For Otago miners - ORC Plan Change 7

Thanks Mangrove hopefully a win for us miners!

Much appreciated for deciphering things for us all Mangrove… I couldn’t understand anything from the emails I was sent haha!

Yup, mangrove is the star of all things consent wise

1 Like

Hi all,
Just to keep you informed on two issues for Otago.

The 24 submissions seeking to challenge the six-year maximum term of non-consumptive takes has been read by the Environment Court Judge. She in her pre-hearing meeting alluded to there being no valid reason for a maximum 6-year consent term for non-consumptive takes.

Irrespective of that, and the strength of the 24 submissions, the Otago Regional Council are already trying to screw dredgers with a maximum consent term of only six years. This is currently being challenged by one in your community.

On another matter, dredgers should read the Paydirt post about the Remarkables Conservation process and submit in support of the miners in the Nevis that will be hurt by these proposed changes. Support your mining mates by showing a unified collective of hobby miners, and when a Council shits in your nest, they will be there to support you.


Hi all,
To follow up on this for the Otago dredgers, the ORC received all your submissions setting out why a maximum term of six years is dopey for a non-consumptive take. It is before the Environment Court right now and I followed up with the ORC planner running this plan change. He acknowledged the rules didnt work for suction dredgers and made the point he would be open minded to revising the rules during the court process. None of the 24 submitters took it further (beyond raising the issue in submissions) and as a consequence ORC have decided to not make any recommendations to the Courts. Pretty bloody hopeless to be honest.

The upside is, we dont have to worry about it, and we have saved our money by not going into that process. I recently secured a consent for an Otago dredger for a 10 year term irrespective of the rules, and it being assessed as a non-complying activity. You can all quote this in your consent applications to get through the back door (and I know some of you like the backdoor or at least a few good jokes about it).

“In terms of the non-complying status for the water take in relation to Policy 10A.2.3(a), the Council has recognised the planning framework does not cater for non-consumptive takes. For Council to grant a non-complying permit (being any water permit with a duration of longer than 6 years), they must be satisfied the proposal does not create a perceived undesirable precedent. In this case, the precedent has been assessed under resource consent RM20.281.01 where the issues set out in s104(1)C where found to not imperil the intent of, or threaten the validity of the Plan. Council can therefore grant a water permit for a non-consumptive take for a duration exceeding 6 years, and consent is sought on that basis”.

That will get you through the process without any worries at all…