Christmas News Roundup

22nd December 2000

1. Trustpower has advised us that the special lowering of Lake Mahinerangi to allow extra generation because of the Manapouri generation being stopped so that the tunnel race could be finished, has now ceased. Generation was carried out continuously from November 30th until December 13th. The lake dropped from 386.86m to 386.32m in that time, about half a metre. Things will return to normal and it is hoped that over the Christmas New Year break, higher levels can be restored to the lake. Authority to lower the lake came as a condition of the original 1926 Water Right.

2. The Proposals by Trustpower for the Resource Consent submissions and hearings will be ready around March 2000. Some problems were encountered regarding the draft and these have had to be re-done. We would expect they will be underway with the consents process by the middle of next year, hopefully.

3. Landcorp (the biggest landholder in the area) has decided on a plan to remove all shelter belts of pine with trees 30 years old or older. The timber will be exported. We expect unwelcome changes to the climate and soils of the area and have made our objections felt. Also, chemical dumps in the area where chemicals containers have been disposed of and burned, may leach into the surrounding soils. This adds to Landcorp's unsustainable ploughing and poison spraying regime which is markedly altering the environment at Mahinerangi for the worse. (see "The Poisoning of Lake Mahinerangi")

4. We are concerned at the high rate of camphlobacter in the water, below Lake Mahinerangi - lower down in the catchment. Organic growers have been forced to add chlorine to the water.

5. Trustpower's consultant, from Becker Carter Ferner, Paul Wellsgreen visited Annette Joel's property at Mahinerangi on Monday 18th December. He spent many hours photographing and assessing the effects of erosion as a result of land use and fluctuating lake levels. He was impressed by the effects of inundation as a means of controlling noxious weeds.

6. Our concern as to how reserves are being handled by the Clutha District Council continues. However, the statement by CEO Ciaran Keogh at the Lawrence Tuapeka Community Board on November 7th was encouraging. He admitted that the council's processes had been "left a bit wanting" and is looking forward to tightening up its processes through the establishment of management plans for reserves. Although saying these plans would cost money, it is clear to us that it will save considerable sums of money over time.

7. Waipori cemetery: due to council mismanagement over the issue of a building permit for a private house on the cemetery reserve land there, the cemetery is without trustees and it appears that although the council may have control and management of the cemetery, they are certainly not carrying out the work of the trustees. The cemetery is not being maintained and there is no process available if someone wants to be buried there. We are seeking clarification from the Health Department and the Clutha District Council but to date, nothing except a letter from the Health Department reversing their original statement about the council not having control and management of the cemetery. Once more we are seeking more information from them.

The process of asking for objections to a council plan to revoke the reserve status of the cemetery has been completed and the council reports that out of 101 "submissions" two thirds are objecting to the lifting of reserve status. The council, however, tried to ask for "submissions" under the wrong act (RMA) instead of Sect.24 ("objections" only) of the Reserves Act. Consequently the Department of Conservation which will assess the application may have to ignore the 34 "ring-in" submissions of those who support the proposal and may disallow the appointment of an "independent chairman" to hear submissions, thus rendering the whole expensive process meaningless and futile. The "independent chairman" will write a report, we are told, to give to the local conservator. This is incorrect process. The conservator simply needs to see the objections, that is all.

The final arbiter is the Commissioner of Crown Lands, anyway, not the local conservator, whom we believe will oppose the application to revoke reserve status because of the illegal presence of the house and the illegal process which resulted in it being built there. The local conservator has already said the attempt to freehold the area on which the house sits is "ultra-vires" and inappropriate and has informed us that his department still retains that view. The Health Department (which controls the cemetery under the Burial and Cremation Act) has written to us saying that they have not approved the Council's process of revocation and says that it expects the council not to proceed with it.

The Ombudsman's report supports our complaint completely and says that the Clutha District Council broke the law in respect of three acts; The Reserves Act, the Burial and Cremation Act, and the Building Act. He says that he may re-visit the matter depending on the outcome of the council's attemp to revoke reserve status. The auditor-general is presently looking into whether he should investigate the process that led to the house being built there and what it has cost ratepayers to date.

It seems to us that it is about 95% certain that the revocation will not be granted and the house will have to be removed from the site. Even if it was decided to revoke reserve classification, it would have to be done for the "public good" not for the good of a private individual. Also, the council would not automatically assume ownership of the site in order to sell or lease it to the Reads. As Crown land it could be offered to anyone; most likely the original owners.

Certainly, we think the house on the cemetery is a critical issue that may lead to a better understanding of the law that does not allow private cribs to exist on marginal strips and reserves. This kind of uncontrolled development can lead to lasting damage to the environment.

This whole "exercise" is believed to have cost tens of thousands of dollars of ratepayers' money, so we are looking forward to a proper regime of reserve management as intimated by Ciaran Keogh, that will help avoid such costly mistakes in the future.

Clearly, with so many reserves in the area needing attention, we look forward to much better protection of the environment.

8. Mt. Stuart Reserve: Although it appeared through reports in the newspapers that the police investigation into the illegal cutting down of the trees had been completed, we have been told today (22.12.2000) that this is not the case. It is still continuing. The result has implications that we are concerned about - as above: the proper management and custodianship of the area's reserves. Also better control over the unilateral actions of councillors and officials, even if they think they are doing some "good" in what they do.

9. In September we met with Dr Margot Parkes, and her party. Dr Parkes works for the Ministry of Health and the University of Otago (undertaking a doctoral study investigating links between community health and freshwater resources in the Taieri Catchment), and is based in Wellington. She explained the results of her survey, "The Taieri Catchment and Community Health Survey" and we went over to the cemetery to view aspects of the environment there.

10. University of Otago Information and technology - overview of land and water use - was impressed by the natural regeneration of indigenous species when fenced off.

11. Trustpower provided four different species for testing out as marginal strip and lake bed plants, to combat erosion and noxious weeds.

12. Haikai Tane (Watershed Systems, Twizel), is helping with procedures concerning any District Plan changes which will ensure that ultimately we will end up with healthy waterways. In particular, a change making the application of all biocides in riparian zones and waterways a publicly notifiable activity requiring a statement of environmental effects. This involves broad-based community consultation and its goal is to protect environmental health and community welfare. The ultimate aim is to make the application of biocides a prohibited activity in riparian zones, water supply areas and environmentally sensitive areas.

13. Last month, there was a field trip with the Hellaby Trust and Forest and Bird. Consisting of people from all over New Zealand, they focussed on the role of upland land management, in maximising the quantity, quality and regulations of water yield.

14. We are still negotiating the approval of another test area to be planted out in indigenous and exotic amenity species.

15. Finally, we wish members of Save Mahinerangi Society Inc., and other readers and supporters a happy Christmas and a prosperous and productive new year.

Save Mahinerangi Society Inc.
P. O. Box 2143, Dunedin
Phone 03 485 9481

---

Return to:
Home Page