Firms ‘bleeding money’ claims forestry group: Environmentalist says industry needs to look at its failings

Environmentalists are rejecting claims by a forestry umbrella group that Gisborne District Council does not have the expertise to support and regulate the industry. 

During a presentation to the council last week, Eastland Wood Council chairman Julian Kohn said while forestry made up 32% of the region’s tradeable activity, many forestry companies were finding Gisborne too costly to invest in. 

Kohn said a balance between social, environmental and economic outcomes needed to be achieved in the forestry space, and highlighted Aratu Forests who, in the last three financial years, had recorded a loss of $218 million. 

Firms were “bleeding money” because of increased costs to build skids, more earth movement, water control and moving more slash to sustainable areas. 

The forestry spokesman added that it used to be common forestry practice to spend $100,000 per kilometre on roads but it was now “three times that”. 

Kohn laid a lot of the cost explosion at the district council’s doorstep, claiming it did not have enough capability, experience and knowledge to balance environmental, economic and social outcomes. 

However, he also noted forestry was struggling nationwide, especially due to the log market in China. 

Supporting Kohn’s discussion was East Coast National MP Dana Kirkpatrick, who said that sorting out the changes was crucial, “so we don’t end up in the situation of prosecution and fining people, because that’s not the answer”. 

“That’s not helpful because it means the same thing is still happening,” she said. 

In response, environmentalists say the forestry industry needs to look at its own failings. 

Mana Taiao Tairāwhiti (MTT), a Gisborne group that organised a petition calling for land-use rule changes, said many recent prosecutions of forestry companies had been because they had previously underspent on skid sites, water controls and roads. 

“There’s a good reason they now need to spend more on doing the job properly.” 

The group added that many forestry companies in Gisborne had been repeatedly prosecuted but not a lot seemed to change unless enforcement orders were made. 

MTT said more than a dozen companies in the region had been successfully prosecuted in the past five years. 

Complaints that harvesting and roading rules were stopping forestry companies from chopping down trees were also dismissed by MTT. 

The environmentalists said it was central not local government rules that prohibited these discharges through Section 15(1) of the Resource Management Act. 

The Government announced proposed plans last week to provide a “comprehensive fit-for-purpose National Environment Standard for Commercial Forestry” which would prohibit councils’ ability to make tougher regulations. 

MTT backed the council’s experience in dealing with the issues of forestry regulations. 

“Council staff have been telling the central government for more than a decade that they need region-specific tools to regulate activities in the unique geology of Tairāwhiti,” they said. 

MTT also said the economic figures Kohn used were misleading as while forestry contributed 32% of exports from the region, it accounted for 8.7% of GDP. 

“And we know the GDP goes up every time a machine is sent to pick up slash from rivers and beaches – hardly something to be proud of.” 

Infometrics chief executive and principal economist Brad Olsen clarified this disputed figure with Local Democracy Reporting. 

Olsen said the combined sector of forestry was around 3.4% of the workforce in Tairāwhiti and employed around 10% of the total tradeable sector employment. 

Technically, clearing slash was a cost to the business and wouldn’t increase the GDP counted for forestry operations. Rather it would detract from the total value of forestry products produced. However, the operator picking up the slash would provide (and be paid for) that service, which would be an increase in GDP for that industry. 

“Even if the forestry operator was doing that work themselves, the cost of doing that work would limit forestry GDP but likely add to other industries that provide the supplies for the work to be undertaken,” he said. 

During the council meeting, GDC chief executive Nedine Thatcher Swann noted the presentation was to listen to and not debate. However, “the consents are there for a purpose in terms of the behaviour that we have seen”.