As part of the No More Glyphosate NZ Council Herbicide Transparency Project, we asked councils across New Zealand about herbicide use in public spaces, the products being used, the policies governing their use, how residents are notified, and whether herbicide practices have been formally reviewed.
Buller District Council provided a detailed response covering herbicide products, application practices, notification procedures, decision-making processes, contractor procedures, record-keeping, and future review plans. Following an initial response, the council also answered a series of follow-up questions and supplied additional documentation relating to vegetation spraying operations and spray record keeping.
Quick Summary
| Topic | Response |
|---|---|
| Glyphosate-based herbicides used? | Yes |
| Other herbicides used? | Yes |
| Product information supplied? | Yes |
| Application locations identified? | Yes |
| Application frequency supplied? | Yes |
| Policy information supplied? | Partial |
| Notification procedures described? | Yes |
| Alternative methods discussed? | Yes |
| Formal review information supplied? | No recent review identified |
| Supporting documents supplied? | Yes |
What We Learned
Buller District Council confirmed the use of glyphosate, Tordon Brushkiller, Vigilant, and Metsulfuron for vegetation management across public spaces within the district.
According to the council, glyphosate is typically used on footpaths, kerbing, reserve edges, walking tracks, and occasionally in bush areas adjacent to tracks. Tordon Brushkiller is primarily used for gorse, blackberry, and broom control within road reserves and cemeteries. Vigilant is used as a cut-and-paste treatment for woody weeds and vines within reserves, while Metsulfuron is applied to difficult invasive weeds such as ginger and blackberry, particularly within rural road reserve areas.
The council advised that glyphosate is generally applied quarterly within parks and reserves, with additional applications sometimes required during periods of rapid growth. Footpaths and kerbing are typically treated annually, while weed management within road reserves is generally undertaken once or twice each year depending on the target species.
Where Herbicides Are Used
According to the council’s response, herbicides are used in:
- Parks and reserves
- Footpaths
- Kerbing
- Walking tracks
- Bush areas adjacent to tracks
- Road reserves
- Cemeteries
Application frequency varies depending on the location, weed pressure, seasonal growth conditions, and the type of vegetation being managed.
Products Identified
| Product | Use Described by Council |
|---|---|
| Glyphosate-based products | General weed control |
| Tordon Brushkiller | Gorse, blackberry and broom control |
| Vigilant | Woody weeds and vines |
| Metsulfuron | Invasive weed management |
Following a supplementary information request, the council advised that glyphosate-based products currently used within the district include:
- Roundup
- Weedmaster
- Weed Weapon Invade Gel
Application Frequency
The council advised that glyphosate is generally applied:
- Quarterly within parks and reserves
- More frequently during active growing seasons when required
- Annually on footpaths and kerbing
- Once or twice annually within road reserves depending on the weed species involved
The response indicates that treatment schedules are influenced by weed growth, site conditions, and the level of management required.
Policies, Standards and Oversight
When asked what frameworks govern herbicide use in public spaces, Buller District Council referred to a combination of legislation, EPA controls, regional council requirements, and contractor operational procedures.
The council identified the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996 (HSNO) as the primary legislative framework and noted that contractors operate under a range of operational procedures supporting herbicide use and agrichemical management.
The council also advised that it relies on New Zealand Standard NZS 8409:2004 – Management of Agrichemicals when assessing herbicide use and safety considerations.
As part of the follow-up request, Buller District Council supplied a redacted contractor Standard Work Practice document covering vegetation maintenance spraying. The document outlines requirements relating to staff training, personal protective equipment, environmental protection, public notification, record keeping, spray drift management, and safe handling procedures.
Notification and Public Awareness
The council advised that signage is displayed during spraying operations at access points and, in some situations, may also be displayed prior to spraying commencing.
Residents are also notified when areas such as the Westport Domain, footpaths, and kerbing are scheduled for spraying.
The contractor procedures supplied by the council require operators to ensure notifications have been completed before work begins and to place signs warning members of the public that spraying is being undertaken. The procedures also note that additional notification should be provided when spraying occurs near sensitive locations such as schools, childcare centres, and health facilities.
