[ad_1]
The Supreme Court has to grapple with how the damage caused by the mining of iron sand from the seabed could be assessed if consent were restored to a “huge” project off the southern coast of Taranaki.
At the end of a three-day hearing in the Wellington court on Thursday, Supreme Court President Helen Winkelmann said the court would take “some time” to consider its decision.
All five judges understood the importance of the issues for New Zealand and Taranaki in particular, he said.
In August 2017, the Environmental Protection Authority granted Trans-Tasman Resources (TTR) 35-year marine and marine discharge permits to extract up to 50 million tons of iron sand per year in an area of approximately 66 square kilometers, off the south coast of Taranaki.
READ MORE:
* Appeal for seabed mining for iron sands begins off the coast of Taranaki
* Groups opposing the seabed mining plan prepare to go back to court
* There is no plan to prohibit mineral exploration of the seabed, says the Minister of the Environment
* Seven things you need to know about seabed mining in New Zealand
But the consents were overturned in Superior Court and TTR’s case in the Court of Appeal failed.
The Court of Appeals said the Environmental Protection Authority could reconsider TTR’s request, perhaps on the basis of a smaller project or with different conditions.
In TTR’s appeal to the Supreme Court, opponents of the project highlighted the lack of information on the environment where the excavation of the seabed was proposed and that the effect on the environment was unknown.
Greenpeace and Kiwis Against Seabed Mining attorney Davey Salmon said it was a huge project that lacked basic information.
Trans-Tasman / Supplied Resources
The 66 square kilometers of the south coast of Taranaki where Trans Tasman Resources has been applied to extract iron ore.
The main obligation of the Environmental Protection Authority was, when in doubt, to reject the request, he said.
For example, there was no evidence of the effect of what could be a 24-hour “air raid siren” on marine mammals that use echolocation to identify other animals, the environment and migration routes, Salmon said.
In his response to opponents, Justin Smith, QC, who appears for TTR, said that consents had been given under many conditions, including a two-year monitoring of the environment to gather the information to assess the effects.
The members of the court questioned the effectiveness of conditions such as not having adverse effects “at the population level” in certain birds and marine mammals, if the starting point is unknown and the term “at the population level” is not defined.
Things
South Taranaki Te Runanga or Ngati Ruanui Trust opposed the iron sand mining project.
Winkelmann said the conditions should be able to be maintained on their own terms.
But Smith said doing the research earlier ran the risk that it would be out of date or irrelevant when mining started.
Taranaki-Whanganui Conservation Board attorney James Gardner-Hopkins said the proposed mining site was near the boundary of the coastal marine area that would suffer the most from the effects of the sediment plume when unwanted sand was discharged.
It was estimated that around 10 percent of the excavated sand would be retained to extract iron ore and the rest would be discharged as a column of suspended sediment, which was a harmful substance.
TOM PULLAR-STRECKER / THINGS
The decision approved by the seabed mining company divided members of the Environmental Protection Authority in August 2017.
The Environmental Protection Authority considered resource management and coastal policy statement requirements broadly, but Gardner-Hopkins said it did not address key performance issues for the area, it said.
How the customary rights of Maori and Tikanga were taken into account in the consent process emerged as one of the main issues on appeal.
After the hearing, a spokesperson for Te Rūnanga or Ngāti Ruanui said that he was determined to stop seabed mining to protect his moana from an environmental disaster.
The president of the rūnanga trust, Haimona Maruera, said they hoped the court would rule in their favor, but took nothing for granted.
The trustees of the Te Kāhui or Rauru Trust and Te Ohu Kaimoana Trustee (Māori Fisheries Trust) also responded to the appeal, along with various commercial fishing groups and the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Authority.
TTR has estimated that hundreds of jobs and millions of dollars could flow into the Taranaki economy if the project continues.
