Mountains to Sea, Recreational Summit

<body topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0> <table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0><tr> <td valign="top" colspan=2 height=90 BGCOLOR="#006699" TEXT="#080000" bgproperties="fixed" background="02c285a1erlcgo.gif"> <div> <FONT SIZE="5" COLOR="#FFCC66" FACE="Arial" ><B>Paper Road Society </B></FONT><B>     |     </B><A HREF="index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Paper Road Society "><U><B>home</B></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id2.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="About Us"><U>About Us</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id3.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Hot Spots"><U>Hot Spots</U></A>   |   <B>Mountains to Sea, Recreational Summit  </B>   |   <A HREF="id6.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Contact Us"><U>Contact Us</U></A></div> <DIV ALIGN="LEFT"></DIV> <div> </div> </td> </tr><tr> <td valign="top" width=210 BGCOLOR="#FFCC66" TEXT="#080000" background="02ad2c00dkelyh.gif"> <div> PRS</div> <div> <I><B>An alternate viewpoint:-</B></I></div> <bR> <div> Subject: Recreation Summit</div> <bR> <div> Andy's tirade on this meeting made me wonder if everyone there was not myoptic, perverted, bigoted...</div> <div> I have to discount any organisation which cannot at least attempt to present an objective account of anything worth reporting.  Having read </div> <div> the Proceedings I found it hard to reconcile Andy's view with them.  </div> <bR> <div> As the man says, we need the facts. If anyone finds it necessary to denigate anyone, especially in print, at least allow readers to form </div> <div> their own opinion.</div> <bR> <div> Peter</div> <bR> </td> <td valign="top" height=390 BGCOLOR="#66FF99" TEXT="#080000"> <div> <I>Mountains to Sea, Recreational Summit  </I></div> <bR> <div> <I><B><U>What an opportunity wasted !</U></B></I></div> <bR> <bR> <div> Shame on DOC for allowing itself to be Shanghaied by secular interest groups when the object of the exercise was to set the future direction of recreation on Public Conservation Lands.</div> <bR> <div> Gone is the opportunity – maybe forever</div> <bR> <div> But others have a different perspective <A HREF="http://prs.org.nz/pdfs/coranz view mountains to sea.pdf" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://prs.org.nz/pdfs/coranz view mount"><U>http://prs.org.nz/pdfs/coranz view mountains to sea.pdf</U></A></div> <bR> <div> Or here <A HREF="http://prs.org.nz/pdfs/Notes%204%20rec%20summitGeoffSpearpoint.pdf" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://prs.org.nz/pdfs/Notes%204%20rec%2"><U>http://prs.org.nz/pdfs/Notes 4 rec summitGeoffSpearpoint.pdf</U></A></div> <bR> <div> <IMG SRC="0511f0c0.gif" border=0 width="31" height="12" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"> Or view left-hand frame</div> <bR> <div> : <IMG SRC="0614fef0.gif" border=0 width="335" height="495" ALIGN="RIGHT" HSPACE="5" VSPACE="0"></div> <div> Running over two days of 16-17 September 2006, DOC hosted a so-called “Recreation Summit” to set the standard of recreation on DOC-Administered lands for the next 20 years.</div> <bR> <div> I was privileged to be there, along with the representatives from most main-line recreational and commercial interests. </div> <bR> <div> What was to prove the undoing of the event was the approx 1/3 participation of extreme education and conservation interests.</div> <bR> <div> This was no one-on-one consultation process with those genuinely interested in using Conservation Lands for recreational purposes – NO – consultation was diluted by extremists with views so myopic that they hold no regard for any opinion other than their own perverted myopic viewpoint.</div> <bR> <div>  Day One</div> <bR> <div> Some very interesting presentations were warmly received. </div> <bR> <div> The only sour note for me on day one, was from the Chair of Parks and Heritage Committee, Auckland Regional Council - this lady is so bigoted and biased I can well see why so many have problems with supporting lawful access in the Greater Auckland area.</div> <bR> <div> Discussion Groups were formed of like-minded representatives to canvas top priorities for DOC and Government - and since these were loosely based upon recreational interest - it was most enlightening to see the views expressed.</div> <bR> <div> What was evident was that even those politicians who fronted up over the evening meal at the end of day one, have scant understanding or no regard whatsoever for the lawful status of legal roads.</div> <bR> <div> John Acland (of the Acland Report fame) was the only person there representing political party interests who knew, understood and supported public access along lawful roads.</div> <bR> <div> Labour, National, Greens, New Zealand First, United Future and the Maori Party all believed that Paper Roads should only be authorised for use "on a case-by-case basis" - and just who would decide that was not immediately evident - but it seemed again as they believed they were better placed to decide such things not the public.</div> <bR> <div> Day Two....</div> <bR> <div> What a shambles. Here's DOC snatching Defeat from the Jaws of victory!!</div> <bR> <div> The day started exceptionally well, with Robyn Judkins doing his usual captivation of the audience. A hard act to follow, but Clive Anstey faired very well.</div> <bR> <div> It was here that things took a severe turn for the worse. The excellent ideas we thought we had produced from Day One were then presented to re-formed groups of mixed interests.</div> <bR> <div> Here the true colors came to the fore – but my group eventually came to a set of rational proposals to take to the Minister.</div> <bR> <div> Later on however, when all reconvened for the summarisation of the various working groups, the devil’s advocate played their respective hands.</div> <bR> <div> Other Group's recommendations were diluted. Their proposals stymied. Rational Decisions reworded to become meaningless. The predators had spring – and DOC lapped it up as manna from heaven.</div> <bR> <div> Gone were our suggestions for an independent body to oversee DOC’s implementation of Recreational Strategies. Gone was the direction to modify legislation and remove bureaucratic obstacles to recreation. Gone was the stated intent to rationalise implementation of policy across Conservancies, Regions and Field Centres.</div> <bR> <div> In short it was an unmitigated destruction of our ideas, our values and our time. Shame on you DOC for allowing such to happen.</div> <bR> <div> Andy</div> <bR> <bR> <bR> <bR> <bR> </td> </tr></table></body>