Up to 60% of New Zealand’s conservation land could be affected by the Government’s Conservation Amendment Bill, which aims to increase economic activity and simplify land disposal processes. The legislation, which passed its first reading in May, has sparked debate over the future of 4,857 square kilometres of Department of Conservation (DOC) land in the Marlborough region alone.
What does the Conservation Amendment Bill propose?
The bill seeks to clarify the criteria for selling or exchanging public conservation land, with a stated goal of improving conservation outcomes. According to Conservation Minister Tama Potaka, the intent is not to sell vast tracts of land, but rather to dispose of “bits and bobs” that hold low conservation value, such as the land beneath the MetService building in Wellington. However, Forest & Bird chairperson Penny Wardle argues that the bill fundamentally shifts the DOC’s purpose. She notes that the legislation requires the department to enable economic use and development of public land “to the greatest extent practicable,” marking a departure from the current mandate of nature protection and restoration.
Which areas in Marlborough are at risk?
Marlborough’s conservation estate covers 46% of the region’s total area. Sites that could be impacted include the Wairau Bar—an area of significant archaeological importance—as well as the Mount Richmond Forest Park, the Molesworth Station, Ka Whata Tu o Rakihouia Conservation Park, and the Pelorus Bridge Scenic Reserve. Marlborough Tramping Club president Murray Chapman expressed concern that the bill could effectively turn the Department of Conservation into a “real estate agent,” potentially compromising public access to these areas to address revenue shortfalls.
Differing views on public land management
Local perspectives on the bill remain divided. Marlborough councillor Gerald Hope has stopped short of opposing a review of public lands, citing concerns over the current “languishing” state of underfunded conservation areas. He suggested that focusing on environmental outcomes is more critical than ownership, and proposed that Molesworth Station remain in public hands under a new operating model. Conversely, Councillor Malcolm Taylor identified limited circumstances where sales might be appropriate, such as land already supporting commercial activity like cafes or campgrounds. Forest & Bird, however, maintains that prioritising economic development over preservation is unacceptable.
What happens next?
The public has until July 2 to submit feedback on the proposed legislation. As the submission deadline approaches, debate is expected to intensify regarding the balance between commercialisation and the preservation of public recreation values. If the bill proceeds, the Department of Conservation could face new requirements to facilitate economic development, a change that critics like Murray Chapman warn could carry political consequences for the National government.
