Irrigation is back in the spotlight as another Mid Canterbury provider prepares for their resource consent to get taken to court.

Last year, Ashburton Lyndhurst Irrigation Limited (ALIL) had a consent for agricultural discharge revoked after Environment Canterbury lost a historical case in the High Court.

The Environmental Law Initiative (ELI), who took that case to court, have lodged another claim against ECan, this one regarding a consent for the Mayfield-Hinds-Valetta (MHV) scheme.

ELI allege that ECan “made multiple errors in the course of considering MHV’s consent application, including a failure to properly [account for] the potential effects of the discharges on local drinking water supplies.”

MHV board chairperson Cole Groves said it was “frustrating” to see their resource consent on the chopping block so soon after its neighbour.

“[It] is disappointing from our point of view, because that’s being appealed, so an outcome hasn’t occurred yet.”

Despite the decision on ALIL’s consent not being final, ELI have said they’ll use it to back up their argument against MHV.

Groves said that for the 204 farmers supplied by MHV, the legal battle won’t change anything.

If ECan lose, the cooperative will just operate on an older consent – which is worse for the environment.

“The consent conditions on our old one actually allows more room for farmers to potentially intensify,” Groves said, “and that’s not what we want.

ELI said their points will focus on nitrates in drinking water for MHV’s hearing.

They said ECan failed to notify community drinking water operators and private well owners when the consent was granted, alleging they wouldn’t have investigated the effects such discharge could have on the environment.

“ECan also did not have information about the costs for drinking water suppliers to mitigate those effects.”

The Commissioner who granted the consents said both ALIL and MHV presented “commitments to staged nitrogen reductions” in their water management plans, which they believed would “remedy the cumulative effects on aquatic life” over time.

Groves said MHV has worked to improve water quality by supporting farmer projects and running one of the “biggest community-led water testing programmes” in New Zealand.

“We test around 145 wells to get a real clear picture on water quality and nitrate movement.

“That’s funded through our scheme, farmers pay for that through their water charges.”

Groves said MHV farmers know they must put in the work to better their environment and manage runoff.

“We’re obviously judged on water quality, we don’t have a single shareholder that doesn’t understand that.

“We could be spending money that we’re having to spend with lawyers on environmental improvement, rather than on a court case, especially when there’s the appeal.”

While the old consent is less considerate of the environment, Groves said MHv will continue pushing farmers to “continue on the environmental journey that we’re on at the moment.”

The hearing will take place on May 19 and 20 May in Christchurch.

By Anisha Satya