Canterbury sharemilker fined for effluent discharge

An Ashburton sharemilker, Richard Neil Spicer, has been fined a total of $12,000 after pleading guilty to two charges, discharging effluent from an irrigator onto land causing ponding (which may have resulted in contaminants entering groundwater) and contravening an abatement notice. The case was heard in the Christchurch District Court on February 2, 2010.

Environment Canterbury officers inspected the farm located at Flemington, near Ashburton, on October 10, 2008 and found that effluent from a travelling irrigator had created severe ponding and run-off onto surrounding land. An infringement notice was served on Mr Spicer informing him that he was in breach of resource consent conditions. On October 15, he was issued with an abatement notice.

Upon re-inspection of the farm on December 16, 2008, Environment Canterbury officers identified problems with the irrigator that would lead to further ponding. Mr Spicer was informed that continued non-compliance would likely result in enforcement action being taken. A large pond of effluent was subsequently discovered on the farm on March 5, 2009.

The defendant said that the incident on March 5 was not deliberate. He claimed that the ponding had occurred because the irrigator had become stationary after getting stuck in a hole in the ground and a bearing had collapsed. Mr Spicer claimed that he was not present on the property that day and a farm worker had set up the irrigator, however he did take full responsibility for the incident.

Mr Spicer’s actions breached sections 338(1)(c) and 340(1)(a) of the Resource Management Act 1991 with regard to the contravening of the abatement notice and section 15(1)(b) and s338(1)(a) in regard to the employee discharging effluent.

Environment Canterbury expressed concern to Judge Jane Borthwick that there appeared to be a number of farmers who were not complying with their resource consents and failing to monitor their effluent disposal systems.

The Judge imposed a fine of $8000 and $4000 for each offence respectively. Ninety per cent of the fine was paid to the regional council.