Forest and Bird considering legal action as Hutt City abandons biodiversity protection plans

Friday, 30 November 2018

Former Hutt City councillor Max Shierlaw was part of a large audience objecting to council plans to list native bush on private property, on its District Plan. He objected to Cr Lisa Bridson chairing the meeting.

Forest and Bird could take legal action against Hutt City Council for abandoning plans to protect native habitat.

The council has decided to scrap its plan to map Significant Natural Areas (SNAs) on private land, something which Forest and Bird says it is legally required to do under the Wellington Regional Policy Statement.

There was standing room only as Hutt residents objected to plans to list their land on the District Plan.

'We're considering seeking a declaration in the Environment Court to that effect,' Forest and Bird general counsel Peter Anderson said.

Hutt City Mayor Ray Wallace apologised to Eastbourne residents following the decision, which saw the council ditch a proposal to use its District Plan to protect biodiversity on private land.

* Eastbourne land confiscation claims**

On Friday, the council issued a statement saying it had voted to map SNAs on council land, and to work with landowners who voluntarily agreed to protect biodiversity on private land.

'With the involvement of mana whenua, land owners and other groups, we will be able to lift the profile of this issue and it will give us the opportunity to understand more about the importance of biodiversity to our community, as well as what we can do as a community to protect and enhance it.'

The issue over Significant Natural Areas (SNA) had proved highly divisive, with residents claiming the council plan was a land grab.

Thursday night's meeting went for six hours until midnight, with more than 200 people present to explain their position to the council.

Much of the debate centred around the impact on private land of having it declared an SNA and listed in the District Plan.

Opponents claimed they would not be able to develop their land and it would impact negatively on property prices.

Much of the debate focused on whether or not the council could legally replace SNAs with a voluntary regime.

Council staff argued that a ruling by the Environment Court provided a warning of what could happen if the council did not use SNAs.

In that case, the New Plymouth District Council decided to take a 'soft' approach to SNAs so it could work with farmers.

Forest and Bird took the council to the Environment Court, which ruled the council was wrong not to include SNAs in its District Plan.

A number of speakers also objected to the accuracy of mapping used to identify significant areas of bush on private land.

After six hours of heated debate, the Hearings Committee rejected the use of SNAs and agreed that the council should work in partnership with land owners to find ways protect native bush.

At 11.30pm, Hutt Mayor Ray Wallace called a council meeting and issued a public apology to landowners.

He said the process had caused angst for landowners and had been deeply distressing.

There was a need for 'healing' and the council would have to rebuild its relationship with the community.

Wallace successfully moved a plan to include SNAs on council land and said the council would work with private landowners who wanted to protect their property with covenants or an SNA.

The council would also work with Forest and Bird, local Māori, the regional council and landowners to highlight the benefit of SNAs.