Supplied
Offending by Forwood Forest Management Ltd., caught in a photograph that was provided to Gisborne District Council.
It might be difficult, but forestry companies need to abide by rules that protect the environment, a judge has told a Gisborne company before sentencing it to a $73,500 fine.
Chief Environment Court Judge David Kirkpatrick has sentenced Forwood Forest Management Ltd. after the company pleaded guilty to 11 charges that involved the use of heavy machinery in streambeds and leaving slash and debris on steep and erosion-prone slopes in Gisborne.
The offending occurred in Papakorokoro Forest, a 287hectare plantation forest about 30km northwest of Gisborne, in 2021 and 2022.
The forest is on steep terrain that is prone to severe erosion, and includes three main streams, all of which flow into the Waipaoa River, which enters Poverty Bay near Gisborne.
Gisborne District Council officers visited the forest in 2021 and on four occasions told Forwood director Matthew Strijbosch that they had concerns around general poor practice, including the large amount of slash left on slopes that were susceptible to rain flow.
Supplied
Offending by Forwood Forest Management Ltd. involved the use of heavy machinery in the bed of the Mangaoai Stream, with logs, slash and debris left at the site.
The offending included the unlawful construction of roads and a stream crossing in the bed of the Mangaruaki Stream. The crossing was poorly built and at risk of failure, which would have seen material enter the stream and cause further erosion.
The road failed to meet permitted standards and would also result in material entering the gully and stream.
Judge Kirkpatrick said Forwood’s offending was an example of “poor practice and poor management of a difficult activity that poses many risks to the quality of the environment and, in particular, to water quality”.
Supplied
A digger in the Mangaoai Stream. Offending by Forwood Forest Management Ltd.
“While one can appreciate the inherent complexity of the activity, operators are required by plan rules and national environmental standards, as well as the guidelines of their own association, to exercise high levels of care and attention and must be held to account for that, otherwise the benefits of the harvest will be offset, possibly to a great extent, by the damage harvesting can do to the environment,” he said.
“In this case, as with others on the East Coast, one must reflect that planting done to recover from damage caused by a significant event some 30 years ago is a potential source of damage from significant events occurring now,” the judge said.
