3 Responses to the Issues
Eight key issues for improving freshwater management in New Zealand were identified in the discussion document as follows:
Issue 1: National and regional strategic planning for water management could be improved
Issue 2: Nationally important values need to be better addressed
Issue 3: Setting environmental bottom lines and allocation limits is costly and contentious
Issue 4: Water is over-allocated in some catchments, is not consistently allocated to its highest value use over time, and can be wasted
Issue 5: Tension between investment certainty and planning flexibility
Issue 6: Māori participation in water management could be improved
Issue 7: A lack of effective action in the management of diffuse discharges of contaminants on water quality, in some catchments
Issue 8: Development of water infrastructure is not keeping pace with demand
Issue 1: National and regional strategic planning for water management could be improved
Participants commented on the need for better strategic planning at all levels of government. Improved strategic planning was regarded as important at the problem identification phase, as well as the research and consultation planning phases. The need to be specific about the extent, trend and spatial distribution of problems was also raised.
Specific problems associated with the current planning system included the time taken to develop plans, the difficulty of predicting sustainable development outcomes and the difficulty of predicting future water and land use.
The lengthy plan development process makes them out of date. The consent process ends up determining the outcome. (Christchurch)
Defining national outcomes and priorities through a national policy statement was regarded as useful by some, as it could help guide plan and policy development at the local and regional levels of government. Central government was regarded by some as having a role in balancing competing national values for water to aid strategic decision-making. The long term council community planning process was also raised at the Whangarei meeting as useful for identifying and monitoring water resources of regional significance.
Issue 2: Nationally important values need to be better addressed
The need for information about nationally important water bodies and values to provide guidance for plan and policy making was raised at some meetings (refer to Action 3 for specific comments on identifying national values and water bodies).
Some participants regarded central government as having a role in balancing competing national values:
Central government should balance the competing national values. (Greymouth)
Concerns were raised however about government interfering with the management of water bodies identified as nationally important:
Central government will take over local government responsibilities. (Christchurch)
Water conservation orders for managing nationally important water bodies were seen by some as adding an extra layer of bureaucracy and in some cases, overriding community values.
There is a conflict between communities determining their values for water and then having a water conservation order placed on a particular water body. (Gisborne)
Issue 3: Setting environmental bottom lines is costly and contentious
There was agreement at most meetings that environmental bottom-lines are a necessary part of any regime for managing freshwater. The need for science-based information for setting minimum flows and allocation limits was raised at most meetings.
Setting environmental bottom-lines requires good information which is expensive to obtain. (Napier)
Establishing environmental bottom lines for water quality was also discussed. Prescribed methods for setting standards at a regional level in regions where poor water quality is a problem were favoured over a numerical standard set at the national level.
Issue 4: Water is over-allocated in some catchments, is not consistently allocated to its highest value use over time, and can be wasted
At some of the meetings participants recognised that over-allocation of water resources is a problem in some regions. Participants considered that the current water allocation system often referred to as the 'first-in, first-served' system, is ineffective for managing over-allocated resources. Central government was regarded by some as having a role in developing a system for managing over-allocated resources.
There is a need for tools that deal with over-allocation and cross boundary issues. (Hamilton)
Allocating water to the highest value use raised more concern than support. Concern was raised at many of the meetings that councils should not have to 'pick winners' amongst uses and values, and that the highest value could become an economic value only. Participants suggested that methods for transferring water permits to the highest value use such as auctions or tenders would need defined boundaries which account for cultural, social and environmental values (refer to Actions 7 and 11 for specific comments on transfer and allocating to highest priority use).
Many agreed that water is not always used efficiently. The need to be able to measure the actual volumes used was raised at most meetings. Many participants regarded water metering as a good start for measuring actual use. Improved information and technology was also regarded as a key factor for improving efficiency of use. Participants suggested developing awareness and education programmes on water efficiency and conservation for rural and urban communities, and industry. The need for greater support for research on methods for improving technical efficiency as also raised.
Issue 5: Tension between investment certainty and flexibility
The importance of investment certainty was a key theme at many of the meetings. Recognising and accounting for existing rights to take water was regarded as important, but at the same the need to provide for new water users was raised.
Existing investments in infrastructure will need to be recognised if management systems change. (Napier)
Increasing the tradability of permits was regarded as a way of providing more flexibility; however, this was only supported when operating within a framework which recognises existing rights and social, cultural and environmental values (refer to Actions 7 and 11 for detailed comments on transfer of permits and allocating water to the highest priority use).
Issue 6: Māori participation in water management could be improved
Participants raised the need for clearly defined roles for Māori in planning processes at some meetings:
The Resource Management Act looks at engagement with iwi while the Local Government Act looks at engagement with Māori. [There is a] need to be aware of the difference and to look at the implications. It must be clear what sort of engagement central government wants and with whom. (Hamilton)
Some councils regarded their existing relationships with Māori as working well, and did not view further improvement as necessary:
Local government already has requirements for building relationships with Māori under the Local Government Act. (Greymouth)
There was general recognition that in many cases effective participation of Māori in resource planning is limited by a lack of capacity of councils and iwi organisations. Central government was regarded as having a role in providing increased resources for participation, and in assessing why current Resource Management Act provisions such as transfer of powers under section 33 of the Act have not been exercised:
Is there commitment towards co-management regimes and to encourage a greater role for Māori to engage in regional decision-making? (Nelson)
Issue 7: Lack of effective action in management of diffuse discharges of contaminants on water quality in some catchments
Problems with managing the effects of diffuse discharges to water were raised at most meetings. People asked whether the recommendations of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment's report Growing for good would be incorporated into the Sustainable Development Water Programme of Action.
