Controls on native forests upheld

Press, 27 July 1988, Page 3

Controls on native forests upheld

By

DAVID CLARKSON

The appeal by Nelson Pine Forest, Ltd, against planning controls on the clearing of native forest on private land has been dismissed by Mr Justice Holland in the High Court. cil.”

In a two-day hearing last week, the company appealed against a decision by the Planning Tribunal, which confirmed a ruling by the Waimea County Council making logging or clearing of native forests subject to conditional-use requirements. The case dates back to a District Planning Scheme Review by the council, adopted in June, 1984. The Native Forests Action Council, now known as the Maruia Society, and others objected to the provision making “commercial forestry and the growing of trees for any purpose” a predominant use in the Rural C zone. After the objections were heard, the scheme was amended to "recognise the importance of the remnant native forests within the county, both on Crown and private land.” The council decided: "Any logging or clearance of native forest in all rural zones will be subject to conditional use application procedures. “The procedure provides the opportunity for

a developer to justify the need for logging, it gives the opportunity for objectors to justify the need for protection, and therefore the council has the opportunity to weigh up the benefits of retaining a piece of native forest as opposed to the economic benefits which would accrue from logging, based on the, information presented.” The company and the New Zealand Forest Owners’ Association then appealed to the Planning Tribunal against the council’s decision. The tribunal gave an interim decision, dismissing the appeal, but suggesting conditions which should be included in the scheme for deciding on logging applications. In the. High Court hearing, the company sought relief from the tribunal’s decision, and wanted the scheme to revert to its state before the Native Forests Action Council’s objection. The company argued that the tribunal erred by adding the conditions, because they went beyond what the objectors had sought.

It also argued that using conditional-use procedures to control logging was “not a bona fide or consistent use of the powers of the Town and Country Planning Act.” The company also argued that the restrictions on logging could not be imposed without the owners being entitled to compensation. There was no dispute that the council and the tribunal could provide in the district plan for the preservation or conservation of native forest. But the company contended this could only be achieved by a total ban, or by creating a predominant use for the activity to be controlled by special applications to the council. His Honour said he could not accept the argument that once there was a substantial element of conservation or preservation, the conditional-use procedure was inappropriate. He said he was satisfied the imposition of conditions was “a proper and bona fide use of the powers given to the coun-

He decided the questions about proposed logging which the tribunal raised for conditional-use applications were relevant, and it was appropriate for the council to seek the information.

“It is quite apparent that the council and the tribunal recognised the need to control the felling of native forest in the zone. It is equally clear that this need could have been satisfied by taking steps that would result in compensation. The council and the tribunal have endeavoured to take steps that will avoid the need for compensation. This court has held that those steps are within the purview of the act and are lawful,” his Honour said.

He ordered the company to pay costs of $lOOO, plus other payments set by the court registrar, to the Native Forests Action Council. The company was ordered to pay $5OO plus other payments set by the registrar to both the Waimea County Council and the Ministry of Conservation.