Tankers in troubled waters

Forest and Bird, Volume 16, Issue 2, 1 May 1985, Page 24

Tankers in troubled waters

by

Gerard Hutching

ock Lee, former Environment Commission employee and today project co-ordinator of the Triune Resources Ltd proposal to ship fresh water out of Deep Cove, would be offended if anyone questioned whether the cause he is championing is in the best interests of New Zealand. He is, after all, as he often points out, a fifth generation New Zealander. But despite the patriotic assertions, Lee has been waging an uphill battle trying to convince the people and politicans of his native land that a foreign owned company, wishing to locate one of the country’s largest ports in the heart of its finest National Park, does in fact have a concern for what is in the best public interest. Ever since American company Triune bought the water right to take water from the Deep Cove tailrace of the Manapouri Manapouri power project in 1982, the scheme has been greeted with opposition from environmentalists. At its recent executive meeting, Forest and Bird formally declared its opposition, although making the point that the Society is not against the concept of exporting water. The motion read "‘that in the Executive’s view, any shipping or industrial activity in Doubtful Sound to do with the export of water which would substantially impinge on the intrinsic qualities of Fiordland National Park, would be unacceptable to the Society.’’ Triune, in not properly addressing environmental concerns, has shown itself to be its own worse enemy. It has also demonstrated a large public relations problem. Since announcing the proposal, Triune has: @ Failed to admit that bringing five 120,000 tonne tankers into Doubtful Sound a week might be environmentally damaging. @ Made exaggerated statements of backing from local people. @ Made unsubstantiated claims that the scheme would be of enormous economic benefit to New Zealand — as much as $75 million a year, @ Continued to pressure the Government to make a quick decision in order to fulfill impending contracts, claiming that the viability of the scheme would be imperilled if such a decision was not made. However, despite the contracts lapsing, the project is apparently still viable. Forest and Bird, through one of its members, Captain Phil Robins — a harbour pilot — prepared a scathing submission on the safety aspects of the proposal, and the possible consequences on the delicate environment. Lee has referred to this submission as now out of date, since a new ‘‘operations manual’’ has been drawn up. The public, however, has not been allowed to see this yet. The Society has also pointed out that Fiordland National Park will probably be struck off its expected listing as a World Heritage Site, described by David Bellamy as one of the cheapest advertisements an area can get.

Finally, the Society took issue with a report of the Tourist and Publicity Department that tankers in Deep Cove would attract tourists. The report, prepared by another former employee for the Commission for the Environment, Peter Brooks, claimed that tourists would appreciate the ingenuity of New Zealanders in conserving nature and at the same time exploiting natural resources.

The Society’s reply was that if tankers were such a tourist drawcard, why was there not a thriving trade at Marsden Point. While Triune has been attempting to persuade politicians and civil servants to its point of view in Wellington, most of the public debate on the issue has been carried on in Southland. There, letters columns have been running hot with

assertion and counter-assertion from opposers and backers of the scheme. One of the most vocal opponents is Les Hutchins, managing director of Fiordland Travel, and a member of the National Parks and Reserves Authority, the Guardians of Lakes Manapouri and Te Anau, and the Deep Cove Hostel Committee. ‘IT don’t think anybody has said they don’t want water exports. But surely there is an alternative to Deep Cove,’’ he says. In fact, there are a number of options which Hutchins believes should be investigated. There are an abundance of sites in the Fiordland region which would not pose the same threat to the integrity of the National Park that the Deep Cove proposal would. Furthermore, there are alternative sites elsewhere in New Zealand which could be considered. At present the Ministry of Works is investigating a number of alternatives to the Deep Cove site; a report on this should be released shortly.

Hotly disputed by some Southlanders is ‘‘evidence’’ gathered by Triune that the people of Manapouri and Te Anau are in favour of the scheme. In fact, the Fiordland branch of the Travel Association has drawn attention to the dangers of a major port to the growing tourist industry in the region. At present it is estimated that tourists bring in approximately $40 million annually to the region, with this rising to $80 million by the year 2000. This represents about 900 new jobs in the tourist industry. Meanwhile, Triune will have to overcome possibly its biggest public relations headache when and if it becomes known overseas that the power station workers’ toilets discharge into the Deep Cove tailrace (as reported in the Commission for the Environment’s audit). While the pollution is infinitesimal relative to the amount of water pouring out of the tailrace, Triune’s advertising could well look over-inflated once the truth is out (‘"The last of the globe’s uncontaminated snow and rain is caught by the Southern Alps, filtered through the many mountain tarns and waterfalls of Fiordland National Park, and decanted in the protected environs of Lakes Manapouri and Te Anau.’’) At the time of writing, Triune were predicting that the first shipment would be heading for its destination in June of this year. Like many of its predictions, however, this is another which is certain to be over-optimistic. oe