Nth. Canterbury Waipara Gorge Access Update

[Steve_t647]

Also to note anyone who is not a member of a club is not by default a member of ORE, ORE was formed because people didn't want to have to join a club that was about X type vehicle, or a older age group or a particular style of tracks, and as such has formed one of the largest and most diverse group of people on trips, knowledge of vehicles, Local knowledge of areas and it is great site.

We cant control every single person not on an ORE organised trip but if we do find one of our members doing something silly we do name and shame them in public as has been done before and will be done in the future, if on an ORE organised trip we do control them group pressure is a good thing, this usualy corrects their behaviour or they leave, but soon return having learned their lesson. This issue happens in every club, I have seen a club member of combined drive too fast, get damage and blame it on a rock that has been there exposed like that for 8 years, then once the damage was fixed winch the rock out of the track leaving a hole, he was even the trip leader!

I have also seen farmers driving bulldozers and tractors through rivers (I had to pull a tractor out once stuck in Pea Shingle! It was a close thing but between spade work and a winch we managed to get the tractor to better ground but boy did that leave a mess, better than the hundreds of litres of diesel and other oils left in the river.

Finaly Locals tend to do the most damage as they are usualy in smaller groups, anonymous and have a this is my back yard attitude, this is where a club trip going past such a group would and does take photo's of people and plates to pass this info on.

[4wdnuts]

its good to see someone taking a pro-active approach to this. :cheers: yes both sides think they are in the right but surely if we sit down and nut it out we must be able to come up with something?

[Gareth]

Thanks to both Steves for their comments - and I look forward to ensuring that there is a healthy debate on this issue.

Finaly Locals tend to do the most damage as they are usualy in smaller groups, anonymous and have a this is my back yard attitude, this is where a club trip going past such a group would and does take photo's of people and plates to pass this info on.

I'm sure this is part of the problem - and makes education of all river users a part of any solution.

Regards

[Gareth]

its good to see someone taking a pro-active approach to this. :cheers: yes both sides think they are in the right but surely if we sit down and nut it out we must be able to come up with something?

Well, that's what we want to do - but there are more than two sides. There are landowner interests, conservation interests, fishing and walking interests, council, ECAN, DOC and LINZ interests. It's complicated, and it's not just about 4WD - even though they are widely perceived as part of the problem. As I said, complex - but at least now we're all talking about the issue!

Regards

Gareth

[Mark]

Can someone please define what AMF rights are... ad medium filum doesn't really mean a whole lot to me

[Gareth]

Definition (second one down). NZ law is based on British common law, and AMF rights, though sometimes contentious, do exist here - and do not have to be "asserted".

Regards

Gareth

[SupraLux]

And this bit sounds like many of us here should join your group - I'm sure you'll find we also agree with your vision.

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.)

The proper recreational use line is a little open, of course, and my vision of that use is possibly a little different to yours

Can I just say that I would be happy to (and as the other Steve has pointed out, often happens) do a rubbish collection and river clean-up trip if and when required (assuming I can get a vehicle running long enough ) - this is one way that the motorised users of the river can effectively 'give back' to the area for what it provides us with.

The gorge itself, which is the true topic of this thread (although I believe the thread has taken on a life of its own, covering access to all areas of the river) will be an area of interest, and is actually a part of the river I have not gone into for a very long time, and never in a 4WD. I would hate to think I don't get a chance to at some point.

Steve

[BrentC]

Definition (second one down). NZ law is based on British common law, and AMF rights, though sometimes contentious, do exist here - and do not have to be "asserted".

Regards

Gareth

Yep - which is why they should be vigorously resisted by everyone - including against those big run holders in the Wairarapa who believe they have a blue water title.

Fortunately - in this case - I don't believe that any AMF right exists because title details and boundary definition is based on cliff tops not river centre line as a Riparian land/margin (Land alongside rivers or lakes) is clearly defined on the ECAN website

http://www.ecan.govt.nz/ECanMapping/viewer.htm

[Leithfield]

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

Any perceived offence is imagined Gareth, my umbridge was with the Waipara River Protection Group's misrepresentation as regards the ORE National 4x4 Assoc Inc., for as a learned man and accomplished author you must surely recognise the importance of separating fact from fiction and confirming the veracity of source.

