Chairperson's Address

Canada Geese, rabbits and rural fire have been some of the major issues occupying the High Country Industry Group in recent months.

Following on from the directive from Conference, High Country has taken the responsibility for establishing an umbrella group in the South Island to co-ordinate effective Canada Geese management. We have established a group comprising landholders, Fish & Game, Department of Conservation, hunting groups and aircraft operators. To date this group has worked well together and has agreed some short-term goals, specifically the need for an effective moult cull this summer.

With this in mind representatives of the group met with Biosecurity Minister David Carter and Conservation Minister Kate Wilkinson in September. Proposals to form a self-supporting structure that would keep S.I. Canada Goose levels to a manageable level long-term were outlined to the Ministers but it was emphasised that success depended greatly on a successful moult cull this coming season. The Ministers indicated that they would consider "something" by way of assistance but, at the time of writing, nothing of any substance has been forthcoming.

We are still hopeful, however, and in the meantime continue our active involvement with the Rabbit Co-ordination Group seeking new and improved methods to manage that particular pest. An application for SFF funding has been made in the name of Federated Farmers High Country for a Landcare Research-led project on refining operational practices for controlling rabbits on agricultural lands. We are also planning on having rabbit management as a major theme in the 2012 High Country Field Day, which is scheduled to be held in Marlborough next March.

There have been some interesting research projects on pest management looked into in recent months. Some of these were outlined at conference and another one, looking into a more economic yet still effective process, has produced some promising initial results. This is outlined in Dave Latham's article on 1080 included in this newsletter and we would recommend that you support this project if approached by Dave or his team.

Some changes are being mooted in relation to the control and management of rural fires and High Country has been involved in discussions with the National Rural Fire Officer in relation to these. A seminar, involving a number of our southern members, is scheduled to be held in Alexandra this month and we will keep you up to date with developments on that front.

High Country has been involved in a project with Landcare Research and the Canterbury Regional Council aimed at evaluating carbon storage in tussock grasslands and identifying business and sustainability opportunities from this. Jim Morris instigated this project and has reported on progress at High Country conference over the past 2 or 3 years. The research findings were due for release at the end of last month (just after writing this report) and we look forward to these with some interest.

Planning is underway for next year's High Country Conference. There will be a slight change to the timing of Conference next year. It will be held immediately prior to Queen's Birthday week-end (it is usually immediately afterwards) on Thursday 31^st May and Friday 1^st June. The venue will be the Edgewater Hotel, Wanaka.

 Graham Reed

STOP PRESS:

Subsequent to Graham's writing this piece we have received advice from Ministers Carter and Wilkinson that Government one-off Government funding will be made available to "help fund the interim control of Canada Geese in Canterbury and Otago during this year's moult". This funding will be subject to the Department of Conservation approving a control plan prepared by the co-ordinating group.

Election Time – “Our Manifesto”

In the weeks approaching an election political parties take great delight in putting out manifestos telling us how they can work even more miracles than they promised last time around. Federated Farmers matches these by putting out its own manifesto informing any potential Government what policies it should be implementing that will enable New Zealand to farm its way out of recession.

 The following extract from that manifesto describes what we expect from Government in relation to High Country matters:

"High Country Issues

"Federated Farmers High Country expects the Government of the day to provide a fair political environment that allows land/leaseholders in the high country to operate their businesses within the spirit and intent of the law, free from threats or coercion driven by whim or political expediency. We expect Government policy and actions to be consistent with the law, and all dealings with its leaseholders to be open, honest and dependable.

"We expect Government to acknowledge openly the contribution that many generations of high country families have made towards making the high country the iconic landscape that it is today: their significant investment in weed and pest control and willingness to provide access and other assistance, so that others may also enjoy this special landscape.

"We look for Government partnership in the protection of the land. In many cases Government can be seen as the original exacerbator, either directly or through its agencies. As such it should provide practical support (including financial in appropriate situations) to landholders experiencing excessive weed and pest incursion problems.

"To be able to continue making this contribution high country families must be provided with a working environment that allows their businesses the flexibility to remain viable during changing times. The Crown Pastoral Land Act 1998 (CPLA) was introduced to provide some of this flexibility, including the tenure review process.

"It is in everyone's interest for government and other stakeholders to work with farmers in achieving outcomes from tenure review that are environmentally, economically and socially sound.

