Submission on Proposed Canterbury Land and Water
Regional Plan
Form 5: Submissions on a Publicly Notified Proposed Policy Statement or Regional lan
under Clause 6 of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991
Return your signed submission by 5.00pm Friday 5 October 2012 to:
Freepost 1201 Proposed Canterbury Land and Water Regional Plan
Environment Canterbury
P O Box 345
Christchurch 8140
Full Name: Jacqueline Margaret Wright
Phone (Hm): 03 3023886
Organisation*: South Rakaia Bach Owners’ Association
Phone (Wk):
* the organisation that this submission is made on behalf of
Postal Address: PO Box 245, Ashburton
Postcode: 7700
Phone (Cell): 0274 380 100
Email: camdave@xtra.co.nz
Fax: 03 307 7132
Contact name and postal address for service of person making submission (if different
from above): N/A
Trade Competition
Pursuant to Clause 6 of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991, a person who
could gain an advantage in trade competition through the submission may make a submission
only if directly affected by an effect of the proposed policy statement or plan that:
adversely affects the environment; and does not relate to trade competition or the effects of
trade competition.
Please tick the sentence that applies to you:
√ I could not gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission; or
I could gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission.
If you have ticked this box please select one of the following:
√
I am directly affected by an effect of the subject matter of the submission that adversely
affects the environment and does not relate to trade competition or the effects of trade
competition.
I am not directly affected by an effect of the subject matter of the submission that adversely
affects the environment and does not relate to trade competition or the effects of trade
competition.
Signature: Jacqueline M Wright
Date: 26th September 2012
(Signature of person making submission or person authorised to sign on behalf of person making the submission)
Please note:
(1) all information contained in a submission under the Resource Management Act 1991, including names and addresses for service,
becomes public information.
I do not wish to be heard in support of my submission; or
√ I do wish to be heard in support of my submission; and if so,
If others make a similar submission, I will consider presenting a joint case with them at the
hearing.
South Rakaia Bach Owners’ Association Submission CLWRP page 1 of 8
South Rakaia Bach Owner’s Association submission to Canterbury
Regional Council on the Proposed Canterbury Land and Water
Regional Plan
Prepared by Jacqueline Wright
South Rakaia Bach Owner’s Association Committee member
September 2012
Summary
The South Rakaia Bach Owner’s Association (the Association) supports the intent of
the Canterbury Regional Council’s Proposed Canterbury Land and Water Regional
Plan (the Plan) and many of its policies to ensure Canterbury’s water use is
sustainable and water quality is maintained. But, the Plan significantly understates
water quality issues in the water catchment we are most familiar with – the lower
reaches of the mainstem Rakaia River; and the quality limits stated for this river are
insufficient to ensure water quality is maintained at an acceptable level.
This submission specifically refers to: Paragraph 1.2.1; page 4-8; Table 1a; policy
statements 4.26, 4.83; Rules 5.40, 5.42, 5.116, 5.133 – 5.137; schedules 2, 5, 7.
Introduction
The Association is an incorporated Society (Incorporated Society number 220068)
comprising 71 member families. It owns the freehold tenure of approximately 10
hectares on the south side of the Rakaia River mouth. Here there are 71 individually
owned homes; approximately 30% of which are occupied by permanent residents,
with the remainder being holiday homes.
The Association is managed by a committee elected by fellow bach owners. What
started out 70 years ago as a refuge of makeshift dwellings is now a well organised,
well presented community retaining a strong focus on salmon fishing and recreation.
A number of residents are long term owners with some baches having been in the
same family for four generations. We know our area and we have a strong sense of
history. We maintain our own museum with records of settlement development;
dwellings, infrastructure and fish catches through the years.
Our 70 years of knowledge in this region relates predominantly to the 6 kilometre
stretch on the south side of the Rakaia River from Dobby’s Ford to the mouth. In this
submission we address:
 Water quality
 Salmon fishery
 Flood protection
South Rakaia Bach Owners’ Association Submission CLWRP page 2 of 8
Water quality
“High quality fresh water is fundamental for aquatic ecosystem health, drinking water
supplies, customary uses and contact recreation. It is also important for maintaining
the mauri, natural character and amenity values of water bodies...” Paragraph 1.2.1
of the Plan.
