Ballina Shire Council will push for a review of the state government’s decision not to allow the council to take control of approving native forestry in the shire. Source: Echonetdaily
Late last year, the council voted to amend the Ballina Local Environment Plan 1987 to introduce a requirement for council consent for anyone undertaking private native forestry (PNF) in the shire.
PNF is the logging of native vegetation on private property, and it requires Environment Protection Authority approval.
Cr Paul Worth brought the issue to the council and as a result council staff prepared a planning proposal to amend the LEP, which was lodged with the NSW Department of Planning and Environment for a ‘Gateway determination’ in January. But the Department rejected the application.
The council last week voted unanimously to ‘note the decision of the Department to reject the planning proposal, but submit a review application’.
Staff had also recommended that Ballina MP Tamara Smith, the Local Government Association of NSW, and other northern rivers councils be advised of the council’s actions.
Cr Worth told Echonetdaily that he was surprised by the state government’s decision.
“I’m surprised by a lot of things but we’ll keep plodding away and hope that common sense prevails,” Cr Worth said.
“I’ve been a long term resident and I’ve seen people destroying fantastic koala habitat to remove it for timber and I’m opposed to it.
“The council should be the authority to give approval to do so.
“The whole issue should be looked at, at a more local level.”
Staff had told councillors that the main reasons for refusal appeared to be that a state government review of ‘E zones’ had not been finalized and ‘it was not seen as appropriate to include additional consent requirements in the deferred areas for a land use linked to existing rural pursuits’.
The Department also said an independent review of biodiversity legislation, including the Native Vegetation Act 2003, had recently been exhibited for public comment.
“Given the proposed changes to biodiversity legislation it was considered to be premature to introduce new controls and duel consent provisions,” the Department said in its response.
Staff countered however, that the proposed amendments to the Ballina LEP 1987 were of no relevance to the government’s biodiversity review.
They also said that the introduction of the proposed provisions were not E zone dependent, and that the Department had not provided any information on a timeframe for the conclusion of the E zone review.
“In the absence of the planning proposal being able to proceed, there is a risk of an open ended continuation of private native forestry with very limited regulation and further adverse impacts in relation to amenity, ecology, soil erosion, sedimentation, noise, traffic and roads,” staff has said in their report.
