The Battle for Iron Sands: the fierce struggle to protect New Zealand's seabed riches | New Zealand

Tthree fishermen sit around an empty table at the Pātea Boating Club, a few hundred metres from Taranaki's south coast. Pigeons have left droppings on the floorboards and the sea laps against the black sand through the salt-covered windows.

“This is one of the best fishing areas in the country,” says club commodore Steve Corrigan of the South Taranaki Bight, which stretches along the North Island's vast west coast. “And it's in danger of being destroyed.”

In addition to the numerous fish species, the bay is also home to coral reefs and New Zealand's pygmy blue whales. It is also visited by endangered species such as the Maui dolphin, the rarest dolphin in the world.

Over the past 11 years, the region's seabed has attracted global interest and become a fierce battlefield between a mining company and the locals who live and work along the coast.

Since 2013, Trans-Tasman Resources (TTR) has been trying to obtain permission to mine the iron sands at depths of 19 to 42 metres. Iron sands are rich in rare earths that are used in the production of steel, batteries and spacecraft – and are increasingly in demand for the production of renewable energy.

TTR's proposal to mine up to 50 million tons annually for 35 years has sparked a years-long legal battle with the community, which fears the sediment returned to the sea could choke marine life, impact fisheries and endanger rare marine mammals.

The fight against marine mining in the politically conservative Taranaki region is bringing together unexpected forces: dairy farmers, boaters, surfers, schools, Iwi (Māori tribes) and environmental groups are working together to block the project.

“I don’t think any of us would call ourselves environmentalists,” says Phil Morgan, a former dairy farmer and keen fisherman.

“We are business-friendly … but that [area] is far too important to destroy – [mining] will ruin it for many years.”

In recent years, opposition groups including local iwi, Kiwis Against Seabed Mining and other environmental organisations have succeeded in delaying mining approval through Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) hearings and court cases. In 2021, TTR lost its attempt in the High Court to overturn a decision that prevented it from obtaining a mining permit.

The court concluded that the agencies “simply could not be convinced that the conditions imposed by TTR were sufficient to protect the environment from pollution” because the impacts of TTR's activities on species such as marine mammals and seabirds were uncertain. It sent the application back to the EPA for reconsideration.

But the opposition's efforts could be jeopardized by a new challenge: a pro-mining government is pushing for passage of a controversial law that could lead to expedited approval of mining projects across the country – a process TTR says it is reviewing after the company withdrew from the EPA's recent hearing.

“Reefs explode in color”

At the high tide mark of Pātea Beach, large bone-white tree trunks protrude from the black sand. The atmospheric scene gives no indication that a colourful underwater world lies just offshore.

“When we shine our lights on the reefs, they glow in bright colors – red, orange, green, purple,” says Karen Pratt of Project Reef, a group that photographs and collects data on the reefs in southern Taranaki.

In 2022, the group and the National Institute of Water and Atmospherics mapped 61 km of reefs in the region. The subsequent report found thriving fish populations, extensive kelp forests, algal meadows, sponge gardens and bluefish breeding grounds in the areas near the proposed mining site.

Walking along Pātea beach, Lyndon DeVantier and Catherine Cheung – ecologists and members of Climate Justice Taranaki – tell the Guardian that their group has been staunchly opposed to offshore mining for many years. Cheung says TTR has failed to gain community support because it has not demonstrated that the environment will be protected from its activities.

“If there is no clear evidence to prove something [is safe]then you have to play it safe,” she says.

Like others in the community, Climate Justice Taranaki is particularly concerned about the impacts of mining wastewater on marine life in the region.

In documents submitted to the EPA, TTR outlines its mining method. Iron sands are mined using a device called a “crawler” – a 40-foot-long, 350-ton, 26-by-26-foot machine that pumps sand through a pipe into a processing boat to filter out the iron ore. About 10% of the material is retained and the rest is dumped back onto the sea floor, TTR says.

In its application for an expedited permit, which TTR provided to the Guardian, the company stated that the area where it plans to mine is a “world-class petroleum deposit” and that mining would have “minimal, limited and only very short-term local impacts” on marine ecosystems.