Current designations
The Plan puts a stake in the ground of where we are now in terms of water quality and
what change from this will be acceptable in the future. The “where we are now” in
The Plan underplays the existing situation for the two rivers and their surrounding
areas that we are most familiar with – the lower Ashburton and the lower Rakaia. In
the map on page 4-8, the Rakaia River is shown as green indicating it “meets water
quality outcomes” and the Ashburton is zoned as yellow – “at risk” whereas all the
area in-between is zoned red – “water quality outcomes not met”.
The designations for these rivers suggest their waters are of a significantly higher
quality than any water in between which is incongruous. The reason for these
designations becomes clear when Table 1a is examined. This shows the quality bar
to be set very low for rivers of these types – alpine lower (Rakaia) and hillfed lower
(Ashburton).
If we are really serious about ensuring continuing water quality throughout
Canterbury we need to set limits which will genuinely assure this.
All subsequent comment relates specifically to the Rakaia River.
Rakaia River water quality
Our members have noted that over time the:
1. River flow has declined;
2. Water temperature has increased;
3. Pollution has increased; and
4. Number of salmon caught has declined
We also note the very real and significant change in land use around the length of the
Rakaia over the last 15 years as vast tracts of land have been cleared of vegetation and
converted to dairy farming.
Whilst some of our observations are anecdotal, expert evidence presented at a recent
hearing for an application to vary the Rakaia River National Water Conservation
Order (WCO) (1988), (and published on the ECAN website) confirms our assertions.
A number of expert witnesses presented river flow data at the above hearing which
confirmed a reduction in flow in the Rakaia River in the last 10 years – and this is
without all allocated irrigation takes being utilised.
At the same time as we are experiencing reduced river flow we are also experiencing
greater nutrient loading on the river. The massive increase in dairying in the region
South Rakaia Bach Owners’ Association Submission CLWRP page 3 of 8
since the introduction of the Rakaia WCO has placed a loading on the river in terms
of nutrient input and irrigation demand which was not anticipated when the WCO was
introduced in 1988. We now have thousands of cows in areas surrounding the entire
length of the Rakaia River. Cows urinate and defaecate and the nutrients in this
excrement enter the River directly via surface flows or gradually leach into the
surrounding waterways.
We support the introduction of farm management plans and on farm monitoring of
nutrient and nitrate discharges (Rule 5.40). But these will not be introduced until
2017 and in the meantime we have no ongoing monitoring of river health in the lower
reaches; nor, do we have realistic quality limits.
We also support the intent of policy statement 4.83:
“Water quality, indigenous biodiversity and ecosystem health in lakes, rivers, natural
wetlands, hāpua, coastal lakes and lagoons are enhanced through establishing or
restoring riparian planting.”
However, it is not clear which method within the Plan is proposed to implement this
Policy. It would be useful for users of the Plan to have some cross-referencing
between the various methods and polices to ensure that all proposed policies are
implemented.
No detail is given as to who is required to undertake riparian planting, where or when,
which makes for a hollow policy statement. Our understanding is that riparian
plantings along all waterways are essential to minimise nutrient leaching.
We do note that in Schedule 7, Farm Environment Plan it does state the objective:
Wetlands and riparian management: To manage wetland and waterway margins to
avoid damage to the bed and margins of a water body, avoid direct input of nutrients,
and to maximise riparian margin nutrient filtering.
But, there is no detail on how this should be achieved.
We also find the rules around stock exclusion from water bodies loose and difficult to
interpret:
“Stock Exclusion from Waterbodies
5.133 The use and disturbance of the bed of a lake or river or a wetland by
outdoor intensively farmed livestock [defined elsewhere in the Plan as:
any stock grazed on irrigated land in or adjoining the bed of a river or
lake, in a wetland or adjacent to a wetland boundary; cows, whether dry
or milking and calves at hoof, in a dairy herd; farmed pigs; livestock
contained for break-feeding of winter feed crops in or adjacent to the
bed of a river or lake, in a wetland or adjacent to a wetland boundary]
for temporary or permanent stocking or temporary access is a prohibited
activity.
5.134 The use and disturbance of the bed of a lake or river or a wetland by cattle
or farmed deer for temporary or permanent stocking is a prohibited activity
in the following areas:
South Rakaia Bach Owners’ Association Submission CLWRP page 4 of 8
1.
