In defence of the ORC’s water allocation process

THE ODT editorial (18.4.19) accurately highlights the difficult situation the Otago Regional Council finds itself in when dealing with the end of a century of water allocation via historic mining privileges and setting minimum flows on overallocated Central Otago rivers.

The independent review of its consents function has identified shortcomings in consenting processes which need to be addressed.

One inaccuracy in the editorial, possibly coming from the report, was the claim that Doc, Fish & Game, and iwi were always identified as affected parties.

These parties are often considered affected by consent applications regarding freshwater. This makes sense, as Doc and Fish & Game have statutory functions to fulfil under the Conservation Act, and iwi have a statutory interest in freshwater.

However, it is not a given, and there are numerous occasions where Fish & Game has felt we were incorrectly considered unaffected.

To my knowledge, no consent applications replacing mining privileges have been publicly notified apart from those relating to the Lindis, which was already before the Environment Court because of minimum flow appeals.

However, I am aware of at least one community organisation which has requested the ORC treat them as an affected party on a mining privilege replacement application without success.

It may be that more public involvement in mining privilege replacement applications is warranted.

While the outcome of the independent review has identified serious shortcomings, it is important to acknowledge the ORC itself initiated the review. It certainly deserves credit for that.

Nigel Paragreen Otago Fish & Game environmental

officer

Reunion

Weston School: A 150th jubilee will be held from September 2022, 2019. Email office@weston.school.nz or phone (03) 4345445.