An Auckland-registered company yesterday admitted failing to comply with conditions imposed under the Historic Places Act 1993 in relation to physical works at Gibbston last year.
Remarkables Wines Ltd, whose sole director is Richard Guthrey, of Auckland, will be sentenced for the offending in the Queenstown District Court on August 13.
In the court yesterday, crown prosecutor Michael Morris, appearing on behalf of the New Zealand Historic Places Trust, told Judge Michael Turner the company, registered to a Greenlane, Auckland, address, had failed to comply with three conditions of an authority granted to it on January 25, 2011.
These were in relation to earthworks on land near the historic Gibbston Hotel complex, on Coal Pit Rd, Gibbston.
The property was a recorded archaeological site under the New Zealand Archaeological Association site recording scheme, with the remains of the hotel - two stone buildings and two stone walls - located on an adjoining title. The hotel was established in the 1860s and burned down in 1912.
In 2006 an archaeological assessment of the site was completed and identified the possibility of long-drop latrines and rubbish pits of archaeological significance in the area between the hotel and the two stone buildings on the property.
On November 10, 2010 the New Zealand Historic Places Trust received an application from Remarkable Wines Ltd for an authority to "enable damage or modification of archaeology at the property", required for it to open a wine-tasting facility.
"This was accompanied by a copy of a resource consent application which had been filed with the local council and noted the historic significance of the area.
"The cover letter ... noted that 'the works involving possible disturbance of an archaeological site are the construction of three gravelled car parks, a disabled toilet and an on-site wastewater disposal system on the lawn between the two original stone buildings and the site of the hotel ... there may be some disturbance of possible midden sites on the lawn where the car park is being constructed'," Mr Morris said.
On January 25, 2011 the trust responded to Mr Guthrey, granting an authority to damage or modify the archaeology on the site.
The cover letter advised him to read the conditions carefully and stated the complex was "significant to the history of the Otago Goldfields" and it was possible rubbish pits and stone paving might be found.
"The contents of any rubbish pits will provide valuable data on the activities relating to the hotel during its use and will add to the story of the hotel," the letter said.
The authority contained 11 conditions, which included ensuring the trust's regional archaeologist was advised of the start date of work; any earthworks be monitored by a trust-approved archaeologist; and any archaeological evidence be investigated, recorded and analysed.
As another condition, archaeologist Andrew Winter was approved to carry out monitoring and work required.
"On May 5, 2011 the NZHPT regional archaeologist made a random visit to the site and discovered that earthworks were under way.
"Mr Guthrey was present.
"The works covered a large area of the site between the old stone buildings and the hotel site, causing damage to part of that site.
"The approved archaeologist, Mr Winter, was not on site and had not been during any of the work.
"The regional archaeologist noted items appearing to be 19th-century glass, ceramics, pottery and a blacksmith hammer amongst the spoil from the work."
Mr Morris said the trust wrote to Mr Guthrey on May 6 seeking an explanation and emailed him again on May 13 to ensure ongoing works were being monitored.
On May 14 Mr Guthrey replied, admitting work had been done "without your attendance and supervision due to my having failed to inform you prior to the contract to commence work on the site".
"I'm very sorry for this oversight and assure you that no further work will be carried out without your attendance," his response said.
No formal response to the letter of May 6 seeking an explanation had been received.
A charge laid against Mr Guthrey was withdrawn in the court yesterday.
The maximum penalty for the breach was a fine not exceeding $40,0000.
After admitting the offending on behalf of the company, Mr Guthrey said he was not seeking to engage a solicitor and recognised "an explanation is required".
