DCC Proposed Reserves and Beaches Bylaw : Real-deal submission

[click to enlarge]

Dunedin City Council
Current consultations: Proposed Reserves and Beaches Bylaw 2017

****

Received from JimmyJones
Sat, 17 Mar 2017 at 10:03 p.m.

Subject: RE: Reserves and beaches consultation failure

Message: Find attached an outstanding submission on the horse-hating bylaw. I am sure there were many good subs, but I noticed this one from an 11-year-old who has a horse called Tonka. She makes a very good case for freedom. Like many of the other submitters, she bypassed the professionally organised DCC misinformation and understood that the DCC are threatening a total ban on horses on beaches.

I think other people should see it, I have removed her name from the submission in case she wasn’t expecting widespread publicity.

The submitters tell us that no other Council has a ban on horse riding on beaches in New Zealand.

—

Related Post and Comments:
8.2.17 Hands Off Enjoyment of OUR Beaches #DCC

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

This post is offered in the public interest.

Hands Off Enjoyment of OUR Beaches #DCC

OUR CULTURAL HERITAGE TRADITION IS HORSES ON THE BEACH
—P*** OFF DCC

[tikitouringnz.blogspot.co.nz]

NO Sand Dunes are at risk if DCC gets off its dung-darkened tail to clearly mark Community-agreed entry and exit points to relevant/historical beaches for horses, light vehicles with training rigs, and sulkies.

WE OWN THE FRIGGING BEACHES

No one we know doesn’t love the sight of powerfully fit horses exercising on rural and urban beaches as they’ve done for generations, according to tides typically discreet and in harmony with other beach users and the coastal environment generally.

If there’s a problem it means DCC hasn’t bothered to consult properly on practical measures and agreed outcomes that enable All beach users to ENJOY OUR COASTAL RESOURCE.

Instead: RED-TAPE COUNCIL BUREAUCRATS WITH GREENIE AGENDAS
dccmakeworkschemesdccmakeworkschemesdccmakeworkschemes

No doubt influenced by ‘academics’ from the University of Otago dune study.

WHO ARE the environmental lobbyists within DCC moving to SHUT DOWN our freedom to move ?

Cast the morons out of this church.

****

█ DCC is currently consulting on the Proposed Reserves and Beaches Bylaw 2017 and seeks public submissions by Friday, 10 February 2017.

DCC would like to know what you think about the proposed bylaw. Your views will shape the final document. The focus of this bylaw review is to direct recreational users and our community to the best reserve and beach spaces for their activities. Your feedback is an important part of the review and we appreciate the time you take to make a submission.

An information pack is available from the DCC Customer Services Centre, by phoning 477 4000 or online.

****

At Facebook:

Council staff would not be interviewed yesterday, but in written responses to questions stressed the need to protect dune systems.

### ODT Online Wed, 8 Feb 2017
Plan for horses on beaches ‘overkill’
By Chris Morris
Nostrils are flaring as the Dunedin City Council faces a backlash over tougher new rules for horses on the city’s beaches. The proposal would restrict horses to thin strips of sand between dunes and high-water marks at four beaches where the animals were permitted to run. The idea has triggered an outcry from riders, as trainers warned of injuries to their animals while one horse trek business owner feared it could spell the end of his venture. The changes were included in the council’s reserves and beaches bylaw, which would remain the subject of public consultation until Friday.
Read more

—

Related Posts and Comments:
6.2.17 Uncontrolled freedom camping at Warrington Domain this weekend —DCC ‘hell model’ [no enforcement]
1.2.17 “Fake news” from DCC boffins & Community Board re freedom camping at Warrington Domain #TheBlight

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

This post is offered in the public interest.

RMA and Key’s right-wing slashers

BACKWARD STEP: Our environment is at risk if the Resource Management act is watered down.

