Makaroro River valley - site of the proposed Ruataniwha Water Storage project. Photo/ Supplied
Makaroro River valley - site of the proposed Ruataniwha Water Storage project. Photo/ Supplied
The Hawke's Bay Regional Council says an Environment Court decision that criticised its stance on water-quality objectives is "not relevant" to the process of setting planning rules for the catchment where the Ruataniwha dam would be built.
But the board of inquiry that last year granted consents for the damsaid it would consider legal arguments from environmental groups who might have a different view.
The board is considering submissions on aspects of a plan change for the Tukituki catchment, which includes the site for the proposed Ruataniwha water storage scheme in Central Hawke's Bay. Plan changes involve amending the regional resource management plan - the regime the council uses to manage Hawke's Bay's natural resources.
After granting consents for the Ruataniwha scheme last year, the board of inquiry was directed to reconsider aspects of the related Tukituki plan change - known as Plan Change 6 - following a High Court challenge by environmental groups.
Meanwhile, issues relating to water-quality objectives in an earlier plan change focused on land use and freshwater management rules - referred to as Plan Change 5 - were challenged by Ngati Kahungunu Iwi Incorporated through the Environment Court.
In a decision released late last month, the court sided with Ngati Kahungunu who had opposed the council bid to remove a "no degradation" objective from the management plan.
"To not aspire and attempt to at least maintain the quality of water abdicates the functions of a regional council," Environment Judge Craig Thompson and commissioners Kevin Prime and Anne Leijnen said in their judgment.
In a memorandum to the Tukituki board of inquiry filed last week, council lawyer Trevor Robinson detailed the council's argument that the Environment Court decision was "not relevant" to the issues the board was addressing.
These included the judgment referring to the board's decision having "leap-frogged" Plan Change 5.
Board chairman Lester Chisholm said any parties wanting to "comment on the relevance of the Environment Court decision" had until 4pm tomorrow to file submissions.
