Nth. Canterbury Waipara Gorge Access Update

tallsam66 · Post by **tallsam66** » Sat Oct 13, 2007 6:58 pm

Your not wrong there...i can relate to that feeling....im not inpressed by what was said & never been to the Waipara Gorge in my life, so im not to happy about being labeled like that.

Steve_t647 · Post by **Steve_t647** » Sat Oct 13, 2007 7:10 pm

I have years ago but that was with a well established club in Canterbury. I do not think ORE has officialy or unofficialy organised any trip to the gorge.

Locals have less respect for areas than people that choose to go to a location in larger groups like ORE.

hosehustler · Post by **hosehustler** » Sat Oct 13, 2007 7:30 pm

Steve_t647 wrote:I have years ago but that was with a well established club in Canterbury.

Here's a link to a pic of one of those clubs

http://www.canterbury-jeep.co.nz/Images ... 02_jpg.jpg

tallsam66 · Post by **tallsam66** » Sun Oct 14, 2007 12:25 am

yep..that is diffinately a JEEP....i wonder what club it was from ???????

rangimotors · Post by **rangimotors** » Sun Oct 14, 2007 1:52 pm

Can't say i no anything about it as im not a memember of any clubs but i dont want this to turn into a blame shifting mud chucking war, i think we all no that we are responsible and from what 'i hear' the local clubs around are good responsible guys

spankmeister · Post by **spankmeister** » Sun Oct 14, 2007 3:13 pm

What annoys me is how it seems biased towards ORE. I notice how in the finer details it mentions how they want 4WD's banned/controlled, but want to keep the right to be able to use their own vehicles. Talk about two-faced.

I also think that a major problem with ORE being labelled as "rogues", comes from all the jap imports with gold "OFFROAD EXPRESS" decals from the factory. Nothing to do with ORE, but the public probably don't differentiate between the two. We can do nothing to control the wider public with these decals on their trucks.

How feasible would it be for Mike to maybe change the name of the website, or at the very least, maybe rename the Association so as to avoid this confusion, as I believe it is doing us un-necessary harm.

Steve_t647 · Post by **Steve_t647** » Sun Oct 14, 2007 6:00 pm

It is Quite funny how he makes an analogy with motorsport, suggesting we get our own area.

Going on his theroy if we ban all cars from town between 7pm and 4am we have no hoon problem.

90% of the tracks are built on council owned land made available for clubs.
Almost all rally driving is done on closed public roads.
The motorsport tracks are managed by the motorsport clubs but rally roads are managed by the roading authorities.
There are problems with these venues also.

The 4wd community has asked for a purpose built area in canterbury similar to the motorbikes and open to all and is still working on it but this is a local soloution and I hope the locals who use the waipra are prepared to drive to chch to use it. We want to be able to travel to a specific unique place to see it not destroy it.

I hope they install toilets or make theirs available for the fishermen and walkers, it can be a long walk for them to a toilet just go to any walking track and see how they treat tracks and rivermouths for fishermen it is not all only some just like the 4wd problems and hoons.

Oh we have 3 companies doing the wine christmas thing and due to timing we have 3 north island wines 3 matlborough wines and one otago wine chosen now we need to get 3 40 foot containers :shock:

shipped to our vietnam manufacturing unit to be repackaged into 5 bottle boxes with a New Zealand dvd and sent from there to our and their customers, looks like we will do this again with these same companys next year if the customers like the idea and it may grow if more exporters join.

tallsam66 · Post by **tallsam66** » Sun Oct 14, 2007 6:08 pm

spankmeister wrote:I notice how in the finer details it mentions how they want 4WD's banned/controlled, but want to keep the right to be able to use their own vehicles.

I too noticed that.

The most likely reason is Claremont Country Estate runs a "Landrover Safari".
One of the biggest advocates for the Banning of 4wd's & also a member of the "Waipara River Protection Group" is Richard Goord from Claremont Country Estate.
Richard Goord is a 49% shareholder (as of 12 July 2007) in Claremont Farms Ltd.The company thats own Claremont Country Estate.So he has interest in maintaining 4wd access to be able to continue running his "Safari's" but it would be to there advantage if other users were banned therefore making his "Safari" more exclusive.

http://www.companies.govt.nz/pls/web/DBSCONT.control_tabs?an=0B0D1AF5541BD9031E1554994CFED381&cn=845137&tab=AL#doc1

Leithfield · Post by **Leithfield** » Sun Oct 14, 2007 7:21 pm

tallsam66 wrote: Two of the biggest advocates for the Banning of 4wd's & also members of the "Waipara River Protection Group" are Rob Gerard ... both from Claremont Country Estate.

