Dunes 'not playground' for drivers

Wheeled/motorised recreation is a legimate activity which includes cycling, motorcycling, quad biking and four wheel driving. I am in 3 four wheel drive clubs and regularly see rubbish and other mess caused by people who like outdoor recreation. My daily driver 4wd is more fuel efficient than a lot of the cars on the road at the moment, most people don't bother to get them tuned which causes polution. I am listed as a contact for local civil defence...so do I not bother now given the comments from greenbone and limelegs?, I know for a fact that a number of four wheel drivers are involved / have been involved in search and rescue and civil defence support operations in the South Island when it snows.... The issue here is organising suitable areas for recreation for the group of ratepayers who are involved in motorised recreation. Yes you get a hoon element in all sports motorised or not, however in a lot of cases councils working with clubs can help educate responsible use. Shame on the anti four wheel driver brigade. It's no point sticking your head in the sand, council has a responsibility to provide direction and amenities for all of its users.

First off I'd like to say some of the views exhibited on this topic are identical to mine and also extremely different. I was an avid user of the Karetai track and over the years traversed it many times in the various vehicles I've owned and enjoyed every minute of each of those trips. I've filled the odd "deep" rut with stones to help other vehicles traverse them and to stop further erosion. While I was using the tracks i was always looking at the other areas that were being used by the "hoon element" and noticed there weren't very many places they used. Since the closing of the roads the areas that are being used by the "hoon element" are becoming more numerous than ever before. Coincidence? I think not. For example there are now tracks in places that there never was before one of these being the one shown in the dunes at Smaills beach. To stop this use of sensitive areas I think that is everyone (including the 4wd hating fraternity) needs to sit down and say "yes we will accept 4wd use in this area and on these tracks and only these tracks/areas". (The council does own a huge acreage of forestry that would be perfect for us to use would it not? There the damage could be mitigated by rotating us through blocks that were about to be logged as they cut new tracks etc as they go about logging. If this was to happen then fines could be handed out to that "hoon element" that are abusing and destroying the sensitive areas. Sorry for the long windedness of this but it is something I feel strongly about.

Our beef is also with the hoon element. Indeed this very topic was being discussed in an off-road forum I'm a member of even before the existence of the article above. The needless damage problem is largely caused by having no where for 4WDers to go. Both responsible and irresponsible 4WDers simply need somewhere to play. This could be access to off-road tracks that are in fact public roads. All public, 4WDers and bird-watchers alike, are indeed "owed" access to these roads. Maintaining such access is a job of local council. Or this somewhere-to-play could indeed be a specific 4WD area (eg a block of disused or waiting to be developed land). Such a 4WD only area could help minimise other conflicts between 4WDers and other land users as well. Even if you don't respect the civic needs of 4WDers as rate-payers to have access to recreational land like other sports do, then surely you can see if such an area minimized the amount of damage to sensitive areas then it's worth it for that alone. It's kind of like skateboarding. Remember the days when the Octagon was terrorised by skaters and the DCC refused the obvious solution of building a city skate park. When sense finally prevailed and they did build one, it's proven a very popular fixture - and I haven't seen a skater in the Octagon for years.

Re my previous remarks about my experience on the Karetai Track - No guys, I'm not 'down' on responsible off-roaders nor especially those who belong to clubs, for the reason that clubs usually jealously protect their good name(s) by not vandalising property nor cutting up tracks. My 'beef' is with the 'hoon' element, which fails to recognise the rights of others not to be disdvantaged by off-roading activities, whether it be by damage to farm-land, unnecessary noise, cut-up tracks and so-on.
The funding of the stadium, known now for what it is, with rugby foremost, and everything else a distant last, has set an unfortunate precedent; where other sporting groups might legitimately clamour to have their own activities catered-for, (after all, why do it for one, if they're not prepared to do it for all?). Surely, though, that's impossible under the general scheme of things, and those who think they are 'owed' off-roading facilities at ratepayer expense as another city amenity might do better to join a club and avail themselves of what is available. That, of course, will mean accepting rules and whatever discipline is in-place; once again something which the 'hoon' element is allergic to, so I guess they're bound to be with us, no matter what.

Well said Baxter.

Yes, the Karetai. I've only been a passenger up this road (it's indeed a bit rough for my 4WD), and while as Ian says very deeply rutted it was a lot of fun in the dry.

But I have no problem with the Karetai being closed to traffic due to damage - it'd be irresponsible not to (as an aside, I'm unsure why the Karetai wasn't shut over winters in the first place to avoid the rutting damage that occurs when it's wet. This may have prevented a lot of the damage occurring).

Anyway, if it were up to me I'd have opened up another track elsewhere when it was closed for exactly the reason that irresponsible people will 4WD in worse places. Indeed I'd think the closure of the Karetai and Abbotsford road makes a good case for an ex-forestry area or similar being made available.

PS - and while I'm not at all justifying the actions of the reckless 4WDer that you had to leap out of the way of, let's remember this happened in the context of you walking on a legal public road.

