A research paper released online last month showed that Gisborne region was the only council that developed rules in a “strategic and principled” way after law changes in 2018 enabled councils to set their regulations.

Lincoln University ecologists and planners are behind the research paper entitled: A stringent failure: Regulators do not use available tools to protect aquatic ecosystems from clearcut forestry impacts in New Zealand.

They are calling for an urgent review of forestry plantation regulations as the research shows current standards are not doing enough to protect aquatic ecosystems nationwide.

Mayor Rehette Stoltz told RNZ that Gisborne needs to have bespoke, fit-for-purpose rules in the region, and Forest Owners Association chief executive Dr Elizabeth Heeg said there could be potential for special provisions around tertiary mudstone, one of the problematic soils causing erosion in the region.

Heeg also estimates that some forestry companies could retire up to 20-30% of their land if they transition the region’s worst eroding land into permanent vegetation cover.

Gisborne District Council is planning for these land transitions as part of land overlay framework Overlay 3b.

Local Democracy Reporting (LDR) asked Forestry Minister Todd McClay whether the proposed changes to national forestry standards will consider research on how forestry slash affects water ecosystems and whether special provisions could be made for tertiary mudstone.

Additionally, McClay was asked whether forestry and farm owners would be compensated for the land they won’t be able to use if retiring highly erodible land for vegetation cover takes place.

McClay did not answer questions about compensation but said the Government is proposing several changes to the national direction, including amendments to the national environmental standards for commercial forestry (NES-CF).

He said these changes would enable council plans to have more stringency than the NES-CF where required and is based upon “clear evidence”.

He acknowledged the council’s current plans for Overlay 3b and said the changes will ensure that there will be a range of tools available to central and local government for forestry and land use policy.

The council recently set up a Transition Advisory Group (TAG) including forestry owners, council staff, the Ministry of Primary Industries, people with farming interests and Māori landowners.

Acting director liveable communities Kerry Hudson said in a statement that the purpose of TAG is to develop methods to help transition steep erosion-prone land to vegetation cover.

The group aims to hold the soil in place and thereby significantly reduce the impacts of forest harvest every 24-30 years.

“The guidance from the group will ultimately help reduce soil erosion and improve water quality, which in turn will enhance land, aquatic and marine biodiversity,” she said.

The council have used modelling and spatial data to show land with high landslide susceptibility and connectivity to waterways.

Hudson said some high-risk land is already eroding, including some areas that are “void of trees” as they “have slipped off steep slopes”, and some soils and woody debris which have already slipped into waterways.

“Much of the land shows slip scarring or gullying.”

She also said some trees are not suitable for harvest because of their stunted condition or are unharvestable because of their location.

“One of the roles of the TAG is to help identify the best transition option for each area,” she said.

Director sustainable futures Jo Noble said that regardless of the potential changes to national forestry rules, the work of the group will remain relevant and extremely useful.

She said from early council discussions with the Government, they are confident that officials understand the challenge posed by Tairāwhiti’s geology and terrain and are actively exploring ways to provide for this.

Noble said the best outcomes are usually achieved if land use changes occur voluntarily. However, because of the significance of the issue, there is a need for some form of regulatory framework rather than reliance on voluntary approaches.