Source: Federated Farmers
Federated Farmers says another $3 million for wilding pines control is very welcome – but falls well short of what’s needed.
“New Zealand’s iconic landscapes are under threat, and the battle against wilding conifers is being lost,” Feds pest animal and weed spokesperson Richard Dawkins says.
“It’s not an exaggeration to call this an ecological crisis. It’s a ticking time bomb that’s about to blow.”
The Government collects $100 each from most international visitors arriving in New Zealand.
Last week it was announced $3 million over three years of this International Visitor Levy (IVL) revenue will go to the National Wilding Conifer Control Programme, in particular for work in the Molesworth and Mackenzie Basin areas.
This boost comes on top of $3.35 million of IVL revenue over three years dedicated earlier this year to wilding control work in Canterbury, Marlborough, Otago and on Rangitoto Island in the Hauraki Gulf.
“We’re grateful for the support, but let’s be clear: this level of funding won’t shift the dial. We need enduring, cross-party funding but also a smarter, more strategic response,” Dawkins says.
“Tourists come here for our iconic scenery, yet in too many districts wilding conifers are overrunning productive land and native biodiversity.”
Community-led groups like the South Marlborough Landscape Restoration Trust and Mackenzie Wilding Trust do exceptional work. However, the scale of the challenge far exceeds the current funding available.
New tactics are required, Dawkins says.
Crown pastoral leases lost through tenure review have seen large areas completely overrun with weeds and pests.
At the same time, grazing concessions on public conservation land are difficult and expensive to obtain.
“Without active land use, these areas turn into breeding grounds for wilding pines and TB-carrying pests, threatening neighbouring farms and conservation efforts,” Dawkins says.
“Putting farmers back on the land means those with the most at stake are managing weeds and pests, while also supporting export revenue and local jobs.”
Dawkins says one of the most significant wilding conifer seed sources in the country, in Marlborough’s Branch and Leatham river catchments, is expected to cost more than $150 million to control.
“That’s just one site, and it’s a seed source for the wider south Marlborough region.
“The area was originally aerially seeded with conifers by the Crown for soil management, with a promise to address any unintended consequences.
“Some funding has been allocated over the years, but it’s been patchy and nowhere near enough to tackle the problem properly.”
Since 2016, governments have spent $150 million on wilding pine control, with another $33 million from landowners and communities.
“But without sustained effort and fresh thinking, we risk all that going backwards.” Dawkins says.
“We’re not trying to sound ungrateful, but the current approach – small, ad hoc funding rounds outside normal budgeting – feels like a lolly scramble.
“It makes long-term planning and prioritisation incredibly difficult.”
Two-thirds of critical work has been deferred since the 2023/24 financial year because of a big drop in funding for the national programme.
“This means we’re quickly losing ground across the country in areas affected by wilding pines, and control costs are increasing exponentially,” Dawkins says.
Base funding for the national control programme is $10 million yearly.
Wilding Pine Network chair Richard Bowman estimates $25 million a year for the next decade is needed to reduce wilding pines enough to a level where private and Crown landowners can get on top of the rest.
Dawkins says the wilding pine problem sits squarely within Federated Farmers’ Save Our Sheep campaign, which calls for urgent action on weed and pest control, and expanded access to high-country grazing.
“We also welcomed the announcement in June of $7.45 million for invasive coastal weed control and weed detection software.
“That’s good news, but we also need to boost council biosecurity teams. They’re under-resourced and fighting on too many fronts,” Dawkins says.
“If we’re serious about protecting our environment and rural economy, we need long-term thinking and practical policy – not just short-term funding rounds.”