Decision-Making and Alternatives
The council advised that several factors are considered before herbicides are used, including:
- Whether the plant is a regulated pest species
- Public safety considerations
- Potential damage to infrastructure or public assets
- Whether non-chemical methods are practical and effective
- Potential public exposure
- Risks to non-target vegetation
- Product suitability
- Scale and practicality of the work
The council stated that hand weeding and manual control methods are used where they are considered effective and practicable.
Where chemical control is required, the council advised that preference is given to the lowest effective toxicity products appropriate for the task. New products are also trialled periodically to assess effectiveness and selectivity.
Review and Safety Considerations
When asked whether the council had undertaken any recent internal or independent review of herbicide use or safety, Buller District Council responded that it had not.
However, the council advised that the renewal of the Parks and Reserves contract this year will align with a review into the Management of Agrichemicals within the contract.
In its follow-up response, the council stated that this review is intended to take a balanced and evidence-based approach and will consider opportunities to reduce reliance on herbicides where practical. The council indicated that integrated weed management approaches, including mechanical, cultural, and biological control methods, may form part of the review process.
LGOIMA Process and Response Handling
Buller District Council provided its initial response on 12 May 2026.
Following review of the information supplied, NMGNZ submitted a series of follow-up questions seeking clarification regarding specific glyphosate products, sensitive-area restrictions, contractor procedures, future review processes, and spray record keeping.
Rather than treating the additional questions as a continuation of the original request, the council advised that the information would be processed as a new LGOIMA request due to the time required to collate the material.
A second response was subsequently provided on 9 June 2026, together with supporting documentation.
Documents and Information Provided
Buller District Council supplied:
- A redacted Standard Work Practice document relating to vegetation maintenance spraying
- A redacted Weed Spraying Record template used by maintenance contractors
The supplied spray record form captures information including:
- Date and time
- Location
- Weather conditions
- Target pest species
- Personal protective equipment checks
- Quantities used
- Chemicals applied
The council advised that completed spray records can be made available upon request, although personal identifying information would be redacted.
Observations and Outstanding Questions
Buller District Council provided one of the more detailed responses received through the Council Herbicide Transparency Project to date.
In addition to answering the original questions, the council responded to follow-up requests, identified specific glyphosate-based products, supplied contractor procedures, and provided examples of operational record-keeping documents.
An interesting distinction emerged regarding review processes. While the council advised that no recent internal or independent review of herbicide use has been undertaken, the contractor procedures supplied show that operational spraying procedures have continued to be updated, including revisions made in late 2025. This highlights the difference between contractor-level operational updates and a broader council-wide review of herbicide management practices.
Another notable aspect of the response is the council’s indication that an upcoming review associated with the Parks and Reserves contract renewal may consider opportunities to reduce herbicide reliance and explore integrated weed management approaches. This was one of the more forward-looking responses received during the project.
The follow-up request also demonstrated a willingness to provide supporting documentation rather than simply describing operational procedures in general terms. By supplying both the vegetation maintenance spraying procedure and an example spray record form, the council provided additional context that would not have been available from the original response alone.
Why This Matters
Councils manage a wide range of public spaces used by residents every day, including parks, reserves, footpaths, cemeteries, road reserves, and recreational areas.
Understanding what herbicides are being used, how decisions are made, how residents are notified, and what records are maintained helps improve transparency around public-space vegetation management.
The Council Herbicide Transparency Project aims to build a nationwide public record of how herbicides are managed across New Zealand’s local authorities, helping residents better understand practices within their own communities and supporting informed public discussion about weed management in shared public spaces.
Information Request Details
| Item | Details |
|---|---|
| LGOIMA Reference | OIA 062/26 |
| Initial Response Received | 12 May 2026 |
| Follow-up Questions Submitted | 13 May 2026 |
| Follow-up Request Registered | 15 May 2026 |
| Supplementary Response Received | 9 June 2026 |
| Follow-up Reference | OIA 069/26 |
| Information Current As Supplied | 9 June 2026 |
Information current as supplied under LGOIMA on 12 May and 9 June 2026.
Image Source & Attribution
The feature image on this page was created using AI-assisted image generation based on a concept developed by No More Glyphosate NZ and refined for publication in Canva.
AI can be a useful tool, but it isn’t perfect. If you spot any inaccuracies in the features shown, please contact us and we’ll be happy to review and correct them where appropriate.
