Stewart Island under threat?

Press, 11 July 1979, Page 19

Stewart Island under threat?

By

OLIVER RIDDELL

Beautiful, tranquil, remote — these three words are the ones that spring most readily to mind when contemplating Stewart Island. But a fourth word is already hovering in the air, and it may be enough to destroy Stewart Island’s beauty, tranquility and remoteness. The fourth word is “money.” Commercial development of Stewart Island is now being seriously considered. It is not a national park, even though much of it is in reserves of one designation or another; its human population is one of the lowest, if not the lowest, any- : where in the temperate zones of the world; and it, has a number of developable (or “exploitable”) assets. ; Its three main commercial assets are minerals, timber and tourism very little serious prospecting has been done on Stewart Island, but traces of gold and tin found there suggest that its mineral assets may be considerable. As far as is known, no major mining companies have applied for prospecting licences there yet, but a couple are known to be interested.

The legal position of any holder of a prospecting licence applying for a mining licence (outside a national park) is still not clear. Some experts say the issuing of a prospect-

ing licence implies a moral obligation, at least, to permit mining. The degree of the obligation depends on a number of factors, but one major factor is the status of the land. Here Stewart Island may be vulnerable because of the hodge-podge nature of land classifications there.

Historically, control of government land on Stewart Island has been vested fairly equally between the Forest Service and the Lands Department. There have been endless frictions between them over the years, which has tended to frustrate over-all planning for the future. These frictions have prevented either department from any major commitment, and there is no clear guideline. Forestry development is, as a result, a real possibility. But whatever the legal situation, conservationists can take comfort from the fact the successive governments and forestry administrations have freely given verbal assurances that they do not intend to mill on Stewart Island. Apart from anything else, the costs of establishing a

mill or even just carrying logs across Foveaux Strait would be prohibitive. Forest Service authority does not end there however. Stewart Island red

deer have always provided particularly good hunting, but red deer can be pests, and now the Forest Service is having to consider, for the first time, the use of significant quantities of 1080 poison on Stewart Island.

The problem is that some of the best bush is dying —■ mainly on the north-east and east costs, which are the main places seen by visitors. No one reason can be advanced for this. It is thought to be a combination of the activities of red deer and opossums, the great variations and savage cold of the climate, and salt spray. Salt spray is normally more important on the west coast, but heavy easterly storms which did so much damage on the east coast of the South Island last year also had an impact on Stewart Island. It is with great reluctance that the use of 1080 is contemplated. The Forest Service does not want to upset the hunters (principally) or the bird life, and conservation interests are very worried indeed about the effect on nontarget species of birds, particularly when so little is known about the birdlife on Stewart Island.

Only when the kakapo was on the verge of extinction was a major colony of the bird found on Stewart Island. Who can be sure what else is there, or which population is in danger now? But the main threat facing the existence of Stewart Island as it stands today is the tourist. This threat is also the hardest to pin down and identify.

Given its appearance, Stewart Island ought to be a mecca for tourists. The same is true of Fiordland ' National Park, but because it is a national park the numbers and movements of tourists in Fiordland can be kept under strict control. There is no plan to make Stewart Island a national park, but neither is there any plan for its development. So any

development may occur piecemeal and be uncoordinated. This in turn could lead to the destruction or severe modification of the values which give Stewart Island its charm. The Member of Parliament for Awarua (Mr R. Austin), in whose electorate Stewart Island lies, has shown a keen interest in it. What seems to be needed is some commis-

sion of inquiry to look into the values of Stewart Island and the options open to it, and then promote a public debate. The values of beauty, tranquility and remoteness are all easily upset and destroyed. Unless a concious effort is made to preserve them Stewart Island may go the way of many other beauty spots, and become a monument to shortsightedness.