### stuff.co.nz Last updated 05:00 21/07/2013
Gutting the RMA – it’s time to be concerned
By Anton Oliver
Source: Sunday Star-Times
OPINION | The Resource Management Act (RMA) has sadly become a much maligned and misunderstood piece of legislation: a kind of universal public punching bag – if mentioned in conversation, it is almost obligatory to put the slipper in. To most Kiwis it represents bureaucracy and inefficiency – pen-pushing do-gooders and paper shufflers who engage us in excessively long and costly processes that get in the way of us Kiwis doing stuff.
In fact the RMA – passed in 1991 – was a means of rectifying mistakes and providing at least some environmental and social integrity to development and planning process. It was recognised by legal minds to be a world-leading piece of legislation. It protected our environment and our economy based on the premise of sustainable resource management. What’s more, it was politically robust in that it received the blessing of both major parties.
It also gave New Zealanders a chance to be heard and it facilitated local decisions made by local people. While the country’s environmental indicators such as water quality and biodiversity loss have still gone backwards – the RMA has stemmed what would otherwise have been fatal haemorrhaging.
Similarly, the RMA has protected a set of fundamental Kiwi values: the notion of fairness and equity in regard to everyone having a right to their say; industry and other activities being required to take responsibility for avoiding, remedying or mitigating adverse environmental impacts; and developments being required to have regard to effects on such things as recreation, scenic values, private property rights, and the public’s access to rivers, lakes and beaches.
That’s all about to change.
The Government plans to alter the Act to give greater weight to economic development over environmental considerations, granting to itself the right to veto any issue. You don’t have to be legal-minded to see the impact of subtle word changes. While the consideration for the “benefits” of a project remains, gone are any references to the “costs”, making a cost-benefit analysis redundant because environmental “cost” is out of the equation.
Gone, too, are the words: “maintenance and enhancement of amenity values”. That’s basically any recreational activity – walking, running, swimming, fishing, kayaking. Who likes doing that stuff anyway? Thankfully the “importance and value of historic heritage” stays. But its cobber, “protection from inappropriate subdivision and development” gets the boot – making the first clause meaningless. And my personal favourite, “maintenance and enhancement of the quality of the environment” has been politely asked to leave. Clearly such an unruly clause has no place in a legal act that’s trying to protect the environment.

The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Jan Wright, has a different interpretation. She thinks the changes “muddy the overwhelming focus of the RMA, to protect the environment, and risk turning it into an Economic Development Act”. Similarly alarmed, the architect of the RMA, Sir Geoffrey Palmer, concludes: “The [proposed changes] will significantly and seriously weaken the ability of the RMA to protect the natural environment and its recreational enjoyment by all New Zealanders.”

The changes also grant considerable new powers to central government, giving it the ability to take individual consent decisions away from local councils and place them in a new national body. The changes go further still, by allowing government the right to insert provisions in local council plans without any consultation.
Read more

● Former All Black Anton Oliver is an ambassador for Water Conservation Order NZ.

—

Related Posts and Comments:
21.4.13 *fashionable* Heritage Dunedin and the RMA holocaust
17.3.13 RMA Bill: Public meeting 21 March
6.7.12 Recommended changes to RMA explode environmental protection

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Image: stuff.co.nz – Anton Oliver

Recommended changes to RMA explode environmental protection

Technical advisory group’s report recommends significant changes to section 6 of the RMA…the proposal to drop the requirement for decision makers to provide for the preservation and protection of indigenous vegetation and habitats as matters of national importance ignores Environment Court case law built up over the last 20 years.

### ODT Online Thu, 5 Jul 2012
Proposed changes reduce RMA protection
By Adam Bennett – New Zealand Herald
A Government-appointed advisory group has recommended a significant rewrite of the Resource Management Act removing references to the protection of coastal areas, wetlands, lakes and rivers and indigenous flora and fauna. Environment Minister Amy Adams released the report from a technical advisory group established after the Canterbury earthquakes with the primary task of looking at natural hazard issues relevant to the RMA arising from the quakes. “After the Canterbury earthquakes, it became clear that consents for subdivisions had been granted without any consideration of the risk of liquefaction,” Ms Adams said in a statement. However, the group’s report addresses much wider issues and recommends significant changes to section 6 of the RMA.

As it stands [section 6] instructs local authorities to recognise and provide for the protection or preservation of the natural character of the coastal environment, wetlands, lakes and rivers when considering RMA applications. They must also provide for the protection of outstanding natural features and landscapes and areas of significant indigenous vegetation or wildlife. Protection must also be provided for historic heritage and protected customary rights while public access to and along the coastal marine area, lakes and rivers must be maintained. However the group’s recommendation proposes removing the words “protection” and “preservation” from the section entirely.
Read more

****

### radionz.co.nz Friday 6 July 2012
Morning Report with Geoff Robinson & Simon Mercep
http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport

08:13 Independent report a major assault on the RMA – Opposition
Opposition parties say recommended changes to the Resource Management Act by independent advisory group are a major assault on the sustainable management of the environment. (3′57″)
Audio | Download: Ogg Vorbis MP3 | Embed

More reading via Scoop
Greens – Report ‘Major Assault On The RMA’
NZ Govt – Report on Resource Management Act principles released
Labour – RMA changes risk more litigation
ACT – RMA Principles Report Encouraging But More Boldness Required
Maori Party – Māori Party comfortable with direction of RMA report
Fish and Game NZ – RMA rejig a disaster for the environment

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr