Latest news with #CycloneGabrielle
Scoop
a day ago
- Business
- Scoop
One Bad Rainstorm Away From Disaster: Why Proposed Changes To Forestry Rules Won't Solve The ‘Slash' Problem
Article – The Conversation Even when forestry companies fully comply with current standards, slash discharge and erosion can happen. New rules must set size and location limits on clear-felling. The biggest environmental problems for commercial plantation forestry in New Zealand's steep hill country are discharges of slash (woody debris left behind after logging) and sediment from clear-fell harvests. During the past 15 years, there have been 15 convictions of forestry companies for slash and sediment discharges into rivers, on land and along the coastline. Such discharges are meant to be controlled by the National Environmental Standards for Commercial Forestry, which set environmental rules for forestry activities such as logging roads and clear-fell harvesting. The standards are part of the Resource Management Act (RMA), which the government is reforming. The government revised the standards' slash-management rules in 2023 after Cyclone Gabrielle. But it it is now consulting on a proposal to further amend the standards because of cost, uncertainty and compliance issues. We believe the proposed changes fail to address the core reasons for slash and sediment discharges. We recently analysed five convictions of forestry companies under the RMA for illegal discharges. Based on this analysis, which has been accepted for publication in the New Zealand Journal of Forestry, we argue that the standards should set limits to the size and location of clear-felling areas on erosion-susceptible land. Why the courts convicted 5 forestry companies In the aftermath of destructive storms in the Gisborne district during June 2018, five forestry companies were convicted for breaches of the RMA for discharges of slash and sediment from their clear-fell harvesting operations. These discharges resulted from landslides and collapsed earthworks (including roads). There has been a lot of criticism of forestry's performance during these storms and subsequent events such as Cyclone Gabrielle. However, little attention has been given to why the courts decided to convict the forestry companies for breaches of the RMA. The courts' decisions clearly explain why the sediment and slash discharges happened, why the forestry companies were at fault, and what can be done to prevent these discharges in future on erosion-prone land. New Zealand's plantation forest land is ranked for its susceptibility to erosion using a four-colour scale, from green (low) to red (very high). Because of the high erosion susceptibility, additional RMA permissions (consents) for earthworks and harvesting are required on red-ranked areas. New Zealand-wide, only 7% of plantation forests are on red land. A further 17% are on orange (high susceptibility) land. But in the Gisborne district, 55% of commercial forests are on red land. This is why trying to manage erosion is such a problem in Gisborne's forests. Key findings from the forestry cases In all five cases, the convicted companies had consents from the Gisborne District Council to build logging roads and clear-fell large areas covering hundreds or even thousands of hectares. A significant part of the sediment and slash discharges originated from landslides that were primed to occur after the large-scale clear-fell harvests. But since the harvests were lawful, these landslides were not relevant to the decision to convict. Instead, all convictions were for compliance failures where logging roads and log storage areas collapsed or slash was not properly disposed of, even though these only partly contributed to the collective sediment and slash discharges downstream. The court concluded that: Clear-fell harvesting on land highly susceptible to erosion required absolute compliance with resource consent conditions. Failures to correctly build roads or manage slash contributed to slash and sediment discharges downstream. Even with absolute compliance, clear-felling on such land was still risky. This was because a significant portion of the discharges were due to the lawful activity of cutting down trees and removing them, leaving the land vulnerable to landslides and other erosion. The second conclusion is critical. It means that even if forestry companies are fully compliant with the standards and consents, slash and sediment discharges can still happen after clear-felling. And if this happens, councils can require companies to clean up these discharges and prevent them from happening again. This is not a hypothetical scenario. Recently, the Gisborne District Council successfully applied to the Environment Court for enforcement orders requiring clean-up of slash deposits and remediation of harvesting sites. If the forestry companies fail to comply, they can be held in contempt of court. Regulations are not just red tape This illustrates a major problem with the standards that applies to erosion-susceptible forest land everywhere in New Zealand, not just in the Gisborne district. Regulations are not just 'red tape'. They provide certainty to businesses that as long as they are compliant, their activities should be free from legal prosecution and enforcement. The courts' decisions and council enforcement actions show that forestry companies can face considerable legal risk, even if compliant with regulatory requirements for earthworks and harvesting. Clear-felled forests on erosion-prone land are one bad rainstorm away from disaster. But with well planned, careful harvesting of small forest areas, this risk can be kept at a tolerable level. However, the standards and the proposed amendments do not require small clear-fell areas on erosion-prone land. If this shortcoming is not fixed, communities and ecosystems will continue to bear the brunt of the discharges from large-scale clear-fell harvests. To solve this problem, the standards must proactively limit the size and location of clear-felling areas on erosion-prone land. This will address the main cause of catastrophic slash and sediment discharges from forests, protecting communities and ecosystems. And it will enable forestry companies to plan their harvests with greater confidence that they will not be subject to legal action. Disclosure statement Mark Bloomberg receives funding from the government's Envirolink fund and from local authorities and forestry companies. He is a member of the NZ Institute of Forestry and the NZ Society of Soil Science. Steve Urlich does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Scoop
a day ago
- Business
- Scoop
One Bad Rainstorm Away From Disaster: Why Proposed Changes To Forestry Rules Won't Solve The ‘Slash' Problem
The biggest environmental problems for commercial plantation forestry in New Zealand's steep hill country are discharges of slash (woody debris left behind after logging) and sediment from clear-fell harvests. During the past 15 years, there have been 15 convictions of forestry companies for slash and sediment discharges into rivers, on land and along the coastline. Such discharges are meant to be controlled by the National Environmental Standards for Commercial Forestry, which set environmental rules for forestry activities such as logging roads and clear-fell harvesting. The standards are part of the Resource Management Act (RMA), which the government is reforming. The government revised the standards' slash-management rules in 2023 after Cyclone Gabrielle. But it it is now consulting on a proposal to further amend the standards because of cost, uncertainty and compliance issues. We believe the proposed changes fail to address the core reasons for slash and sediment discharges. We recently analysed five convictions of forestry companies under the RMA for illegal discharges. Based on this analysis, which has been accepted for publication in the New Zealand Journal of Forestry, we argue that the standards should set limits to the size and location of clear-felling areas on erosion-susceptible land. Why the courts convicted 5 forestry companies In the aftermath of destructive storms in the Gisborne district during June 2018, five forestry companies were convicted for breaches of the RMA for discharges of slash and sediment from their clear-fell harvesting operations. These discharges resulted from landslides and collapsed earthworks (including roads). There has been a lot of criticism of forestry's performance during these storms and subsequent events such as Cyclone Gabrielle. However, little attention has been given to why the courts decided to convict the forestry companies for breaches of the RMA. The courts' decisions clearly explain why the sediment and slash discharges happened, why the forestry companies were at fault, and what can be done to prevent these discharges in future on erosion-prone land. New Zealand's plantation forest land is ranked for its susceptibility to erosion using a four-colour scale, from green (low) to red (very high). Because of the high erosion susceptibility, additional RMA permissions (consents) for earthworks and harvesting are required on red-ranked areas. New Zealand-wide, only 7% of plantation forests are on red land. A further 17% are on orange (high susceptibility) land. But in the Gisborne district, 55% of commercial forests are on red land. This is why trying to manage erosion is such a problem in Gisborne's forests. Key findings from the forestry cases In all five cases, the convicted companies had consents from the Gisborne District Council to build logging roads and clear-fell large areas covering hundreds or even thousands of hectares. A significant part of the sediment and slash discharges originated from landslides that were primed to occur after the large-scale clear-fell harvests. But since the harvests were lawful, these landslides were not relevant to the decision to convict. Instead, all convictions were for compliance failures where logging roads and log storage areas collapsed or slash was not properly disposed of, even though these only partly contributed to the collective sediment and slash discharges downstream. The court concluded that: Clear-fell harvesting on land highly susceptible to erosion required absolute compliance with resource consent conditions. Failures to correctly build roads or manage slash contributed to slash and sediment discharges downstream. Even with absolute compliance, clear-felling on such land was still risky. This was because a significant portion of the discharges were due to the lawful activity of cutting down trees and removing them, leaving the land vulnerable to landslides and other