Court decisions 'unworkable'

Regional and infrastructure development and green fields subdivisions across the country could be challenged as a result of an Environment Court decision on water quality, believes Horticulture New Zealand.

HortNZ says the court's decision is unworkable and economically damaging, but will not be challenged by Horticulture New Zealand because of the cost and time involved.


Photo: File.

The court's decision to uphold an appeal from Ngati Kahungunu against Hawke's Bay Regional Council's amendments to sections of a resource management plan was based on the interpretation of the words 'maintenance and enhancement” of freshwater bodies.

The Court says those words mean the water quality within every single water body must be managed in a way that water quality is maintained or enhanced.

HortNZ believes this interpretation will cause huge problems because it goes against the direction the government has taken in its national policy for freshwater, which allows local communities to decide how their water bodies are maintained.

The decision could be used to challenge the development of land across the country for any purpose.

'This is simply unworkable,” says HortNZ natural resources manager Chris Keenan. 'Land use is always changing, to meet the needs of communities. This can't always happen with nil effect.”

HortNZ estimates the cost of appealing the decision would be well over $100,000, and with the considerable and increasing grower commitments to farm planning, environmental research and water quality tools, it cannot justify the expense.

'We are deeply concerned about the effect of this decision across the country, but growers can't afford to fight it alone, and the issue is not ours alone,” adds Chris.

Activities such as urbanisation, farming, development of roads and other infrastructure can all have adverse effects on freshwater.

'Central government will need to take a long, hard look at this decision and the words used in it,” he says.

'Because the way it reads now, activities like regional development, green fields subdivision and infrastructure development can all be challenged if they have impacts on water quality.”

You may also like....

3 comments

The good and the bad ...

Posted on 29-04-2015 11:31 | By YOGI BEAR

Indeed a major issue of any development, to have to consider the affects on water. perhaps that not being so in the past is the reason for the determination of the waterways in the past. The Government plan to 'allow" communities to decide the level or not of water quality isn't working because the consultation process is and failure, it is effectively the "squeaky wheel" brigade, nothing more.


Squeaky wheels

Posted on 29-04-2015 16:28 | By YOGI BEAR

That means developers looking for free lunch on the ratepayers.


At last

Posted on 29-04-2015 18:54 | By Hunterway

At last the courts have seen the need to protect and indeed reverse the needless degradation of our waterways. It is not hard to develop and conserve and no one has the right to dump their crap in the waterways for those downstream


Leave a Comment


You must be logged in to make a comment.