Federated Farmers: Feds give stewardship quandary a nudge

Federated Farmers raised the issue over conservation estate and how it can be better utilised. The question is when will the Government act on proposals endorsed by Dr Jan Wright?

Being appreciated gives you a good feeling.

Late last year, in this publication, Federated Farmers suggested it was high time Government got around to assessing the true value of "stewardship land". Well it has taken the best part of three decades to get this underway.

In brief, stewardship land is administered by the Department of Conservation (DOC) and is land that has not been specifically categorised or identified for special protection such as national parks.

About one third of all the conservation estate remains in this state of "limbo" -- most of it since DOC was established in 1987.

Our call for action was noted by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Dr Jan Wright.

In an update to Parliament in April, Dr Wright reported, "The proposal from Federated Farmers to simplify land swaps has merit and is in line with the original purpose of allowing boundary adjustments and rationalising small areas of conservation land".

At the time of the October article we were looking into why the process of land swaps was so protracted.

Land swaps that achieve net conservation gains for the conservation estate are allowed by the Conservation Act (clause 16A).

The Act also provides for (DOC) purchases of private land that is seen to have high conservation values and disposal of land that does not.

With extensive consultation criteria to be followed in the disposal of any Crown land, any negotiation is going to be more involved than private deals.

But aside from this, the more we looked into the matter the more we realised that the biggest stumbling block is that while legislation allows for these deals there is no budgetary provision for DOC to do this.

So any deal that DOC agrees to not only has to bring it a net conservation gain but also a net financial gain -- or at least, no loss.

The anomaly of the situation was compellingly emphasised in one situation (a sale) where the landowner told us he believed the land in question had major conservation values.

He acknowledged that "DOC should have the land".

DOC wanted the land and the regional council wanted the land protected. All parties readily reached agreement -- but without the financial wherewithal available to them, DOC went to the Nature Heritage Fund to finance the purchase. The fund declined the proposal.

Thus there exists a deficiency where there is a provision for land swaps or purchases to be enabled but there are no funds to allow this to happen.

There is a possible solution to this situation that would cost Government very little, if any, funds -- and this is where the review of the status of stewardship land comes in.

The review would facilitate the disposal of stewardship land that has minimal conservation value but could be useful commercial (productive) land.

The funds acquired from such disposal should be "ring-fenced" to be used only to enable public/private land transactions to proceed.

And yes, there is legal precedent for this: clause 16A(4) of the Conservation Act requires any funds acquired by the Crown through this process to be allocated to "the Department of Conservation Grants and Gifts Trust Account, and shall be applied ... for the acquisition of land under this Act or the Reserves Act 1977 or the National Parks Act 1980".

To us it seems like a win-win-win situation all round: DOC has the wherewithal to acquire land with special conservation values; DOC does not have to use funds in the administration of land that has minimal conservation value; and more land is returned to useful production. What's the hold up?