The RMA is on its way out. On 29 September 2026 the Planning Act and the Natural Environment Act received Royal assent, starting a transition to a system the Government says will make it easier to build homes and infrastructure. For anyone subdividing, developing or managing rural land in the ecological side of consenting is going to look different – though not all at once, and not always in the ways people expect.
This post sets out what has changed, what hasn’t yet, and what it means for the ecological input that sits behind most consent applications.
Where things stand
The Acts are law, but the RMA isn’t gone yet. Both bills passed their third reading on 22 September and received Royal assent on 29 September 2026. The key dates from here:
- 30 October 2026 – the transition period starts. The RMA keeps applying, but with modified consenting rules (Simpson Grierson).
- 2027–2030 – national policy direction and national standards are issued, then regional spatial plans, land use plans and natural environment plans are prepared and notified.
- Late 2030 – the full system is intended to be running, with a four-year backstop bringing any remaining provisions into force regardless.
Each region will end up with one combined plan. More than 100 planning documents become 16. For my clients, that means the Auckland Unitary Plan, the Northland Regional Plan, the Kaipara and Whangarei District plans will all eventually be replaced.
In the meantime, existing plans, existing consents and applications already in the system carry on. Your current consent is still valid.
Most expiring consents are also automatically extended until two years after the transition ends, with scope for a further two years by regulation.
What changes for consenting
The big shift is that more decisions get made once, in the plan, and fewer get argued out consent by consent. That has real consequences for how ecological evidence is used.
The plan becomes the main test. A decision-maker on a consent or permit must now first consider the land use or natural environment plan and national standards. The high-level goals of the Acts only come into play where the plan is silent, unclear or conflicting. If your site’s ecology isn’t recognised in the plan, it will be harder to argue for it at consent stage – and harder for a council to require more of you than the plan says.
Standardised zones and overlays. Zones and overlays will be set nationally through national standards, rather than written district by district. Expect more permitted activities and less room for bespoke local rules.
The precautionary principle is gone. Under the Bill as introduced, a decision-maker facing uncertain or inadequate information on a natural resource permit had to favour caution. That requirement was deleted at select committee. In practice, this puts more weight on whatever evidence is in front of the decision-maker. Good survey data matters more, not less.
Controlled activities survive – for regional matters only. The controlled activity status was reinstated for activities under natural environment plans, but not land use plans.
During the transition, the RMA is modified. From 30 October 2026, councils must disregard some residential design effects (glazing, balconies, outdoor living space and the like) on district land use consents. None of these is ecological, and landscape effects were taken off that list, so ecology assessments carry on largely as now until the new plans arrive.
What changes for ecology
From “no net loss” to protecting what’s significant. The Natural Environment Act’s biodiversity goal no longer seeks no net loss of indigenous biodiversity. It now focuses on protecting significant indigenous biodiversity. Bush, wetland margins and habitat that don’t meet a significance threshold will carry less weight than they do today.
Mapping decides a lot. Significant natural areas and indigenous biodiversity are now grouped as “terrestrial indigenous biodiversity to the extent it relates to an identified area”. Protection follows identification. The real argument over which bush, gully or wetland counts will happen when the new plans are drafted, not at consent stage.
Regulatory relief may make councils cautious. Councils must assess how biodiversity, landscape and similar controls affect the reasonable use of private land, and consider relief where restrictions are significant. Estimates of the national cost range from $7 million to $1.99 billion. With that bill attached, I expect some councils to map less, not more.
Auckland shows the scale. The Unitary Plan’s Significant Ecological Area overlay alone covers about 26,000 ha of private land across roughly 17,300 properties, and around 24,000 properties are caught by some kind of specified rule. The Environmental Defence Society expects councils to keep relief cheap, offering bonus development rights and help with fencing and pest control rather than cash. It also flags that it’s unclear whether notable native trees count as “identified” biodiversity. If that’s how relief plays out, covenanting, fencing and restoration planting could become part of the relief package itself.
The effects management hierarchy is written into law. Decision-makers must consider whether adverse effects are avoided, minimised or remedied where practicable, and offset or compensated where appropriate. Offsetting and compensation stay central to ecological work, and well-designed offset and compensation packages will remain a key part of getting consent.
Environmental limits, with exits. Regional councils will set ecosystem-health limits, including for indigenous biodiversity, in natural environment plans. But a cost-benefit analysis is now required when setting limits, and the Minister can authorise activities that breach them on a net public benefit test.
A new route for wildlife approvals. The Natural Environment Act sets up a wildlife approvals pathway that runs alongside the Wildlife Act process run by DOC. Applicants can choose either, though the new route isn’t available on conservation land or marine reserves. That could matter for lizard salvage and relocation, kiwi and bat management on development sites.
Wetlands and the NPS-IB still apply – for now. RMA instruments, including the freshwater wetland rules and the NPS for Indigenous Biodiversity, continue until a transition date is set once the new regional plans are in place. Wetland delineation and the current consent tests aren’t going away soon.
Not everyone thinks these changes are an improvement. The Environmental Defence Society and the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment both raised serious concerns that too much has been left to Ministers. Supporters argue the new system gives landowners more certainty and reduces case-by-case litigation.
What this means if you own land in Northland and Auckland
- Don’t wait for the new system to lodge. The current rules will apply for years yet, and they are known. Applications under the RMA continue to be processed under the RMA. Holding off for the new plans means holding off until 2029–2030, with rules nobody can see yet. If you need a private plan change to rezone land, the window under the RMA closes on 1 January 2028.
- Ecology reports still matter – arguably more. Wetland delineation, vegetation and fauna surveys and effects assessments are still needed under the RMA plans and national standards in force. With the precautionary principle gone, the quality of your evidence carries more of the decision.
- Watch the mapping. When your regional spatial plan and new natural environment plan are drafted, check how your land is shown. Whether bush or wetland on your property is “identified” will shape what you can do for decades. A site-specific ecological assessment is the best tool for challenging a map that’s wrong – in either direction.
- Get involved in plan-making. Submissions on the first regional spatial plans and natural environment plans are where the important decisions will now be made. It’s far cheaper to get a map or rule right at plan stage than to fight it consent by consent.
- Expect offsetting and compensation to stay central. The effects management hierarchy is now in statute. Well-designed restoration, covenanting and enhancement planting will remain the main way to make a proposal stack up ecologically.
- Lizards, bats and kiwi – a choice of pathway. Once the wildlife approvals framework is running, there may be a quicker route than a standalone Wildlife Act authority for some projects. Ask early which route suits your site.
The bottom line
For the next few years, very little changes on the ground: the RMA, the NPS-IB and the wetland rules still govern ecological consenting. What’s shifting is where the ecological arguments get made – away from individual consents and into plan-making and mapping. Landowners who understand the ecology of their site now will be best placed when the new plans arrive.
If you’re planning a subdivision, development or land use change and want to know where ecology fits under the current rules or the new ones, get in touch with Wild Ecology. I work across Auckland, Northland and Waikato, and I’m happy to talk through your site.
This post is general commentary, not legal advice. The new system is still being implemented, and details will change as national direction is released.