"We support the CPLA principle that owners of perpetually renewable Crown Pastoral Leases should be allowed to buy the freehold title to all or most of their land, provided there is ongoing legal protection of areas with Significant Inherent Values (SIV's). We also believe that more recognition should be given to the use of protective mechanisms for SIV's as provided for in the CPLA.

"On most farms, SIVs are defined as Significant Natural Areas by the local district council, and protected by rules laid down in its District Plan under the Resource Management Act. If the local District Plan has yet to provide this protection, these values could be protected by a temporary legal covenant. On properties where large areas of land have both productive and environmental values, protection could be provided by 'sustainable management covenants' under freehold title, as provided for under the CPLA. This would also help to promote community custodianship of covenants.

"SIVs should be evaluated objectively, on the basis of regional significance, rather than what is present on an individual property.

"It is also in everyone's interest to respect the preference of those who do not wish to enter into the tenure review process. These people should not be forced into entering tenure review because valuations for Pastoral Lease rental purposes are based on non pastoral considerations. The Land Act, supported by the CPLA and subsequent legislation asserts that rental values on Crown Pastoral Land is to be determined on the land's productive capability. Any other intention is contrary to the intent of the law.

"Federated Farmers High Country expects the Government of the day to make pragmatic land use decisions rather than decisions stemming from ideology or diehard beliefs. Grazing of Crown Land, for example can provide benefits for all parties. The effects of under-grazing can be as disastrous as those of overgrazing. Under-grazing can create exotic weed and fire problems while a judicious grazing regime can have economic benefits while still protecting vegetation, landscape and other values.

"Federated Farmers High Country wants:

• Government commitment to productivity based rental on Crown Pastoral Leases
  
• A political environment that allows Crown Pastoral Lease holders to chose freely whether to apply for freehold title or continue to operate under leasehold contract
  
• A flexible and practical application to protecting significant inherent values by "alternative" (to reverting to full Crown ownership) means
  
• More pragmatic decision making in dealing with grazing applications on Crown Land."

It should be noted that this policy was written before the release of one Party's manifesto which declared an intention to stop Tenure Review and acquire land to complete a high country parks network by direct purchase. It also intended to "save" the Mackenzie Country. Obviously we need to have more dialogue with that Political Party.

Squatters Rights

About three years ago, the Queenstown Lakes District Council started trying to track down the descendants of 17 sections in the Cardrona Valley which had been abandoned.  This was triggered by an incident in 2008, when a couple of people tried to claim ownership of two sections opposite the Cardrona Hotel by fencing them off and putting signs on the fences claiming the land was private property.  The last known owner of the sections was a 19^th century Chinese gold miner.  Their attempt to claim the land was unsuccessful, but it raises several questions.

If you have been grazing stock on land you suspect has been abandoned or belongs to a "lost" owner, what rights to do have?  Can you turn your occupation into some form of permanent ownership?  If you have been using the land for long enough, you may be able to claim ownership of it, without having to pay for it. 

The Land Transfer Amendment Act 1963 allows any person who is in possession of land, and who has being in continuous possession of that land for at least 20 years, to apply to the Registrar-General of Land  for the issue of a fee simple title to the landing that person's name.

What does "possession" mean?    The Courts have said that the possession relied on must be "actual, open and manifest, exclusive, and continuous. "   The possession must be open so that, if the owner lived in the locality and passed the property from time to time, he or she could reasonably see that some person had taken possession of the land. 

The type of conduct which indicates possession will vary according to the type of land.  In the case of vacant and unfenced land which is not being cultivated or grazed, there is little that can be done on the land to indicate possession.  In many cases, possession cannot be continuous from day to day, but possession may still be established even if there are intervals, and sometimes long intervals, between events of use by the applicant.  Fencing the land is evidence of possession, but it is not necessary, nor is it conclusive evidence of possession.

It will be up to the person making the application to prove possession.

If the Registrar is satisfied that the applicant has proved possession, then the application is advertised by the Registrar. 

If the registered owner of the land lodges a caveat, then the applicant's claim is defeated.  If not, then the Registrar will issue a fee simple certificate of title in the applicant's name.   No application can be made if;

owned by the Crown

• the land being claimed is Maori land
  
• the land being claimed is owned by a local authority
  
• the land is owned by a trust for any public purpose
  
• the claim for the land which is occupied is based on the fact that a fence, wall, hedge, building, ditch or other means of marking the boundary between that land and the adjoining land is not on the common boundary
  
• the claim is based on a change of course of any river, creek or stream
  
• the land is isolated from any other land in the same ownership by any river, creek or stream or any other natural feature of the land or of adjoining land or by any road.
  