Rob Gerard is neither affiliated with Claremont Country Estate or a foundation member of the Waipara River Protection Group; he is an ECAN Senior Resource Care Co-ordinator and, in my personal opinion, has worked concientiously to balance the interests of stakeholders in Canterbury.

Kevin Dougherty
Public Relations Officer
Southern Region
ORE National 4x4 Assoc inc.

tallsam66 · Post by **tallsam66** » Sun Oct 14, 2007 7:37 pm

Well in the information i got under the Official Information Act it states.

"Rob Gerard and Richard Goord of Claremont were too...."

If im incorrect i publically apoligise for the mistake...but im only saying what is in the info i got from the Hurunui District Council.

Leithfield · Post by **Leithfield** » Sun Oct 14, 2007 7:47 pm

I suggest you re-examine Pg5 Tallsam66, and refer the referenced appendice (1).

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

SMOKEY · Post by **SMOKEY** » Sun Oct 14, 2007 8:31 pm

Well --- well --- the photo of the JEEP :oops:

, I believe the vehicle in the photo is in the very sensitive area known as the Waipara Gorge , one of the areas that we are being told to keep away from, and one of the areas that ORE "rogues" use to bring all 4WDers with the exception of "responsible 4WD users such as the Canterbury Combined 4WD Club" into disrepute.

I wounder If the member who got on to the subject of giving 4WDing a bad name over the publishing of a photo of my vehicle doing a burnout going up Worsley Track has anything to say on this photo.

:wink:

FITZY.

Steve_t647 · Post by **Steve_t647** » Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:43 pm

Lethfield is correct he does work for ECAN and has been or is working hard to bring a balance to the proposal, I think that must have been a typo.

Following is a link to ECAN and their staff list you will see his name (Rob Gerard) on the 5th line I think.

http://www.ecan.govt.nz/NR/rdonlyres/2D ... region.pdf

You are right tho there are two shareholders but for their privacy wont publish

I recommend you request the following

Leithfield wrote:Dear Sir,

Request for release under the Official Information Act 1982 & the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987

Under provision of the above Acts, I am writing to request that the Hurunui District Council release to myself all records in respect of the submission made by the Waipara River Protection Group and subsequent Council proceedings.

Yours faithfully,
(name)

smurf182 · Post by **smurf182** » Sun Oct 14, 2007 10:02 pm

I'm not certain if this has already received the attention of the forum however with respect to Mark's post on page 4 of this thread:

[June 2007: Note for visitors from Offroad Express. I see you're as happy to ignore the copyright laws (by reposting this piece without permission) as you are to rip up the riverbed.]

(My rights are better than your rights, http://www.limestonehills.co.nz/Down%20On%20The%20Farm/Topics/Soapbox.html)

If the reproduction of Gareth Renowden's blog entry is contrary to copyright law then it should be removed.

tallsam66 · Post by **tallsam66** » Sun Oct 14, 2007 10:29 pm

Leithfield wrote:I suggest you re-examine Pg5 Tallsam66, and refer the referenced appendice (1).

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

I have looked at Pg18 (Pg5) & it does state as i have written..but im guessing its a mistake in the document.So i have amended my previous post to correct this error.

Leithfield · Post by **Leithfield** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:21 am

Steve_t647 wrote: ... I think that must have been a typo.

Less a typo than poor gramatical construction; on Pg5 of my copy of the Waipara River Protection Group Submission to the HDC, the context is a meeting referenced in Appendice 1, and the sentence should have been structured thus:
"Rob Gerard, and Richard Goord of Claremont, were to ..."
The absence of a comma after Gerard presents latter noun association confusion.

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

BrentC · Post by **BrentC** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:48 am

Worth re-posting

BrentC wrote:
My rights are better than your rights

A river runs through our farm: in fact it is half of our boundary line. In some places, our boundary is in the middle of the river, in others there's some Crown (government) land, and in still others it's not entirely clear who owns what. The Waipara River defines our property.

Not sure what this gentleman has been told - but he really needs to check his boundary pegs, because only one of them gets close to the centre of the river. His land is very clearly defined in the latest data.

Post by **mike** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:51 am

smurf182 wrote:I'm not certain if this has already received the attention of the forum however with respect to Mark's post on page 4 of this thread:

[June 2007: Note for visitors from Offroad Express. I see you're as happy to ignore the copyright laws (by reposting this piece without permission) as you are to rip up the riverbed.]

