Sediment-laden stormwater flowing from the Baygold site towards SH2 at Pikowai. Photos / Supplied
Sediment-laden stormwater flowing from the Baygold site towards SH2 at Pikowai. Photos / Supplied
A Bay of Plenty company has admitted illegally discharging sediment-laden stormwater from an earthworks site, some of which ended up in a nearby protected wetland.
Baygold Holdings Limited (Baygold) appeared for sentencing in the Environment Court this week after it earlier pleaded guilty to two charges.
It admitted contravening aregional rule under the Bay of Plenty Regional Council's natural resources plan by breaching resource consent conditions.
It also earlier pleaded guilty to discharging sediment-laden stormwater onto land in circumstances where it may enter a waterway.
The regional council prosecution relates to discharges of sediment-laden stormwater from earthworksnear State Highway 2, Pikowai, in August 2018.
Baygold was granted resource consent on March 21, 2018 for earthworks to convert the site into a large kiwifruit orchard. The conditions imposed included making sure no stormwater was discharged off-site during the works and all sediment contaminated water discharged to ground soakage.
During a council inspection of the site in July last year, the officer noticed two sediment ponds specified in the resource consent had not been constructed.
A large amount of sediment had run off on the access track next to the property,
After complaints to the council, the same officer visited again and found there had been two illegal discharges between August 7 and 14 last year, which left sediment along the access track and SH2.
Sediment contaminated stormwater flowing from the Baygold site alongside SH2 at Pikowai. Photo / Supplied
Some of the sediment-laden water also went into the Ōtamarākau Wetland, the court heard.
Contaminated stormwater from the Baygold's earthworks site flowing towards to SH2 at Pikowai. Photo / Supplied
The council's lawyer Adam Hopkinson told Judge Melinda Dickey that Baygold had either been careless or reckless in not making sure it kept toits consent conditions.
Hopkinson said these discharges would have had a "cumulative impact" of sedimentation in the wetland, which had a national priority for protection.
He said a fine starting at $80,000 was appropriate given the offending was at the "high end of the scale" and the harm caused, before discounts for early guilty pleas.
Baygold's lawyer Lara Burkhardt argued the council's sentence starting point was too high.
Baygold was genuinely remorseful for the failures and accepted it was "too passive" in the early stages of the earthworks to prevent the risk of these discharges.
It was "moderate serious offending" but other parties were involved, which the court needed to take into account when setting the level of fine, Burkhardt said.
She argued a $50,000 to $60,000 was the appropriate start point for the fine, given the level of fines imposed for similar more serious cases.
