Otago Regional Council feedback dredging IMPORTANT

As many of you are aware with the givealittle page created we also have to provide feedback to the ORC about these changes they are proposing. Ive prepared a how to and the best way to do this. We need as many of you as possible to get mobilize and provide feed back IN YOUR OWN WORDS

Ive tried to keep this simple and easy to follow

Go to:

  1. Then scroll down until you see “Draft Land and Water Regional Plan Feedback’; in black bold.

There is a drop-box which says ‘Which FMU/rohe do you wish to feedback on’. Click on this and hit the top option which is ‘Otago Wide”.

  1. Then the next option is a suite of topics you wish to give feedback on. Click ‘Beds of Lakes and Rivers’.

  2. The next section is general feedback. Here you need to add what your concerns are.

In short, you want to retain the permitted activity rule whereby dredging is retained as a permitted activity because the science proves the effects are localised, temporary and less than minor even in the most sensitive of Otago waterbodies.

You need to add the phrase ‘The effects of suction dredging is less than minor on the bed and the aquatic ecology. This is proven in the ecological evidence presented by both ORC staff and consultant ecologists and applicants ecologists during hearings where mining is proposed in Schedule 7 sensitive waterbodies and consent is required.

You can then talk about some of the following points, and it is important to use your own words in this so the ORC do not get a near exact version from each miner. Here are some examples and talking points.

  • You were very disappointed to read in the ODT that Policy Manager Fleur Matthews stated “suction dredging has significant ecological impacts”. This statement is not supported by science and is misleading the public. She clearly has a preconceived position on the process outcomes even before submissions are considered.
  • Gold mining was the foundation of Otago and Dunedin and that Dunedin was the capital city of NZ because of gold. You wish to exercise the right to be part of the history of gold in Otago.
  • The ORC are extremely expensive in their consent fees. It is extortionate and unreasonable to force a hobby miner to spend between $10-40,000 on a hobby dredging consent and a permitted activity rule should be provided.
  • Gold mining supports your economic and social wellbeing as promoted in the s5 of the RMA.
  • Hobby gold mining supports your mental health wellbeings.
  • Previous consent decisions approved by independent hearings commissions found hobby dredging is consistent with s6 of the RMA.
  • Previous consent decisions approved by independent hearings commissions found hobby mining consistent with Te Mana o Te Wai despite Manawhenua opposition.
  • You are a 4th generation gold miner in Otago.


  1. The next question is “do you want a copy of your feedback”. Click Yes.
  2. The next question is your age
  3. The next question is what best describes you. Click Other
  4. The next question is ‘do you want to be kept informed of progress’ and click Yes and then include your email address. This is important you do this so it registers interest from a range of dredgers,

Then click SUBMIT


Done and done thanks ,my claim is in nelson but you guys are right ,time to make a stand here.you are doing a great job,my family mined at Livingston way back when so i recon i can do a submission


Done. Hoping this helps any affected in Otago. And prevents the spread.

Very similar poor diplomacy was used and cited around gun stats and use during the “buy back” and banning event. The classic being semi auto “assault rifles” (has to have full auto function to meet that title) and “high caliber bullet” (.223 is tiny) those words and terms scare the public into agreeing without any knowledge.

Silly silly.


I have submitted last week the key is to get your name on the list at this stage.


Done, thanks prich.

A point I made about the Policy and Planning manager’s comments:

Turbidity produced by suction dredge mining is miniscule compared to the annual flooding that happens in each and every Otago waterway. Floods are a regular and natural event for Otago’s waterways, and Otago’s indigenous species have evolved to thrive in said waterways. How does it then follow that a localised streambed disturbance which is orders of magnitude smaller than the most innocuous of high flows will have “significant ecological impacts”?

I hope that eventually the ORC realize the truth - we are ordinary humans, we love the outdoors, and pro-dredging does not equal anti-environment!


Absolutley agree with you there madgoldnz . Your right the river biota have evolved to handle in stream turbidity for long periods of time,
Thanks for taking the time to provide feedback .

Madgoldnz, that would be have to be the best description I have heard describing small scale dredging impact. Surely comon sence has to get through to this cult like green wave of administrators


Yes, we all know that but the white collar pen pushers wouldn’t have a clue. Or do they? They are just puppets answering to their masters & licking balls & kissing arses & selling us out for other agenders & taking away more of our “rights”. :face_with_symbols_over_mouth: :rage:

JW :cowboy_hat_face:


Done!! It is a good time to remind everybody that submissions close on Monday. I hate doing that sort of thing, so if I can do it, then anyone can.


Thanks for the reminder! Just submitted mine in the nick of time thanks to it :wink:

1 Like

I would recommend everybody read the ACT policy agreement with national there is a massive change coming to minerals and fresh water there kicking all thease idiots into touch including nghi tahu


Got a link to the agreement?

It sounds positive

1 Like

Also this from the national and nz first coalition agreement


Thank god. The faster it happens the better


is it possible to have lobby group submit repeal whole mining act to include sluicing case by case

Invited the ORC on the river last week . A summary of what happened is created in new topic