Development noise ‘stressed hens out'
Poultry farmer Nigel Hewitson at his Tisbury poultry farm yesterday. PHOTO: NINA TAPU
Invercargill poultry farmer Nigel Hewitson is living a ''nightmare every damn day''.
Mr Hewitson spoke at the public forum of the Invercargill City Council's community wellbeing and regulatory committee meeting this week .
Mr Hewitson said since September last year the noise from a nearby housing development had disturbed the 5000 hens on his Tisbury poultry farm, causing him and his employees distress.
''The noise and vibration of the development stressed the hens out,'' he said.
''They were attacking each other.''
The hens lost their appetite and their condition, and egg production dropped.
In particular, the machine used to compact the construction site was ''like earthquakes'' to the hens.
Hens had no muscles in their feet and felt the vibration throughout their bodies, he said.
It was very upsetting for staff members to pick up the dead bodies of the chickens, he said.
''I'm living this nightmare every damn day and it plays on you.''
When he talked to a council staff member in November he was told the project complied with the Resource Management Act (RMA), he said.
''I'm tired of fighting people because all I ever get out of the city council office is 'there's nothing we can do ... oh, this is a unique situation'''.
He could not understand why the RMA part of the consent had been signed off as not affecting anyone else, he said.
He believed the council was remiss because the welfare of animals had not been considered when the consent was approved.
The poultry farm was established on the property in 1938 and was one of the oldest businesses in the region, he said.
He was also concerned where the stormwater from the 40 plus houses in the development would go.
Mr Hewitson said the birds were now so affected by noise even a cough or sneeze caused them to panic and run to the end of the shed, where they piled up.
Some had died of smothering as a result of the pile-up.
Mr Hewitson said he had been advised by a council staff member to contact the Ministry for Primary Industries as the noise was an animal welfare issue.
After an MPI staff member visited they issued a compliance order to the developer giving it 14 days to work with him to resolve the issue, Mr Hewitson said.
When the company failed to do so, he appealed to the High Court as his ''only option'', he said.
''I was picking up deceased animals all the time and I had to do that because nobody had my back.''
The emotional and financial toll of the situation was high.
He was still feeding the hens the same amount of food, but production was halved and there were lawyer's fees as well.
Cr Grant Dermody asked how Mr Hewitson would like to see the situation resolved.
Mr Hewitson said the only way he could make a living from the land was through poultry farming and he did not want to give up his business.
Cr Dermody then asked if Mr Hewitson could co-exist with the development until it was finished.
Mr Hewitson said it was possible.
However, there would need to be give and take and at present it seemed like he was the only one giving, he said.
After Mr Hewitson's presentation, committee chairman Darren Ludlow said it was important to acknowledge the distress Mr Hewitson was experiencing.
Council consenting and environment group manager Jonathan Shaw was investigating the matter.
Mr Shaw spoke to the meeting and said while he had met Mr Hewitson it was too soon for him to report what he had found out.
Cr Ludlow asked for a timeline of when Mr Shaw would make his report.
It was agreed Mr Shaw would share his findings with Mr Hewitson within 14 days and report back to the committee when it met next month.
