Port Otago's plan to dredge Otago Harbour and dump the spoil off-shore will have its day in court after mediation with fishing industry groups failed.
An independent panel approved resource consents for the company's Next Generation Project last year but the decision was appealed to the Environment Court by the Careys Bay Association and seven fishing and related industry groups.
Mediation since had resolved the concerns of the Careys Bay Association and Southern Clams Ltd, regarding inner harbour activities.
However, the appeals relating to the open sea disposal site by the East Otago Taiapure management committee, paua, rock lobster and commercial fishing groups remained unresolved.
The Environment Court confirmed yesterday the case would proceed to a hearing in November.
Otago Rock Lobster Association spokesman Simon Gilmour said mediation had failed as Port Otago had not agreed to its request that the coastline north of the dump site be monitored to assess if sediment from the site was reaching it.
A requirement to monitor sediments at key points north of the dump site was in the company's original consent application documents but not in the conditions of the consent granted, he said.
The association was loath to continue with court action but felt it did not have any choice, Mr Gilmour said.
"This part of the coast is fundamental to our fishery and that of the paua, kina and fin fish ... we want assurance that the sediments are not entering the kelp and shoreline."
East Otago Taiapure chairman Brendan Flack said the area was a hugely important nursery for fish of all types and any impact on that would affect adult fish stocks.
While taking it the next step to court was expensive, it was important to get the "right result".
If sediment from the site did reach the northern coastline, the dumping should stop, he said.
Port Otago chief executive Geoff Plunket said the company believed the requests for additional monitoring were excessive and could not be practically delivered.
The conditions to monitor imposed on the company by the panel were comprehensive, he said.
"We have no option but to proceed to the environment court."
