An aerial view of the Port of Tauranga. Photo / Mead Norton
An aerial view of the Port of Tauranga. Photo / Mead Norton
A key witness for the Port of Tauranga, which is seeking consent for a multi-million-dollar wharf extension, says the proposed work will have “negligible” effects on the marine environment in the long-term.
However, a lawyer representing an iwi fisheries trust has challenged the findings, saying they were based on incompleteinformation.
Tauranga marine ecologist Professor Chris Battershill made the comment in the Environment Court at Tauranga today, but during cross-examination confirmed he was unaware of a requirement for annual surveys to take place in and around the Te Paritaha pipi bed.
Te Paritaha is located north of Sulphur Point, which is not the subject of this resource consent.
Port of Tauranga Limited (POTL) has applied for resource consent for a 385-metre wharf extension and 1.8-hectare land reclamation at Sulphur Point, as well as wharf extensions of 530m north and 388m south of the tanker berth, and a 2.9ha reclamation for the Mount Maunganui wharves.
POTL also says the associated extension to the shipping channel covers 14.4ha and would involve dredging up to 1.5 million cubic metres of the sea floor.
The applicant has submitted that the proposed $88.5m extension is an urgent national priority because of severe capacity constraints on exports within a few years.
Tauranga Marine ecologist Professor Chris Battershill.
Eleven iwi and hapu groups from Tauranga Moana have raised unresolved concerns about the plans.
Chief Environment Court Judge David Kirkpatrick and three independent commissioners, Jim Hodge, Anne Leijnen and Glenice Paine, began hearing evidence in the Environment Court at Tauranga on February 27.
Battershill presented written briefs of evidence to the court at the start of his evidence, and then was cross-examined by legal counsel on behalf of iwi and hapū groups.
In reaching his conclusion, Battershill said that he had considered all elements of the potential environmental effects and studies carried out in response to the proposed dredging and wharf extension work.
“I consider marine environment effects will be minor in the short-term and negligible in the long-term.”
During cross-examination, legal counsel Lara Burkhardt, on behalf of Ngāti Ranginui Fisheries Trust, put it to Battershill that his findings were based on incomplete information, given there were “six years of data missing”.
She said no annual monitoring surveys had been undertaken in and around Te Paritaha since 2016, despite that being a condition of a previous dredging campaign consent.
Burkhardt also put to Battershill that his assessment that Te Awanui (Tauranga Harbour) was in “relatively good health” and the cumulative effects of the proposed work was based solely on a Western science basis.
His evidence was in “significant conflict” with the views of iwi and hapū, views which also looked at cultural impacts, she said.
Battershill said his evidence had been based on all available literature and ecological studies dating back to 2009, and confirmed he had been unaware of the annual monitoring surveys condition of a previous dredging consent.
He “absolutely” acknowledged that the assessment of the cumulative effects was based on Western science, and also on a working harbour operating in a highly urbanised environment.
“I am acutely aware of the concern that tangata whenua hold for Te Awanui. And while the harbour is in good health, there will always be room for improvement...
“While there may be short-term effects associated with dredging and shortly after any dredging has been completed, there are systems in place to avoid this happening. In my opinion, the proposal will not impact on the marine ecology of Stella Passage and adjacent habitats further from those that had incrementally occurred over decades.
Battershill also said he supported having an Integrated Mātauranga-led review of the state of the Tauranga Moana environment and the suggested options for Kaimoana restoration, led by tangata whenua and supported by all stakeholders.
The hearing, which is expected to take three weeks, continues on March 7.
