'Please correct this information' feature?

What stirred everything up was not his request for the information to be deleted, but rather his statement that what trampers were doing was illegal (and by implication, that this site was encouraging illegal activity.) I have had a quick scan of the trips on this site, and the only other trip that I thought has access issues is the Shotover-Lochnagar trip (other than those western Ruahine trips.)

I doubt very much we've made anything at all worse. Clearly his mind was closed before he got here. He was clearly spoiling for a confrontation, and while his attacks generated useful and robust discussion, at no point was he personally attacked or denigrated. We disagree with his perspective and have expressed it. Clearly we value our expectation to access backcountry, and in some case this involves crossing privately held land along customary routes. While he says he values his privacy above all else and demands to keep everyone out. Well these two positions are in conflict and us backing down from what is important to us is not a solution I am willing to accept. We've been doing that for decades and all we seem to achieve is lose ground. The obvious way through is for DoC or WAC to negotiate a marked linear route that is protected by easements or similar legal agreement. This should be a perfectly workable compromise in most cases. I accept it takes good-will and maybe time to successfully negotiate these things. But Ainslee has flatly told us to fuck off, with no hint he's even contemplated what is important to us. Personally that does not incline me to humbly grovel for his forgiveness and supinely give in to what he's demanding for fear that he'll only become more confrontational. It doesn't take much reading between the lines to guess he's already got record on that front. What is more the legal notion of 'customary' access is something which ultimately hinges on all types of social documentation to provide important evidence. A route may have no formal legal standing, but the fact that numerous people have used it over time could be critical in future negotiations or court hearings. Allowing landowners the power to unilaterally erase such evidence without challenge would be altogether too convenient for them.

@phillipw. I just feel that forcing a landowner to psyche themselves up for a fight in a hostile forum is not helpful. A simple ability to email / comment to a moderator would separate them from the investigation / debate. We can still have that debate ... but involving them is the bit that I'd love to avoid (unless they want to, of course). As for cowtowing - all we're talking about is a one line flag above a track saying 'This route crosses private land. The landowner requests that consent to be obtained before entering'. We have a comments board for feedback on whether access is ever granted. Then people can make their own minds up whether to do so or not, knowing the landowner's wishes. Probably the most common thing I search for prior to trips is details of access - and I'd much prefer to head off knowing the true situation. @jessietramps - there are many routes and hut accesses on here crossing private land with no legal easements or on tracks diverging from the legal route, several of which I've penned. Take a look at Haurangis or Raukumaras or silverpeaks for examples. I try to state that private land is crossed where i am aware of it - and believe that that is the appropriate action: describe the route but let the reader know.

i'm not aware of any other land owners complaining on here, its just one. we may not get any more landowners complaining for a long time if at all. i found ainslie a bit high and mighty in the language used. i'm reluctant to give anymore than the bare minimum of time and effort to someone wanting to behave solely like that. this isnt the dark ages where land owners come along saying get off my land with some two dimensional response.

I think the time in the discussion has come were the specific land that started this discussion should be left out. The above comment is not wise helpful or quotable. A please fix this info form does sound like a very good idea but it could also be a lot of work. There needs to be a system in place so that I as a landowner with a legal road running not far from my shearing shed cant put a form in saying the road doesnt exist or that the other me (yes that makes 3 mes) cant put info saying a route does exist when it doesnt Unfortunantly this event has shown how hard it is to often verify data and that often the doc infois lacking in this regaurd

@madpom "I just feel that forcing a landowner to psyche themselves up for a fight in a hostile forum is not helpful." No-one here wants to alienate landowners unnecessarily, but equally Green might want to think about how wise it was to start throwing around accusations of illegal hunting and trespass, and loudly telling us to our faces that he wants all the public permanently off his land. Especially when legally and morally that's a fairly shaky bog to be standing on. If the debate hasn't warmed him to our point of view, it's also fair to say he's won no sympathy points with me either. But the alternative of avoiding the conversation altogether doesn't seem much better. "This route crosses private land. The landowner requests that consent to be obtained before entering" Precisely. And I'm more than happy to ask for it as a courtesy. It makes complete sense to ask in advance as it avoids surprises for both parties. There may well be some specific conditions I want to know about, and the farmer doesn't have to stress out if he sees us. All good reasons. But equally I would not expect permission to be repeatedly and unreasonably withheld.

@geeves Why is it that it's only the landonwners 'rights' that seem important in this discussion? Certainly I've repeatedly stated they have a very real and important interest in managing who is on their land, where and when. I'm more than happy to respect that. I've stated this repeatedly. I'll keep on saying it even when people pretend they haven't read it. I'll make myself very boring by saying it over and over. How many more times do I have to say... more than happy to seek permission, more than happy to keep to a marked route and carefully observe any warning signs. But I do not believe this means we must be silenced on our interests either. Bona-fide walkers, trampers, anglers and hunters have a legitimate moral right to cross private land where it is justified by the need to access public land beyond, and/or the route has been customarily used over many decades. And when we do so, we expect not to cause nuisance or harm. But in my experience whenever someone tries to bully me into keeping my mouth shut, appeasing them never has a good outcome. In the real world I may well pick my moment, but on the internet ... who knows? Farmers have a long record of treating their land as a petty fiefdom on which they can do what they like. Whether it's illegal logging, stock shitting in waterways, fertiliser run-off, failing to control weeds and pests, research to control ruminant methane ... there's always a loud section of them who bitterly resent the wider community telling them to lift their game. They very much react against 'townie outsiders' telling them what to do. Well this issue isn't much different and it isn't going away. It is just a replay of a very old story that's been played out many times in history. I'm emphatically NOT asking for a liberal 'right to roam' enjoyed in other countries. New Zealand is generations away from getting it's narrow mind around that. I'd much prefer to negotiate in good-faith, but I will fight to protect the modest and reasonable rights we do have at present if that is the only option left.

Philip, Quick question: When you ask permission to cross private land,and they say "no sorry you can't",what would you do then?

There was a time in the not too distant past where New Zealand had a general socialist mentality that would put any communist country to shame. Farmers were more public servant than private entrepreneur. The land was New Zealand's land. Access to the untouched wilderness was not a problem. It was one kiwi letting another kiwi wander about in our great land. What I don't get about this country is how much we cowtow to farmers in this day and age. Why should the average tax payer take the burden of the dairy industries short sighted stupidity. Why do they get such a large say in what goes on here anymore. They are private entrepreneurs. They expect us to help them in drought, in flood, in times of economic stagnation. So why do they not help us? Why is meat and dairy so expensive here? It didn't use to be. But that's when they really were the life blood of this country, when they really were our civil servants and this was a land of milk and honey. My father has a farm that backs on to the western ruahine. Unfortunately it doesn't gain access to the maunga. It frustrates the heck out of me how brutal the farm owners are being in the district these days. It just doesn't need to be like this, maybe it's time they sold up and got a life. It's ironic that tourism is right up there with farming in terms of bringing home the bacon in this country yet is is an endless uphill battle for places like DOC to get the money and support they need to support their industry/resource. While farming gets all it needs and more. Yet they have shown time and again their short sighted boom mentality to economy and have been constantly shit on by less naive overseas economies. When guys like Bill English are long gone I'll be a happy man. It's time people who still love this country woke up to the evil people that really run the National Party. They are being quite happily used by the US, and are manipulating us to set them selves up to become very rich when they finish up in politics and it's at our expense. Sorry to vent.