerns and asked what the NZFWDA is doing.

All i can suggest is that people in CHCH call into 4wd Accessories and get a copy of the info pack that DOC put out. This has the info about putting a submission in.

kiwiphilip · Post by **kiwiphilip** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 7:48 pm

I note concern by a number of posters about controlled access.

Here in Wellington one of our major 4WD areas, the Akatarawa Forest, is access by permit and this works well enough. I'm sure there are some who think anyone should be allowed to go in. The blunt reality is uncontrolled access means just that and some four wheel drivers are their own worst enemy as they quite simply can not be trusted to follow any rules and have scant regard for protecting the very resource they want to use.

Of course open access is best but I'll vote for controlled access over no access any day.

Philip

hosehustler · Post by **hosehustler** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 8:11 pm

Im with you Dave on the newbies who post without even an intro...or are they infact newbies or name changers, either way it's rude :evil:

DaveM · Post by **DaveM** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 8:13 pm

hosehustler wrote:Im with you Dave on the newbies who post without even an intro...or are they infact newbies or name changers, either way it's rude

Yeah, I was going with the "name changers" :roll:

Most genuine newbies introduce themselves properly

albundy · Post by **albundy** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 8:31 pm

Kiwiphilp wrote:

Of course open access is best but I'll vote for controlled access over no access any day.

So did I until I read the Westcoast CMS plan.

42nd wrote:

I get quite annoyed when i hear people making accusations about some one who is trying to represent our sport

they are not accusattions, I have heard it for sometime now.
This was the primary reason why some of us on this forum formed a club affiliated to NZ4WDA, to have a voice and form a front against agendas.

it is very easy to sit back and slag some one off,

I am not slagging anyone off. If people make their beds, then they have to expect to lie in them as well.

people to offer to pitch in and help out, they will probably then find out ,it aint that easy

I have spent the last three weeks reading and digesting the 687 pg document and the Conversation Act and it aint easy to fight the agendas of a group that does not reflect the wishes of its constitutency, but then that's politics I suppose.
Al ( I don't hide :wink:

)

Leithfield · Post by **Leithfield** » Sat Sep 22, 2007 6:56 pm

Inevitably one must judge for themselves whether D.O.C.'s Westcoast CMS plan, and proposed 'access by pemit only', is in keeping with their mission statement: "to conserve New Zealand's natural and historic heritage for all to enjoy now and in the future".

It is also the charter responsibility of any Club to fairly respect the interests and instruction of it's members, unless to do so would risk legal compromise; as in National elections, if you are dissatisfied with your elected representative, vote with your feet. If your elected representative has overstepped their mandate, then one reserves option to table vote of no confidence.

Kevin Dougherty
Southern Public Relations Officer
ORE 4x4 National 4wd Assoc Inc.

hosehustler · Post by **hosehustler** » Sat Sep 22, 2007 8:08 pm

Leithfield wrote:Inevitably one must judge for themselves whether D.O.C.'s Westcoast CMS plan, and proposed 'access by pemit only', is in keeping with their mission statement: "to conserve New Zealand's natural and historic heritage for all to enjoy now and in the future".

It is also the charter responsibility of any Club to fairly respect the interests and instruction of it's members, unless to do so would risk legal compromise; as in National elections, if you are dissatisfied with your elected representative, vote with your feet. If your elected representative has overstepped their mandate, then one reserves option to table vote of no confidence.

Kevin Dougherty
Southern Public Relations Officer
ORE 4x4 National 4wd Assoc Inc.

well summed up, and no more words from me except to say I agree entirely :mrgreen:

PR · Post by PR » Sat Sep 22, 2007 8:10 pm

hosehustler wrote:
Leithfield wrote:Inevitably one must judge for themselves whether D.O.C.'s Westcoast CMS plan, and proposed 'access by pemit only', is in keeping with their mission statement: "to conserve New Zealand's natural and historic heritage for all to enjoy now and in the future".

It is also the charter responsibility of any Club to fairly respect the interests and instruction of it's members, unless to do so would risk legal compromise; as in National elections, if you are dissatisfied with your elected representative, vote with your feet. If your elected representative has overstepped their mandate, then one reserves option to table vote of no confidence.

Kevin Dougherty
Southern Public Relations Officer
ORE 4x4 National 4wd Assoc Inc.

well summed up, and no more words from me except to say I agree entirely

x2

PeterVahry · Post by **PeterVahry** » Sat Sep 22, 2007 8:11 pm

The whole game is just perception and if DOC perceive that they will get beaten up by the green faction then they will obviously not be generous to 4x4.
To be realistic we can only expect a low level of accommodation on DOC lands but we need to set some targets. The Conservation Act 1987 says that their role is to preserve our heritage and we must emphasise that roads are our heritage.
We need to identify the roads that we really want to keep for 4x4 use and that can be reasonably maintained. It's no use saying that such and such a road is important if it is just a long swamp and a ready target for the opposition.
Even DOC land is required to conform with regional environmental requirements. The Regional Council can require DOC to close or mitigate places that don't meet standards for mud run-off etc.

4x4 recreation has little money to contribute to longterm maintenance projects so we have to be careful what we tackle.

A permit scheme may be forced onto 4x4 recreation by law, as DOC already have such a law waiting for a politically suitable moment to put it to Parliament.

The catch is that unless a CMS allows 4x4 use, then a scheme saying that DOC will issue permits, will be useless!

For the West Coast CMS, request the lot but also be specific where worthwhile 4x4 routes exist. If they are " heritage" roads then use that argument. Decide your targets so that there can be general support for those.

Identify some worthwhile 4x4 routes that form a loop or go somewhere interesting and again consider how and who will maintenance be handled by.

What are those routes and where are they, so we can list them in our submissions?

Peter Vahry

PRO4WD · Post by **PRO4WD** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 12:35 pm

I asked a reasonable question, i thought many club members would be interested in some informed discussion on this topic.
now i feel like the all black forward pack just went over me.
And i dont even have the ball.
It would seem that Pauls denial of supporting an agenda of access by permit only is not believed.
apparently at the clroc meeting 18/9 paul was questined about the westcoast cms.
he said 1. the combined are supporting the cms in its current form.
2. there is no intention to challenge the wording.
3. club members will not be shown what is being submitted on their behalf.
if this is true, every member of every club should read this with extreme alarm. pip

coxsy · Post by **coxsy** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 12:49 pm

from way up here not happy with what they are doing to their club members , that is not the way things can be run , in a western country

access to doc land

access to doc land

access

Re: access to doc land

Re: access to doc land

access

doc submissions