We have recently seen the draft decision released on the minimum flow for the Manuherekia River. If you don’t know what this is all about, the Manuherekia River catchment originates in the St Bathans and Hawkdun ranges, then flows 85km to join the Clutha River at Alexandra. There are 182 surface water take permits within the wider catchment, most related to agriculture, and 17 groundwater consents for agriculture and two for council.

Developing minimum flows for the Manuherekia rohe has been underway by the ORC since 2016 but since well before that time, debate has raged about whether the amount of water taken out of the river currently and into the future is too much. Flipping that, how much water needs to stay for the river to be healthy (the minimum flow) is the crux of the issue.

Consultation on the preferred water management regime began on 17 May 2021 and finished on 18 June 2021. That’s quite a while ago now and that’s mostly because the outcome of the consultation was only one part of the puzzle. The ORC councillors, in August 2021, decided to put off making a decision on the flows until further scientific work was completed. That work took until quite recently and two weeks ago, ORC councillors set out a number of things to bring to you for consultation. Amongst those were minimum flows which set the current voluntary 900 litres per second minimum flow (measured at the Alexandra Campground) to be increased over seven years to 1200 litres p/s by 2030, and ultimately to 2500 litres p/s by 2040.

Since that announcement, comments have come from both sides of the argument with some saying the flows are not high enough and are proposed to happen too slowly and others saying that they are too high and are happening too quickly. 

For what it is worth, here’s my two cents worth.

Those who decry the levels as being too high and are talking of going to the Environment Court should, in my view, be investing their money in engineers not lawyers. Any win that may come from the Environment Court, given the investment in time and money in getting the science the ORC is working from overturned is likely to be pyrrhic in my view, meaning even if some form of victory is won, it will be so small as to make the effort a waste. I cannot see any oncome in future years other than a significant increase in the minimum flow in the river and getting on with finding a way (or ways) to achieve those flows is a far better use of time and money than going to court.

I say the exact same things to those who say the proposed flow is too low. The flows the Technical Advisory Group have put forward as being what is needed to ensure the health of the river are what the experts tell us are right, and who am I to argue? Those who I have heard at any number of meetings citing figures based, it seems to me, on emotion rather science need keep that in mind. To those who say the proposed timeframe out to 2040 until the changes are fully implemented is too long, I suggest the interim measures in place will improve the situation and balance must be found in this highly emotive space. Frankly, those who say we need to do this now and to hell with the farmers are being unreasonable and are adding fuel to a fire that is not helping the community as a whole find a way forward.

I’ve suggested there may be more than one way forward to achieve these flows. Increased water storage is the most obvious one, and the most obvious way of doing that is replacing the near 100-year-old Falls Dam. I believe there will need to be a conversation with the broader community led by the CODC in its 2027 LTP as to what investment the populace as a whole is willing to make to build that dam. I do not believe that this work and the huge cost of it should be borne by the irrigators alone when the whole community of, at least the Vincent Ward, benefits from the money those irrigators bring into the community.

I also believe that serious consideration needs to be put into a concerted effort to remove significant numbers of willows along the river. These invasive pests extract vast amounts of water that can be put to far better use, either in the river or on the ground. Yes, they are pretty, but they are weeds and they need to go. How this can be done, how it is funded and what the likely benefits are needs to be looked at closely, and soon.

Speaking of invasive pests, I applaud the ORC for including fish barriers on the tributaries before the flow is increased to 1200 litres per second. Our galaxiids are on the same level of endangerment as takahe and cannot be forgotten in this debate. They no longer exist in the mainstem, having been wiped out by the introduced predator that is the trout. Under no circumstances should trout be allowed to predate into the last footholds of these taonga. I have my concerns as to whether fish barriers will survive when the river floods and ensuring the maintenance of these is crucial to any plan moving forward. 

Thanks for reading this column; what happens on this river is crucial for generations to come, but the task of getting it right falls on our generation. When the consultation begins, please get informed then get involved.