link to page 1 link to page 1
Memo
To:
Shay McDonald - Otago Regional
Cc:
Council
From:
7(2)(a) - Lane Neave
Date:
29 September 2025
Client:
Matakanui Gold Limited
Matter Number:
271881.0001
Matter
Bendigo-Ophir Project Resource Consenting
Description:
Subject:
Surface Water Flows Augmentation
1.
As you know, Matakanui Gold Limited (
MGL) is seeking approvals under the Fast-Track
Approvals Act 2024 (
FTA) for the Bendigo-Ophir Gold Project (
BOGP).
2.
MGL is progressing the Section 30 assessment of the FTA with Otago Regional Council (
ORC)
to confirm that there are no existing resource consents held by another person that would mean
MGL could not fully exercise FTA approvals if granted until the existing consents expire.
3.
We understand you have discussed the minor surface water activities proposed by MGL as
RELEASE
part of the BOGP with Mitchell Daysh and MGL which are:
(a)
Take and use surface water that accumulates within mining features (pits, sumps and
silt ponds) as a result of rainfall and groundwater ingress.
(b)
Install cofferdams in Shepherds Creek and abstract water from behind the cofferdams
for use in construction works.
4.
This advice considers whether the BOGP will ensure existing permit holders are able to access
their consented allocation in full throughout the life of the BOGP and the approvals sought by
MGL can be sought alongside the existing approvals. This is within the context of the
requirements of Section 30 of the FTA.
SR.10485
5.
In summary, the technical assessments supporting the BOGP and the proposed conditions
securing augmentation of surface water flows demonstrate that ORC can be confident that the
approvals sought by MGL can be exercised alongside existing permits and will not result in a
derogation of the rights held by existing water permit holders.
6.
We consider therefore that the Section 30 certification by ORC can be provided.
Section 30
7.
The application form for substantive applications requires an applicant to confirm whether they
hold an existing resource consent(s) for the same activity using some or all of the natural
resources
.1
LGOIMA
8.
This is due to Section 30 of the FTA which applies i
f:2
(a)
the substantive application seeks approvals for resource consents; and
(b)
the applicant does not hold an existing resource consent for the same activity using
some or all of the same natural resource.
1
FTC00-Fast-track-substantive-application-form.pdf at page 13.
2 Fast Track Approvals Act 2024, Section 30(1).
271881.0001 15285788.4
link to page 2 link to page 2 link to page 2 link to page 2 link to page 2
2
9.
The Section 30 framework is a two-stage process, the first of which is applicant led before the
Environmental Protection Authority carries out the second stage.
10.
The purpose of Section 30 is to ensure a substantive application does not progress until any
overlaps with existing resource consents are identified and resolved
.3
Consideration of the Bendigo-Ophir Gold Project in Section 30
11.
For the purposes of Section 30, when assessing whether existing resource consents held by
another person could prevent MGL from fully exercising its BOGP FTA approvals until those
consents expire, the effects management proposed for the BOGP must be considered as a
whole, rather than being divided up into artificial components or assessed without proposed
mitigation in place.
12.
It is a well-established principle in the context of Resource Management Act 1991 (
RMA)
decision making that all activities proposed in an application must be assessed holistically in
order to the assess the effects of granting consent for the proposal
.4
13.
As such, the BOGP activities, including the measures proposed to avoid, remedy and mitigate
adverse effects in relation to water quantity, must be considered as a collective whole to
determine whether the BOGP would result in a derogation of the rights held by existing water
permit holders.
RELEASE
14.
The augmentation of flows is an important part of this effects management approach (in this
case the avoidance of effects arising).
Potential Direct Impacts on Downstream Water Permits
15.
In the absence of any augmentation of flows, expert assessment anticipates that the BOGP is
expected to result i
n:5
(a)
an average reduced flow of 3.3 litres per second in Shepherds Creek and 1.9 litres per
second in Rise and Shine Creek; and
(b)
a peak reduced flow rate of 5.2 litres per second in Shepherds Creek and 17.3 litres
SR.10485
per second in Rise and Shine Creek.
16.
