A decision by the Minister for the Environment, Amy Adams, to ban dams on the Nevis River would give the Government some desperately needed ''green points on the board''.
That was the suggestion of the Central Otago Environmental Society yesterday in the wake of an Environment Court report on the controversial issue.
The court is divided on whether the water conservation order should be amended to prohibit damming or diversion of the river. Its 148-page report to Ms Adams, who will make the final decision, was made public on Tuesday.
The Environment Court became involved after Pioneer Generation, the New Zealand and Otago Fish and Game Councils and Whitewater New Zealand all appealed against a decision made by a special tribunal, appointed to look into the matter. The tribunal said damming should be prohibited to protect the environment of a native galaxiid fish, found only in the Nevis.
The court heard the matter over seven days in October and November last year. Commissioners Kathryn Edmonds and John Mills have recommended a complete ban on damming, while Judge Jon Jackson took a different view and recommended the potential for a small dam be left open, subject to conditions.
The majority decision and minority decision will both be forwarded to Ms Adams.
The environmental society was a party to the appeal and spokesman Graye Shattky, of St Bathans, said the group was heartened to see the majority of the panel confirmed the decision of the special tribunal.
''We understand Judge Jackson's concerns but think this is an opportunity for the minister [Amy Adams] and Government to get some green points on the board, which they desperately need.''
In his recommendation, Judge Jackson said after completing its inquiry into the matter, a unanimous decision was not possible from the court.
The minister had discretion to retain the water conservation order in its original form or make some or all the changes recommended, he said.
When he weighed the positive reasons to allow the possibility of a dam against its adverse effects he found ''the scales come down strongly on the side of retaining the possibility of a dam''.
The potential dam proposed by Pioneer Generation would be very small, about 14ha, and would be invisible except from close by, Judge Jackson said.
If the potential for a dam was left open, any developer would have to apply for consents from the local authorities and a detailed assessment of environmental effects would be made public. Groups and individuals would have the chance to make submissions on the proposal.
Commissioners Edmonds and Mills said before drafting their recommendation, they had the benefit of reading Judge Jackson's reasons for his decision, but they came to different conclusions.
The adverse amenity effect and visual effect and the ''damage to the perception of a wild, free flowing river'' from a hydro dam, such as that proposed by Pioneer, would be significant, they said.
The potential effect on the kayaking amenity alone, might justify a ban on damming and diversion, the commissioners said.
