Farmers ‘unlikely to clear native bush’

Most farmers have no intention of destroying native bush just to get in ahead of new rules protecting significant natural areas (SNAs), a West Coast farmer and district councillor says.

West Coast Regional Council chairman Allan Birchfield is advising landowners to clear potential SNAs if they can legally do so before the new combined district plan draft comes out in January. ‘‘I’d say get it done now – there’s going to be a big scrap over this and lots of opposition, but if you can do it under the existing rules, my advice would be to do it.’’

The Tai o Poutini Plan Committee (TTPP) – of which both Birchfield and Grey Valley farmer and Grey District councillor Anton Becker are members – is at an impasse over the legal requirement to identify SNAs on the Coast, after a desktop mapping exercise showed more than 25 per cent of remaining private land could be affected.

Becker said the Grey District Council identified 74 SNAs within its boundaries some years ago, and had agreed with those landowners that any native bush outside their SNAs could be cleared without resource consent.

The same did not apply to Buller and Westland districts, which had rules about vegetation clearance, Becker said.

The desktop exercise – largely done from aerial photographs – had classed 25 per cent of his own farm as SNA, Becker said. ‘‘But what it’s picked up on is a lot of gorse – it’s triggered by the height of the vegetation, but it hasn’t distinguished between gorse and native.’’

The Government and the West Coast Regional Council’s own policy statement required the mapping of SNAs but some TTPP members were balking at giving effect to it, Becker said.

‘‘We are stuck at the moment on how to proceed. I personally think it would be best to map just the SNAs that landowners agree to. But whatever we do, I don’t think there will be any wholesale destruction of native bush on farms.’’