Southland’s regional council has failed to meet its legal duties to monitor and protect wetlands, the High Court has ruled, in a landmark case.
The Environmental Law Initiative (ELI) sought a judicial review on the basis Environment Southland was not meeting its obligations to monitor and protect wetlands and had failed to comply with the Resource Management Act.
Environment Southland said the decision was helpful clarification, and that protecting and restoring wetlands was a priority.
“This ruling is a major victory for environmental accountability,” ELI senior researcher Anna Sintenie said.
Less than 10% of original wetlands in Aotearoa remain.
Half the total wetlands lost in the more than twenty years between 1996 and 2018 took place in Southland, more than 2700 hectares.
Sintenie said the group was shocked at Environment Southland’s lack of action.
“Wetlands are legally protected under the RMA, and by Environment Southland’s own plan, but this was not leading to protection on the ground.”
The court rejected Environment Southland’s stance that a lack of resourcing contributed to the problem, finding the council is still required to carry out the monitoring required by law.
The issue was not limited to Southland, Sintenie said, and the declarations issued by the judge served as a strong legal precedent.
Wetland experts in the case pointed to a lack of monitoring and enforcement by councils in many parts of the country as “the weak link in the regulatory chain of wetland protection”.
Councils throughout the country should take heed of the judgement, which reinforce the requirement for councils to take effective steps to protect wetlands, she said.
She warned that moves to weaken rules and regulations around water and environmental protection will lead to even more damage.
“Wetland degradation is a serious and ongoing issue, and councils cannot turn a blind eye to their responsibilities under the law.”
Protecting and restoring wetlands a priority — Environment Southland
Environment Southland chief executive Wilma Falconer said the court’s decision was helpful clarification about the council not meeting its legal obligations.
“The protection, restoration and creation of wetlands are priorities for the Council,” she said
“In its decision, the Court noted the Council had not intentionally contravened its obligations and acknowledged the laudable work it has undertaken in regard to wetlands.
“The Court did not direct the Council to take any further action in regard to its statutory obligations for wetlands.”
The Southland Water and Land Plan was largely operative and the council would monitor its efficiency and effectiveness for wetlands and report on the results, as well as developing its wetland programme, she said.
The council had acknowledged from the outset that it had not published a report assessing its planning provisions, Falconer said.
“The Council had assessed the Regional Water Plan for Southland and was aware of deficiencies, which were addressed in the new Southland Water and Land Plan.
“The new plan has rules controlling wetland drainage and other activities that could negatively affect the quantity and quality of freshwater, including wetlands.”
rnz.co.nz