KEY POINTS:
Auckland City Council says without a Court of Appeal ruling in its favour this week it may have had to re-evaluate the status of mining as a prohibited activity on Hauraki Gulf islands.
The council has joined Auckland Regional Council and the Thames-Coromandel District Council in praising the ruling, which reversed earlier decisions by the Environment Court and High Court about when it is appropriate for councils to prohibit activities in their district plans.
The councils say the appeal ruling has clarified the use of the term "prohibited activity" and should allow them to retain their power to protect sensitive environments.
"It just restates what we believe is the proper approach to dealing with prohibited activities," said the Auckland City group manager city planning, Penny Perrit.
She said the council had taken a precautionary approach in its district plan to activities which had effects on a particular environment that were not well known or understood.
An example was mining on the gulf islands, which was prohibited under the plan because of the value of the unique environment and ecology, although prospecting was permitted.
"At the moment, what we're saying if you want to undertake mining in the Hauraki Gulf islands, then we would expect you to go through the rigour required of a plan change," she said.
"If the decision had gone the other way, we would have to rethink what activity status we give mining."
Ms Perrit said that based on the High Court decision, it was possible mining would have to be reclassified as a non-complying activity, giving it the same status as prospecting, and greatly easing the assessment criteria for resource consent.
Such an interpretation had major implications for councils around the country who used prohibited-activity status in the same precautionary way as the Auckland City Council.
Thames-Coromandel Mayor Philippa Barriball also welcomed the Court of Appeal ruling.
"This decision will hopefully strengthen our district's ability to protect our special landscapes and decide what can happen in our own backyard," she said.
But she and district plan manager Leigh Robcke said it was frustrating the matter had gone all the way to the Appeal Court and taken so long.
"It's nine years, but in many ways it's back to the start," Mr Robcke said.
The case began in 1998, when the council proposed in its plan that mining be a prohibited activity in conservation and coastal zones, and in all recreation and open-space policy areas. In all other zones and policy areas, it provided that mining was a non-complying activity.
The Minerals Industry Association and Ministry of Economic Development appealed against the prohibited-activity status to the Environment Court and High Court, which found in their favour.
The Thames-Coromandel council decided not to appeal against the High Court decision because of limited funds. But because of the far-reaching implications of the case the Auckland City Council and the ARC joined environmental group Coromandel Watchdog in taking the matter to the Court of Appeal.
The case now returns to the Environment Court for final consideration.
