Herricks resource consent application declined

A proposal to take groundwater for dairy pasture irrigation from bores near Taumata Lagoon has been declined by a Greater Wellington Hearing Committee.

The Committee said there were a number of inconsistencies between the proposal and the policies of the Regional Policy Statement, Regional Freshwater Plan and the Resource Management Act.

It concluded that despite a lack of information on the ‘baseline' fluctuations in lagoon water level, "there was sufficient evidence that the proposed abstraction may affect these levels and that, if these levels are affected, that this will in turn have adverse ecological effects."

The Committee said the proposal was inconsistent with the preservation of the natural character of wetlands, lakes, rivers and their margins, and their protection from inappropriate use and development, which are matters of national importance.

Taumata Lagoon contains remnants of indigenous vegetation that are otherwise absent in the area as well as habitat for indigenous fauna, some species of which are threatened, while there were also amenity values for residents and visitors alike.

"Because of the ecological significance and sensitivity of the environment within the Taumata Lagoon and associated wetland the Committee concludes that the identified (ecological) effects are potentially significant. In addition the following matters reinforce the need to protect the lagoon and wetlands:

that wetlands are identified as areas of National Importance under Section 6 the RMA
that part of Taumata Lagoon has a QE II National Trust Covenant and
that it is identified as a Key Native Ecosystem by Greater Wellington Regional Council."
Both the applicant and submitters have 15 working days to appeal the decision.

Herricks consent decision Q & A

What was the application for?

The application was for the renewal of consent for MB & HF Herrick to abstract water for irrigating dairy pasture.

The proposed abstraction was from two bores situated on the floodplain at the confluence of the Ruamahanga and Waiohine Rivers within the applicant's property at Waihaheke Road, Carterton. The bores are located within the Middle Ruamahanga Groundwater Zone as defined in the Regional Freshwater Plan.

The proposal was to continue to abstract groundwater at up to the same rate as stipulated in the previous resource consents - from bore 5H/11/14.3/I at a rate up to 28 litres/second and from bore 5H/12/22/I at a rate up to 20 litres/second.

Why was the application declined?

The Hearing Committee concluded that there were a number of inconsistencies between the proposal and the policies of the Regional Policy Statement, Regional Freshwater Plan and the Resource Management Act.

The proposal was inconsistent with the preservation of the natural character of wetlands, lakes, rivers and their margins, and their protection from inappropriate use and development, which are matters of national importance.

In particular, the Committee concluded that from the evidence presented there was a potential connection between the Taumata Lagoon and the aquifers from which water would be abstracted. Therefore the proposed water take may affect lagoon levels leading to potentially significant adverse ecological effects on the natural character of the lagoon.

Why is the Hearing Committee's decision different to the officer's recommendation?

It is important to remember that the Officer's report was not a decision, but a recommendation to the Hearing Committee. The intention of the report is to inform the Hearing Committee by providing an independent assessment of the proposal. The officer's recommendation is just one part of a considerable range and volume of very complex evidence provided to the Hearing Committee by the applicant and its experts, and submitters.

The decision to decline the consent is made by the Committee. In making the decision, the Committee weighed up all the information provided, and concluded that "there was sufficient evidence that the proposed abstraction may affect (lagoon) levels and that, if these levels are affected, that this will in turn have adverse ecological effects."

Why is Taumata Lagoon ecologically significant?

Taumata Lagoon has a considerable number of natural values that make it a regionally significant wetland area. These values include: fluvial landforms; natural open water, and remnant podocarp forest. The area has been subject to a sustained pest animal control operation.

The relict fluvial oxbow landform is one of very few in the region that is vegetated and naturally retains open water. This open water provides habitat for a number of native wetland birds, including the threatened NZ dabchick.

It is one of the few places of open water that has had sustained predator control for many years, undertaken by GW Biosecurity staff, through our Key Native Ecosystem programme. The wetland is associated with some primary modified podocarp forest dominated by kahikatea with matai, tawa, titoki and kowhai trees also prevalent in the canopy. In addition, a number of other species occur in this area that are now uncommon in the predominantly agricultural landscapes of the Wairarapa.

A considerable effort to actively manage and restore the wetland has been made by the landowner in recent years. This is apparent by the lack of pest plants, well established plantings of native species and recent efforts to retain open water by mechanical means. A large proportion of the wetland area is protected by a QEII National Trust Open Space Covenant in perpetuity.

Who was on the Hearing Committee?

The Hearing Committee comprised Sally Baber (Chair), Ian Buchanan and Elizabeth Burge.

What happens now?

Although the Committee has declined consent, the applicant and submitters have 15 working days to appeal the decision.

Where can I get more information?

A copy of the decision is available at the Environment Helpdesk, Level 3, Greater Wellington Regional Centre, 142 Wakefield Street. For an electronic copy email matt.velde@gw.govt.nz.