Fish and Game New Zealand could be stung with a six-figure
legal bill after a failed bid to get legal access to Crown
pastoral lease land.
The two respondents to the High Court action instigated by
Fish and Game, the High Country Accord, representing pastoral
lessees, and their landlord, Land Information New Zealand
(Linz), have both said they are seeking reimbursement of
their costs.
The High Country Accord has said the case cost it $250,000,
while Linz would not reveal its costs or how much it was
seeking from the action heard by the High Court in
Wellington.
"The Crown is seeking agreement on costs with Fish and Game,"
the department's manager of Crown property and investment,
Brian Usherwood, said in a statement.
These costs will be in addition to the $60,000 Fish and Game
spent taking the case, which it lost and which the
organisation's spokesman, Ric Cullinane, confirmed it would
not appeal.
Mr Cullinane said the $60,000 it spent was equivalent to 50c
for every fishing and hunting licence-holder and the effect
of any additional costs awarded against the body was pure
speculation.
"It depends on the success and the quantum of any success,"
he said in an interview.
A full-season fishing licence is $105 and a full-season
hunting licence $80.
The organisation's website says Fish and Game has an annual
budget of $6 million and sold 123,000 fishing and 34,500
hunting licences a year.
Mr Cullinane said Fish and Game believed a thesis by Lincoln
University Fulbright Scholar Ann Brower on the subject of the
legal rights of pastoral leases was compelling and worthy of
seeking a declarity judgement.
That thesis said pastoral lessees had rights to pasture only
and not exclusive possession, and Fish and Game sought a
ruling that would have allowed members "responsible and
respectful access" to pastoral lease properties.
The Crown Law Office had already published an opinion counter
to Dr Brower and supporting the view that pastoral lessees
had exclusive possession.
Mr Cullinane said Fish and Game took the action to enhance
hunting and fishing access, saying some pastoral lessees
restricted access to guides only, yet water, fish and game
were not attached to a property's title.
The court action had provoked plenty of feedback from
members, he said, opinion being evenly split between those
opposed to the governing body's actions and those supportive.
Some said the action had angered landowners and endangered
existing access agreements they had with farmers.
The failed court action also provoked a stinging attack from
Agriculture Minister David Carter, who said it raised
questions about Fish and Game's direction and leadership and
its use of licensing fees.
"I am concerned this divisive action was taken when there was
no foundation for Fish and Game's claim for greater public
access to high-country stations."
The website says Fish and Game New Zealand and its 12
councils are public entities established under the
Conservation Act 1987 which report to the Minister of
Conservation but are not funded by taxpayers.
A name, residential address, and (preferably residential) telephone number is required from readers who comment on ODT Online. These details will not be visible to site visitors.