One of the organisers, Mick Goodwin, said the event was very successful.

"We met at the southern end of the Broadwater and walked across the weir, along the river front before returning," he said.

"Everyone was very buoyant and thankful for the efforts in raising the concerns of many of the Broadwater residents.

"There has been a lot of positive comments about the protest and against the placing of extra signage and footpath stencils.

"Prior to the protest walk, we also took the opportunity to inform the residents about the current situation in relation to access."

That advice included, the status of access, what the law is, and what action can be taken by council and individual landowners.

Mr Goodwin acknowledged that dogs and bikes are prohibited from the footpaths in some sections of the precinct.

He said civil action could be an alternative for landowners where people walked their dog or rode their bikes along these prohibited areas.

"But that action can only be taken by the individual person through the civil courts and not by police or council," he said.

"We are making sure that everyone knows the current situation.

"However, many residents are still concerned about the lack of consultation in relation to this matter, but we hope that council can achieve this during the passage of time."

Mr Goodwin said signage placed around Sunday's walk and the support of residents not participating in the walk was also very encouraging.

"We had plenty of support. There were people coming out onto their verandahs and cheering us on," he added.

Port Macquarie-Hastings Council director Alex Fisher clarified the history of the Broadwater Canal precinct and the unique nature of access.

"The footpaths leading directly to and from the weir and lighthouse structures and those paths within public reserves are publicly owned and maintained, accessible by all persons, day and night," she said.

"However, some footpaths are located on private property and although are publicly accessible through a 'right of footway', the signage restrictions causing concerns do not relate to a publicly-owned pathway, rather publicly accessible pathways located on private land.

"At the time of land development, this arrangement achieved the developer’s aim of providing the public with foreshore access whilst also creating private lots with direct waterway frontage.  

"However, in light of the fact that those pathways in ‘rights of footway’ traversed private land, restrictions to the times and types of access were placed on the titles of the land in order to ensure that public access across private land was not detrimental to the rights of the landowners.

"The terms of the ‘rights of footway’ are registered on the title of each burdened lot and include a number of restrictions defining the terms of access such as; no bikes, no skateboards, no dogs and no fishing. 

"The instrument also restricts the times of permitted use of the footpath to between sunrise and sunset only."

Ms Fisher said the terms of the ‘right of footway’ are fixed, and have been since development of the estate, and could only be amended subject to the consent of all landowners in the estate (and any other body who holds a mortgage or covenant on a burdened lot) and council.