Part of the problem in managing diffuse discharges was thought to be a lack of information. The need for independent research on nutrients and solutions for managing diffuse pollution was raised.
Dissemination of information and best practice for managing diffuse pollution was regarded as a key part of addressing water quality issues. Some participants suggested that water fora should be established to share knowledge and expertise on water quality.
Forums to discuss issues and disseminate ideas would be useful. (Nelson)
Current non-regulatory approaches such as codes of practice and riparian planting for managing water quality were also raised at many of the meetings as effective solutions.
Issue 8: Development of water infrastructure is not keeping pace with demand
Most councils agreed with this issue and called for central government support and investment in developing and upgrading infrastructure.
Central government should have a role in infrastructure. A separate national group could be put in place to oversee infrastructure and to provide funding. (Dunedin)
Funding for regional development projects was also regarded as important:
Funding is needed for long-term community investment in water development. (Nelson)
Many participants felt that water storage needs more emphasis in the programme.
Water storage is missing from the document. (Dunedin)
Storage is a major issue. (Christchurch)
Additional issues
A number of additional issues were raised at the meetings which participants felt were not sufficiently emphasised in the discussion document. The additional issues included:
- integrated catchment management
- urban use and supply
- climate change
- biosecurity
- sustainable development.
Integrated catchment management
The value of adopting an integrated catchment management approach as part of a national framework for freshwater was raised at many of the meetings. A whole of catchment approach without a separation between allocation and quality issues was regarded as useful by many participants. Participants supported developing closer links between district and regional planning at meetings held in Greymouth, Napier, Whakatane, Whangarei, Christchurch, Dunedin and Wellington.
[There is a] need to integrate planning and thinking around water issues. Domestic, stock, irrigation and biodiversity interests should all be integrated. An holistic view is needed. (Dunedin)
One participant raised concern at the Napier meeting that the discussion document did not address the tension between increased demand for water and water quality problems that often result from intensive agricultural production. The participant suggested that the programme should include solutions for managing this tension.
Too much emphasis on water allocation at the expense of looking at water bodies as living systems was raised as a concern at the Wellington meeting. The need to consider the total water cycle rather than looking at water in a linear way was also raised at the meeting held in Christchurch.
Specific issues relating to the interface between land-based activities and water were raised, such as the effects of subdivision on riparian management. The need for controls on land management practices was raised at the meeting held in Whakatane. There was also thought to be inequity between point source polluters having to pay for technology and practices to reduce impacts, and diffuse polluters who do not always have to deal with their impacts. This view was raised at the Hamilton meeting.
Urban use and supply
At most of the meetings people asked why urban freshwater issues have not been incorporated into the scope of the programme. The view that urban and rural water issues should not be separated was expressed at many of the meetings. Particular concerns raised included:
- the impacts of storm water on water quality in urban areas (Whangarei)
- the need for central government to have a greater role in stormwater management and monitoring (Christchurch)
- peri-urban development and the demand for potable water supplies, and concerns about public health issues relating to drinking water from groundwater sources which can be affected by intensive agriculture (Dunedin)
- the need for urban residents to better understand their demands for potable water and the cost of making water available (Dunedin)
- the need for sustainable water use to be considered as a component of urban design principles (Auckland)
- the need to incorporate criteria and guidelines for sustainable water use into long term council community plans (Auckland).
Climate change
A lack of reference in the discussion document to the impacts of climate change on water supply and demand was raised at meetings held in Whakatane, Nelson and Wellington. One participant at the Nelson meeting suggested that climate change should be regarded as a key issue and if so, it is perhaps relevant to Actions 5 and 8.
Biosecurity
The problem of aquatic weeds was raised at two of the meetings held with local government. At the Nelson meeting, one participant raised the need for central government to develop a proactive campaign for the eradication of aquatic weeds. The participant also stated that pest issues have been left to local government to manage without national resources. Clarity on central government's responsibility for national biosecurity was requested at the Whangarei meeting.
Sustainable development
At the Napier meeting one participant expressed the view that the actions outlined in the discussion document are reactive to the Resource Management Act and do not incorporate a broad sustainable development approach. A question was asked about how regional councils can address the social, economic and cultural factors for making effective environmental decision-making within the Act's sustainable management framework which does not explicitly provide for these values.
The status of the discussion document in relation to the Resource Management Act review was also raised. The point was made at the meeting held in Invercargill that some of the proposals to change the Act appear to override the actions in the discussion document which are supposed to be about sustainable development. One participant asked whether the government had already determined what the outcomes of the programme will be.
