Budawangs nr Endrick R - Extinction of public right of way

[melinda]

I've been exploring northern area of Budawangs (via Sassafras) recently and bikes are a very handy way in.
Planning a trip in near Nerriga in next few weeks, so this is very timely information.
Thank you for pursuing the issue colinm.

[melinda]

Tried to go thru here 2 weeks ago.
There is a locked gate on the road and a sign stating that the road is is definitely closed to the public.
Redgrounds track is still open.

[colinm]

Tried to go thru here 2 weeks ago. There is a locked gate on the road and a sign stating that the road is is definitely closed to the public.

There are lots of roads around there, can you indicate where on the maps/images below you encountered the sign and locked gate?

The right of way you can see below does not always follow formed roads - the farmer has made his own road at one point, and he has every right to prevent access. However, there is a right of way as detailed below, and he has no right or power to block or gate that. If someone is blocking a public right of way, things can be done. To establish this, it would be necessary to know precisely where the gate is. Photos and GPS waypoints would help with that.

Because the right of way departs from public formed road before the farmer's private road starts (see maps below,) it may well be hard to find, and should be marked out with a GPS and some trail markers. The right of way may not be suitable for bikes (if that's what you were doing) it's not a road, it's a right of way.

[melinda]

Hi Colin,
I went in by the road directly to the north of the Michael Dowling hut (which has been restored) and then continued along the route marked by the green highlighter.

Screenshot of section of Endrick map.jpg (59.75 KiB) Viewed 30805 times

I estimated this to be the correct route after looking at your map.
Did I get it wrong?
The farmer and his wife were very nice and let us pass through their property to get on to the Endrick River Trail.

[colinm]

Hi Melinda,

I went in by the road directly to the north of the Michael Dowling hut (which has been restored) and then continued along the route marked by the green highlighter. I estimated this to be the correct route after looking at your map. Did I get it wrong?

I'm sorry I nearly got you into trouble.

Yes, I'm afraid you did misread the map(s). The right of way isn't on the formed roads made by the farmer, but is between the parcels of land indicated on the map by very faint beige lines. See below, I've marked what I think it is in red (by hand, so it's wonky, and 'your mileage may vary'.)

The right of way may not be as convenient as the formed roads, but it is ours, and using it doesn't depend upon the permission of the adjoining land owners.

I can generate a fairly accurate track for what I think is the correct route, but don't want to be held to account for this. What format would people like?

The farmer and his wife were very nice and let us pass through their property to get on to the Endrick River Trail.

Well, that's very kind/nice of them.

Colin.

Here's my reading of the route:

Endrick-ROW.jpg (57.31 KiB) Viewed 30787 times

[colinm]

Any surveyors here?

I'm talking to LMPA (LPMI) about getting the cadastre (the property boundaries) from that area, and also whatever information they have pertaining to the crown road reserve over which the rights of way exist. Once I have that, I propose to generate a track (.gpx, .kml, etc) running down the centre of the area cadastrally indicated as being between lots, on the assumption that that would also be the midpoint of the right of way.

I will then/also project that generated track onto a segment of the relevant topographic maps, and put it up here, with the track. I guess I could also turn it into bounds and meets, bearings and distances, whatever.

It should then be possible to load the GPX into a GPS, and follow the track pretty precisely (subject to the vagueries of satellite reception,) and to mark the track on the ground to a reasonable standard, so people can follow it.

I might also have a word to NPWS about all this, see what they're thinking. It seems reasonably important to mark this track on the ground, so the farmer gets some peace, and so people can hike in there when they want (without carrying a theodolite, plane table and chain )

[david510]

Thank you colinm for making us all aware of the access problem near Michael Dowlings hut. I went through yesterday (1/8/12) using spatial information from six in my GPS. Someone has marked the route between lots 27 and 42 with pink flagging tape which agrees closely with my GPS. This section crosses three fence lines, the first of which I think has been cut by the landowner, the second is leaning on the ground and is easy to cross and the third involved a scramble under barbed wire. If the owner wishes to keep this last fence across the Crown Road then a stile will be required. A small pedestrian gate provides access into Lot 144 around the locked road gate so a stile would not be out of the question.

