Dan Elderkamp: Forest & Bird responds to RWSS

Dan Elderkamp

Contrary to what Irrigation NZ (INZ) believes, Forest & Bird (F&B) has a very good understanding of the issues and processes which have occurred to date with the Ruataniwhai water storage scheme, as the organisation has been involved with the project through its Hawke's Bay branches since its inception.

We were part of the Stakeholders Group and lodged submissions to the Board of Inquiry and also at the March 2015 DoC hearing, as Andrew Curtis from Irrigation NZ confirms. What has become clear to us over the past four years is there are many vested interests involved in the scheme, of which INZ is one of the largest.

For them to suggest that F&B has no interest in developing a thriving, sustainable future for provincial New Zealand is ludicrous and shows their ignorance of the 90-odd years of F&B's involvement in communities across the country.

Furthermore, the economic benefits they speak of are achievable in other more sustainable and environmentally acceptable ways - INZ and the pro-dam lobby are aware of this but have steadfastly kept their heads in the sand on this point, refusing to acknowledge the obvious.

And to try and lecture us on the meaning of sustainability is rich, considering not a single irrigation scheme in NZ has been proved to be environmentally sustainable.

There is not one recorded case, for example, where water quality has improved as a result of an irrigation scheme, including Opuha, where groundwater quality in the surrounding irrigated areas has decreased over time. To claim the RWSS will result in net environmental benefits is not based on facts and has been disproved by highly-qualified scientists.

Regarding the DoC land swap issue, it seems INZ did not properly read our submission to the hearing, which clarified F&B's concerns. Our position that the land swap proposal is unlawful under current legislation was clearly stated at the time, and has not changed since.

Our intentions to challenge the revocation approval, should it be given, were also made clear, and have been re-stated in the media regularly since. This has now happened, and F&B has confirmed its intentions by requesting a judicial review of the DoC decision, which we are entitled to do.

F&B also believes this revocation, if allowed to go unchallenged, will set a precedent for other specially protected land, in that any project which is presumed to bring economic benefits will justify revoking the status of conservation land, ie for sale to the highest bidder.

And considering F&B's motto " the Voice for Nature " this is not an option for us. So-called "progress" through environmental destruction, which is what INZ clearly stands for, is no longer acceptable in this day and age, for any reason.

Our motives are therefore very clear " to protect to the best of our abilities what little remains of NZ's precious natural environment from persons and entities who would seek to exploit and mine it for their own pecuniary benefit regardless of the consequences.

-Dan Elderkamp is co-chairman, Forest & Bird Central Hawke's Bay branch.

-Business and civic leaders, organisers, experts in their field and interest groups can contribute opinions. The views expressed here are the writer's personal opinion, and not the newspaper's. Email: editor@hbtoday.co.nz