erosion. The second conclusion is critical. It means that even if forestry companies are fully compliant with the standards and consents, slash and sediment discharges can still happen after clear-felling. And if this happens, councils can require companies to clean up these discharges and prevent them from happening again. This is not a hypothetical scenario. Recently, the Gisborne District Council successfully applied to the Environment Court for enforcement orders requiring clean-up of slash deposits and remediation of harvesting sites. If the forestry companies fail to comply, they can be held in contempt of court. Regulations are not just red tape This illustrates a major problem with the standards that applies to erosion-susceptible forest land everywhere in New Zealand, not just in the Gisborne district. Regulations are not just 'red tape'. They provide certainty to businesses that as long as they are compliant, their activities should be free from legal prosecution and enforcement. The courts' decisions and council enforcement actions show that forestry companies can face considerable legal risk, even if compliant with regulatory requirements for earthworks and harvesting. Clear-felled forests on erosion-prone land are one bad rainstorm away from disaster. But with well planned, careful harvesting of small forest areas, this risk can be kept at a tolerable level. However, the standards and the proposed amendments do not require small clear-fell areas on erosion-prone land. If this shortcoming is not fixed, communities and ecosystems will continue to bear the brunt of the discharges from large-scale clear-fell harvests. To solve this problem, the standards must proactively limit the size and location of clear-felling areas on erosion-prone land. This will address the main cause of catastrophic slash and sediment discharges from forests, protecting communities and ecosystems. And it will enable forestry companies to plan their harvests with greater confidence that they will not be subject to legal action. Disclosure statement Mark Bloomberg receives funding from the government's Envirolink fund and from local authorities and forestry companies. He is a member of the NZ Institute of Forestry and the NZ Society of Soil Science. Steve Urlich does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
RNZ News
2 days ago
- Business
- RNZ News
Bad rainstorm away from disaster: Why proposed forestry rule changes won't solve 'slash' problem
By Mark Bloomberg and Steve Urlich of During the past 15 years, there have been 15 convictions of forestry companies for slash and sediment discharges into rivers, on land and along the coastline. Photo: RNZ / Kate Newton Analysis - The biggest environmental problems for commercial plantation forestry in New Zealand's steep hill country are discharges of slash (woody debris left behind after logging) and sediment from clear-fell harvests. During the past 15 years, there have been 15 convictions of forestry companies for slash and sediment discharges into rivers, on land and along the coastline. Such discharges are meant to be controlled by the National Environmental Standards for Commercial Forestry, which set environmental rules for forestry activities such as logging roads and clear-fell harvesting. The standards are part of the Resource Management Act (RMA), which the government is reforming. The government revised the standards' slash-management rules in 2023 after Cyclone Gabrielle. But it is now consulting on a proposal to further amend the standards because of cost, uncertainty and compliance issues. We believe the proposed changes fail to address the core reasons for slash and sediment discharges. We recently analysed five convictions of forestry companies under the RMA for illegal discharges. Based on this analysis, which has been accepted for publication in the New Zealand Journal of Forestry, we argue that the standards should set limits to the size and location of clear-felling areas on erosion-susceptible land. In the aftermath of destructive storms in the Gisborne district during June 2018, five forestry companies were convicted for breaches of the RMA for discharges of slash and sediment from their clear-fell harvesting operations. These discharges resulted from landslides and collapsed earthworks (including roads). There has been a lot of criticism of forestry's performance during these storms and subsequent events such as Cyclone Gabrielle. However, little attention has been given to why the courts decided to convict the forestry companies for breaches of the RMA. The courts' decisions clearly explain why the sediment and slash discharges happened, why the forestry companies were at fault, and what can be done to prevent these discharges in future on erosion-prone land. New Zealand's plantation forest land is ranked for its susceptibility to erosion using a four-colour scale, from green (low) to red (very high). Because of the high erosion susceptibility, additional RMA permissions (consents) for earthworks and harvesting are required on red-ranked areas. New Zealand-wide, only 7 percent of plantation forests are on red land. A further 17 percent are on orange (high susceptibility) land. But in the Gisborne district, 55 percent of commercial forests are on red land. This is why trying to manage erosion is such a problem in Gisborne's