In lot 145 the flagging tape seems to follow the curved route of the Crown Road accurately but, again, there is no track. The flagged route exits the property at a very old fence post. Once out of the property the flagged route meanders a bit and comes out exactly at the junction of Round Mountain Track and Endrick River Trail.

We followed the road down to the entry gate to lot 145 but were confronted with a private property sign and we would have been trespassing if we had gone through the gate so we exited the legal way in which we had come.

This is my first post so I would upload an OziExplorer plot if I knew how.

[colinm]

Thank you colinm for making us all aware of the access problem near Michael Dowlings hut. I went through yesterday (1/8/12) using spatial information from six in my GPS.

Thank you for taking so much trouble to scout out the route. Good track notes, too.

Someone has marked the route between lots 27 and 42 with pink flagging tape which agrees closely with my GPS.

We should also be grateful to whoever marked the track.

This is my first post so I would upload an OziExplorer plot if I knew how.

The map is a good one. If you can generate GPX or KML I can put it up on google maps and we can link to it, but the map's certainly sufficient.

[david510]

The map is a good one. If you can generate GPX or KML I can put it up on google maps and we can link to it, but the map's certainly sufficient.[/quote]
A gpx file of our walk into the Round Mountain and Quiltys area of Morton NP should be attached.
I didn't meet the owners on my way through but judging by Melinda's comment the owners are friendly. What is important now is that National Parks and the land owners get together and work out a way of advising walkers of their responsibilities rather than their rights. This will mean some formal signposting and route marking will be required which may take some time or it may never happen if inertia takes hold again.

[colinm]

Cool, so here's the map on google maps http://goo.gl/maps/Bx3fN

[mikeb]

Hi
Can anyone advise how this works in practice - have they bulldozed new roads or marked a path along the public right of way? Or do you go cross country through the paddocks and scrub-bash through the bush? I presume you are no longer allowed to follow the existing gravel road where it differs from the right of way? Im planning to walk through here over Easter.
Thanks
Mike

[Mervyn]

Mikeb
I just follow the gravel road. But I have never seen anyone. Other bushwalkers have told me the land owners are friendly.
Mervyn

[mikeb]

Hi
Have just returned from an excellent three day trip.

Ignored signs directing walkers towards the Endrick River ford and Redground Track and continued along road past Michael Dowlings Hut (Stone Cottage B&B) and along N side of Lot 27 to gate to what I now understand to be a road running south wards between Lots 27 and 42. At the time we believed it to be the older angled road slightly to the west. So we kept walking eastwards towards the Endrick for another 100m then walked southwards across the paddocks of Lot 42, crawling under a couple of barbed wire fences. Guess we could have followed the southwards road between Lots 27 and 42. Anyway, luckily no one saw us. Rejoined the road between Lots 27 and 42 and headed south through gate onto Lot 145. Found obvious pink tape hanging next to road here but could not find any other tapes in the bush along the curved right of way. We ended up giving up here (no GPS so were just guessing) and walking along the southeastwards running road through Lot 145 to Morton NP. Looking back the way we had just come saw "Private property. Trespassers prosecuted" sign. Whoops! Continued onwards to the intersection of the Endrick River Trail and the Round Mountain Track. Scouted around in the bush here and found another pink tape but no others and no tracks or pads. It does not appear that this curving route through the forest has received much traffic over the last couple of years.

Anyway, after a few fun days exploring The Vines, Bora Ground, Hidden Valley, we returned via the Redground Track. In our opinion this was a much more attractive track to get from paths road end at Endrick to The Vines. It has an interesting mix of forest, open heathland, grassy clearings, some beautiful creek crossings with swimming holes (Tea Tree Creek and Piercy Creek) and excellent views of the sandstone cliffs to the north. Slightly longer, but only by a few km.

Understand Redground does not provide access to get to the Round Mountain Track, Sallee Creek etc and the legal right of way is the only option. Would be great if landowners, national parks or any GPS-savvy bushwalkers could remark the legal route so that all passing this way can do so legally and responsibly.

Thanks again for the excellent info in this topic.
Mike

[Macca339]

Thanks for this info. I was thinking of going in for a day walk tomorrow and check out the Redground track. How far can we drive in from Nerriga / Bindi Brook?