As for the kind offer of discount on your publications, thank you; those I presently own are rather a good read.

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

[kiwipete]

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.

For me personaly, as both a registerd member the ORE website and a financial member the ORE Association, I find your apology too little and too late as the emails and comments in the submissions have severley tarnished our good name in more ways than one. If you must suggest something about ORE in a negative light, please make dam sure you are portraying truthful fact, not hearsay from a 2nd or 3rd party!
Do those whom you have written to in the past know of your so called apology re these errors? I think not, and as such they will still hold it against us as being a "rouge club"

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 hope you stick to this statement and not hold any more secret closed meetings. Thats how I have read it in the reports.

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.

Including those who operate their own private touring operations? Be the area closed off because of this so called AMF thing or some other ecological enviromentaly sensitave such thing, if its good to exclude one, then it should be good enough to exclude all surely.

As I said, I'm sorry if a few phrases in our submission ruffled some feathers here. That wasn't our intention.

Um not so sure here......... I still smell a rat.

I am not an educated person with regards to the typing skills as is presented by some of the above author(s), and am trying my hardest to keep a cool head, but you have more than ruffled a few feathers with me..............

[Gareth]

For me personaly, as both a registerd member the ORE website and a financial member the ORE Association, I find your apology too little and too late...

It's all you're getting, sorry. (Damn - another apology )

I hope you stick to this statement and not hold any more secret closed meetings. Thats how I have read it in the reports.

We've never held any secret closed meetings. We held a meeting of landowners with river boundaries on all parts of the river (from lagoon to upper Waipara) to seek their views. The minutes of that meeting were attached to the submission, so those who have a copy can see what was said and discussed.

Including those who operate their own private touring operations? Be the area closed off because of this so called AMF thing or some other ecological enviromentaly sensitave such thing, if its good to exclude one, then it should be good enough to exclude all surely.

What landowners get up to on their own property is entirely up to them, provided they observe all applicable laws. Nothing we're proposing would affect that.

Um not so sure here......... I still smell a rat.

You may need a good pest controller. I can recommend a few...

I have been impressed with reasonableness of most responses on here, and I prefer to take those as representative.

Regards

Gareth

[Gareth]

Fortunately - in this case - I don't believe that any AMF right exists because title details and boundary definition is based on cliff tops not river centre line as a Riparian land/margin (Land alongside rivers or lakes) is clearly defined on the ECAN website

http://www.ecan.govt.nz/ECanMapping/viewer.htm

You are wrong. As I said, ECAN's maps use river banks (or cliff tops) as a convenience, and what an ECAN map shows says nothing about any AMF right that may be associated with a title. That's a fact.

[Edited to add:]And their overlays aren't always accurate either. In places the river performs some remarkable gravity defying feats.

In any event, the exact status of any individual title is not relevant to the overall picture - ownership of the riverbed is complex, and there is no simple "right of access" to the whole river.

Regards

Gareth

[BrentC]

Fortunately - in this case - I don't believe that any AMF right exists because title details and boundary definition is based on cliff tops not river centre line as a Riparian land/margin (Land alongside rivers or lakes) is clearly defined on the ECAN website

http://www.ecan.govt.nz/ECanMapping/viewer.htm

You are wrong. As I said, ECAN's maps use river banks (or cliff tops) as a convenience, and what an ECAN map shows says nothing about any AMF right that may be associated with a title. That's a fact.

In any event, the exact status of any individual title is not relevant to the overall picture - ownership of the riverbed is complex, and there is no simple "right of access" to the whole river.

Regards

Gareth

[kiwipete]

For me personaly, as both a registerd member the ORE website and a financial member the ORE Association, I find your apology too little and too late...

It's all you're getting, sorry. (Damn - another apology )

This is exactly what upsets me so much with you and your river protection group.
You think you can just say what you like about another group (ORE), publicly, and then offer a measly "sorry".
It still does not go anywhere to undo the dammage you and your so called group has done in tarnishing us here does it!

