The Gore District Council has outlined its rules for consents in its new district plan, which included clauses about communication with Ngāi Tahu.
While it has stressed there was no blanket requirement for landowners to obtain cultural assessments, Federated Farmers Southland feels it sets a dangerous precedent.
Southland branch president Jason Herrick said it amounted to a "massive over-reach".
"This is going to be a major headache for local farmers and add a lot of unnecessary cost and complexity to even the most basic farming tasks."
He said Federated Farmers had identified 91 rules or standards in Gore’s plan where Māori values will need to be assessed.
"These include everything from digging dead holes and farm rubbish pits through to earthworks for silage pits and the construction and maintenance of farm tracks.
"There will also be issues with the height of poles, masts and other infrastructure, and the maintenance of existing defences against water."
But Ngai Tahu called the comments "scaremongering"
"Under the proposed new district plan it will remain the council’s job to process resource consents."
Mr Nicholas said council planners sought prompt advice from Hokonui Rūnanga when they were processing a resource consent application that requires consideration of Ngāi Tahu cultural values and "we expect that this process will continue unchanged".
"The sites and areas of significance to Māori rules took effect at notification of the plan and consents have still been processed on time. The decision framework has not increased the regulatory burden."
Gore District Council general manager operations David Bainbridge-Zafar said the organisation understood there were genuine questions in the community and was keen to ensure people have clear, accurate information.
"We know the proposed district plan has generated conversation, and we want to ensure everyone has access to accurate, straightforward information," he said.
"There is no blanket requirement for landowners to obtain cultural assessments.
"As with the existing plan, the council may seek input from mana whenua only where the Resource Management Act requires it — usually in situations where a proposal may have potential effects on recognised cultural or heritage values. For most everyday activities, this does not apply."
But Mr Herrick told the Otago Daily Times yesterday he stood by every word of the media release.
"We need to go through the appeals process, right, and get this sorted out properly in the right channels. Unfortunately, it’s going to cost money. It’s going to take time.
"But if we don’t sort this out, then it sets a national precedent for the whole country and other councils can do the same."
Mr Herrick said their goal was to make sure that the plan was "written properly and worded properly so it can’t be interpreted by the wrong person".
"As it presently sits, the way the plan is written and worded, somebody can interpret it totally different and come in and rule with an iron fist, and that’s not what we want."
If appeals to the Environment Court were lodged, the council will be limited in what it can publicly discuss about specific matters.
"We will continue to provide general information about the plan and the resource consent process, but cannot comment on any matters under appeal," Mr Bainbridge-Zafar said.
"Ultimately, this is about ensuring our community has reliable information and is well-supported throughout the process."
Only one consent application this year has required a cultural impact assessment, and that was for a large mining proposal, he said.