- By Sandy Eggleston
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
4 days ago
- Scoop
Hoarder's Home Drew 19 Complaints Before Fire
Article – Linda Hall – Local Democracy Reporter In the early hours of Saturday morning the 'materials', which included piles of scrap wood, ignited and quickly spread. Nineteen complaints were made in one year to Hastings District Council about a home surrounded by hoarded goods before it caught fire over the weekend. But firefighters as recently as eight months ago did not deem the pile a fire hazard, because of a lack of ignition source – meaning there was no enforcement option available to authorities. In the early hours of Saturday morning the 'materials', which included piles of scrap wood, ignited and quickly spread to the Frederick Street home, near the Mahora shops. Firefighters were called from Hastings, Napier and Taradale. One person was treated by ambulance staff at the scene. Police said on Monday the fire was now being treated as suspicious, and they were investigating. Neighbours and locals who have watched the pile in the yard grow over the past few years say they have been stunned at the lack of council action at what they claim was an obvious fire risk. A council spokesperson said it had received the complaints, but after exploring the Health Act, Building Act and the Resource Management Act it found 'no enforcement tools available' to allow it to remove goods from the private property. The council spokesperson said staff were exploring whether there were any other options for enforcement before the fire broke out. The council has now employed contractors for an urgent clean-up of the charred debris at the house, the cost of which is yet to be determined. A close neighbour, who declined to be named, said the house was set up like a 'fortress' and said the last four and a half years living beside an 'obvious' fire risk had been 'hell' for her family. She said she was lucky in the early hours of Saturday morning she was lying awake when 'all of a sudden the room was light'. By the time her husband went outside to have a look and came back in, the blaze had spread from the stuff piled in the front yard to the neighbours' house. 'We woke up our three children and my mother-in-law and took them over the road, then grabbed our dog and birds. 'I also grabbed my go bag, which has our birth certificates in it, because I just knew that one day this would happen. 'Things were exploding. It was scary as hell. Just nuts man.' Among the debris was a charred gas bottle, which was placed on the footpath near the home at Frederick Street on Saturday. Firefighters remained onsite most of the day with parts of Frederick Street closed to traffic. The neighbour said she had made numerous complaints to the council about the piles of goods around the property. 'I've been sent from the council to the police to fire and back to the council. 'People have said to me 'why don't you just move?' 'It's not that simple. We bought in the boom, so paid top dollar and the fortress wasn't there then – you could see the front door.' Fire Emergency New Zealand Hawke's Bay advisor for risk reduction Clayton Locke said the house was assessed roughly eight months ago and no fire hazard was found. A fire risk was different from a fire hazard, he said. '[Even] your car parked on the side of the road can be a fire risk. 'A fire hazard has an ignition source such as an incinerator in your backyard, with grass up to the window sills,' Locke said. He said if a property was found to have a fire hazard, firefighters' first approach would be education, before then issuing a notice of remedy. Rochelle Sudfelt from ClearHoarding NZ – a task force dedicated to raising awareness, reducing stigma and providing support for homeowners who hoard – said she also made a complaint about the house last year. 'Someone from the council had assessed the property and didn't deem it a risk to the environment until it spilled on the berm,' she said she was told. She said one in 20 homes in New Zealand was considered at risk of becoming a 'hoarding house'. 'Fire is the greatest risk to people inside these homes as well as fire and emergency staff who put themselves at risk getting inside to help people. ' Another nearby resident said the council was receiving ongoing complaints about the Frederick Street property. 'I live just down the road, the footpath always had items being dropped on council land outside. 'I asked the council if they could advise the occupant to remove it and if it could do something about the risk it was creating. 'The items were then moved into the property until the room inside was running out quickly. 'I found the council's reply hard to believe. It said 'sorry, we understand your concern, but there is unfortunately nothing we can do, we are aware of the property, however, we can refer your complaint to the fire services to look into'. 'Nothing happened. This property has been a fire and safety concern for years.' Police urged anyone with information to contact Police on 105 and quote 250621/9027.