(My rights are better than your rights, http://www.limestonehills.co.nz/Down%20On%20The%20Farm/Topics/Soapbox.html)

If the reproduction of Gareth Renowden's blog entry is contrary to copyright law then it should be removed.

Seems the copyright was just added. And as for his statement about ripping river beds up well id rather be "labeled" as a hoon ripping up rivers and land than a potentially childish irate land owner throwing tantrums and assaulting people in front of their kids. Which land owner did this I have no idea but I'll just lump them all into one basket and assume they are all the same as they do with us!

Mike

albundy · Post by **albundy** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 12:07 pm

Hey Mike,
you need to get a copy of the stuff and have a read. These guys really hate our guts, and I expect that others with agendas against us have add some more to his hate for us. Personally, I just don't go there anymore. I am sick of having him rave his bullshit from his clifftop. I just want to walk away from it all, but then that just gives him what he wants on a plate. How long has he owned the property, as I don't remember any problems until he came on the scene.
Al

billyvanboheman · Post by **billyvanboheman** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 12:13 pm

[June 2007: Note for visitors from Offroad Express. I see you're as happy to ignore the copyright laws (by reposting this piece without permission) as you are to rip up the riverbed.]

(My rights are better than your rights, http://www.limestonehills.co.nz/Down%20On%20The%20Farm/Topics/Soapbox.html)

If the reproduction of Gareth Renowden's blog entry is contrary to copyright law then it should be removed.

Seems the copyright was just added. And as for his statement about ripping river beds up well id rather be "labeled" as a hoon ripping up rivers and land than a potentially childish irate land owner throwing tantrums and assaulting people in front of their kids. Which land owner did this I have no idea but I'll just lump them all into one basket and assume they are all the same as they do with us!

Mike

I note with interest that there is a link included in the above mentioned blog titled "a page of its own" which in an exert from a web site that is run by a friend of mine, I wonder if he is aware his site is being used in this blog :?:

I think I may just bring this to his attention.

Gareth · Post by **Gareth** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:38 pm

OK, I've registered here to - with luck - clear up a few misunderstandings.

My blog post on 4WDs in the river was made in March 2005, and like every other item on my blog is copyright - there's a copyright note at the bottom of every page. I haven't complained to your site admin about it because I'm happy for members of this forum to read my views. It would have been nice to be asked, though... ;-)

My statement in that post about my boundaries is entirely accurate, and I have to say that I find it rather amusing that someone in the North Island thinks I need to check my boundary pegs. Where old riverside titles have not been resurveyed, their mapped boundary is taken to be the river bank, but that does not affect AMF rights if they exist. (Canterbury rivers move about in their beds, so as an administrative shortcut, surveyors (and ECAN) use the banks, which move much less.) On old titles - like the one on the left of my block - AMF rights exist. In other words, my effective boundary is the middle of the flowing water in the river. There's also Crown land (the cliff face below my house) and resurveyed land (on the right). Look at BrentC's map: on the far left, there's a white block: its boundary is well back from the river bank because when it was surveyed 11 years ago, an esplanade strip was created. See the difference?

This sort of complex situation is repeated all the way down the Waipara. There's Crown land, HDC and ECAN reserves, Ngai Tahu interests, landowners with AMF rights, esplanade strips with Hurunui Council rules that forbid vehicle use, shooting, dogs etc. There is no simple "right of access" anywhere - certainly no continuous strip from sea to gorge.

In over ten years here, I have only once shouted at anyone from my clifftop - and they were driving a farm bike over my land (well away from the riverbank). I do, however, allow two school groups to cross my land on their annual field trips to the gorge, and I never refuse access to any walkers/fishermen who want to cross my land to get to the river - in fact I encourage it. The gorge is a beautiful place, and I want people to enjoy it.

This issue is not about access, it's about responsible use. Some 4WD owners are treating the river as a trials ground - attempting to drive through the gorge, leaving skid marks up the limestone, trashing a picnic spot, mud-plugging in swimming holes, damaging river banks or driving through sensitive wildlife areas. Others are shooting in places where it is simply not legal to do so, still others leave litter, light fires during fire bans, and so on.

I'm sure that most of the posters here are responsible and don't wish to cause anyone problems - or damage beauty spots. But there are some people who do just that - and unfortunately it is the landowners on the river who have to put up with the results. We can't drive home at the end of the day. We live here, and we have to pick up the pieces.