Firstly, I do not, and have never, on any website described myself as "Bush Crasher". Please withdraw this comment Limelegs.
I suspect that the "Bush Crasher" term you've found is from a forum where each user is attributed a label depending on the number of posts they have made; ie there will be several hundred other members that have made similar numbers of posts as me that are also automatically labeled as "Bush Crashers".
Please be clear it's not a term chosen by me; indeed the number of foums that have such stupid arbitrary labels irks me.
You're are welcome to trawl my actual entries - ie stuff I've actually written - on forums etc, and you will find that I am indeed as I proclaim a largely responsible 4WDer.
Secondly, yes I agree it would be easier to manage if everyone joined a 4WD club and limited their activities to private land and organised trips. However in the real world this will not solve the above problem. The damage is caused largely by irresponsible 4WDers, and they are unlikely to join a club. The only effective solution is an area with casual access they can play in.
The reason I've never joined the local club is that it's play area is open once a month, which is almost always on a day I have other things on. So it'd be pointless for me.
Lastly, now what right do you have to deny access to public land to 4WDers that do not do damage to those specific areas? Sure, I've no problem with prevention of access to areas that can be damaged, indeed I advocate such. But there are public areas that will suffer no environmental damage by responsible 4WDing. Indeed if that potentially relieves damage to sensitive areas it seems pretty stupid not to make such areas available.
I think you betray your ignorance (I mean that literally, not as an insult) with your comment on the term "responsible 4wder" being an oxymoron, and you're convinced that all 4WDers fit your stereotype and thus can not be controlled and managed.
Let me be clear. 4WDing does not have to be environmental destructive, and can be effectively managed. However, if people build uninformed walls to each other based on your stereotypes then there's little to be gained by discussion and things will remain in effect as they are now - which clearly does not work for anyone.

What me, mossman and baxter are saying, we a responsible 4x4 drivers who would like the the council to provide somewhere to play. Hey the council provides library books, art centres musems etc, rugby fields, boat ramps and provides affordable leases for golf courses etc, why cant we use what was deemed a road, to be used as a road.

It might make it hard for u to walk up, but u cant walk on the motorway, thats an amazing place so why dont you complain about that. All we want is a forest block or a few paper roads to be allowed to use. Yes there a irresponsible fools out there who are causing the damage, like up mt cargill, that is not us though.

Four wheel drivers do have and spend money, personally i have spent serveral thousand dollars locally modifiying my truck. To play responsibly i do have to leave dunedin which i feel sucks and i travel to more 4x4 friendly cities, like Christchurch and West Coast for a play and i happily spend a thousand dollars on accommadation, food repairs etc that i could of otherwise spent locally.

Accept the council gives alot of other sports a hand all we want is the same for ours.

Limelegs you would be wise to remember that there are thousands of kilometers of unformed public roads in New Zealand and while they are not sealed highways, they facilitate a huge amount of both motorised and non-motorised recreation. Unformed public roads allow all people to choose when, where and by what means they explore the countryside, just as you would expect in a free nation.

I doubt anyone from the 4x4 fraternity would presume to tell you how to best enjoy New Zealand's outdoors so please extend us the same courtesy. If you think the future for 4x4ing in NZ is on private land only then I expect you will be sorely mistaken. I for one will continue to enjoy our country both in and out of my off-highway vehicle and I will do it as responsibly and with due care for our surroundings as any other person.

The Council deserves support on this one. It is clear that sensitive public lands are being damaged by the selfish and senseless actions of individuals who believe that owning a particular product of technology automatically gives them the right to range wherever the vehicle can physically go.

They should not be pandered to by the provision of a free public area set aside, for like the boy racer fraternity they are unlikely to restrain themselves to any one area. They should however, be encouraged to join or form a club and buy and maintain their own private off-road playground where they might, once having put some investment in to facilities and maintenance, both learn some responsibility and also lessen their nuisance effects.

Designated off-road areas only work for the law abiding drivers. The irresponsible people see them as a challenge to be ignored. Ideally you get the law abiding 4WDers to monitor the dunes and the beaches but you need full co-operation from the Police at all times.

While Baxter likes to think of himself as a "responsible 4wder" (oxymoron?) he describes himself on an off-roading website as a "Bush Crasher", and perpetuates the expectation among those who buy offroad motor vehicles, that they will be provided with public land on which to amuse themselves. Government kindly provides us with lots of places on which we can drive - they are called roads, and they cost lots to maintain because motor vehicles wear them out. If I buy a set of golf clubs I'm not allowed to play golf at the local park because of the disruption and danger I'd cause to others - the Otago Land Rover Club has its own patch of vehicular playground - that's the future for 4wd. Don't demand public land for private destruction. Anyway, heaven forbid that I would deny that 4wding is "valid recreation". Whatever rocks your boat can be your recreation, but think of the different societal benefits deriving from physical activity and from driving a motor vehicle. You can drive a motor vehicle on a road, and that's where you should recreate.

I think that 'Baxter' uses 'Karetai Track' as an instance of a road formerly accessible to four-wheel drive vehicles being closed. As I occasionally walk there, bottom to top and back again, allow me to inform him that Karetai Track was stuffed up for all recreational purposes by the treatment it had received, particularly four-wheel drive-based activity.

