Community opposition at seabed mining hearing in South Taranaki
Wednesday, 13 March 2024
“We are not having it,” Ngāti Ruanui iwi chair Haimona Maruera declaredduring his spirited challenge at a hearing about mining the seabed off the South Taranaki coast.
“We are fed up. Go somewhere else, this is our whenua. Our children are here to share their distress, our community and allies are protesting, we don’t want this here,” he said.
“The decision-makers sit in Wellington, we are the people that have to live with the results of what is happening.”
A new independent decision-making committee (DMC) from the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) is considering evidence and submissions for an application from Trans-Tasman Resources Limited (TTRL) to mine iron sands off the south coast of Taranaki.
The hearing, expected to last eight days over three months, started in Hāwera on Wednesday.
About 50 protesters, from Ngāti Ruanui, Kiwis Against Seabed Mining (KASM), Climate Justice Taranaki, Greenpeace and the South Taranaki community, had chanted loudly outside the TSB Hub as the legal team of TTRL entered the building.
During the mihi whakatau, Maruera, brandishing a carved whalebone patu, left the audience in no doubt of his passion and vehemence, whether or not they could understand his words in te reo Māori.
“My message today was that this is the fifth time back at this place. We have had enough, we want to end it, whatever they say they can do to mitigate, we are not having it,” he said.
“The old people advised me to use this five or 10 minutes I had to punch through. Now we have to sit and leave it to the lawyers.”
DMC member Dr Sharon Luca said Maruera’s “spirited” words emphasised for the audience the importance of the coming hearing.
For a decade, TTRL had tried to win the required consents to extract up to 50 million tonnes of sand each year from the seabed within the South Taranaki Bight.
The first attempt was rejected by the authority in 2013, but a follow-up application three years later was successful.
However, court action followed involving a number of parties including iwi and that decision was ultimately overturned.
Following the Supreme Court decision, the application was sent back to the authority for reconsideration.
After the opening, DMC chairperson Lyn Stevens CNZM KC, who is a retired judge of the Court of Appeal, introduced the committee, before a day of presentations by submitters on behalf of TTRL followed.
Monday’s speakers presented for TTRL included King’s Counsel Justin Smith, who made an overarching statement covering the past decisions on the proposal and discussed legal interpretations, and points raised by opposing submitters.
In the afternoon, experts appearing for TTRL were questioned by the committee.
Seabird and shorebird expert Dr David Thompson said that provided the sediment plume modeling was correct, the seabed mining proposal would not cause material harm to sea and shore birds.
Modeling of the sediment the mining ship would leave as it moved across the sea discharging processed material showed the plume would cause turbidity in the water that would prevent birds from foraging for food, for a short time, before it settled to background levels.
Thompson said the area directly affected was quite small.
“In my opinion, that area is relatively small compared to areas where birds can forage.”
He said pre commencement surveys for at least two years would be required to provide the most up-to-date data on bird populations, and a longer study would be better.
Marine mammal expert Dr Simon Childerhouse said there had been minimal sightings of marine mammals in the proposed mining area.
He said the predicted noise of the operation would be similar to that of a passing ship, but would last a lot longer as the vessel would move at about 70 metres per hour.
“The work we have done suggests the impact from this operation would be negligible,” he said.
The hearing continues on Thursday and Friday.
Correction:** The speed of the mining vessel in the proposed operation would be about 70 metres an hour, not 70kmh as mentioned in an earlier version of this story. (Story updated at 11am, March 14, 2024).**