In a statement to the Guardian, TTR chairman Alan Eggers said the environmental impacts would be controlled “by a robust package of over 100 agreed conditions” as well as a series of EPA management and monitoring plans.

The sediment returned to the seabed will have “no negative impact on nearby reefs or people's ability to surf and eat seafood on the coast.”

According to Eggers, the project would make New Zealand the world's third-largest vanadium producer, while creating new jobs and annual export earnings of about NZ$1 billion.

Some in the community support the proposal. Taranaki shipping company Phoenix Shipping's managing director Billy Preston says he sees seabed mining as an opportunity for his business and the region.

Preston, a minor shareholder in TTR, says he has expressed interest in participating in the project if it goes ahead.

“There are opportunities for employment, education and spending in the economy. The people of Taranaki are not the only ones who will benefit – New Zealand would benefit too.”

Preston is frustrated by the opposition to the proposal and says TTR has spent millions to ensure environmental protections.

The biggest concern with seabed and deep-sea mining (mining at depths of more than 200 meters) is that so little is known about the ecology of the organisms living in these habitats, says James Bell, professor of marine biology at Victoria University of Wellington.

“These are low-energy environments that have probably been stable for long periods of time. So if you disturb them and kill these animals, it's probably going to take a long time for them to recover.”

Concern about the sediment plumes has grown, he says.

“In the deep sea, there is often relatively little current. So once the sediment is suspended, it can stay there for a very long time. And if there are currents, [plumes] can be quite far from the site where seabed mining has taken place.”

There is a risk that organisms such as sponges will become clogged and die.

“If you remove this kind of complexity from the seafloor, it can have knock-on effects.”

International pressure is increasing

Pressure is growing to halt efforts to develop the seabed, with at least 27 countries arguing there is not enough data to begin development. Other countries are open to development, and in January Norway became the first country to approve deep-sea mining.

The International Seabed Authority (ISA), which will regulate mining in international waters, has awarded 31 exploration contracts under the auspices of 14 nations.

New Zealand's stance on seabed mining is unclear. In 2022, the country signed the ISA's conditional moratorium on seabed mining, which covers waters outside New Zealand's exclusive economic zone (leaving domestic waters open for proposals). But in 2023, Labour, National and Act rejected a Māori Party bill that would ban seabed mining. National and Act said blanket bans would not be helpful, while Labour voted against it because it risked disrupting gas production.

Meanwhile, the right-wing coalition government elected last year wants to strengthen New Zealand's mining sector while gradually rolling back Jacinda Ardern-era environmental policies. Resources Minister Shane Jones says he wants to double the country's mineral exports from NZ$1.03 billion to $2 billion by 2035.

The coalition agreement between the large National Party and the smaller populist party New Zealand First – of which Jones is a member – states that they want to “examine strategic opportunities” in mineral resources, including vanadium.

In a statement responding to Guardian questions about the government's stance on marine mining, Jones said the government was working hard to improve New Zealand's economy.

“The strategic and responsible use of New Zealand’s natural resources offers us excellent opportunities to do this,” he says.

The minister is determined to “give people more jobs, including more well-paid jobs and jobs for highly skilled workers,” he says.

The government, meanwhile, says it will not comment on hypothetical proposals – such as TTR's mining proposal – because no projects have yet been selected under the fast-track procedure. The draft bill is before the Environment Committee, which is due to present its report in September.

Twenty minutes north of Pātea, in the rural town of Hāwera, Rachel Arnott and Graham Young of local iwi, Ngāti Ruanui, tell the Guardian that ocean, land and iwi are inextricably linked.

Young says the Iwi are not opposed to appropriate use of marine resources as long as best practices are followed.

“But TTR never crossed that line … and the courts have upheld that,” Young says.

The fast-track procedure poses a new and significant threat, says Young. He is particularly concerned that iwi and community groups could be excluded from the discussions.

Jones says the current proposal would require expert panels to seek and consider comments from local government, Māori groups and landowners, among others, when reviewing projects.

Speaking from the iwi headquarters in the heart of Hāwera, Arnott says the iwi will continue to fight “to the death” to stop the Taranaki project.

“We will speak loudly and proudly – we will use all possible delaying tactics. Because it's not about me or us, it's about the future.”