BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH (ENV-2012-CHC-138, 139) IN THE MATTER OF Appeals under sections 120 and 121 of the Act BETWEEN D R MCINTYRE AND WAITAKI TRUSTEES (GOLDEN ACRES LIMITED) Appellant (ENV-2011-CHC-138) AND BETWEEN C E F KIDD AND G W KIDD Appellant (ENV-2011-CHC-139 AND CANTERBURY REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent EVIDENCE IN CHIEF OF STEPHEN KENNETH BROWN ON BEHALF OF THE ROYAL FOREST AND BIRD PROTECTION SOCIETY OF NEW ZEALAND INCORPORATED AND THE MACKENZIE GUARDIANS INCORPORATED 22 December 2017 Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand Inc. PO Box 2516 Christchurch 8140 Solicitor acting: Peter Anderson 021 2866992 [email protected] Duncan Currie/Ruby Haazen Richard Allen Counsel for Mackenzie Guardians Solicitor 8 Mt Eden Road Unit 1, 26 Putiki Street Eden Terrace PO Box 78326 AUCKLAND Grey Lynn Ph: (021) 144 3457 AUCKLAND E: [email protected] 1. My name is Stephen Kenneth Brown. I hold a Bachelor of Town Planning degree and a post- graduate Diploma of Landscape Architecture. I am a Fellow and past President of the New Zealand Institute of Landscape Architects, an Affiliate Member of the New Zealand Planning Institute. 2. This statement of evidence has been prepared in response to the appeals over the granting of consent for irrigation of land owned by C.E.F. and G.W. Kidd (referred to in my evidence as the Kidd Block) and D.R. McIntyre and Waitaki Trustees Golden Acres Limited (referred to as the McIntyre Block). It has been prepared on behalf of the Royal Forest And Bird Protection Society Of New Zealand Incorporated and the Mackenzie Guardians Incorporated. PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE 3. I have practised as a landscape architect for 36 years. During that period, the great majority of my professional practice has focussed on landscape assessment and planning. This has included evaluating the landscape, natural character and amenity effects associated with large scale proposals, such as Auckland’s Waterview Connection (SH16 / SH20) project, the recently consented East West Link project, and the two tranches of King Salmon marine farm proposals for the Marlborough Sounds. 4. I have also undertaken a large number of assessments of landscape and natural character characteristics and values in different parts of New Zealand, including, for example, the West Coast Region and related districts, the Auckland Region (twice) and the Far North District. Relevant projects and studies are set out in my Appendix A. In 2006 I was also part of a team managed by Urbis Ltd that was awarded the (UK) Landscape Institute’s Strategic Planning Award for the “Landscape Value Mapping Study of Hong Kong”. I developed the assessment method and assessment criteria employed in that study. 5. Of most relevance to the current proceedings, I undertook an evaluation of the northern two- thirds of the Mackenzie Basin in 2016 as part of my analysis of the Basin for the Plan Change 13 Appeals. I prepared evidence for those appeals and attended the Environment Court 2 Brown NZ Ltd December 2017 hearing, which addressed them. I will further explain the relevance of that work to the current appeals in my statement. CODE OF CONDUCT 6. I confirm that I have read the Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses contained in the Environment Court Practice Note 2014 and that I agree to comply with it. I further confirm that I have considered all the material facts that I am aware of that might alter or detract from the opinions that I express, and that this evidence is within my area of expertise, except where I state that I am relying on the evidence of another person. 7. This statement has been prepared in response to the appeals arising from the Canterbury Regional Council’s decision to decline water take consents for the Kidd and McIntyre blocks, north to northwest of Lake Benmore within the Mackenzie Basin. As a result, I have visited the Mackenzie Basin and undertaken an evaluation designed to assist the Court in its deliberations over PC13. PRELIMINARY COMMENTS: THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE KIDD APPEAL & CHANGES TO THE McINTYRE PROPOSAL 8. This statement has been prepared in response to both the Kidd and McIntyre appeals. Since nearly of it was prepared, C E F and D G W Kidd have withdrawn their appeal and Mr McIntyre has reduced the scale of his irrigation proposals by approximately 50%. These are significant changes. 