2.
5.135
5.136
5.137
In an inanga or salmon spawning site listed in Schedule 17;
Within 1000 m upstream of a group or community water supply intake
as listed in Schedule 1;
3.
Within 1000 m upstream in the bed of a lake or flowing river of a fresh
water bathing site listed in Schedule 6 [Note: many sites along the
Rakaia are used for bathing and are not recognized in Schedule 6];
or
4.
In a bed of a Spring-fed plains river.
The use and disturbance of the bed of a lake, river or wetland for
temporary or permanent stocking or temporary access and any associated
discharges is a permitted activity, provided the following conditions are
met:
1.
The use or disturbance is not a prohibited activity under Rules 5.133 or
5.134
2.
The disturbance by livestock shall not, outside the Mixing Zone cause:
(a) a conspicuous change in colour or clarity of the water;
(b) the concentration of Exherichia coli to exceed 550 E.coli per 100
millilitres;
3.
The disturbance shall not result in the following effects being clearly
visible in or on the bed, including the banks of a river or lake:
(a) pugging or trampling of the land; or
(b) areas of bare ground; and
4.
The disturbance of a wetland shall not result in:
(a) a conspicuous change in colour or clarity of the water;
(b) any clearly visible pugging or trampling of land.
The use and disturbance of a bed of a lake, river or wetland for a
permanent stock crossing point and any associated discharges is a
permitted activity, provided the following conditions are met:
1.
The use or disturbance is not a prohibited activity under Rules 5.133 or
5.134;
2.
The crossing point is not more than 20 m wide;
3.
The crossing point is perpendicular to the direction of water flow,
except where this is impracticable owing to the natural contours of the
riverbed or adjoining land;
4.
The crossing point aligns with a constructed track or raceway on either
side of the crossing point;
5.
The crossing point does not obstruct the passage of fish;
6.
The approaches to the crossing shall be located, constructed and
maintained to ensure that the parts of the crossing approaching the
area of the bed covered by water under low flow conditions are
underlain by compacted gravel or some other material with an
equivalent or better stability against erosion.
The use and disturbance of the bed of a lake or river or a wetland for
temporary or permanent stocking and any incidental discharges that does
not comply with one or more of conditions 2 to 4 in Rule 5.135, and for a
permanent stock crossing
South Rakaia Bach Owners’ Association Submission CLWRP page 5 of 8
Surely one of the most basic rules of water quality is endeavouring to keep all stock
out of waterways at all times? (which is what is indicated in policy 4.26, but is then
attenuated in the above rules).
We note that in rule 5.42 that prior to 1 July 2017 the use of land for a change to an
existing farming activity is a permitted activity if six conditions are met. This
suggests that we will see a rush on dairy conversions in the next five years. If dairying
does intensify, the pollution load on the river will increase but the Plan does not allow
for recognition and measurement of riverine effect.
E coli
Escherichia coli is a bacterium found in faeces. It is termed a ‘faecal indicator’ as its
presence in water indicates the water is contaminated with faecal material. Therefore,
the presence of E coli indicates other disease causing faecal organisms could also be
present such as Giardia, Cryptospordium, Salmonella and Campylobacter. For this
reason E coli in the river is of concern to us.
E coli can also cause disease; and, like most living things E coli likes food and
warmth. When it is warm and well fed E coli multiplies – by division. One splits and
becomes 2, these two grow and divide and become four. In perfect conditions one E
coli can become millions of E coli within 24 hours.
In their Canterbury’s Rivers and Streams Assessment (2010), Stevenson et al
categorise the lower reaches of the Rakaia as Alpine-lower. They conclude that based
on data collected from 2002 to 2008 nutrient enrichment and faecal contamination
were potential issues for this category of river. We note that dairy cow numbers have
increased in the Rakaia River area since 2008.
We have obtained the raw data from Ms Stevenson, ECAN, and note that of the 39
samples collected between June 2002 and November 2011 from this site, 11 samples
exceeded what we perceive to be the recommended contact recreation guideline for E
coli of 126/100ml. We note in Schedule 5 of the Plan the 95% quality bar is set at
550 E coli /100ml. This is excessive given the amount of contact recreation occurring
in the Rakaia River.
