Big water users not yet metered

More than 200 of Canterbury’s biggest water-consent holders have still not installed meters to monitor their water use.

However, Environment Canterbury says these consent holders are not necessarily breaking the law, as some may not have started taking water.

ECan does not release details of non-compliance by users unless an infringement or abatement notice is issued.

But in the past year eight consent holders have been investigated, with five continuing abatement notices issued to stop or make immediate changes.

No prosecutions have been taken and none are pending.

Out of 7342 consented water takes, 6306 are now metered.

For the biggest water users – with consent to take 20 litres or more of water a second, granted before November 10, 2010 – meters were required by November 10, 2012.

For those with takes between 10 litres per second (l/s) and 20l/s, meters needed to be in place by November 10, 2014.

The date for metering compliance for those allowed to take between 5 and 10l/s was November 10, 2016.

ECan figures show:

■ Of 5-10l/s takes, 349 of 666 are still unmetered.

■ Of 10-20l/s takes, 107 of 826 are unmetered.

■ Of 20-100l/s takes, 364 of 3546 are unmetered.

■ Of more than 100l/s takes, 216 of 2304 are still unmetered.

Power companies, irrigation trusts, the Christchurch City Council and the Selwyn and Ashburton district councils are in the top 30 largest water takes, but there is no indication that these are unmetered.

Meridian Energy has the two biggest water consents, with each allowing it to take 17.662 billion cubic metres of water each year for the Waitaki hydro scheme.

ECan zone delivery manager Paul Hulse said the council’s priority had been to target consent holders whose lack of compliance posed ‘‘the greatest risk to the environment’’.

‘‘Our top priority has been dealing with water users with consented takes of 20 litres per second and more, and we have made good progress, with 90 per cent of meters installed.

‘‘If we find consent holders have not installed a suitable water-metering system, or are not supplying annual usage data when required, we will take compliance action. This is likely to include a site visit at the consent-holder’s expense followed by appropriate compliance action.’’

An infringement notice, with a fine of up to $750, could be followed by an abatement notice to stop taking water, he said.

Apparent non-compliance with the rules might be due to:

■ Water not yet being taken.

■ A meter being installed but the consent holder not telling ECan.

■ The consent being transferred to a new owner, or the consent holder having died and the new owner not being aware of consent conditions.

■ A consent being granted but there being no bore to take water from, or the well-head had been capped or covered.

Since October last year, ECan had investigated 45 consents for non-compliance, with 37 resolved before a need for abatement notices, Hulse said.

‘‘We have made contact with the remaining eight consent holders and have an agreed action plan with each.’’

Irrigation New Zealand chief executive Elizabeth Soal said it had recognised the need for water metering before it became compulsory.

‘‘We have always strongly encouraged water users to install and verify the required water meters.

‘‘However, it is up to them to ensure they are meeting both regulatory and resource consent requirements.’’