Farmer wins $300k payout

SDC went to the Environment Court last April seeking an enforcement order to prevent any further indigenous vegetation clearance on the station and also requiring significant remedial work. However, in October 2022, the court released a detailed 107 page decision declining the council's application for an enforcement order.

At the time, Chartres welcomed the ruling clearing him of unlawful clearances dating back to 2001, saying the council's approach had been "overzealous".

SDC had accused Chartres of unlawful clearance activities dating back to 2001. However, it failed to prove that there had been any breach of the relevant biodiversity rules that applied since that time.

In a statement, SDC chief executive Cameron McIntosh said the council accepted the judgement.

"This has highlighted the difficulties of operating in the realm of the Resource Management Act and associated government regulations," he added. "In the New Year we intend to raise these matters with the Ministry for the Environment to highlight the complexities of the situation."

However, Chartres told Rural News it was disappointing to read McIntosh's comments on the decision.

"He blames 'the difficulties of operating in the realm of the Resource Management Act and associated government regulations' for the council's failure in these enforcement proceedings," Chartres explained.

"Council's failure in this case was clearly spelt out by the Environment Court in its decision where it found that SDC had not established any breach of the rules."

Chartres says it was SDC's "complete failure to provide any evidence to the court to support its allegations of a breach of the rules" that resulted in the court finding in his favour

"This has nothing to do with the Resource Management Act and associated regulations as claimed by Mr McIntosh, and nor does the court's decision identify this as a problem," he added.

"As the court found, the real issue was that the council did not correctly apply or even understand its own district plan rules, and nor did it ever try to understand or engage with my consistently expressed position on existing use rights."

Chartres believes the decision awarding him $300,000 in costs "is a vindication of my position and reflects the failings of the Council's case and their conduct".

"It is disappointing that the ratepayers will have to bear the $300,000 costs awarded to me and the more than $500,000 costs that the council spent on its case."

Chartres told Rural News his family has farmed Te Anau Downs Station since 1925 and that around 78% of the original farm had ben appropriated to the conservation estate without compensation.