Concerns over water take in Ruataniwha
News
Central Hawke’s Bay residents are concerned resource consents could be granted allowing another 15 million cubic metres of groundwater to be taken from an area that is already in short supply.
One of the side effects of the failed Ruataniwha Water Storage Scheme and the associated Plan Change 6 was that 15 million cum of extra groundwater in the Ruataniwha area could be taken, provided that the effects of the take were mitigated though ‘‘augmentation’’. This meant it could be taken from the ground for irrigation and also put in the Tukituki and Waipawa rivers if their levels were getting low.
The Hawke’s Bay Regional Council’s investment arm, Hawke’s Bay Regional Investment Company, which was driving the water storage scheme, originally applied to take 10m cum of this water. The company withdrew its application, but over the past four years eight other entities have lodged applications to take 17.1m cum.
Last year, council scientists said the water takes would have significant impacts on neighbouring wells and would ‘‘have an impact on overall groundwater levels’’ across the Ruataniwha basin, but noted that the board of inquiry that heard the plan change application said it was sustainable to take an extra 15m cum on top of the 28m cum of ‘‘Tranche 1 water’’ already being taken.
The eight entities, which include three dairy farms, have applied to use close to 12m cum of groundwater for irrigation, with the other 5m cum being used as ‘‘augmentation water’’.
Local farmers and others, as well as Forest and Bird, are concerned that these applications will further reduce the already decreasing amount of water available.
Alistair Setter, whose family has farmed near Waipawa since 1928, said the proposed water takes would have a huge impact on all those businesses and farms that were reliant on groundwater takes.
It would also likely impact the people living in Waipawa, Waipukurau and Otane, he said.
These towns took water from stream depleting sources ‘‘and while townships can continue to take water during ban periods for human welfare, it usually means very strict community water restrictions’’.
Setter said the council’s own reports showed that water abstraction over the past decade had impacted aquifer storage and resulted in less water being available through springs. ‘‘This backs up what I’m seeing at my place. Springs and waterways that have never been known to run dry have done so twice in the last five years. Many residents in Ongaonga were forced to redrill and lower their bores at the time the large irrigators started in 2004/2005. I believe that anything that risks further deterioration in our water sources is simply not worth it.’’
Setter said there were real risks to the 53 people and entities that held consents to take surface water and he asked the council to terminate all Tranche 2 water consents.
He said the council’s own bore monitoring records showed that the maximum and minimum depths of water had dropped substantially since the early nineties. In some cases the maximum depth had dropped from 13 metres to 34 metres.
Forest and Bird said any application to take groundwater in the area should be publicly notified.
‘‘This is an already stressed environment. Groundwater in the region has been steadily declining over the last 10 years. Local farmers are telling us that spring-fed streams are drying up, and groundwater wells are having to be lowered to reach water,’’ Forest and Bird’s freshwater advocate Annabeth Cohen said. ‘‘We urge the council to notify the applications, so that local farmers and concerned community members can have their say.’’
Council consents manager Malcolm Miller said the applications for the Tranche 2 water were on hold while scientific work was carried out by the applicants in terms of the effects of taking the water and how the effects could be offset.
A decision on whether the consents would be notified would be made after the science was in and had been analysed, he said.