Luggate rights approved but planning criticised

Press, 3 July 1985, Page 29

Luggate rights approved but planning criticised

PA Dunedin The Otago Catchment Board has recommended that Crown water rights for the planned Luggate dam on the Clutha be granted, but it has criticised the planning approach. Approval for 12 out of 13 rights for the Ministers of Energy and Works and Development was given by the board’s water committee when it dealt with a report from its special committee. Additional to the conditions of the rights, the board will recommend to the National Water and Soil Conservation Authority that if possible, the commissioning date for the Luggate power station be deferred as the result of further gas from the Maui field becoming available for electricity. This would allow time for irrigation options and other multi-purpose development

to be investigated, the report said. It called for investigations to be given urgency to allow irrigation to be built into an over-all development plan for the Clutha. A theme of greater regional planning for the Clutha was extended with a recommendation that strong representations be made to the Government for co-ordi-nated planning. This would include aspects of electricity generation, irrigation, recreation, and other interests. The board also wants a direct portion of the benefit of the dam to be put back into maintenance and improvement of the productive and other values of the area. It has recommended that the Crown be urged not to exercise the rights until these additional recommendations are met. “In light of the planned

further development of the resources of the Clutha River, this lack of a truly multipurpose approach assumes even greater significance for the future,” the report said. “The Government should be urged in the strongest possible manner to broaden and co-ordinate its approach to development of the productive resources of the region in order that this potential can be realised to the best long-term advantage of the area, region and nation.” The benefits of the power, and the monetary costs of the dam, would be met nationally, but the loss of productive land and recreational opportunities “are borne disproportionately by the area and region.” The lost opportunity for regional development in the form of irrigation was also criticised.

At the hearing considering the water right applications, the Crown said 230 hectares would be flooded by the dam lake. Approval for water rights was recommended covering construction of the dam, diversion of the river, discharges from excavations, and extraction for aggregate washing and other processes. Two major rights were recommended for the generation of electricity and one for allowing excess water to pass through the dam. One right denied was for the discharge of septic tank effluent. Fifteen conditions were imposed on the main generation right, covering the points of concern raised in the report. Smaller numbers of conditions were set on other rights.