Keith Chapple — Speaking for the Rivers

Forest and Bird, Volume 21, Issue 4, 1 November 1990, Page 41

Keith Chapple — Speaking for the Rivers

(From By the

, by

by

River Ashley

Ursula Bethell).

Gerard Hutching

Too late we hear, too late, the undertones Of lamentations in all the natural songs What have you done with my mountains? What have you done with my forests? What have you done to your rivers? Too late.

Is ANOTHER LIFE Keith Chapple might have been a lawyer. According to those who have watched him at work in a Planning Tribunal, in this life Chapple is the match of most with an LL.B after their name. "He would have made a brilliant lawyer. He has a quick ability to size up issues and an equally quick ability to size up technical matters," considers Jim Guthrie, the lawyer who handled the Department of Conservation’s Wanganui River flows appeal. The David and Goliath encounter between those who advocated a return of the headwaters of the Wanganui and Electricorp who opposed such a move provided the platform for Forest and Bird’s King Country branch chairperson to hone his legal skills. For six months he commuted weekdays to Wellington for the marathon hearing, probably the lengthiest Planning Tribunal hearing ever held. There he advocated on behalf of the Wanganui River Flows Coalition, of which Forest and Bird is a member. Despite the personal hardships the hearing caused, one senses it was a role he relished. "It was the most difficult thing I’ve done in my life. | developed a love-hate relationship towards the legal process. The satisfying times were cross examining and destroying a witnesses’ credibility. "But at the same time Electricorp made life difficult, changing evidence and suddenly forcing me to change my questions. At times it was overwhelming when their witnesses had so much information," he says. For Keith and Brenda Chapple — an indispensable partner in the saga — the Wanganui story began in 1987 when they were making submissions to the Whanganui National park draft management plan. It was then that the implications of taking all the headwaters away from the lower reaches of the Wanganui River, and in fact diverting the waters of 66 rivers from around Tongariro National Park for the Tongariro power scheme, hit home. Fish stocks were depleted, the blue duck’s population plummeted, canoeists and rafters lost some of the finest white water rivers in the North Island, and the local Maori lost the source of their mana. Chapple chronicled the history of the scheme in a sell-out booklet The Rape of the Wanganui. Fortunately a review of the minimum flow regime for the Wanganui was due in May 1988. The Chapples swiftly seized upon this opportunity. Realising that broad community support would be one of the key elements in winning the campaign, they melded together 35 groups into the Wanganui River Flows Coalition. King Country Federated Farmers, the Wanganui Chamber of Commerce and Forest and Bird were some of the diverse organisations involved. A detailed hearing before the Central Districts Catchment Board followed. At the same time the Government an-

nounced it was preparing to sell all water rights and assets to Electricorp. The Chapples promptly organised a petition calling on the State-Owned Enterprise to apply for a water right for the Wanganui. The petition had the desired effect; within six weeks of its launch Electricorp had decided to apply for a water right for the western diversion and the Wanganui tributaries. By October 1988 the Catchment Board announced its decision in favour of returning 100 percent of the Wanganui River headwaters and eight to sixteen times the flow of the Whakapapa River. Unaffected by the decision were the remaining 64 rivers diverted for the power scheme. They would continue to flow north into Lake Taupo. The decision was an obvious body blow to Electricorp. Chairman John Fernyhough’s immediate reaction — informing TV news viewers that their power bills would jump by $100 as a result — graphically demonstrated how shaken the SOE had been by the decision. The scaremongering claims were swiftly rebutted by energy researcher Molly Melhuish who calculated that at the most the extra costs would amount to $1.54. However, pleading that the national interest was at stake, Electricorp decided to appeal the case to the Planning Tribunal. It soon became apparent that Electricorp would spare no expense to win the hearing. They called more than 40 witnesses and rumour places their total costs at anything between $7-$15 million. Citing the potential costs of more than $100,000, Forest and Bird decided to withdraw from the hearing in April 1989, leaving the Department of Conservation, the Wanganui River Flows Coalition and the Wanganui Maori Trust Board to advance the conservation case. In fact Forest and Bird continued to play a part in the proceedings: for a period Keith Chapple was forced to take leave from his job in the engineering department of the local hospital, for which the Society reimbursed him. However, he often continued to work night shift at weekends. It was a frenetic schedule: commuting to Wellington on Monday for the hearing, returning to Kakahi on Friday evening and working at the hospital through the weekend. "It was bloody murder. The hearing lasted eight months and I took two-thirds of that time off work. If it wasn’t for Forest and Bird's help we would have been forced to withdraw from the hearing,’"’ Chapple recalls. As Electricorp raised the ante, the support the Flows Coalition had received up until then began to recede. Of the 35 groups originally in the coalition, only 13 agreed to remain for the hearing. The spectre of costs being charged against the coalition was having its effect. The Coalition prepared its case. Keith describes Brenda as "the lynchpin’ of the

