Passion, tears over Rotoiti cleanup plan

Opponents of a structure designed to reduce pollution in Rotorua's Lake Rotoiti say it will lead to coastal pollution and diminish the mauri (life force) of a river and estuary.

The Ohau Channel diversion was granted consent in November.

The Environment Bay of Plenty regional council has proposed it as part of a programme to clean up Rotorua's ailing lakes.

The Environment Court is hearing appeals against the project at Mt Maunganui this week.

The council says it could reduce toxic algal blooms in Lake Rotoiti, one of the lakes worst affected by smelly, dangerous cyanobacteria, by up to 40 per cent in four years.

Under the council's plans, the diversion would channel nutrient-filled water from Lake Rotorua down the Kaituna River and out to sea through the Maketu estuary, avoiding Lake Rotoiti.

Three groups, including two representing Maori, have appealed against the consent, saying the diversion would transfer pollution downstream.

Concerns have also been voiced about potential effects on trout fisheries, although submissions by Fish & Game were withdrawn when representatives failed to show up on the first day of the appeal hearings yesterday.

Representatives of Nga Tangata Ahi Kaa Roa O Maketu, a group representing iwi at Maketu, made emotional addresses to Judge Jeff Smith and commissioners John Mills and Kathryn Edmonds.

Raewyn Bennett cried as she spoke, saying the Maketu estuary had already been degraded by an earlier diversion.

"Our whanau wants the estuary restored before we consider taking Rotorua's pollutants," she said.

Maketu kuia Piatarihi Kerr said: "Maketu and all its beautiful kai there has been ruined by the first diversion."

The Nga Tangata group is seeking an amendment to the consent to reflect local kaitiakitanga (guardianship) over the estuary.

The other Maori appellant, Darlene Dinsdale of Tapuika iwi, opposes the diversion on cultural and spiritual grounds, saying it will affect the mauri of the Kaituna River by creating adverse health effects through the increase of nutrients in the water.

But Judge Smith said evidence could show that the mauri of the river might be restored by the diversion if it were to clean up the water.

Ms Dinsdale's appeal will be heard later in the week, with that of Katikati resident Jim Chapple, who is arguing that the diversion is unnecessary and will pollute the coast with additional nitrogen and phosphorous.

Mr Chapple says changes to farming practices to restrict the use of fertilisers would stop the main source of pollution.

He told the Herald that the ocean had been "blatantly excluded" from consideration by Environment Bay of Plenty.

But Paul Cooney, acting for the regional council, said the consent application had been made solely for environmental reasons.

"If no immediate action is taken in an integrated way ... it will take many years before water quality in Rotoiti is improved."

The consent has been granted for 12 years with conditions.


OHAU CHANNEL DIVERSION

* 1.25km steel sheet-pile wall extending from lake bed to 500mm above water surface.

* Designed to keep polluting nutrient-laden water away from Lake Rotoiti by diverting it down the Kaituna River and out to sea at Maketu.

* Estimated cost: $12 million.