Hiring a company to pump and spread effluent from a dairy pond does not make farmers liable for any ponding that might result, counsel for dairy farmers Eric and Daniel Gordon say.
Burnbrae Holdings Ltd and its directors, Eric James Gordon (62) and Daniel Clark Gordon (33), face prosecution by the Otago Regional Council for discharging dairy effluent on to land within 50m of a water body between June 4 and 7, 2011, on their property next to State Highway 1 at Milburn, near Milton.
Also accused of the same charge is Dairy Pond Spreaders Ltd, of Havelock North, and its co-director Harold Charles Summerell (72).
Environment Court Judge Brian Dwyer, of Wellington, heard the case in the Dunedin District Court yesterday.
Council counsel Alistair Logan said the Gordons had procured Dairy Pond Spreaders Ltd to carry out the activity, which breached the regional council's water plan rules.
Council witness environmental officer Mark Burns told the court he was driving along State Highway 1 on June 7 when he saw a large amount of effluent being irrigated on the Milburn property and when he investigated, he found ponded effluent and saturated soils within 50m of the highway.
The ponded liquid was green, had the consistency of effluent and gave off a distinct dairy effluent odour. There was also brown-stained grass indicating where effluent had been applied, he said.
The irrigator was in a different paddock, on the far side of Gorge Creek, a tributary of the Tokomairiro River, which ran through the property and had ponded effluent around it.
There was no sign the effluent had made it into the creek.
Samples were taken and sent to a laboratory for analysis.
Hamish Lowe, an environmental scientist, of Palmerston North, said soil moisture sites monitored by the regional council about 30km from the farm showed levels were well above field capacity and were indicative of the levels at the farm, he said.
"In my view, any form of irrigation should not have occurred."
Co-counsel Bridget Irving said the Gordons, who had pleaded not guilty, had hired Dairy Pond Spreaders to pump out an effluent pond and disperse it on to their paddocks.
They did not procure the company to discharge the effluent in breach of regional council rules.
The Gordons took all precautions to avoid the discharge and to remedy it, she said.
They hired the company because they had no knowledge of how to pump and spread the thick effluent from their new wintering shed. A company team member monitored the spread.
Daniel Gordon said in evidence the solids separator system for the shed was wrongly installed and not operating to capacity, so their effluent pond had filled to near capacity.
The company which installed the system recommended Dairy Pond Spreaders.
The case continues today.