coalition. A former secretary/personal assistant, she provided the professional touch required for submissions. She became pregnant during the campaign and gave birth to Brendan Wainui at the time when Tribunal members were undertaking a field inspection of the rivers. Little Brendan and Brenda attended the Tribunal during its last days to lend moral support to a proud father. Other key members of the coalition were Tom Wells, Larry Rogers, the Parker brothers, Manu Lala and Jim Gosman. Expert advice came from Massey University geography lecturer Peter Horsley and former Auckland University environmental studies lecturer Dr Bob Mann. Graeme Dingle and Grant Davidson gave invaluable advice on recreation; David Pate on the electricity system, energy conservation and management; Brian Carran on regional development and tourism opportunities; the Parker brothers, owners of Plateau Guides Ltd, donated thousands of dollars of time and research trips down the rivers. In addition the Chapples received an award from the Orangi Kaupapa Trust — "for services to the environment" — which assisted with personal expenses. Other financial support came from the Ruapehu District Council which weighed in with $5000 for the Coalition when funds were running short, and Taumarunui residents who donated

RIVER LAW

A\ sconoinc to the Justice Department, the Planning Tribunal hearing into Electricorp’s appeal over the minimum flow regime set down for the Wanganui and Whakapapa Rivers was "probably" the lengthiest and most costly in New Zealand history. For the statistically minded, the following facts about the case will be of interest: Length of sitting: 94 sitting days spread over seven months. Number of witnesses: 104 Number of lawyers: 14 maximum, 10 minimum. Electricorp’s evidence: 2.5 metres tall. Length of transcript: 2,500 pages. Length of evidence of all parties: 100,000 pages. Expense to Electricorp: Estimated $7 million minimum; $15 million maximum. Expense to Department of Conservation: $625,000. Witness expenses: Rumoured $750,000 to one witness; $250,000 to another; $5 million to a scientific establishment.

$10,000 during the course of a three-hour radio appeal. "The decision not to employ counsel was a big worry. However I decided to put my best foot forward and fronted up at the court. "When we decided to advocate it ourselves we were sending a message to Electricorp — that ordinary people were prepared to have their say on the Tribunal’s terms," says Chapple. The coalition confined itself to regional issues: the impact of the diversions on the blue duck, recreation, the trout fishery, the history of the scheme and tourism and regional development. The Department of Conservation played the major role, tackling energy conservation, economics, hydrology and environment. On the Putiki marae — the first time a Planning Tribunal hearing had been held on a marae — the Wanganui Maori Trust Board told of the spiritual values of the river to their people. "The river can only live and maintain its mauri, essence of life, with a plentiful supply of water from its source," said tribal elder Mr Taitoke Tawhiri. Central to the coalition’s thinking about the case was the fate of the blue duck, since birds are the best indicator of environmental degradation. Being a torrent duck, the loss of the cold headwaters around Tongariro National Park had a devastating effect on the bird's population. It has been claimed that the blue duck is especially vulnerable because it does not readily fly from one catchment to another. Therefore, the argument goes, once the habitat is degraded in a river, the population there is highly vulnerable. The strong territorial instincts of the blue duck mean that chicks fail

to establish new colonies. However, Electricorp’s expert witness contended that, while the bird was threatened, there was evidence of it moving from catchment to catchment. This was based on observations of one bird. However, researchers point out it appears more likely that males only are travelling long distances; therefore new populations are failing to establish. Chapple says there is no doubt the blue duck is fragmented and under pressure. He cites the example of the diversion of the Tongariro River in 1984. Beforehand the population was 32; today it has plummeted to five. Despite the huge negative impact the diversion of the rivers’ headwaters has had, the coalition does not advocate scrapping the Tongariro scheme. "The nation has spent money on the scheme, we should be able to get something out of it. But Electricorp have shot themselves in the foot. Fernyhough said the decision on the Wanganui would affect all rivers, but that’s nonsense. "Had they accepted the catchment board's decision they would have had a pretty good deal, allowing them half the water from the western diversion," Chapple says. He sees one benefit of the Planning Tribunal hearing being the higher standard of information presented than at the catchment board hearing. As a result the tribunal could more accurately judge the percentage of water that should be restored for ecological purposes. Wie HE ARRIVED in New Zealand in 1968, Keith Chapple had little inkling he would be making national headlines 20 years later. Born in London in 1943, he cut short a philosophy and political science degree at Reading University in favour of travelling the world. His first 18 months in New Zealand was spent on a farm near Lake Waikaremoana, which he describes "as good an introduction as any to New Zealand." He was impressed by his contact with local Maori; years later the Maori community alongside the Wanganui River would prove invaluable allies. __ From there he lived in Auckland where he met Brenda. "We used to sit down at dinner parties and solve the world’s problems," he recalls. It was not until 1980 when he and Brenda moved to Kakahi, near Taumarunui, that theory was transformed into practice. The occasion was a developer advertising his intention to extract metal from the Whakapapa River. From his home on the terrace overlooking the river, he describes in his quiet and intense manner how locals formed Friends of the Rivers of Kakahi (FORKS). Well known