Scoop
5 days ago
- Scoop
Latest Trawl Bycatch Numbers "A Grim Wake-Up Call"
The latest fisheries bycatch data paints a grim picture, with trawlers hauling up thousands of kilograms of coral and killing hundreds of fur seals and seabirds over a 12 month period. The bycatch deaths include 108 Salvin's albatross, which are at high risk of extinction. The figures from the Ministry for Primary Industries reveal that from April 2024 to March 2025, the New Zealand bottom trawling fleet dragged up over 8,300kg of protected coral, which is crucial to deep sea habitats and supports a huge range of ocean the same one-year period, 1092 seabirds, including 395 albatross, were killed by trawlers. Of those, 108 were Salvin's albatross, a middle-sized mollyhawk which are listed as "nationally critical," meaning they face an immediate high risk of extinction. The primary threat to Salvin's is industrial fishing. Just over 270 mammals also died in trawl nets. This included 25 dolphins and 239 fur seals, which are already dying in unusual numbers due to starvation, as climate change and industrial fishing put pressure on their food these figures are self-reported interactions with protected species made by fishers to MPI. Greenpeace oceans campaigner Juan Parada calls these figures "an urgent wake-up call". "The New Zealand bottom trawling industry is one of the greatest threats to ocean health. Year after year, the trawling fleet bulldozes ocean ecosystems, threatens already endangered species and smashes vital coral habitats which take centuries to form", says Parada"And while the seafood industry keeps insisting that such destruction is rare, the data shows otherwise. From the corals of the deep to the dolphins, fur seals and albatross that die as collateral damage in trawl nets every year, the cost of bottom trawling is too high. "The government can no longer be complicit in the devastation this industry is inflicting on the oceans. We need an immediate ban on bottom trawling on seamounts and vulnerable areas, as well as a commitment to establish marine sanctuaries on the high seas before it's too late." "New Zealanders care deeply about the ocean and want to see it thrive. Bottom trawling is a major threat to healthy oceans, and it is time New Zealand finally abandoned this indefensible, archaic practice." Bottom trawling is a destructive and indiscriminate fishing method that involves dragging large, heavy nets along the seafloor and over seamounts to catch fish.
Scoop
11-06-2025
- Scoop
Protected Corals Destroyed In Six-Tonne Bycatch 'Disaster' From A Single Bottom Trawl
Press Release – Joint Media Statement Environmentalists are describing the incident as a stark reminder of the horrors of bottom trawling and are renewing calls for the destructive fishing method to be banned on seamounts and other vital deep sea habitats. Key points: 6 tonnes of bycatch, mostly stony coral, was dragged up in a single bottom trawl last year Around the weight of a male African elephant, the heaviest land mammal on earth. Stony corals (Scleractinia species) are reef-building corals of the deep sea around Aotearoa. Stony corals are protected species under the New Zealand Wildlife Act. Deep sea corals are particularly found on seamounts and similar features. Reef-building corals provide critical habitat for many other deep sea species. If it happened in international waters, the area would've been closed immediately. BREAKING: It's been revealed that a New Zealand bottom trawling vessel has pulled up six tonnes of protected stony coral in a single trawl – making it the worst reported case of coral destruction in New Zealand waters in over a decade. Environmentalists are describing the incident as 'a stark reminder of the horrors of bottom trawling' and are renewing calls for the destructive fishing method to be banned on seamounts and other vital deep sea habitats. The stony coral, which is a critical reef building coral and protected in New Zealand, was pulled up by an unnamed trawler towards the end of the 2024 while it was fishing on the Chatham Rise, a large underwater plateau with seamounts and a diverse range of ocean life, off the South Island's east coast. The data was released by the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) only after an official information request by the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition (DSCC) and is the largest reported coral bycatch since a similar incident in 2008. Karli Thomas from the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition, who's at the United Nations Oceans Conference (UNOC) in France, says the incident is 'a disaster for deep sea corals' and is 'truly heartbreaking'. Reef building corals, like stony corals, are slow growing and can live for thousands of years. Coral reefs in the deep sea provide critical habitats for a variety of deep sea life. 