He is the first to acknowledge defending the district plan is not for the fainthearted or thin-skinned.
"WESI [Wakatipu Environmental Society Inc] are in recess through sheer exhaustion. People like [former WESI members] Barry Lawrence and Ralf Kruger worked themselves into the ground to get a decent district plan written in terms of the policies and objectives that apply to the rural area," he said.
It had taken him 15 years to become familiar with council and court procedures.
He had received personal threats in anonymous letters, and the paper war could be sheer drudgery.
It had helped to maintain a sense of humour, although the jokes made in a planning forum were hardly the stuff of a comedy club.
Still, in 2005 he could not help but describe long tubes of documents delivered to him by one determined applicant as "rocket-propelled evidence".
Auckland lawyer Christian Whata returned fire a couple of months later, in the Environment Court on behalf of his client, the Matukituki Trust, admonishing the opposition for its "blunderbuss approach, attacking every aspect of the appellant's evidence".
It took at least five years for the trust to win a consent for a house on rural general-zoned Roys Peninsula - although not on the first site it wanted and not on the site the society preferred.
The society of about 40 members recently conceded that battle was over, but now faced a huge application for costs from other parties in the case, believed to total well over $100,000.
But the UCES had won many other battles since 1995, either as appellant or supporting the council in defending its decisions, and still had irons in the fire.
Ultimately, maybe next year, once he had tied up some of those loose ends, Mr Haworth hoped to step aside from the society.
He had felt ambivalent about his future for some time and was exploring options that included developing a more formal role as an Environment Court advocate.
Mr Haworth believed the district had "perhaps the best district plan around" in terms of controlling intrusive development.
Others were "basically rubbish at this".
His feedback to council next month was likely to be "fairly simple" and involve tightening the rules around landscape categorisation.
"The rural rules are working reasonably well at the moment. They certainly don't need to be weakened. That's the last thing we want. Quite a lot of development is being allowed anyway. If they want to simplify the plan, bring the rules that apply to the Wakatipu outstanding natural landscape to ONL in the whole district... It would make life a lot easier for everybody," he said.
The ONL rules were developed in response to community anxiety about the erosion of rural values.
The Wakatipu ONL rules were tougher than those in Upper Clutha because about 12 years ago, the Wakatipu Basin was experiencing more development.
Now, development around Wanaka was catching up, Mr Haworth said.
"If you look at the [council's] maps, what's really scary is the amount of already consented development that hasn't been built. And it's not just housing. It's all the roads and other things that go with that."
RURAL REVIEW
The council is reviewing its district plan rules for rural general, rural residential and rural lifestyle zones. Public feedback is sought by June 18.
"The District Plan and Rural Areas Discussion Document", March 2010, is available at: www.qldc.govt.nzDocuments, maps and images are also available from council offices and libraries in Wanaka and Queenstown.
The council will analyse the response. Suggestions for future plan changes will be debated by the council followed by public submissions and a hearing. This process could take at least three years.
