Former Marlborough District councillor Geoff Evans at his family farm, Stronvar, in 2018. Photo: Supplied / Stuff
A Marlborough farmer does not want to hand over pine control on his land over concerns his "struggling" natives could get caught up in "chemical boom spraying".
Geoff Evans had been battling pest pines on his Waihopai family farm, Stronvar Station, for close to two decades, when the Marlborough District Council placed a "containment control zone" on his property.
The zoning was part of an early pest management plan, and Evans had to take "active control efforts" to prevent further infestations of pines outside the zone.
Evans, a former district councillor, previously fought the council over the cost of the wilding pine control, arguing it would be unjust for landowners to pay for eradication, as pines were once introduced by authorities to control silt run-offs.
But, under a new plan adopted in 2020, the council agreed to take over the "containment control zone", which included the pines on the land at Stronvar Station.
Stronvar, at the head waters of the Waihopai, had been in ownership of the Evans family since 1944. It was immediately south of an area of land within the Wye Catchment which was planted in a range of pest conifer species between 1959 and the mid-1980s.
Those plantings - mostly contorta pine, the most "aggressive" spreading species - were carried out by the former Marlborough Catchment Board for erosion control as part of the Wye Catchment Control scheme.
The pines were planted on 370 hectares of land, but later spread to 7000ha, including the "uppermost slopes" of Stronvar, said to be "fragile" mountain lands.
Evans understood the council would chemically boom spray the wilding pines, which he said would damage the indigenous vegetation established amongst the conifers. It was why he took it to the Environment Court as he wanted the containment zone reinstated.
The judgment from the Environment Court said Evans wanted certainty about how the council would go about clearing the pines.
"He also wishes to maintain some control over the process so that he can ensure that the vulnerability of the land and the emerging indigenous vegetation are appropriately accounted for in any eradication operations."
The Environment Court found in his favour, and instructed the council to develop a site led programme and insert it into the pest management plan for Stronvar.
As part of this, a management plan for Stronvar could be developed with Evans' involvement, to address his concerns about the values of the land.
The council, who had concerns that other landowners would want the same thing, had since decided to appeal that decision to the High Court.
Although in doing so, councillors debated about whether they should, given the court process to date had cost at least $45,000.
Blenheim ward councillor Jamie Arbuckle thought the council should accept the Environment Court decision, rather than taking it to the High Court. Photo: LDR / Maia Hart
When the matter was moved to full council last month, Blenheim ward councillor Jamie Arbuckle called for the council to withdraw its appeal.
"The decision has cost council time and money," Arbuckle said.
"What my concern is here, is now we go to the High Court ... that doesn't necessarily mean we will win that challenge, but it will cost council more legal funds.
"Today we've spent probably a little bit more than $45,000, that's an open cheque book when we get to the point of going to the High Court."
The regional pest managment plan would next be reviewed in 2028, and Arbuckle thought it was "unlikely" other landowners would ask for the same thing as Evans had. He thought the previous containment zone was what Evans was asking for.
"I believe the right thing to do is accept the Environment Court decision, get on with business, spend the money on biosecurity, on the business, on the pest conifers. Don't give the money to the courts, let it run it's time to 2028.
"My reading of this ... the containment issue was already being dealt with in previous pest reviews.
Deputy mayor David Croad thought the council should go forward with the appeal. Photo: Stuff / Anthony Phelps
But deputy mayor David Croad - while in agreement that spending more money was "horrible" - thought the council should push ahead with the appeal.
"I believe there are statements made in that judgment, like our regional pest management plan is not consistent with the national policy direction, nor the Biosecurity Act, and I think those things are really large statements.
"And if our legal advice is that we don't believe that is correct, then we need to challenge that."
The full council agreed to push ahead with the appeal which was lodged with the High Court in April.
Local Democracy Reporting is Public Interest Journalism funded through NZ On Air