forests. In all five cases, the convicted companies had consents from the Gisborne District Council to build logging roads. Photo: RNZ / Rebekah Parsons-King In all five cases, the convicted companies had consents from the Gisborne District Council to build logging roads and clear-fell large areas covering hundreds or even thousands of hectares. A significant part of the sediment and slash discharges originated from landslides that were primed to occur after the large-scale clear-fell harvests. But since the harvests were lawful, these landslides were not relevant to the decision to convict. Instead, all convictions were for compliance failures where logging roads and log storage areas collapsed or slash was not properly disposed of, even though these only partly contributed to the collective sediment and slash discharges downstream. Clear-fell harvesting on land highly susceptible to erosion required absolute compliance with resource consent conditions. Failures to correctly build roads or manage slash contributed to slash and sediment discharges downstream. Even with absolute compliance, clear-felling on such land was still risky. This was because a significant portion of the discharges were due to the lawful activity of cutting down trees and removing them, leaving the land vulnerable to landslides and other erosion. The second conclusion is critical. It means that even if forestry companies are fully compliant with the standards and consents, slash and sediment discharges can still happen after clear-felling. And if this happens, councils can require companies to clean up these discharges and prevent them from happening again. This is not a hypothetical scenario. Recently, the Gisborne District Council successfully applied to the Environment Court for enforcement orders requiring clean-up of slash deposits and remediation of harvesting sites. If the forestry companies fail to comply, they can be held in contempt of court. This illustrates a major problem with the standards that applies to erosion-susceptible forest land everywhere in New Zealand, not just in the Gisborne district. Regulations are not just "red tape". They provide certainty to businesses that as long as they are compliant, their activities should be free from legal prosecution and enforcement. The courts' decisions and council enforcement actions show that forestry companies can face considerable legal risk, even if compliant with regulatory requirements for earthworks and harvesting. Clear-felled forests on erosion-prone land are one bad rainstorm away from disaster. But with well planned, careful harvesting of small forest areas, this risk can be kept at a tolerable level. However, the standards and the proposed amendments do not require small clear-fell areas on erosion-prone land. If this shortcoming is not fixed, communities and ecosystems will continue to bear the brunt of the discharges from large-scale clear-fell harvests. To solve this problem, the standards must proactively limit the size and location of clear-felling areas on erosion-prone land. This will address the main cause of catastrophic slash and sediment discharges from forests, protecting communities and ecosystems. And it will enable forestry companies to plan their harvests with greater confidence that they will not be subject to legal action. This story was first published on The Conversation .
Scoop
2 days ago
- Business
- Scoop
Tairāwhiti Sets Regional Benchmark With New Land Transition Guidelines
Today marks a strong step toward protecting our whenua and supporting sustainable land use with the launch of Transition Guidelines for Sustainable Land Use developed by the Transition Advisory Group (TAG). The guidelines are a result of months of collaboration by the TAG – a locally led, cross-sector group made up of farmers, Māori landowners, forestry representatives, those with environmental interests and experts from Gisborne District Council and the Ministry for Primary Industries. TAG was set up in 2024 to develop guidelines for transitioning erosion-prone land into permanent vegetation cover. The group is a direct response to the long-term erosion and land management challenges identified in the Ministerial Inquiry into Land Use. Gisborne District Council Chief Executive Nedine Thatcher Swann says TAG has delivered essential work to determine local solutions for our region's unique land issues. 'The group has done an outstanding job bringing together a range of perspectives to co-design a tool that's practical, grounded in local expertise and future focused.' 'This work isn't about quick fixes. It's about setting a foundation for long-term change that reflects the needs of our whenua, economy and communities.' Ms Thatcher Swann says keeping a wide range of voices around the table will continue to be key as the guidelines are rolled out. 'The guidelines are a shared achievement, created through open and sometimes difficult conversations across sectors. That kind of collaboration is crucial if we want meaningful long-term progress.' Eastland Wood Council chair Julian Kohn said the region's challenges have been built over decades—and will take just as long to fix. 'We support the land use transition principle,' he said. 'But it's important for our community to understand that the proposed land use changes are among the most significant the forestry sector has faced in 40 years. 