Forest & Bird want land exchange for Ruataniwha water scheme overturned

The Royal Forest & Bird Protection Society is arguing in court the Department of Conservation shouldn't have allowed a land exchange deal letting 22 hectares of Ruahine Forest Park be flooded as part of the Ruataniwha Water Storage Scheme.

The case is being heard at the High Court in Wellington before Justice Matthew Palmer, where Forest & Bird is seeking to overturn the director-general of conservation's decision revoking the conservation status of the land that lies within the footprint of the proposed reservoir.

A land exchange was preferred over Hawke's Bay Regional Investment Co seeking a concession application which was unlikely to be in line with the Conservation Act.

Forest & Bird says the the director-general erred in law in revoking the land's status, which is inconsistent with the differentiation between protected land and stewardship area, and the proper ambit of stewardship area classification.

It also says the purpose to swap the land was improper as only stewardship land or marginal strips can be exchanged, not conservation land, and that "facilitation of a proposed land exchange is not a proper purpose for the exercise of the discretion to revoke specially protected conservation park status."

Forest & Bird also says the director-general cannot rely on the net benefit to the conservation estate achieved by the land swap, as facilitating an exchange isn't a relevant consideration to revoke conservation status.

The lobby group is also arguing the decision isn't in line with the Hawke's Bay conservation management strategy and general conservation policies, that it shouldn't rely on the water scheme going ahead, and that it doesn't address the marginal strips of land created by the swap.

Forest & Bird isn't pursuing its seventh cause of action that the director-general erred by taking into account money that Hawke's Bay Regional Investment Co agreed to provide for habitat enhancement for a native bird, the whio.

The group wants the court to set aside decisions revoking the land's conservation status allowing the land exchange and any other orders the court sees fit. Forest & Bird will also seek costs.

(BusinessDesk)