NEWS

'

A court ruling has confirmed the powers and actions of Waikato Regional Counsil to undertake pest plant control and bill property owners if they fail to carry out such work to the required standard of the regional pest management strategy. In a complex case brought by landowner Michael Graham Smith Family Trust trustee Maurice Hayes, who had the pest plant woolly nightshade on his property near Pokeno, it was alleged the council exceededits powers under the Biosecurity Act 1993 when it carried out woolly nightshade removal and then billed the iandowner. A council biosecurity contractor first noticed woolly nightshade on the property tn 2002 and, after making various requests to get the weed destroyed,eventually sent a notice to the landowner in 2005 formally requiring that the woolly nightshade be dealt with. The contractor had also tried to help the landowner locate a suitable weed control However, Judge Gibson, sitting in the company. In 2007 the contractor becamefrustrated Manukau District Court found that the with the lack of progress and in January biosecurity contractor and the council had issued a further notice under the Act for the acted properly and fully within its powers landowner to destroy all woolly nightshade in carrying out the work. The council's intention in carrying on on his property. Some limited control was subsequently with the work was merely to destroy the infestation of woolly nightshade after the undertaken. However, an inspection by the contractor plaintiffhad failed to adequately do so, the in July 2007 found 90 per cent of the woolly judge said. "So I do not find any element of bad faith nightshade still remained and the council organised for the work to be done under its in any aspect ofthe fcouncil's]dealings over the matter," he said. regional strategy powers. The council is now in the proeess of The landowner was subsequentlybilled a total of nearly $1"1,000in charges and claiming legal costs. Council manager for biosecurity related costs. After receiving this, he made a number of operations Peter Russell said the case was legal claims alleging the council had acted regrettable. "The landowner did make some attempts improperly. The landowner paid the $11,000 but to deal with the woolly nightshade but not nearly enough," said Mr Russell. refused to admit any liability.

PEST PLANT: Thelackof controlof woolly led nightshade to a courtse a between landownerand Waikato Regional Council. "The judge has upheld our right to take action when landowners aren't doing enough to meet their obligations. "\Moolly nightshade can be a particular problem in the northern Waikato District and we are happy to work with landowners to sort out infestations where they occur and provide control advice. "But equally we won't shy away from taking firm action when landowners don't meet their obligations." Mr Russell stressed that the majority of landowners were co-operative and worked with the council to eradicate pest plants. Woolly nightshade is designated a 'total control' pest under the regional pest management strategy. The plant's total control status is clue to its ability to spread quickly, out-competing native vegetation and impacting upon farm and orchard production in the process.