Rena wreck to stay on reef

Click the image above to view slideshow

Bay of Plenty iwi are asking for an exclusion zone surrounding the Rena following the decision by an independent hearing panel to leave the wreck on Otaiti (Astrolabe) Reef today.

The panel has granted a resource consent application made by Rena's owners and insurers to abandon the Rena wreck in situ.


The Rena on Astrolabe Reef: Photos: Darryl Torckler.

The panel's decision will see the remains of the Rena, its equipment and cargo left on the Otaiti Reef it also gives consent to 'discharge” any harmful substances or contaminants from the remains of the Rena, its equipment and cargo that may occur over time as a result of the degradation of the vessel pursuant of Section 15B of the RMA.

Nga Hapu o Motiti has asked the Government to leave the area around the wreck excluded from shipping as it has been since Rena grounded on October 5, 2011.

A report given to SunLive reveals the iwi is requesting a ban on all fishing for at least two years to allow marine biodiversity to continue to recover.

The exclusion zone covers three nautical miles around a point on Otaiti Reef and covers an area of about 97sq km.

It's been reported that Forest and Bird is backing the iwi's call for the exclusion zone.

Submissions on Nga Hapu o Motiti's application for temporary closure under the NZ Fisheries Act close on March 14, 2016.

The decision released by the independent hearing panel is contained within two volumes, with a full copy available here or from the Bay of Plenty Regional Council.

The owner's representative, Konstantinos Zacharatos, says now a decision has been reached it is time to work towards the next step.

'The next steps from here will be to carefully consider the decision and the conditions, in consultation with our New Zealand legal and environmental team, before I return to New Zealand next month,” he says.

'We intend to continue to listen to and work together with iwi, members of the community and local authorities to discuss the decision, including next steps in concluding the incident.

'Finally, to all the volunteers involved during the initial response and those in the extensive salvage and clean-up operation that has not stopped since the accident in October 2011 – thank you for your remarkable efforts,” says Konstantinos.

New Zealand Diving & Salvage is scheduled to complete the final stage of the debris clean-up operation in March, subject to weather and marine conditions.

Once completed, the Bay of Plenty Regional Harbourmaster will review the two nautical mile exclusion zone that has been in place since the grounding.

When the exclusion zone is lifted, an Access Plan will be implemented to encourage safe and responsible public access to the Reef. For more information about the Access Plan, please click here.


16 comments

No surprises there

Posted on 26-02-2016 14:37 | By Astoreth

Had consent not been granted, the remains would still have been left there. It all comes down to money in the end


See

Posted on 26-02-2016 15:01 | By Kenworthlogger

Told you so....


Icon

Posted on 26-02-2016 15:50 | By Icon

This is fantastic new's for our region. I also agree with leaving the reef to continue it's renewed re-generation. Better still, a 1 mile no-take zone reserve, would be of immense benefit long term, especially for local recreational fishers & Win win for our fishing /diving / tourism industries etc. If you get lemon's make lemonade.


Hmmmm

Posted on 26-02-2016 16:31 | By How about this view!

Totally the "BEST" outcome. Let "mother nature" get on with the job. It probably won't get in the way of a good financial windfall for some "Individuals" that will no doubt be lining up to throw their toys out of the cot, to be silenced with money.


jmac

Posted on 26-02-2016 16:46 | By JohnMac

Most logical outcome.


And the B.O.P. will pay for generations

Posted on 26-02-2016 17:09 | By SML

for the pollution from the biggest ecological disaster to ever hit our shores! I cannot believe the insurance company has been absolved from future costs with the "onsent to


Obvious decision

Posted on 26-02-2016 17:12 | By Crash test dummies

Could have been made years ago, hate to see all the bills for all this long winded creative nonsense: before, since and during.


Common sense really.

Posted on 26-02-2016 17:20 | By astex

Would have done far more damage to remove it. Common sense prevails. Nature has taken care of much worse situations around the world and will deal with this one far better than we can.


Rena wreck

Posted on 27-02-2016 00:09 | By Theodorus

We have been treated like Zombies in a far away little country Perhaps we are


Read the Report

Posted on 27-02-2016 09:53 | By rosbo

The actual Report is well worth reading, particularly the individual reports on all the various aspects. Media coverage is necessarily selective. You'll need some time, but the conclusions are inevitable and sensible


Great decision

Posted on 27-02-2016 12:53 | By spencerb

The correct and sensible decision has been made. Why do IWI have to get involved in everything and why should they have to be consulted at all.


Seems like some people..

Posted on 27-02-2016 14:06 | By groutby

....think WAAAY to much. SML, most writers here including myself, seem to think this is a logical decision based on past, current and likely future events. The pictures indicate the reef is thriving with activity, NO-ONE died, NO-ONE was injured, and quite frankly I believe to call it a disaster in the"bigger scheme of things" is still a little far fetched. It was sad that some bird and sea life suffered during this time,and even though these numbers were exaggerated beyond logic by some groups, were minimised as best as possible.A decision now made, albeit rather drawn out, lets move on to the next hurdle mentioned by other writers, in regard to "requirements" surrounding the reef by other groups.Many, many vessels were sunk and many lives lost in and around the coastline of other countries during recent wars, all still remain where they lay...the World is still turning SML.


And on it goes

Posted on 27-02-2016 16:09 | By Jitter

I see that local iwi (represented by Buddy Mikaere) intend to appeal the decision in the Environment Court. Can't they ever except a decision made by an independant panel ? They keep stating that Maori are in a partnership with the Crown ie the Government of the day and the rest of NZ. However rather than being partners they always appear to want to dictate what the outcome must be to them or demand financial compensation. It is time they accepted the laws and legislation of the country and show they are genuinely in a partnership with the crown instead of only when it suits them and comes out in their favour.They are NZers like the rest of us but waste millions of taxpayers money on ridiculous and selfish demands.


iwi

Posted on 27-02-2016 16:10 | By Captain Sensible

Iwi do not own NZ....yet. No need to consult them. Treat all Kiwis the same.


All of the above

Posted on 28-02-2016 10:44 | By firstperson

Agree with all the above, except derogatory references to Iwi. Independent panel decision, why appeal. If your case wasn't good enough, according to the RMA, then thats that. Hate to see days and weeks listening to another drawn out saga. More pay for lawyers? God forbid.


To Firstperson

Posted on 28-02-2016 16:24 | By Jitter

What derogatory comments ? Please clarify.


Leave a Comment


You must be logged in to make a comment.