Foreshore facts as murky as the tide

By RUTH BERRY political reporter

National MP Nick Smith has released a Department of Conservation legal opinion which says less than 1 per cent of the foreshore is privately owned, and he claims it shows the Government has misled the public over the issue.

But Land Information Minister John Tamihere is sticking by his comments in the Herald last week that significant chunks of the foreshore were in private ownership.

He said then that more than 1000km of foreshore was privately owned. The foreshore is the part of the beach that is covered and uncovered by the tidal flow.

Mr Tamihere also revealed that more than a third of the land running along the coast, beside the foreshore, was in private ownership, creating significant public access problems.

The Government has this week used both pieces of information to try to embarrass National over the stance it has taken on the foreshore and seabed debate, accusing it of misleading the public and double standards.

National, running a Beaches for All campaign, had said it wanted legislation introduced asserting Crown ownership of the foreshore.

The Government accused National leader Bill English of backtracking when he said late last week that National knew some of the foreshore was privately owned and wanted Crown ownership only when ownership was "in doubt".

National MPs have been angered by what they see as a Government attempt to divert attention from the core issue and have suggested that Mr Tamihere had exaggerated the extent of private foreshore ownership.

National MPs have this week been ringing surveyors and other land experts to try to establish the facts.

When asked by Dr Smith in Parliament yesterday whether he stood by his foreshore claims, Mr Tamihere said "given the preliminary work done, and given the fact this is a hugely complex issue, I stand by those statements".

Dr Smith later released a 1993 opinion by then DoC head office solicitor Timothy Mansfield contradicting Mr Tamihere.

It said "the Crown owns all foreshore (by common law) and seabed (by legislative vesting) except where there is a surveyed title. The proportion of private title is probably very small (less than 1 per cent of the coastline), but is concentrated on the crucial land/sea interface".

Private title may have been created as a result of surveyors using the mean low water mark instead of the mean high water mark as the baseline for surveys of coastal properties.

In other cases the land may have eroded, creating new foreshore and seabed where there was a dryland title, Mr Mansfield said.

Mr Tamihere said it was impossible to tell what facts the opinion Dr Smith had found was based on.

There was no rationale or evidence included in the opinion and "I'm suggesting to you it's not correct".

Land Information was rapidly trying to compile the information, but there were thousands of titles and the job could not be done overnight, he said.