'These proposed changes have serious implications for the viability of forestry in our district and are deterring future investment in Tairāwhiti. 'Forestry is deeply embedded in our region's economy, social fabric, and environmental management. 'We value having some forest industry members at the TAG table and would welcome additional expertise to ensure these changes are implemented in a way that works for everyone.' Dan Jex-Blake, TAG member representing farming interests, says the responsibility to act now lies within this generation. 'Cyclone Gabrielle gave us all a salutary reminder of the fragility of some of our landscapes and the enormous damage that our more highly erodible land can do when it enters our waterways.' 'The repercussions of this are that the damage and cost is not shared by just the landowner alone, but by all those who live downstream – our highly valuable flats, infrastructure, waterways, ocean and the businesses and communities that they support.' 'As a landowner with an intergenerational perspective and who is kaitiaki of some of that sensitive land, I firmly believe that it is beholden upon us to do the right thing and embrace the challenge of protecting this land so that generations to come are not continually left to pick up the cost and question why did their forebears not address this issue, when nature was so pointedly calling for change.' Sam Rowland, General Manager for the Tairāwhiti Environment Centre, says the guidelines are a starting point for wider impact. 'These guidelines are a starting point for lasting community impact, driven by many sectors collaborating to heal Tairāwhiti's economy, livelihoods and ecosystems. While progress has been made, there is still more work ahead to refine these guidelines and ensure they truly serve our community's long-term well-being.' Hilton Collier, Director of Tairāwhiti Whenua Collective, emphasises the need for balance in how land is managed. 'As kaitiaki, we take a long-term view of sustainable land use. We understand the relationship between whānau and whenua and the need to look after both in a much more balanced way. We must transition land use over time to ensure we achieve a more stable landscape and reduce the harm current practices have on our rohenga.' The focus now shifts to sharing the guidelines with communities and supporting landowners to begin planning and implementation. TAG is continuing to work on developing a regional business case and delivery plan to seek government funding and other investment. The aim is to support landowners with transition costs and enable long-term change.
Scoop
3 days ago
- Business
- Scoop
Annual Plan Adopted For Year Ahead
Kaipara District Council has unanimously adopted its Annual Plan for 2025/2026, with an average rates rise of 8.3% after growth. This includes a new targeted rate for three of the district's museums. Originally, the museums rate was expected to be on top of a previously signalled rate increases of 8.9% after growth for the coming year, but cost savings across other areas have reduced the final figure. Kaipara District Council Mayor Craig Jepson says the outcome reflects careful planning. 'We understand that any rates increase can be challenging for many members of our community, but this represents a significant achievement for our small rating base, especially given the current national economic climate.' Roading remains a key priority, with around $30 million planned on capital works this year, and around $13 million on operations and maintenance (excluding work carried forward from the previous financial year). Approximately $8 million is set aside for Cyclone Gabrielle and other extreme weather event-related repairs, of which up to 92% is funded by NZ Transport Agency Waka Kotahi (NZTA). Recovery work includes repairing under and over slips, road surfaces, remediating slips, fixing our bridges, and replacing damaged drainage systems. Some of the projects planned for this year include pumpstation upgrades for Dargaville, the progression of the Proposed District Plan, local elections, and Wood Street revitalisation stormwater and surrounds. The Annual Plan for 2025/2026 comes into effect at the start of the financial year, with new rates taking effect from 1 July 2025. Final digital versions can be viewed on the council website from next week. Print versions will be available at council offices and libraries across the district in late July. What is a Long Term Plan and an Annual Plan? Every three years Council develops a Long Term Plan (LTP) in consultation with the community. Our Long Term Plan 2024-2027 was adopted on 31 July 2024. It outlines the services we will provide, the projects to be undertaken, the cost of doing this work, how it will be paid for and how the performance for each shall be measured. Following major damage to local infrastructure during the 2023 weather events, Kaipara is one of eight councils with an unaudited three year LTP focused on recovery, rather than the typical ten year outlook. In the two years between adopting an LTP, an annual plan is developed. The Annual Plan is a yearly update on what has been agreed through the LTP, highlighting any budget changes and work plans for each specific year. View the council discussion and decision on the (from 2:34:07).