[mikeb]

Hi all
Just returned from a 3 day trip to Hidden Valley. Had planned to ride bikes from Sassafras in to the Vines but when we were driving in to the Sassafras car park we encountered a locked gate about 1 km away from the car park, with signs saying "private property" and "trespassers prosecuted". The lock appeared to be new. We thought about parking and riding in anyway but decided to beat a retreat and head in via Endrick and the Redground track. On the way through Nerriga we stopped at the cake stall and barbecue and spoke to some locals. Some who lived around Sassafras suggested people usually ride in, but they may have been referring to the PWS gate rather than this private one. Others said that locals
sometimes leave gates partly locked to scare people off but if you pull on it, the hoop isn't fully engaged (so they don't break any laws). However, we had pulled on it and it was definitely locked. A lovely old lady who has walked through the area extensively said we should report it to PWS. A very sad state of affairs if this entrance is blocked to the public!

In any case, we did ride up the Redground track, leaving our bikes by the second Endrick crossing (but should have ridden them further to Pierces Clearing). Another group had also ridden in and were camped there.

Note very dry in park at present - only small pools in the creeks on the E side of Quilties Mountain, no water in Hidden Valley including around Dark Brother Cave. Had to do a water run to Styles Creek to fill all our bottles.

Cheers

Mike

[davidp]

This is worrying news
please keep us posted about the reply from NPWS

[davidp]

I contacted a friend who has a small property on that road .

He said ' I haven’t heard of any problems with gate access before.
National Parks have had the road surveyed over recent years and have told Lester, the main land holder at Sassafras, that it is a public road to the park entrance.
I would definitely be passing any locked gates. "

More worrying is the tendency for State Governments to sell off "useless" bits of crown land (old road corridors) to adjoining property owners who then prohibit access to parks. We all need to be alert for this. There should be a mechanism before any such sale for bushwalkers to be informed and consulted.

[mikeb]

Good news!

I alerted Bushwalking NSW and the National Park Association of NSW and asked them to take it up with their established contacts in the NPWS. They each reached out, including to the Ranger at NPWS's Ulladulla South Coast Branch. The Ranger has just provided the following response:

[quote] "have spoken to the neighbour in question regarding the locked gate issue and he informed me that the lock is no longer present on the final gate before reaching the park boundary. Apparently he placed the lock there over the long weekend following vandalism of signage he had erected, informing the public to not stray from the access track when accessing the park.

As discussed, the access track from Sassafras to MNP passes across private property (seven separate holdings) and there is currently no public access easement on the track in use. Therefore landholders are within their rights to prohibit public access, and, it is fair to say, access to the Park in this location is a privilege, not a right for members of the public. NPWS is very keen to formalise public access, and as such, are in the process of negotiating the creation of an easement over the track in use to secure public access into the future. Despite general support of the easement proposal from the affected landholders, details of the easement are still being negotiated. Because this process is taking longer than anticipated certain landholders are frustrated may explain the locking of the gate.

Hopefully this will not happen again leading up to the formalisation of the easement."

So looks like NPWS have sorted out a temporary solution to maintain access to the Sassafras entrance and are working on a permanent solution.

Now, if only someone would grade the road - it's pretty rough and barely passable in a 2WD.

Cheers

Mike

[davidp]

Thanks Mike
If you have any further correspondence with the ranger and NPA and BW NSW it would be interesting to ask about
-- the status of the access at the Endrick River end past the old stone cottage
-- generally the status of access to parks in NSW and if these old road corridors are still being sold off without first informing BW NSW and other stakeholder groups
David

[Allchin09]

Mikeb and Davidp,

Further to the information provided by the Ranger through Bushwalking NSW, SIX Maps (http://maps.six.nsw.gov.au/) shows location of road reserves in the area, as per the below screenshot.

As you can see, whilst there area road reserves through the area (those parallel strips of crown land not owned by the landholders, which I've highlighted in yellow) they don't line up with the current road access.

Hopefully, we're able to keep the locals onside with the current arrangement, but having an easement created would be a good step forwards.

Also, the Budawangs Walking and Camping Strategy from 2007 (http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resou ... rategy.pdf) makes the circumstance clear on page 6:

Access to the car park for the Sassafras walk-in camping area is through private property to the park boundary. Visitors are asked to respect private property and to close gates along the road.