And then in the next breath you expect us all to sit together and amacably (sp?) discuss the issues! Get real Mr!

[Steve_t647]

I am a member of 3 different clubs and I did not go on a trip up the Waipra into the gorge aranged by one of the Combined clubs due to the fact we were asked not to here.

I also advised the trip leader that there was issues with access in the area and they went anyway because of the theroy they have access to the river and ECAN mark your boundrys.

We as a group have stayed away a lot of us have never been there. I was in a school trip on my first trip and have not been back since.
would we like to go? Yes
given the opportunity to go would we? Yes
Have we gone just for the hell of it? NO

Edit: due to remove off topic content

[kiwipete]

I also note in the documents (P109) "photographs and information downloaded from the website of Off Road Express."

What photos and information is being referred to here?

There is other mention of photos but these were not included in the documentation, bottom of page 111.

I still cant get my head around the feeling that some parties seem to want public vehicles banned so they can continue with their private vehicle enterprise(s), be it on public or suposedly private land. If there is to be a vehicle restriction to certain areas, then restrict all vehicles. Im sorry, but you cannot have your cake and eat it too. ref P114

P124, I would love to see real documentation, maps or otherwise, that legaly and lawfuly show exactly where these "AMF" rights lie, if indeed they exist at all. It is said in the documentation that "believe that they have land titles that enjoy AMF rights and that they have effective effective control of their part of the riverbed to the centerline".

Can it be said that I for one do not believe this (AMF rites) to be the case? I will of course stand corrected too.
And just because I do not believe, does not mean that I wish to tread in these said "environmentaly sensitave areas". I appreciate I may have done wrong in the past, but I have been "educated" too!

[Gareth]

Let me ask a question: do you think this is acceptable behaviour?



I think it is wholly inappropriate to treat a beauty spot in this way.

The picture is hosted at this site, and is available for anyone with a web browser to see. And there are others.



This one shows someone's vehicle parked up on the rocks on the right hand side of the gorge. The rubber marks left by that vehicle are still there. Those pics are marked "Waipara Social Trip". Is that considered acceptable behaviour by ORE or posters here?

The fact that these pictures are posted here suggests that this site and its membership condones these actions. If you're worried about your public image, consider what these pictures demonstrate.

Steve_t: you made some sensible suggestions in an earlier post - ones I think have some real merit, but if this debate's going to get hung up on who's apologising to whom, then I'm out of here.

Regards

Gareth

[hosehustler]

I have been impressed with reasonableness of most responses on here, and I prefer to take those as representative.

Gareth

Most of us are reading......and fuming......

Never shouted abuse from clifftops......Bah I must have been dreaming
(pehaps too much of the liquid amber could be blamed)

P.S I still think you have a nice dog

[BrentC]

[rangimotors]

Without thrying to make this worse as i am only trying to understand your point of view as much as possible, could you please explain what is wrong with the first picture, im not sure that its doing any more damage than would be done if it rained.. ?? Infact i have seen pictures of "responsible" clubs doing the same thing not to mention tour groups etc that are all acceptable?
Rather than arguing about our different ideas can we try and explain and maybe understand them.
cheers.

Note. I make my comments being a newer guy to the sport, still learning and unaware of the rules and regulations of certain areas, so only way to learn it to ask.
Although i am well aware of the tread lightly code of conduct and follow it like many do.

[hosehustler]

Let me ask a question: do you think this is acceptable behaviour?



I think it is wholly inappropriate to treat a beauty spot in this way.

The picture is hosted at this site, and is available for anyone with a web browser to see. And there are others.



This one shows someone's vehicle parked up on the rocks on the right hand side of the gorge. The rubber marks left by that vehicle are still there. Those pics are marked "Waipara Social Trip". Is that considered acceptable behaviour by ORE or posters here?

The fact that these pictures are posted here suggests that this site and its membership condones these actions. If you're worried about your public image, consider what these pictures demonstrate.

Steve_t: you made some sensible suggestions in an earlier post - ones I think have some real merit, but if this debate's going to get hung up on who's apologising to whom, then I'm out of here.