artist Peter Macintyre, who owns the house the Chapples live in as well as a neighbouring holiday cottage, was a founding member. His love of angling and artistic appreciation of the area's natural beauty had also led to his campaigning against the Tongariro power project in the 1960s. Then the term "environmental considerations" was relatively unheard of. However in the early 1980s FORKS won the day against the metal extractor and continued as a ginger group for several more years. Chapple’s next major issue became the 1984-86 campaign to create a forest park centred on Tongariro State Forest. It was the end of an era: in its dying days the Forest Service was still clearing native forest using taxpayers’ funds. Even after the logging had stopped, officials continued to insist that they, and not the local people, knew what was the best use of the forest. The issue taught him not to trust bureaucrats and showed him they were not the servants of the people. Brenda proved her worth with her secretarial skills and determined advocacy. "In our first meeting with the Forest Service they treated us very patronisingly. However Brenda took extremely accurate notes and at the next meeting we were able to go through each point of what they had agreed to. They didn’t expect us to be so professional," he says. In 1986 he became chairperson of Forest and Bird's King Country branch. "When we arrived King Country people had a pioneering ethic but you couldn't blame them. Now we've become accepted for our views. Just look at the stance taken by the locals over the Wanganui — that’s a real achievement." RAISE for Keith Chapple’s abilities — from both supporters and opponents in the Wanganui case — abounds. Massey University Geography lecturer Peter Horsley sees his role as crucial. "He had the extra tenacity and a clear vision of what had to be done. Without him there would have been a different outcome. Keith was respected by all in the tribunal." Horsley says that Chapple's role in bringing in local opinion to the tribunal hearing was especially important. According to Jim Guthrie, the Wanganui case would never have got where it did if it had not been for Chapple’s commitment. He had galvanised other, perhaps less committed people: "Once you've got on the train, you've got to take it to the station," is the way Guthrie puts it. The Dunedin lawyer — a member of the New Zealand Conservation Authority — also found Chapple "extraordinarily well read" with a taste for fine red wines (discovered on a trip to Hawkes Bay). Electricorp officials are reticent about criticising Chapple. Public relations head Juliet

Hensley applauds him for "putting the rights of local people into perspective. I think people do care very deeply about the environment." She sees the Wanganui issue as part of a "huge debate" and the question that has to be resolved is whether the regional or national interest comes first. Electricorp’s staff lawyer Hilary Talbot is similarly reserved in her comments. She found the Flows Coalition to be very professional, especially in relation to the way it presented evidence. Ms Talbot credits Brenda for her role in this. Privately Electricorp officials feel deeply wounded by the bad publicity the SOE has attracted as a result of the Wanganui case. A Frontline programme on the Wanganui River earlier this year exposed Electricorp’s role on the issue to a national audience — an audience usually assailed by Electricorp's TV advertising campaigns promoting power use. As the spearhead of the Wanganui campaign, Chapple is held responsible by some for placing Electricorp in such an unfavourable light. However he is unrepentant. He sees Electricorp as "the great New Zealand clobbering machine writ large" and with Forest and Bird staff and members is now embarking as coordinator of Forest and Bird’s nationwide energy conservation campaign. Electricorp will be a major focus. On the one hand, he points out, the corporation has a production arm which claims to have an environmental policy; on the other it has a marketing arm which is hell bent on increasing energy usage, hence profits. Electricorp’s sophisticated PR machine has fought back with an expensive video putting its side of the story. Fronted by Peter Hayden, better known for his role as presenter of TVNZ’s Wild South series, and scripted by cartoonist Tom Scott, the video has the smart

PR title of Our Future Generation. Electricorp says the video is intended to portray the corporation as environmentally responsible and thus assist in its endeavours to be granted water rights for its power plants. The effect is somewhat spoiled, however, by the flier promoting the video — it features a photo of the Whakapapa River with the heading "environmentally sound." Chapple believes that, with the threat of climate warming around the corner, the public is more likely now to get behind an energy conservation campaign than at any time in recent history. "However, energy conservation does mean that people will have to change their lifestyles, and that will be difficult. For example, people on Auckland’s North Shore will not

take readily to messages that their sole passenger Car trips will have to stop; neither will industry want to control energy plants and reduce CO, emissions." He believes it is vital that the campaign places the emphasis on the positive rather than negative values of energy conservation. One thing is for certain: if the Chapples put as much drive and commitment into energy conservation as they did into saving the Wanganui, such a campaign has a strong chance of being a success (Editor's note: at the time of writing the Planning Tribunal had not announced its decision). yr