Park board written out of will after whare dispute

Press, 28 February 1980, Page 1

Park board written out of will after whare dispute

By

BARRY SIMPSON

When the Abel Tasman National Park Board decided in 1977 that eight bach owners on park board land had until 1984 to dispose of the buildings, one of those affected, Mrs Perrine Moncrieff, of Nelson, was so incensed that she threatened to cut the board out;of her will. And she-did. , ■ > > Mrs Moncrieff died on December’ 16/ 1979, aged 86. Probate of her-will has since been granted, The board — at least initially —is not a beneficiary. The legacy the board had hoped (and still hopes) it

would receive was a pocket of 194 ha of land (about 480 acres) in the park. It was valued at $60,000 in 1977. This land, according to the will, is to go to Mrs Moncrieff’s friend, Mr Richard Fowler, a solicitor, of Lower Hutt. Mr Fowler’s family has had a long association with Astrolabe, the area in which Mrs Moncrieff and her late husband, Captain Moncrieff, had their "whare.” But, although Mrs Moncrieff did not leave the land to the board, she left Mr Fowler a confidential letter in which, according to Mr Fowler, “she left

very clear directions,” regarding the land. Mr Fowler said last evening that at this stage he was in no position to disclose the contents of the letter, but he intended to do precisely as Mrs Moncrieff wanted. Asked if the letter contained provisions which would aid the other seven “squatters;” Mr Fowler said he was unable to comment. Mrs Moncrieff had provided in her will that if Mr Fowler did not want the land, or would not pay the death duties on it, the land was to go to the board. Mr Fowler said he had accepted the land and he would pay the duties.

Mrs Moncrieff, a well known ornithologist and environmentalist, was one of the founders of the Abel Tasman National Park and served on the board for almost 30 years. Her whare at Astrolabe was sited on a paper road, a strip of Crown land, between the land she owned and the sea. When the board discussed in 1977 her position and the position of seven others who had built baches on land that was later taken over as part of the park, she took up the cudgels on behalf of the other seven and threatened she would disinherit the board unless it relented. It did not, although it

was made quite clear to Mrs Moncrieff that the board would certainly reassess her case since she owned land behind her whare. She declined the offer. The chairman of the board (Mr L. H. Russell) told a board meeting yesterday that Mr Fowler had written to the board giving his views on how the property should be handled. In the letter, Mr Fowler said the land would ultimately go to the board, or to the Crown. He would ensure that when he had finished with it, none of his children would get it but it would go to the board.

Since the land was still designated private scenic reserve, he suggested it should be brought within the terms of the Reserves Act, 1977, said the letter. His second concern was the placement of the whare. It was on a strip of park board land which adjoined the land owned by the late Mrs Moncrieff. It was his intention to move the building on to this land where it vvould be resited to the satisfaction of the board and the local authority. He confirmed that people should still use the land in question as part of the park and asked that the board s rangers oversee it as they

had done in the past, the letter said. Mr RusSell said Mrs Moncrieff’s letter placed on Mr Fowler some moral obligations which he had said he would uphold. He told the board that its decision was that' the eight bach owners had until 1984 to dispose of the buildings, unless the owners died. Mr Fowler said that it might require a little extra time to move the whare. The job could be quite a big one. The whare would be moved about 50 metres up a slope, Mr Fowler said. Mr Russell said, “It was a great tragedy that she got into the position of changing her will in the

way she did. However, Mr Fowler has undertaken to make ’ the legal commitment for the land to come to the board when he has finished with it.” Mr Russell said that once Mr Fowler was finished with it he thought that the land would be sold to the board. Mr Fowler would be faced with having to pay the death duties for it and there would be other costs, “and there is no reason why he shouldn’t get that back.” The board resolved that it should extend the life of the whare beyond 1984, and that it would be happy to co-operate with Mr Fowler as far as possible.