Forest group active where Govt tardy

Press, 24 June 1978, Page 14

Forest group active where Govt tardy

By

OLIVER RIDDELL

in Wellington.

Government departments and agencies engaged in the administration of the land and environment have been uncomfortable for at least a decade with the tactics and antagonism of a number of extreme environmentalist groups. These groups have ranged from the small to medium sized, but have been able, over major issues — such as over the Manapouti dispute and the Maruia declaration — to draw on wide public support. Because these groups were generally small, and because they seemed permanently at loggerheads with the Government, there has been a tendency to assume that only occasionally could they atiract widespread support and that only occasionally did their ideals attract the general public. But a new organisation which does seem to have a wide basis of popular support. is beginning to impinge on central and local government To describe it as ■•new” is perhaps misleading — it was formed as long ago as 192'4 — but its role is new. and so is its impact on the decisions of others. This is the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society, with a current membership of 27.000 which is growing rapidlv. This formerly staid and dignified repository of amateur interest in outdoor science is undergoing a revolution. which is proving much more embarrassing to the Government than the tactics and antagonism of the extremist groups ever did. The new militancy of this organisation does owe something to the traail-blazmg extremists of the last decade, but the phenomenon is much more interesting than that. Its new membership strength seems to be comms from elderly and middle-aged, paiticularlv from people (often married couples) who hate retired recentlv and shifted perhaps to new areas where the retired congregate — Nelson. Kapiti, Tauranga, Bat of Islands, and elsewhere.

"Militancy” is probably the last word that springs to mind to describe such people. They are usually well-off, conservative in their work and recreation habits, quiet, successful in their chosen fields, and often former senior employees of central or local government. And '‘militancy” is not what they themselves feel. But many of them grew up in rural or semi-rural areas, many are keen gardeners with a knowledge of plants, and many are used to being stimulated and leading a mentally active life. In retirement or old age, job stimulus may not be open to many, but they can still be stimulated by their environment. and the natural corollary for active people is to become actively involved. This has not so far led to Forest and Bird members sitting in trees in large numbers to prevent foresters from cutting them down, but it has obliged the society to be much more actively involved than in the past. The entire nation-wide system to recover birds damaged by oil spills has been set up by and is staffed by society personnel. The society has become a powerful lobby with the Government. It was a letter from the society at the last moment w'hich seemed to have the most profound impact on the Government’s decision not to transfer the Wildlife Service from the Department of Internal Affairs to the Department of Lands and Survey. Local government is feeling increased pressure from "the society throughout New Zealand Local schemes affecting forests and wildlife are now subject to keen local scrutiny, with less need for central agencies such as the Commission for the Environment or the Nature Conservation Council to become involved. Then there is the tendency to assume responsibility locally for functions of

hard-pressed government departments. This is particularly important in the overseeing, policing and even management of reserves.

The question government departments are beginning to ask is, Where does it all end? Where will the society slop in its assumption of responsibilities, either responsibilities not exercised or responsibilities already allocated to government agencies?

The rationale behind it all is that the members of the society would rather do things themselves than see government departments do them. Only a miniscule part of the tax take is spent an conservation matters. They have the time and money to do things themselves. Why not take over things themselves rather than pay the Government to have them done—often too late and sometimes never.

It is not as if a bunch of extremist radicals were threatening them. The threat is coming from a conservative and responsible section of society, whose membership includes at least two former Directors-General of Forests.

At the moment, the society tends to justify its involvement in particular projects, such as raising money to study and save the kokako, on the grounds that the Government is either not doing it or not doing it properly. The Government welcomes this interest—so far—but may find it becoming more of an embarrassment. And the justification given by the society is usually just a blind. It will strive to do this work anyway, because its members want to be involved and want their society to do it, and so encroach increasingly on the responsibilities of the Government. The final solution may be to give the society empowering legislation and let it get on with what it wants to do.