Finally, for those who characterise the Waipara River Protection Group as "vigilantes" (which I consider insulting, by the way), I will post here our vision:
To protect, conserve and enhance the Waipara riverbed, its ecology and biodiversity.
The group intends to develop strategies to promote the following:
Proper recreational use
Didymo prevention
Weed control
Pest control
Planting of native species (Greening Waipara)
Co-ordination with the Waipara river users group
Liaison with Hurunui District Council, ECAN and DOC
Public education (Public Notices, press releases, signs etc.)

If that means controls on 4WD access to all or parts of the river, then so be it. But if anyone here would like to park and walk up from my property, you only have to ask.

Regards

Gareth Renowden

billyvanboheman · Post by **billyvanboheman** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:51 pm

Gareth wrote:OK, I've registered here to - with luck - clear up a few misunderstandings.

My blog post on 4WDs in the river was made in March 2005, and like every other item on my blog is copyright - there's a copyright note at the bottom of every page. I haven't complained to your site admin about it because I'm happy for members of this forum to read my views. It would have been nice to be asked, though...

My statement in that post about my boundaries is entirely accurate, and I have to say that I find it rather amusing that someone in the North Island thinks I need to check my boundary pegs. Where old riverside titles have not been resurveyed, their mapped boundary is taken to be the river bank, but that does not affect AMF rights if they exist. (Canterbury rivers move about in their beds, so as an administrative shortcut, surveyors (and ECAN) use the banks, which move much less.) On old titles - like the one on the left of my block - AMF rights exist. In other words, my effective boundary is the middle of the flowing water in the river. There's also Crown land (the cliff face below my house) and resurveyed land (on the right). Look at BrentC's map: on the far left, there's a white block: its boundary is well back from the river bank because when it was surveyed 11 years ago, an esplanade strip was created. See the difference?

This sort of complex situation is repeated all the way down the Waipara. There's Crown land, HDC and ECAN reserves, Ngai Tahu interests, landowners with AMF rights, esplanade strips with Hurunui Council rules that forbid vehicle use, shooting, dogs etc. There is no simple "right of access" anywhere - certainly no continuous strip from sea to gorge.

In over ten years here, I have only once shouted at anyone from my clifftop - and they were driving a farm bike over my land (well away from the riverbank). I do, however, allow two school groups to cross my land on their annual field trips to the gorge, and I never refuse access to any walkers/fishermen who want to cross my land to get to the river - in fact I encourage it. The gorge is a beautiful place, and I want people to enjoy it.

This issue is not about access, it's about responsible use. Some 4WD owners are treating the river as a trials ground - attempting to drive through the gorge, leaving skid marks up the limestone, trashing a picnic spot, mud-plugging in swimming holes, damaging river banks or driving through sensitive wildlife areas. Others are shooting in places where it is simply not legal to do so, still others leave litter, light fires during fire bans, and so on.

I'm sure that most of the posters here are responsible and don't wish to cause anyone problems - or damage beauty spots. But there are some people who do just that - and unfortunately it is the landowners on the river who have to put up with the results. We can't drive home at the end of the day. We live here, and we have to pick up the pieces.

Finally, for those who characterise the Waipara River Protection Group as "vigilantes" (which I consider insulting, by the way), I will post here our vision:
To protect, conserve and enhance the Waipara riverbed, its ecology and biodiversity.
The group intends to develop strategies to promote the following:
Proper recreational use
Didymo prevention
Weed control
Pest control
Planting of native species (Greening Waipara)
Co-ordination with the Waipara river users group
Liaison with Hurunui District Council, ECAN and DOC
Public education (Public Notices, press releases, signs etc.)

If that means controls on 4WD access to all or parts of the river, then so be it. But if anyone here would like to park and walk up from my property, you only have to ask.

Regards

Gareth Renowden

It's always good to see both sides of the story :!:

tallsam66 · Post by **tallsam66** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 8:14 pm

Welcome Gareth

It awesome to have you here & here what you have to say first hand.
Often things get misunderstood when heard 2nd 3rd hand etc.

kiwipete · Post by **kiwipete** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 9:49 pm

Im biting my tounge here, im seeing red.
I will hold off responding to this for now, at least until I have re-read the transcripts i have.

Leithfield · Post by **Leithfield** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 10:53 pm

Gareth wrote:OK, I've registered here to - with luck - clear up a few misunderstandings.