'If this incident had happened in the international waters of the South Pacific, the area would have been immediately closed to trawling. Coral must be protected if we want healthy and thriving ocean ecosystems and this latest coral bycatch is a reminder of how destructive bottom trawling is – and why it must be banned from ancient and fragile deep sea habitats' says Thomas. Thomas noted that NZ trawlers destroy huge amounts of coral every year, with the fleet reporting tonnes of coral bycatch annually: it 22/3 the observer-reported amount of coral bycatch from trawlers was over six tonnes – but only 22% of trawls were covered by observers. Dr Kayla Kingdon-Bebb, Chief Executive of WWF-New Zealand, is also on the ground at UNOC and says this incident further underscores the absurdity and unsavouriness of Seafood New Zealand's recent greenwashing of the widespread reliance on bottom-trawling in Aotearoa's commercial fisheries. 'If people were horrified by the bottom-trawling depicted in Sir David Attenborough's new Ocean film, then they will be shocked to know that some of what takes place in Aotearoa is actually far worse than that footage. These images of a trawl net bursting with tonnes of bulldozed corals speak for themselves.' While MPI is attempting to argue the bycatch was a mix of natural and dead coral – and mud – Barry Weeber from ECO calls this 'disingenuous'. 'There is no way that official coral bycatch would be registered in the data with mud making up part of that weight. There are separate codes for an observer to record non-biological material on vessels and MPI reports the bycatch on their public database as corals, not corals and mud. The government spin that this catch is half mud is simply ludicrous and reeks of an industry-captured government department defending the indefensible. The image they provided doesn't show any mud at all.' Weeber says that mud making up a significant portion of the catch seems unlikely given the towing speed and having to retrieve a net from nearly 1km down: any mud would be washed out of the net. He also noted dead coral was an important part of the ecosystem. The release of the coral bycatch information comes as the New Zealand government is attending UNOC. One of the issues that will be discussed is a global fund for coral reef conservation, to which Foreign Minister Winston Peters has pledged NZD $16.2 million (USD $10 million). 'It's deeply ironic that the New Zealand government is internationally promoting coral conservation while wholesale coral destruction like this continues in our waters, and bottom trawlers are still allowed to trawl on seamounts and features – areas we know are hotspots for protected corals,' said Karli Thomas. Greenpeace spokesperson Ellie Hooper says Greenpeace witnessed the kind of destruction caused by trawlers in the deep sea first hand, during a seamount expedition in March where deep sea cameras were used to survey the seafloor, including in intensively trawled areas. 'What we saw was shocking; hours and hours of footage of lifeless fragmented and broken coral – a coral graveyard in the deep. The bottom trawling industry has gotten away with this kind of destruction in the waters of Aotearoa and the South Pacific for too long. Trawling causes indiscriminate damage to these vital habitats. It's indefensible and it must stop.' Environmental groups have repeatedly called on the New Zealand government to ban bottom trawling on seamounts and other areas where protected corals are known to occur, and to stop issuing permits to New Zealand vessels to bottom trawl on seamounts in international waters. New Zealand is the only country with vessels still bottom trawling seamounts in the South Pacific high seas. Note: The NZ Ministry of Primary Industries released information on 29 May 2025 in response to an OIA request of 19 March, for information and images of any incidents of benthic fishery bycatch of 500 kilograms or more in the last 12 months. [OIA available on request] The critical part of their response was: 'In the previous 12 months, there has only been one trawl bycatch event for protected benthic species over 500kg. Reported in the October to December 2024 quarter is a single capture of a reported 6,000 kg of stony coral on the Chatham Rise. Initial identification has confirmed the coral as a stony coral, and that the capture was likely to include a mix of live and dead coral, and mud. Identification will be confirmed as part of an ongoing project to identify observer samples. Further information reported by the fisher and the on-board observer indicate that the trawl net missed the intended previously trawled area.' The relevant data from the MPI quarterly reporting (which combines all trawls of this area, so will include other coral bycatch by trawlers in FMA4 over the period Oct-Dec 2024) can be found here: Non-fish and protected species caught by commercial fishers Fishing Year: 24-25 Quarter: 1 (that means, sometime in the period October-December 2024) Fishing Area: FMA4 South-East (Chatham Rise) Method: Trawl Protected species: Cnidaria Species code: COU – True Coral (Unidentified) Weight: 6,163.24 kilograms (over 6 tonnes) *Note this includes other coral bycatch in this area in this 3-month period, as well as the individual 6 tonne bycatch incident.
