Sand mining: Commercial gain vs. Communities, lifestyle and environmental destruction

KEN RAYWARD

17 Jan, 2022

The battle being fought by the Mangawhai-Pakiri communities to protect our beaches from ultimate destruction caused by decades of continuous sand mining, is now going up a gear.

Excavation company, McCallum Brothers, have prepared their reasons as to why their three new consent applications should be granted by Auckland Council, with proposed sand removal being permitted for 35 years.

Our community is mounting a major opposition stating why these consents should not be granted.

Starting in February last year at a Resource Management Act (RMA) hearing dedicated to the far-shore consent application, the commencement of this battle has been delayed due to Covid interruptions, the completion of a seabed survey and some commercial manipulation, but is now set to continue on February 28 and 29, 9.30am, at the Warkworth Town Hall.

This first hearing is to hear responses from Auckland Council, the consent providers, and McCallum Bros, to the challenges made within opposing submissions covering multiple consent breaches, both on and off the water.

These allegations include McCallum Bros trespassing into Northland Regional Council (NRC) waters to mine; taking sand too close to the shoreline; overmining of sea beds causing disruption to marine life and natural sand movements; extraction inconsistencies with volumes taken under challenge; and abuse of the current compliance requirements at all levels.

Anyone following this can be excused for feeling a little confused, as the original consent application was provided by the Kaipara Limited extraction company who contracted McCallum Bros to do the actual mining.

However, during the Covid stand-down time, McCallum Bros advised all that they were to take over the role of principal in the consent process, with no reason given and with Kaipara Limited disappearing completely from the sandmining operation.

Considering this action happened half way through the hearing process and with significant investment input already from Kaipara Limited, it was quite a disruptive action undertaken by McCallum Bros, and there is much conjecture regarding this change. One speculation is that Kaipara Limited held serious concerns that the high level of community opposition to their application would impact on the integrity of their broader business. Another is that the transfer of consents was a pre-planned action driven by McCallum Bros, to ensure that there would be two hearings. If they had announced their ownership of all three applications prior, they would have had great difficulty mounting a case with the cumulative damage of all three consents being a hurdle their best lawyers would find a challenge to support.

Having lost out 14 years ago when their EPA-approved (Environmental Protection Authority) opposition to the current nearshore mining approval was unexpectedly overturned, the communities have taken strength and positive action from the words of recently-deceased world leader Desmond Tutu: ‘Don’t raise your voice, improve your argument’. And this we have done. With opposing groups, either community-based or environmentally concerned, working together under the ‘SOS - Save Our Sands’ umbrella.

This collaboration has enabled the preparation of irrefutable science-based data that covers all impacted areas from environmental, sea bed eco-system destruction, marine and bird life preservation, the recognised impact of heightened sea levels through global warming, the lack of recognition of local Maori traditions and heritage rites, plus the alternative supply options and the economic and lifestyle impacts on communities who are dependant on the ongoing quality and sustainability of our beaches and harbour.

New Zealand is one of the few remaining countries that still permits near-shore sand mining. PHOTO/SUPPLIED

Concerned locals gather in protest last February to send out an SOS to Save Our Sand. PHOTO/JULIA WADE