9. Unfortunately, I have not had the time to recast my statement in line with those changes, while my Annexures still address both the Kidd and McIntyre blocks, as well as the wider setting afforded by the Mackenzie Basin. I was also unaware of them when I undertook my recent site visit, which compounds the difficulty of responding to the changes to the appeals. Even so, in response to the withdrawal of the Kidd appeal and amendments to the McIntyre application, I have added a brief section at the end of my Conclusions which attempts to summarise how that withdrawal affects my findings. In all other respects, my evidence remains as drafted up to the 20th December 2017. 3 Brown NZ Ltd December 2017 SCOPE OF EVIDENCE 10. I was asked to review the evidence of Christopher Glasson on behalf of the applicants, Peter Rough on behalf of the Canterbury Regional Council, and to visit both the Kidd and McIntyre sites in order to evaluate the landscape effects of both irrigation proposals. I have also been asked to explore those effects in the context of the wider-ranging proposals for irrigation across the Mackenzie Basin that I addressed in my 2016 evidence on PC13, so as to reach findings about the cumulative effects and changes that irrigation proposals – of the sort proposed by Messrs Kidd and McIntryre – are having on the wider landscape character and values of the Basin. 11. I have undertaken that evaluation. At the outset, I need to make it clear that I don’t disagree with the description of both irrigation sites, as outlined in the evidence of Mr Glasson, nor with his analysis of much of the wider landscape setting afforded them. In this regard, my views are also aligned with those of Mr Rough, who makes the point in his statement that he feels little is to be gained from reiterating much of the material in Mr Glasson’s evidence, which provides and introduction to the sites and their landscape surrounds. 12. Consequently, my evidence focuses on the following matters: a) The changes to the wider Mackenzie Basin landscape and its Subzone that led to PC13; b) The Basin’s wider characteristics and values; c) Recent and on-going changes to the Basin’s wider characteristics and values; d) The ‘place’ of the Kidd and McIntryre blocks within this landscape matrix; e) Visual exposure and other effects; f) My findings about the effects of irrigating the Kidd and McIntyre blocks. 13. In reaching my findings about the effects of the both consents, I have also taken into account the evidence of ecologist, Dr Susan Walker. As you will see, there is close alignment between the views that she expresses in relation to some aspects of the current proposals and my own, although I am not an ecologist and have avoided stepping beyond my area of expertise. Nevertheless, as with PC13, I have found Dr Walker’s evidence provides important ‘reference 4 Brown NZ Ltd December 2017 points’ in relation to some key matters addressed by Messrs Glasson and Rough – such as the significance and prevalence of hieraceum within the Mackenzie Basin and the viability of pastoral planting within the proposed buffer areas around each irrigation circle. INTRODUCTION 14. As with my PC13 evidence, I need to start by indicating that, even though I live and work (for the most part) within Auckland, I have visited and stayed within the Mackenzie Basin over many years – in fact, decades – and consider that I know it reasonably well, albeit not with the same familiarity and intimacy as those who live and work within the Basin. Even so, I have visited it in both a professional capacity, and also as a ‘visitor’: passing through on the way to Wanaka, Queenstown and Mt Cook / The Hermitage far more times than I can recall, as a guest at Tekapo village (once being foolish enough to swim in the lake) and Omarama, while skiing at Roundhill, Mt Dobson and Ohau ski fields, and as a student undertaking field trips to the Pukaki Basin, Mt Cook and the Tasman Glacier. 15. In 2009 I was briefed to assess the effects of proposed irrigation schemes on behalf of a number of Upper Waitaki landholdings owned by Southdown Holdings Ltd, Five Rivers Ltd, Williamson Holdings Ltd, and Killermont Station Ltd. After initially presenting evidence on this matter to Environment Canterbury, I was subsequently asked to prepare evidence for additional intensive dairying proposals. After much consideration, I decided that I could not endorse or support proposals for further dairy intensification within the Upper Waitaki catchment. I was involved in preliminary discussions between Richard Peacock in 2010 (then owner of Glen Eyrie Downs and one of the water right applicants) and EDS, but these occurred without achieving any merger of views over the future of the Upper Waitaki area. 16. In 2013, I was invited to visit Simons Hill Station, abutting SH8, southeast of Lake Pukaki. Again, I was asked if I could support irrigation proposals to support dairy intensification. After much deliberation, I decided that I was unable to support the landowner’s proposals for irrigation of large parts of that property.