High Country Accord
Media Release
26 August 2009

Farmers welcome new high country policy

The government’s new policy for Crown Pastoral Lands has been welcomed by those who farm the two million or so hectares of high country land under perpetual pastoral lease contracts.

“This is very sound policy. The government has taken into account the interests of the public as well as the rights of the land holders, while achieving a balance between economic and environmental objectives,” says High Country Accord chair Jonathan Wallis.

“The commitment to rebuilding relationships between the Crown and high country farmers is particularly welcome. Coupled with the recognition of the iconic nature of high country farming and its contribution to New Zealand culture and identity, this will hopefully put to an end an unfortunate era in which farming families were under constant attack by their own government.”

Mr Wallis says the lifting of the ban on lakeside properties from entering tenure review was inevitable.

“The previous exclusion policy was based on the premise that tenure review would automatically lead to unsustainable or inappropriate development on what was previously public land. This was completely incorrect.

“Tenure review is a change of tenure from leasehold to freehold while achieving outcomes that reflect the national objectives for high country land. It is not an alienation of Crown land, rather it is a review of land already alienated from the Crown under the pastoral lease system.

“Tenure review does not mean farmers are given a right to develop or subdivide. Both of these activities are subject to district planning regimes under the Resource Management Act.

“No one has ever supported or endorsed unsustainable or inappropriate development, but it is for the district planning process to decide where to draw the line. The government’s initiative to ensure a level of consistency between the various district plans is fair and makes sense.”

Mr Wallis says the three new objectives of stewardship, economic use and relationships are practical and achievable unlike the ones they replace. The key difference is that the new objectives reflect an understanding that conservation and farming can co-exist as part of sustainable enterprises.

“The new policy no longer envisages the creation of a network of high country parks. This reflects the fact that there is already a considerable network of conservation land in the South Island high country and that there are options other than Crown ownership when looking to achieve conservation outcomes,” he says.

“This government appears to understand the need to distinguish preservation from conservation and the need to prioritise what is genuinely in the public interest.”

Mr Wallis says the policy surrounding the rental formula on pastoral leases is still an area of concern. Until the Crown explains the exact nature and intent of their High Court appeal in the Minaret case he says there is an element of not knowing where it will lead.

“If the appeal does not challenge the fundamental determinations of the Land Valuation Tribunal regarding the description and value of improvements, nor the determination of where Minaret Station sits as a pastoral proposition, there are some positives for the station,” he says.

“But if they are seeking to have non-pastoral values included in the rental valuation, this would be highly problematic for all pastoral leases. Depending on the outcome, this would raise the prospect of yet a further appeal with Minaret supported by the High Country Accord representing all other high country lessees.”

Mr Wallis says the prospect of further litigation is disappointing. It means further financial and emotional cost for farming families who have already endured more than six years of uncertainty as a result of the previous Government’s decision to review its approach to rental valuations in the high country.

“Clarifying the decision will indeed come as a benefit for both the Crown and the farmers, but the costs will be substantial. The Government appears committed to seeking a legitimate sustainable approach to high country management, but in so doing they must respect the well established legal rights of lessees.”

ENDS

© Scoop Media