Regards

Gareth

Actually Gareth the top pic is of Blair Kelly, it was taken on a "Canterbury landrover owners club trip to the gorge in 2005 of which I was a member at the time and was an attendee on that trip.
They are all members of the coverted "combined clubs"
We see your game and are not impressed

P.S That pic was on the front page of the CLROC monthly publication back then hmmm I wonder where it was sourced from and placed on this site....... :salut:
I think I may have a copy of that mag, I'll hunt it out hopefully I will find it

Why don't you go take your lies, accusations and smear campaign to some other site thats full of muppets and leave ORE alone

[Leithfield]

What landowners get up to on their own property is entirely up to them, provided they observe all applicable laws. Nothing we're proposing would affect that.

And it is exactly such inequitous entitlement which nurtures resentment Gareth; how can the Waipara River Protection Group posit:
(Didymo) "It is apparent that every river infection had probably been caused by vehicles at entry points"

(Fishing) "Driving in shallow gravels is to be avoided in May/June/June & July to protect spawnng fish and fish eggs."
and in good concience exclude their own vehicles from sharing in such precaution


Now, in general plea to all forum users, please do not confuse Gareth with other landowners who neighbour the Waipara River. He is no more responsible for the anti-social behaviour of a minority than are we.

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

[coxsy]

it is a open forum ore does not control who places what in their albums

[H2OLOVA]

Now, in general plea to all forum users, please do not confuse Gareth with other landowners who neighbour the Waipara River. He is no more responsible for the anti-social behaviour of a minority than are we.

Totally agree there, I know this is a hot issue, but i applaud Gareth for at least having the balls to come into this forum and give us some form of balance.

It would be good to stay on the issue of access and protection here, rather than fanning the flames and trying to get apologies for something that cannot be changed. Lets make sure that our posts focus on the issues and not on the person.

[Gareth]

Without thrying to make this worse as i am only trying to understand your point of view as much as possible, could you please explain what is wrong with the first picture, im not sure that its doing any more damage than would be done if it rained.. ?? Infact i have seen pictures of "responsible" clubs doing the same thing not to mention tour groups etc that are all acceptable?

OK rangimotors, I'll have a go.

There are two main points. The first is that the Waipara River is prone to long periods with low flow - summer or winter. The sort of fresh required to remove vehicle tracks is relatively uncommon. The current flow is (as I write) about 1 cumec, down from a peak of 1.5 or so over the weekend. If you look back over the last six months, you'll find that's the highest it's been. It has cleaned up only the main stream - there are still vehicle tracks up the river bed, up banks etc. To get a really good clean up, you need a flow of about 20-30 cumecs, which is about enough to open up the river mouth. (The highest I've seen was well over 300 cumecs, but that was probably a 1 in 100 year event). So - the driver who went through the gorge did it at low flow (sensibly, from his perspective), but his tyre marks and track would almost certainly have remained behind for weeks, possibly months. Every subsequent visitor to the gorge (prior to a good fresh) would have seen evidence of his activity. The Waipara is different to, say, the Ashley (which always has more water in it) or the Waimak, which gets a fresh every time a good front hits the West Coast. 4WD drivers need to bear that in mind when they drive the river.

The second point is more to do with what I would call "acceptable use". Using your vehicle to get somewhere - to see the gorge, have a picnic and a swim - is one thing, but to drive through the gorge is just unecessary. He didn't have to do it. He wasn't treading lightly. Same goes for the bloke who parked his vehicle up on the rocks. He didn't need to do it, and his tyre tracks are still there to remind us of his visit . When my family and I walk up to the gorge, we look forward to a swim there. By the look of the water in the picture, a swim wouldn't have been pleasant that day...

Now, I have to say that from my perspective it doesn't matter whether that was an ORE member or a LandRover member or whatever. Both pictures are evidence that some people treat the gorge badly, and I found them on this site. It's the sort of thing that winds non-4WD people up.

Hope that helps,


Cheers

[rangimotors]

ok cool thanks for the comments, so am i right in thinking at you don't have any issues with people driving in to go fishing, for a swim or a family picnic etc assuming they only drive where they have to and tread lightly?
Speaking only for myself but i wouldn't have an issue if they were your requirements..