Thank you for taking the truffle to respond Gareth. As you have pledged committment to "clear up a few misunderstandings", perhaps you would be so kind as to address the foundation behind the Waipara River Protection Group's assertions under items 3 and 4 of Conclusions and Possible Solutions:

(3) " ... Whilst it should be possible for the group to reach an accomodation for regulated use of the riverbed with the Combined 4WD Club (who acknowledge the need for responsibility and a code of conduct) there are other groups such as Off Road Express where this is likley to prove impossible. ... "

(4) " ... Indeed, it is arguable that control can only realisitically be accomplished on official 4WD club outings under the leadership and supervision of a responsible group leader. This is demonstrated through the extensive correspondence with the non-affiliated "rogue club" known as Off Road Express whom Combined have disowned. ..."

Perhaps the celebrated recipient of the Special Jury Award (2007 Gourmand World Cookbook Awards) and the author of 'Hot Topic' is unaware that the ORE National 4x4 Assoc Inc. is a fully affiliated member club of the New Zealand Four Wheel Drive Association, bound by their constitution and 'tread lightly' code of conduct.

As for Combined disowning this purported "rogue club", I again suggest you confirm the veracity of your source; the common purpose shared by the ORE National 4x4 Assoc Inc and the Combined 4wd Clubs will always unite us more than differences divide.

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

kiwipete · Post by **kiwipete** » Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:03 pm

Cant hold off sorry.................... Tried to type as arruratley as I can here.

Quote; It is evident that "Combined" are unable to effectively influence or control the, so called, "cowboys" who cause most of the problems. Indeed, it is arguable that control can only realistically be accomplished on official 4WD club outings under the leadership and supervision of a responsible group leader. This is demonstrated through the extensive documented correspondence with the non-affiliated "rogue club" known as Off Road Express whom Combined has disowned; un quote.

What a load of bollocks, where do these so called facts come from Mr Gareth Sir?

How dare your Waipara River Protection Group insult my/our club! You dont even know us! To suggest we are all cowboys!

And I aint finished yet. There is more to come!

edit; Bugger, beaten to the post! My thoughts still stand.

BrentC · Post by **BrentC** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 7:25 am

Gareth wrote:
My statement in that post about my boundaries is entirely accurate, and I have to say that I find it rather amusing that someone in the North Island thinks I need to check my boundary pegs. Where old riverside titles have not been resurveyed, their mapped boundary is taken to be the river bank, but that does not affect AMF rights if they exist. (Canterbury rivers move about in their beds, so as an administrative shortcut, surveyors (and ECAN) use the banks, which move much less.) On old titles - like the one on the left of my block - AMF rights exist. In other words, my effective boundary is the middle of the flowing water in the river. There's also Crown land (the cliff face below my house) and resurveyed land (on the right). Look at BrentC's map: on the far left, there's a white block: its boundary is well back from the river bank because when it was surveyed 11 years ago, an esplanade strip was created. See the difference?

Sure, I can see that all Land Owners would like to assert some form of AMF rights. However, it is in ever citizens best interest to vigorously contest those spurious rights.

In this case there is also a legal road reserve which is covered by the local government act ie every citizen has a free and unencumbered right to traverse that road by any means they want to.

I will watch with interest - just sorry I don't own any land in that district anymore

SupraLux · Post by **SupraLux** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 9:03 am

BrentC wrote:I will watch with interest - just sorry I don't own any land in that district anymore

I too, as an ex-local who is looking to return to the district, will look on with interest - and I will add my 2c where I feel it is necessary, for my own satisfaction that I have done what I can to bring this absolute shambles to a peaceful and gratifying conclusion for all.

Gareth, first of all thank you for joining, and for posting your side of the issue. Unfortunately for you a number of members here, myself included, have taken possession of documentation containing emails and other correspondence which shows us in a very poor light, when as you yourself pointed out it is the minority of 4WDers who are responsible for any damage. I would expect you may take a little heat initially but I would like to think that now you have taken steps to open the lines of communication that we can work together towards a common goal.

I would like to state for the record that Off-Road Express is not a club, it is simply an online forum where 4WDers chat and discuss topics of mutual interest, and occasionally organise trips together. There is the ORE National 4x4 Association, but they are a separate entity and should be treated as such. Most association members do spend time in these forums however. Regardless, I think you will find the vast majority of people here, club members or not, would be appalled to think that anyone in a 4WD or other form of offroad recreational vehicle was causing harm or public nuisance. Anywhere, let alone the Waipara. Period.

