The thing that strikes me as most revealing about the revelations around the DOC draft submission is that DOC claimed they were not going to submit on the one-nutrient management approach “as the conservation values of the Tukituki catchment do not justify the resource investment required”.
The Tukituki is already deemed a freshwater ecosystem of national importance for biodiversity, and a water body of national importance. If these do not justify the investment of (supposedly) $200,000 to protect rivers of such recognised significance then at what point will DOC make such investment?
When we consider DOC’s stance, along with that of MPI is it any wonder that we have very little confidence in the excuses given by the Regional Council for why the contract they had with GNS science was cancelled.
Like Pandora’s box each of these revelations are unravelling the web of spin that has been constructed around the dam. The truth appears to coming out and does not bode well for the anti-fresh water brigade who are the dam’s supporters.
Submitted 28 Sep 13. Published 2 Oct 2013