[Smurf]

There are two main points. The first is that the Waipara River is prone to long periods with low flow - summer or winter. The sort of fresh required to remove vehicle tracks is relatively uncommon. The current flow is (as I write) about 1 cumec, down from a peak of 1.5 or so over the weekend. If you look back over the last six months, you'll find that's the highest it's been. It has cleaned up only the main stream - there are still vehicle tracks up the river bed, up banks etc. To get a really good clean up, you need a flow of about 20-30 cumecs, which is about enough to open up the river mouth. (The highest I've seen was well over 300 cumecs, but that was probably a 1 in 100 year event). So - the driver who went through the gorge did it at low flow (sensibly, from his perspective), but his tyre marks and track would almost certainly have remained behind for weeks, possibly months. Every subsequent visitor to the gorge (prior to a good fresh) would have seen evidence of his activity. The Waipara is different to, say, the Ashley (which always has more water in it) or the Waimak, which gets a fresh every time a good front hits the West Coast. 4WD drivers need to bear that in mind when they drive the river.

The second point is more to do with what I would call "acceptable use". Using your vehicle to get somewhere - to see the gorge, have a picnic and a swim - is one thing, but to drive through the gorge is just unecessary. He didn't have to do it. He wasn't treading lightly. Same goes for the bloke who parked his vehicle up on the rocks. He didn't need to do it, and his tyre tracks are still there to remind us of his visit . When my family and I walk up to the gorge, we look forward to a swim there. By the look of the water in the picture, a swim wouldn't have been pleasant that day...

Now, I have to say that from my perspective it doesn't matter whether that was an ORE member or a LandRover member or whatever. Both pictures are evidence that some people treat the gorge badly, and I found them on this site. It's the sort of thing that winds non-4WD people up.

Hope that helps,


Cheers

So why the heck didn't you just come on here and make this statement in the first place instead of getting on your 'soapbox' as you put it??? An amicable comment and discussion in the first instance would have had a much quicker and friendlier result than the path that was taken.

[Gareth]

Leithfield and H2OLOVA,

Thanks for your comments.

Didymo is a real concern (the low flow issue I mention above is one very good reason why - the Waipara in summer could be horrible if didymo became established) - but the risk comes from vehicles that are driving in different waterways, not from one vehicle that only sees the Waipara.

Any restrictions on 4WD access in the river will of course have to observed by everyone, but you can't legislate to stop someone driving over their own land. There would be (rightly) a huge uproar if we tried to suggest any such thing.

Cheers

[Goose]

Yes, I can see your point. The vehicle would turn up a fair bit of silt and debris that will affect swimmers downstream. Speaking for myself, I would not take that kind of action if there were swimmers anywhere near me!

I have to agree with H2O's sentiments. Gareth is giving, in my opinion (and regardless of previous comments in other publications) his account of what he see's as a problem. I think if we give him a "fair hearing", we will all have a better understanding of what his issues are, and Gareth an understanding of ours. And hopefully a happy outcome for those involved.

One of the posters on this thread has told me of a personal experience driving up the waipara, of being abused in front of his kids. This is unacceptable in my opinion. That said, some of the behaviours Gareth has mentioned (by recreational vehicle users) are also unacceptable. There's a lot of emotion on both sides of the story. I would like to see more dialog before it turns into a slanging match.

The worst that can happen from this kind of dialog is the staus quo. What have we got to loose? And what could we have to gain?

[spankmeister]

When my family and I walk up to the gorge, we look forward to a swim there. By the look of the water in the picture, a swim wouldn't have been pleasant that day...

Gareth, surely you're not suggesting that the vehicle was the cause of the river being murky/brown. The water is brown for ages in front of it, and couldn't possibly have been caused by this vehicle driving through the gorge.

Also, you mention that people are free to do what they like on their land. Are you also saying that if peoples land runs to the river centre line, then it is OK for the landowner to drive in the river, but not the general public? Surely that is going to damage the river just as much as a member of the publics 4WD.

What does the chap at Claremont running his 4WD business think of this? Restricting 4WD's from the river is going to impact his business big time.