Existing water permits downstream from the BOGP are used for pastoral, viticultural,
horticultural, and agricultural activities
.6 Modelling prepared by MGL’s technical experts
concludes that without augmentation of Shepherds Creek and Rise and Shine Creek at
downstream points of the BOGP, some potential direct impacts on the following downstream
water permits will be possible
:7
(a)
Tarras Farms Limited’s pastoral abstraction from Shepherds Creek for irrigation and
storage; and
(b)
Bendigo Station Limited’s abstraction from Rise and Shine Creek for irrigation, stock
water supply, and domestic supply.
LGOIMA
3 Amendment Paper 238 at page 3.
4
Cable Bay Wine Limited v Auckland Council [2022] NZCA 189 at [16].
5 Rekker, J., (2025). Bendigo – Ophir Gold Project, Assessment of Downstream Water Rights, and any Derogation of
Rights. Report: Z24002BOG-4, prepared by Kōmanawa Solutions for Matakanui Gold Ltd, August 2025 at pages 3 -4.
6 Rekker, J., (2025). Bendigo – Ophir Gold Project, Assessment of Downstream Water Rights, and any Derogation of
Rights. Report: Z24002BOG-4, prepared by Kōmanawa Solutions for Matakanui Gold Ltd, August 2025 at page 9.
7 Rekker, J., (2025). Bendigo – Ophir Gold Project, Assessment of Downstream Water Rights, and any Derogation of
Rights. Report: Z24002BOG-4, prepared by Kōmanawa Solutions for Matakanui Gold Ltd, August 2025 at page 2.
271881.0001 15285788.4
link to page 3 link to page 3 link to page 3 link to page 3 link to page 3 link to page 3 link to page 3
3
17.
To ensure these potentially directly impacted downstream takes are able to access their
consented allocation at all times, MGL has proposed through the proposed conditions of
consent to maintaining the flows necessary for downstream water takes through use of the
groundwater taken from the Bendigo Aquifer (which will be the subject of one of the resource
consents being sought).
18.
To provide for this, the proposed conditions of consent require a minimum flow rate to be
maintained at all times throughout the life of the BOGP. To meet this condition, MGL will
continuously augment flows at Shepherds Creek and Rise and Shine Creek at points
downstream of the BOGP.
19.
This will be achieved by taking water from the Bendigo Aquifer, which is not fully allocated, via
MGL’s water supply borefield and pipeline. This Aquifer benefits from the infiltration of water
from the Clutha River and provides substantial opportunity for storage of augmentation wa
ter.8
20.
This will ensure existing permit holders are able to access their consented allocation in full
throughout the life of the BOGP and the approvals sought by MGL can be exercised alongside
those existing permits.
21.
In the active closure period, as dewatering activities are reduced, the surface water depletion
is expected to decline
.9 By the post-closure period, runoff flow rates into the creek network are
projected to increase above that of the pre-mining state as former mine surfaces are fully
RELEASE
restored and the TSF surface is rehabilitated to return drainage to the creek network
.10
Potential Indirect Impacts on Affected Downstream Water Permits
22.
Potentially indirectly affected downstream waters have been considered by MGL technical
experts and consist of water users that take water from groundwater in circumstances where
Shepherds Creek or Bendigo Creek is one of the multiple replenishment or recharge sources
of the groundwater aquifer.
23.
Potentially (all be it unlikely) indirectly impacted downstream water users would be groundwater
takes from the Lindis Alluvial Ribbon Aquifer, Ardgour Valley Aquifer or Bendigo Aqui
fer.11
MGL’s technical experts have determined that the amount of water that may be lost from creek
flows represents a very small percentage of the naturally occurring replenishment sources such
as irrigation return water, land surface recharge and surface water infiltration
.12
SR.10485
24.
This expert analysis of the quantitative effect on the groundwater users in the
lower Lindis
Valley and Bendigo catchment undertaken by the technical experts determines that the effect
of the BOGP in terms of access to water or supply reliability
would be negligible.13 The
technical assessment states it is arguable whether upstream impacts of the BOGP would have
any net effect on the physical availability of water to indirectly affected users
.14
25.
From this starting point of potential indirect impacts, and to ensure that indirect impacts do not
arise on downstream water permits, MGL has committed through the proposed conditions of
8 Rekker, J., (2025). Bendigo – Ophir Gold Project, Assessment of Downstream Water Rights, and any Derogation of
Rights. Report: Z24002BOG-4, prepared by Kōmanawa Solutions for Matakanui Gold Ltd, August 2025 at page 6.