[davidf]

I am not a lawyer but hows does Bob Browns successful high court win affect crossing private land? anyone know?

[Grabeach]

I'm not a lawyer either, but the high court ruling as I understand it concerned provisions of the state anti-protest legislation. If not involved in protest action, I would assume general right of way was never affected, hence the high court ruling is not relevant.

[Grabeach]

I drove in part of the way down the Sassafras road just for a look a few months back and noted that the second and third gates I encountered were open. One looked like it hadn't been moved in a fair while. I followed the outback, "leave gates the way you found them" rule for both. Does anyone know if all the gates are supposed to be shut? If not, which ones aren't?

[crollsurf]

I was just down there. I was confused. I thought that we're expected to use the easements, road reserves, marked in yellow but they are locked. The enterance is the original entry point that is now on private land. Where Sassafras is printed on the map above.

[potato]

I was just down there. I was confused. I thought that we're expected to use the easements, road reserves, marked in yellow but they are locked. The enterance is the original entry point that is now on private land. Where Sassafras is printed on the map above.

I haven't been there in a couple of months but the road doesn't follow the yellow highlighted easements - rather the road as you have described.

[Grabeach]

The definition of easement seems to be "a right to cross or otherwise use someone else's land for a specified purpose". I suspect the easements marked on the yellow map are rights some government department has to build a road in that position and are not necessarily an easement for you and I to use as we choose. That the National Parks have persisted for so long to formalise the traditional and obvious entry road indicates that there is no intention of building any new road on the easements. Other than the occasional instance where the landowner understandably spits the dummy in response to vandalism, the traditional access seems to have worked quite well for decades, albeit unsuitable for some modern 2wd at times.

[Warin]

Easements exist for all sorts of things ... power lines, pipes (water, gas, sewerage), communication lines (underground optic cable etc), old stock routes and private access roads. I have one at the back of my place .. for a road .. it will never be build - costs of multiple bridges.

Just because there are lines on some map don't assume you have the right to use them. The local council can be helpfull depending on who you get and how busy they are.

[davidp]

Very important for bushwalker access that rights of way like these do not get extinguished however. There is a move across NSW and perhaps elsewhere for governments to sell off these little strips of land often without consulting bushwalkers (not surprising perhaps as they may not know who we are anyway). It is a shame there is not some formal consultation process with Bushwalking Clubs when easements near parks are planned to be sold.
Also I have heard it is in the interests of local landowners to either buy or at least fence these strips because (strangely) if you are a landowner adjacent to one of these strips you actually have to pay rent for them if they are not fenced because the crown thinks you will gain a benefit from letting your stock graze on these unfenced strips of land. This applies apparently even if you do not own any stock! Some rules are so archaic and so anti the environment.
Lets all be vigilant when it comes to preserving rights of public access near National Parks.

[Grabeach]

davidvp; As I have tried to point out, road reservations are often not right of ways. And right of ways don't necessarily have to be a road. It would appear logical in the Sassafras situation for the National Parks to formalise a right of way that covers the existing direct and historical access. This would give them the right to cross other's private property to there 'property' (the park). Their 'guests' (the public) would then have the right to use the right of way to visit the park. This is possibly what exists through the Carlon property in the Megalong Valley and would likely have been negotiated when the southern part of the land was sold.

I actually live in this type of situation and have a right of way of across four properties, and two further properties have a right of way across my land. There is also an easement for services that extends well beyond the defined right of way. It is interesting that the upkeep of the right of way and common services eg. poles and wires are paid by those who have the right of way, not the actual owners of the properties. It can get quite complex.

I suggest that there would be little point in opposing sale by the government of land that they are not going to use for services including roads. Blocking such sales could possibly be counter productive, in that it may deter landowners from agreeing to a logical right of way.

[tom_brennan]

As I have tried to point out, road reservations are often not right of ways.

What makes you say that?

The yellow sections certainly appear to be public gazetted roads (Crown Roads), though confirmation would need to be through the Lands Dept. They can be leased and fenced by adjacent landholders, but need to maintain public access (eg no locked gates). Obviously the current public roads don't provide any useful vehicle access to the NP, but would no doubt be useful in negotiating a permanent easement or similar for the current access.