The samples these data pertain to were collected in the north channel, State Highway
1 on a quarterly basis at a similar time of day (1100-1330) usually in the months of
March, June, September and December. Thus, not at times of warmest temperatures;
nor, at times of lowest flow.
When there is low flow, favourable water temperature and high nutrients for the
journey downstream, the E coli numbers at our end of the river are likely to be
significantly higher than at State Highway 1 – and this is without taking into account
additional loading of faecal contamination into the river as it journeys down.
Any change to what is currently the case: i.e. lower flow (due to more irrigation
allocations being utilised), warmer water (a consequence of low flow), increased
South Rakaia Bach Owners’ Association Submission CLWRP page 6 of 8
nutrients, more faecal contamination (consequences of increased dairying), will
increase the E coli levels in the Rakaia River.
The existing levels of E coli in our river already put our community who use the water
for food gathering and contact recreation at risk of waterborne disease. The very real
risk that the levels will increase means our foodbasket and our playground could
become more hazard than haven.
Salmon Fishery
The salmon fishery on the Rakaia is recognised as nationally important as reflected in
the Rakaia Water Conservation Order. It is also internationally recognised. Overall,
the fishery holds very strong recreational, cultural and historic values not just for our
hut owners but for generations of New Zealanders.
During a recent hearing for an application to vary the Rakaia River National Water
Conservation Order (1988), Mr Martin Unwin (an acknowledged New Zealand
Salmon expert) stated that salmon numbers have declined 75% in the Rakaia in the
last 30 years.
Mr Unwin (in paragraph 5.12 of his evidence which can be found on the ECAN
website) gives the following reasons for the considerable drop in salmon numbers:
“…I would expect a long term decline in Rakaia runs to be associated with factors,
both natural and anthropogenic, which vary only slowly with time. The list of
potentially relevant factors is large, diverse, open-ended, and speculative. It includes
land use changes, water quality, flow regime, fry losses to irrigation intakes, angler
harvest, impact of hatchery releases and climate changes…”
We support the introduction of fish screening as described in Schedule 2 of the Plan,
but fish screening alone will not preserve our salmon fishery. We need to ensure
water quality is maintained at a level higher than set out in the Plan.
Flood protection
Flooding was part of bach life up until the 1990s when the Association undertook a
major flood protection project and built a major earthbank supported by concrete
blocks and a network of willow plantings. This project was consented under CRC
991246 to erect, reconstruct and to extend flood protection work; and to plant plants
in the Rakaia River bed.
The Association maintains this flood protection programme under CRC 991246.
Each year the Association runs at least one major working bee. Members spend up to
500 volunteer man hours each year undertaking remedial earthworks; planting willow
poles; and partially lopping existing willows to encourage lateral root formation (to
ensure rooted support of the river bank).
South Rakaia Bach Owners’ Association Submission CLWRP page 7 of 8
We note rule 5.116 states:
“The installation, maintenance, use and removal of flood protection works, and
including the associated deposition of substances on, in or under the bed of a
lake or river and excavation or other disturbance of the bed of a lake or river is
a permitted activity, provided the following conditions are met:
1. The activity does not prevent access in any way to lawfully established
structures, including flood protection works, or to flood control
vegetation;
2. The activity is not in, on, or under the bed of any river or lake listed as a
high naturalness lake or river in Sections 6-15; and
3. The activity is undertaken by a local authority or a network utility
operator in accordance with a flood protection plan that has been certified
as being in accordance with the CRC’s River Engineering Section Quality
and Environmental Management System Manual (March 2010) by the
CRC.”
We seek clarification of our position of undertaking maintenance work and not being
a network utility operator or local authority.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the part of the Rakaia River that we know so well is the “butt” end.
The flow, temperature, bacteria, and nutrient levels here are the culmination of the
effects of all activity upstream. There are no long term measurement data for this part
of the river; thus, there is no baseline against which to measure the effects of any
future changes.
We request that a rigorous ongoing surveillance programme be introduced as soon as
possible to monitor water temperature, nutrient levels, E coli levels and flow rate off
the Great Island at the mouth end of the Rakaia River, and that in the interim the
quality indicators for this river are set at level appropriate to truly assure water
quality.
South Rakaia Bach Owners’ Association Submission CLWRP page 8 of 8