I myself, as a recently moved ex-local who's property backed onto Leithfield Beach, fully understand the implications of damage to the local ecosystems - and on more than one occasion I have given people some information to allow them to make an informed decision about their choice of tracks on the beach (sometimes friendly, sometimes heated - not everyone agreed). And I would be the first person to get out and berate someone wilfully and unnecessarily damaging an area in or adjacent to the Waipara river - an area that I have spent many enjoyable days exploring, picnicing with my family, driving, and yes, testing my vehicle in certain places. I would like to point out that any damage I have caused to the riverbed will be long gone in the raised river levels of the last week or so - in fact there is nothing I could do to the riverbed that mother nature couldn't fix, or make a bigger mess of, in about 2 minutes of flood.

As for damage to your property, I would hate to think that anyone here was responsible. I was brought up to respect other property and years of scouting taught me, if nothing else, to leave things as best I can how I found them.

Ok, so we have differences but I believe you will find most of us would like a mutual resolution - where do we go from here? A sit down over some quiet beers for a chat and see where that goes? A public meeting? (I doubt that will get us ahead at all). More online correspondence? I'd appreciate your thoughts.

Steve

Gareth · Post by **Gareth** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 9:07 am

Thanks for the responses. I really don't want to get involved in the politics of relationships between 4wd clubs. What was in the submission was what we believed to be the case, based on conversations with people involved and reading this site. If we were wrong in that, I'm happy to apologise.

As I said in my first post, I'm sure most ORE members & posters in this forum want to be responsible users of the river - but there are some drivers who are ignoring any semblance of a "tread lightly" code. Indeed, there are (or were) pictures & video clips hosted on this site which show people behaving irresponsibly in the Waipara (driving through the lagoon, bouncing vehicles up river banks, driving up the rocks next to the gorge), so perhaps I can be forgiven for assuming that the people in those pictures are ORE members - they're obviously not.

The central point has nothing to do with which club anyone belongs to, but rather with the overuse, and misuse, of the riverbed. That is the problem we want to address, and that is what the Hurunui council has said it will act on. The eventual solution will be informed by consultation with everybody who has an interest in the recreational use of the riverbed - which will include 4WD groups and individuals. I'm sure we'll be able to get a result that enhances the Waipara as a recreational resource and conserves its special features for everyone - though that will probably mean restrictions on 4WD use in sensitive areas, and (I hope) a ban on use of firearms or lighting of fires in the riverbed.

Kevin: PR officers generally get the best results by not being rude. Perhaps I could offer you a discount on some of my books?

BrentC: You may not like AMF rights, but they are an established part of NZ property law, and exist on many parts of the Waipara. The paper road on your map is on the clifftop above the river, not in the river bed, and doesn't run down the whole length of the river in any case.

As I said, I'm sorry if a few phrases in our submission ruffled some feathers here. That wasn't our intention. There's a great deal more in our submission than those few paragraphs. I'm sure, for instance, that you will all be happy to endorse our vision for the future of the Waipara River as an important recreational resource for the entire community.

Regards

Gareth

Steve_t647 · Post by **Steve_t647** » Tue Oct 16, 2007 9:08 am

Apologies can come later and name calling etc (both sides) will not resolve the access issue but will get rid of some of our frustration's from the process up to now so for now on topic please, and we may produce a satisfactory soloution for all.

Access to all of the waipra all year round is not what we are after, if there is an area that is marked for 4wd use (reasonably sized) this would suit individual's 4wd requirements and our training days, but not club group requirements.

If we (Canterbury 4wd Clubs/groups) were able to get say one organised club trip each up through to the gorge a year (aranged through the river protection group) that would be really nice, it is a great area and we do not wish to ruin the area for anyone, drive up in a group have a Picnic Swim look around take Photo's and drive back with all our rubbish like we do, and sometimes more rubbish than we started with, even on occasion getting a burnt out car to a point a tow truck can get it.

The Ashley is managed to allow bird nesting (a large keep out area setup over a few months) I am sure we can do the same for fish spawning, but the individual 4wd area would want to be in an area where the fish do not spawn so the locals can still use it. (ECAN actualy built a 4wd track around this area for us to use this year)

Introducing restrictions and penalties to the whole river does not work, look at the boy racer scene. In Auckland the council gave them a place to go (Industrial area) this reduced 95% of their problem you cant stop everyone there are Idiots in every sport but we travel out of CHCH to go to such a special area.

Edited for Spelling