LGOIMA
9 Rekker, J., (2025). Bendigo – Ophir Gold Project, Assessment of Downstream Water Rights, and any Derogation of
Rights. Report: Z24002BOG-4, prepared by Kōmanawa Solutions for Matakanui Gold Ltd, August 2025 at page 6.
10 Rekker, J., (2025). Bendigo – Ophir Gold Project, Assessment of Downstream Water Rights, and any Derogation of
Rights. Report: Z24002BOG-4, prepared by Kōmanawa Solutions for Matakanui Gold Ltd, August 2025 at page 6.
11 Rekker, J., (2025). Bendigo – Ophir Gold Project, Assessment of Downstream Water Rights, and any Derogation of
Rights. Report: Z24002BOG-4, prepared by Kōmanawa Solutions for Matakanui Gold Ltd, August 2025 at page 6.
12 Rekker, J., (2025). Bendigo – Ophir Gold Project, Assessment of Downstream Water Rights, and any Derogation of
Rights. Report: Z24002BOG-4, prepared by Kōmanawa Solutions for Matakanui Gold Ltd, August 2025 at page 6.
13 Rekker, J., (2025). Bendigo – Ophir Gold Project, Assessment of Downstream Water Rights, and any Derogation of
Rights. Report: Z24002BOG-4, prepared by Kōmanawa Solutions for Matakanui Gold Ltd, August 2025 at page 6.
14 Rekker, J., (2025). Bendigo – Ophir Gold Project, Assessment of Downstream Water Rights, and any Derogation of
Rights. Report: Z24002BOG-4, prepared by Kōmanawa Solutions for Matakanui Gold Ltd, August 2025 at page 3.
271881.0001 15285788.4
link to page 4 link to page 4 link to page 4
4
consent to maintaining the flows necessary to ensure these permit holders can access their
consented allocation at all times.
26.
Augmentation will supplement potential small-scale losses to the downstream groundwater
systems at augmentation rates equivalent to the mean net reduction in in-creek water
resourc
e.15 The pumping of the MGL borefield to carry out augmentation will avoid effects on
other groundwater users in the same aquifer and any change to the water balance would be
largely balanced by infiltration of river water from the Cluth
a.16
27.
With this mitigation in place, there is no possibility that the effects of the BOGP can indirectly
impact existing holders of water takes in the catchment.
Conclusion
28.
The conditions of consent requiring MGL to augment flows secures the outcome that potentially
directly and
indirectly impacted water permits will be able to access their consented allocation
at all stages throughout the BOGP. This demonstrates that the approvals sought by MGL can
be exercised alongside those existing permits.
29.
Judicial authority is clear that decision makers are to assume that an applicant will comply with
the proposed conditions of consen
t.17 We consider therefore that ORC needs to consider the
effect of the proposed augmentation when undertaking their Section 30 assessment. To not
RELEASE
do so would not be accurately assessing the effects of the BOGP.
30.
Through the technical assessments supporting MGL’s position and the proposed conditions
securing augmentation of flows, ORC can be confident that the approvals sought by MGL can
be exercised alongside existing permits and will not result in a derogation of the rights held by
existing water permit holders.
31.
While not strictly relevant to the Section 30 assessment, we consider that Rule 10.0.1.2 of the
Regional Plan: Water for Otago will not be triggered by the BOGP given the proposed takes
will not cause the primary allocation of the relevant catchment to exceed any surface water
limits, due to the augmentation proposed. Without the proposed augmentation we consider the
Rule would be triggered however that is not the case for the BOGP as the effect is avoided all
together.
SR.10485
LGOIMA
15 Rekker, J., (2025). Bendigo – Ophir Gold Project, Assessment of Downstream Water Rights, and any Derogation of
Rights. Report: Z24002BOG-4, prepared by Kōmanawa Solutions for Matakanui Gold Ltd, August 2025 at page 4.
16 Rekker, J., (2025). Bendigo – Ophir Gold Project, Assessment of Downstream Water Rights, and any Derogation of
Rights. Report: Z24002BOG-4, prepared by Kōmanawa Solutions for Matakanui Gold Ltd, August 2025 at page 4
17
88 The Strand Limited v Auckland City Council [2002] NZRMA 475 at [19].
271881.0001 15285788.4