• the owner of the land claimed is under a disability e.g. the owner is under 18 years old, or has a mental disability

 (Contributed by Mike Toepfer, a partner in the Wanaka Office of AWS Legal)

Promising Results from Reducing 1080 Costs

A Landcare Research team headed by Dave Latham, Graham Nugent, and Bruce Warburton has been involved in a research project investigating economic, yet effective, ways to refine operational practices for using aerially sown 1080 carrot for controlling rabbits on agricultural lands

In many areas, with the waning effectiveness of Rabbit Haemorrhagic Disease, rabbit densities are now at very high levels. They are adversely affecting stocking rates, causing significant soil erosion, and damaging natural ecosystems and plant communities.

Aerial baiting with 1080 or Pindone remains the most effective method for primary control of rabbits but it is hugely expensive, costing up to $100 per hectare. The high cost results mainly from the high quantities of bait needed to be sown to minimise the risk that rabbits get sub-lethally poisoned from eating bait that is variable in size and in toxic loading (i.e. because of poor bait quality).

We examined if new bait application methods, aimed at reducing the amount of bait and 1080 used in poison operations, could significantly reduce control costs but still achieve high reductions in rabbit numbers.

As a first step, we sowed toxic bait in strips 75 metre apart as opposed to broadcasting bait to get complete coverage which is current best practice. This method reduces the amount of bait and fixed-wing aircraft flight time required to spread the bait by 66 percent, but still provides sufficient bait for all rabbits within the treated area to obtain a lethal dose. We similarly manipulated the second non-toxic pre-feed in some trials to further reduce the amount of bait and flight time required.

We found that experimental treatments were as effective at reducing rabbit numbers as the current practice of broadcasting bait. The amount of bait spread on treated properties was reduced from 30 kg per hectare to 10 kg per hectare (i.e. a 66 percent decrease), with similar proportional reductions in the amount of 1080 used per hectare. Costs were reduced by 25 percent when this method was applied solely to the toxic application, whereas costs were reduced by 50 percent if the new sowing methods were applied to one pre-feed and the toxic application.

Our initial trials have shown great promise in reducing rabbit control costs using 1080. In subsequent years, we aim to assess the efficacy of reducing the sowing rates still further (e.g. 5kg/ha), and whether increasing the concentration of 1080 from the current best practice of 0.02 percent to 0.04 percent will enable even lower sowing rates to be effective.

This work was a collaborative effort between Landcare Research and Otago Regional Council

(Contributed by Dave Latham, Landcare Research)

National 1080 Operations

Those involved in 1080 operations may be interested to know that the 2010 Annual Report on Aerial Use of 1080 is now available on the Environmental Protection Authority website by clicking here.

The report contains a synopsis of the data from the post operational reports for aerial 1080 operations carried out in the 2010 calendar year.  It also includes an update on the progress made towards the best practice and research recommendations made by the Authority in its 2007 decision on the reassessment of 1080.

The website also includes information about the ‘watch list', (our ongoing monitoring of aerial operations), best practice information, copies of annual reports on aerial operations, and other useful links and documents.

Post-operational reports are progressively posted on the Environmental Protection Authority website as they are received and verified, and can also be viewed on the webpage.

NOTE: "Tussock Talk" is distributed electronically to all Federated Farmers members who list "High Country" as an interest and who have supplied us with their e-mail address. If you have received a hard copy it will be because we do not have your e-mail address. Please let us know if you would like this newsletter delivered electronically (Tel. 0800 327 646 and ask for Membership Services, Bronwyn Wilson or Bob Douglas)

Tussock Talk is an electronic newsletter distributed to all Federated Farmers members who list High Country as an interest on their membership and who have supplied us with their e-mail address. If you have received a hard copy it will be because we do not have your e-mail address. Please let us know if you would like this newsletter delivered electronically, and to check all your details are up-to-date on our database, please call 0800 327 646.

If you have any questions or comments about matters in this newsletter, or anything else relating to the High Country industry, please contact the High Country executive or committee by clicking here. Alternatively, you can contact industry manager, Bob Douglas, by clicking here or by calling 0800 327 646.