For much of the year, after heavy rain, lower Karetai Track functions as a watercourse for run-off from the surrounding area. Deeply rutted, the track self-destructs very quickly, and not long before it was closed, was such a time. It was difficult to walk up there in safety, especially after rain. As an indication of 'how' deeply rutted, I once had to take myself off the track with considerable alacrity to avoid being hit by one of the recreational users he appears to support. They passed me going uphill. In a minute or two, there was an ungodly commotion further up the hill, and there was the vehicle in question (a pretty run-of-the-mill 4WD), stranded on its sump with both front wheels dangling ineffectually into ruts which its wheels couldn't reach the bottom of. That was an indication of the state of that portion of the track at the time. They made to solicit my help to unstick the vehicle, but I passed on, as they had got themselves into that situation and they could get themselves out of it, as far as I was concerned.

Why that attitude? Well, all sorts of people use the track, but principally walkers, cyclists and girls (usually) exercising horses. The actions of idiot Four-wheel- drivers, (not the majority, I concede), selfishly put all other users at risk and I was glad to see that access from Smaills Beach had, finally been blocked off.

Regarding the Smaill's Beach dunes. Although wind-action on dry sand, regularly reshapes these features, deep ruts, in which erosion can get started, certainly doesn't help. I have video-footage, of the 're-shaping' process in action, taken in a gale registering 120kM/Hr at the time (eg hard to walk against). Minute-by-minute, large chunks of dune were being simply blown-away to be deposited on nearby paddocks. I notice that an attempt has been made, recently, to stabilise the dunes by means of a woven plastic mesh material. I have no doubt, that those who caused the cutting-up shown in the photograph, would probably look upon those as some sort of interesting 'obstacle-course'.

Nor should we overlook the damage also caused by the two-wheel variety of transport either. As for any suggestion that 4WD enthusiasts and other recreational users should share beaches, forget it. I've seen it abused time-and-again by people who think that having paid the deposit on a vehicle gives them carte-blanche to 'go-where-they-like' and 'do-what-they-like' with it. The usual argument is, 'well the dealers sell them., so it must be OK to use them'. Commonsense or a sense of responsibility doesn't come into it, apparently.

Presumably because Mossman thinks he's a human being and a rate-paying citizen of the city. What high horse are you riding to suggest that 4WDing is not a valid recreation?

Sure it's not the most environmentally sensible thing to do. But it also won't end the world. Or even make an appreciable difference to carbon levels.

I suspect you're riding a wave of largely uninformed 4WD hysteria. Sure too many people drive them in cities, no arguement there, but they need not necessarily do damage to off-road areas they're used in if managed. Indeed, just like trampers, if not managed by the use of allocated areas they can be "destructive and anti-social" as you seem to class all 4WDers.

The OAP's who were delivered meals-on-wheels by 4WDers during the recent snow will know that not all 4WDers are environmental wreckers. And let's not forget the many grateful walkers etc that are lost or injured and 4WDers play essential roles in their search and rescue. How do they fit your irresponsible 4WDer stereotype you seem to have?

Most importantly: right or wrong, the less responsible 4WDers will create havoc unless there's somewhere for them to go. You can either force all 4WDers into this category and increase the amount of damage done - or you can manage 4WD recreation and allocate a small piece of the area for 4WDing.

Fliss is right in her observations; we have access to a lot of sensitive ecological areas that are suffering from some irresponsible 4WDers. However, as noted below, Dunedin does not have any specific designated casual 4WD play areas unlike most other cities.

Or even information on what is, and isn't, ok. Many people don't understand that beach driving is largely ok, while dune driving is environmentally bad. So even a simple guide saying beach driving is ok at X, Y, Z beaches, but not in any dunes ever would be a good start.

Closing down the two roads Dunedin did have for 4WDs without opening up others hasn't helped. I note one of these roads wasn't far from the dunes in Filss' example.

Until we do have designated 4WD play areas the less responsible 4WDers will indeed just go whenever they can and have fun. As wrong as it is, this is just human nature.

While the more responsible, like myself, will leave their vehicles in the garage and wonder why people in other cities have designated casual access to areas they are allowed to play in.

As for the people in between, well as we can see the lack of somewhere to go will tempt them to become less responsible 4WDers and use sensitive areas.

Why does Mossman think that the Council should provide him with a place to 'wreckreate'? Presumably he has an expensive, fuel guzzling toy, and expects to destroy public land for his entertainment. He should have thought, before he bought his toy, that it's use was destructive and anti-social, as well as completely at odds with any attempt to minimise carbon emissions. He might even have wondered what sort of a society allows this wreckreation. Cr Butcher and the City Council deserve support.

I have e-mailed the council on three occasions now with regards to possible places where off roading is possible in the Dunedin area so as not to destroy the flora such as that at Smaill's beach or up on Mount Cargill, From these e-mails i have had no responses. Its little wonder that people are off roading in the wrong places when the council gives no guidance. I believe the council should follow the lead of other councils such as Auckland, and designate areas that can be accessed for this reason.