Eastland Wood Council chairman Julian Kohn (pictured bottom left) is concerned about the potential economic impact of a draft land use transition plan. Gisborne District Council CEO Nedine Thatcher Swann is pictured top left. Photos / Supplied
A forestry stakeholder has expressed concerns around the potential economic impact of a plan to have permanent native vegetation cover on up to 100,000 hectares of erosion-prone land in Tairāwhiti.
The Gisborne-East Coast region has been hit hard by storms and cyclones in recent years. Woody debris and eroding land are ongoing issues with Gisborne District Council estimating about one million tonnes of soil and sediment is lost into rivers in Tairāwhiti every week.
The council intends to present a sustainable land use business case to central government, seeking Crown investment to help transition some of the region’s worst erosion-prone land - labelled indicative transition zone (ITZ) and formerly known as Overlay 3B - into permanent vegetation cover.
A 145-page draft and a 16-page executive summary were presented at a council meeting this month.
The council has identified that up to 1000 landowners will need to transition anywhere from 60,000 to 100,000ha (up to 12% of Tairāwhiti’s land area) of vulnerable land identified by Landcare Research / Manaaki Whenua, according to the business case.
The Transition Advisory Group (TAG), a group of local farmers, foresters, Māori landowners, council staff and MPI experts, has worked over the past 12 months to develop a plan to transition vulnerable land.
However, Eastland Wood Council (EWC) chairman Julian Kohn, an advisory group member, disagrees with some aspects of the draft business case.
EWC is a forestry industry advocacy group for the Gisborne and Wairoa regions. Members collectively manage tens of thousands of hectares of forest in Tairāwhiti.
Kohn agreed that land-use transitions needed to take place, particularly around the vulnerable land that had been identified, but he had concerns surrounding the proposal’s wording on natives.
“We certainly don’t agree that natives are the only answer on all this land,” he said. “You only need to look at examples like poplars, willows, redwoods and other timber, which would do a good job in terms of their root and soil-holding capacity.”
Kohn was concerned the report understated potential risks to the region’s economy, saying no one had done “any real analysis” of the potential economic impact of the land-use changes.
The business case notes excessive quantities of sediment and woody debris caused economic, social and environmental harm to Tairāwhiti.
The executive summary states “transition makes economic sense for Aotearoa”.
“Undertaking the transition of our vulnerable whenua avoids costs and negative impacts for whānau, the region, the economy and our nation, and opens up opportunities for high-quality jobs, new businesses and new commercial opportunities,” the executive summary says.
From the perspective of the forestry industry, Kohn said it could already see there would be a significant economic impact from the proposed land transition.
He believed the plans could have “major implications” for the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS).
“If we are not able to replant in areas which are under the ETS, and credits have been sold in those areas and we can’t replant them, we will be liable.”
Aratu Forests chief executive Neil Woods earlier shared concerns about potential issues with the ETS.
“If we deforest now and don’t establish a crop that meets the ETS requirements within four years, we’re liable for a currently around $50,000 hectare charge for deforestation tax,” Woods told RNZ earlier this year.
The voluntary carbon market was another “big question mark” for Kohn.
If the council prescribed regulations in that area, landowners may not be able to claim voluntary credits, he said.
The council was approached for comment on Kohn’s comments.
Head of the Gisborne-Wairoa Province of Federated Farmers, Charlie Reynolds, initially expressed concerns in a written statement to The Gisborne Herald that the process of land transition would not be voluntary.
However, in a statement after meeting with council staff member Kerry Hudson, he said his earlier concerns had been “cleared up”.
“It turns out much of the issue came down to wording and tone in the business case. The council has acknowledged that and agreed some changes are needed,” Reynolds said.
“We’re now fully engaged with each other and moving forward in a constructive way. The council is genuinely keen to hear from farmers, and we’ll be working together to hold consultation meetings and presentations so that farmers can have their say.”
Reynolds said there would be some regulatory elements for landowners who refused to take any action, but for those willing to do the work, the council would provide information and support.
“I’m confident we’re now heading in the right direction.”
During a council meeting this month, chief executive Nedine Thatcher Swann said in the long-term the vegetation would be permanent indigenous cover, “but to get there, landowners also needed to make these decisions for themselves”, so they had not been specific on that in the business case.
The council is seeking $1 million in Government funding for the establishment phase, followed by $16m to $48m annually for the programme’s first 10 years.
It is estimated the plan will cost $359m in its first 10 years.
However, the council anticipates it would “reduce the future need for the $80+ million already spent cleaning up rivers and beaches after recent storms”.
The financial aspects of the business case were still under development, with work still required on the long-term sources of funding and the evaluation mechanisms.
The business case highlighted the status quo was “unsustainable” under the current model of land use.
“Under the current land use, benefits are concentrated among a small group – mainly landowners, forestry operators and overseas investors – while disbenefits are widely distributed across communities, infrastructure and the environment."
The council aimed to submit the complete business case and delivery plan to central Government for its consideration by the end of this month in time for Budget 2026.
If successful, the council aimed to have core elements to establish the programme in place by Q3 2026.
At the council meeting, Thatcher Swann said regulatory changes would be a key part of pursuing the plan.
The council said in a joint statement with Federated Farmers, issued after Reynolds new statement: “Current land-use practices are no longer sustainable. Around one million tonnes of soil is lost into rivers in Tairāwhiti every week, and the recovery bill from recent weather events is estimated at $1.2 billion.
“Both council and Federated Farmers agree that without dedicated funding the cost of transition will fall to landowners and ratepayers. That’s neither equitable nor feasible.
“That is why council and TAG are developing a regional Business Case and Delivery Plan – to seek co-investment from Government and other funding partners. This is about building long-term resilience, not spending millions after every flood on clean-ups that don’t address the cause."
The statement said stronger rules were needed in the Tairāwhiti Resource Management Plan (TRMP) around how erosion-prone land was managed.
As part of a review of the management plan, the council was exploring property-specific Sustainable Land Use Plans (SLUP) for landowners to plan the transition of their whenua, avoiding duplication with freshwater farm plan requirements.
“Council is only in the early stages of investigating what the plan change could involve, and this is dependent on further consultation with landowners to draft a proposal, and on securing an exemption to Plan Stop legislation,” the joint statement said.
The Resource Management (Consenting and Other System Changes) Amendment Act was passed into law on August 20. Included with this legislation was the Plan Stop amendment, which stops councils from carrying out some plan-making work in advance of the Government’s replacement of the Resource Management Act.
“Federated Farmers supports the content of the transition programme and sees the SLUP approach as a constructive alternative to top-down regulation,” the joint statement said.