Talking Point, not published in HB Today

Louise Phillips.  Tikokino horticulturalist and Advocate for Wise Water Use.

The Talking Point below was submitted to the editor of the HB Today Newspaper on 27th June; however, has not been published.

On June 17th I attended Mike Petersen’s presentation at the Waipawa Town Hall on the Ruataniwha dam v.2 which I found long on hyperbole and short on facts.

Mr Petersen would like us to believe that this iteration of the Dam is significantly different from version 1, with the environment now being the top priority.  Perhaps he thinks we have short memories.  Environmental flows are already a requirement of the consents issued for Ruataniwha v.1.  Not that so called ‘environmental flows’ work.  No answers were provided as to who will pay for this 20 Mm3 water, yet Mr Peterson has previously stated that he believes the public should foot the bill.

Mr Petersen also suggested that water would be made available for other significant water bodies, such as Lake Whatumā.  Unless he has discovered a way to make water flow uphill, this is simply not possible.  Furthermore, the lake’s low levels are not a simple matter of water volume.  Historically, the lake has been artificially lowered by altering the southern outlet, and much of the exposed surrounding land is now in private hands.

Mr Petersen further claimed that the Supreme Court’s 2017 decision to protect the 22 hectares of DoC conservation land was a mere technicality, whereas in fact the Court upheld the ecological significance of that native bush.  That he now seeks to override that decision via the coalition government’s Fast Track legislation demonstrates a disregard for the environment, despite the rhetoric.  This legislation prioritises economic development at the expense of environmental and community well-being.

The dam promoters’ claim they care about climate change, yet they ignore the substantial emissions associated with the Dam’s construction and the long-term environmental cost of removing and transporting gravel build-up from the reservoir.

Another argument put forward at the meeting was the supposed need for water to grow more food for a growing population.  However, this ignores the real issue, food waste and affordability.  New Zealand currently wastes enough food each year to feed the entire population of Dunedin for three years.  We don’t need to produce more food, we need to focus on fair distribution and affordability.  As a small, geographically distant nation, our competitiveness lies not in sheer volume, but in environmentally sustainable and value-added production.

The idea that water flowing out to sea is "wasted" reveals a poor understanding of the ecological role of braided river systems. The real waste lies in the rainfall that hits our pasturelands and is not retained in the soil.  There is growing recognition of how increasing soil carbon boosts moisture retention, reduces erosion, regulates soil temperature, and enhances biodiversity.  Just a 1% increase in soil carbon can increase water holding capacity by 17 litres per square metre. Nature-based solutions offer far more long-term resilience to climate extremes - floods, droughts, and cyclones - than engineered ones like dams.

The proposed dam has significant financial risk and promotes business as usual, namely environmental degradation, all to compensate for mismanagement of our shared water resource by past regional councils who have over-allocated water consents.  

The over $20 million already squandered on the Ruataniwha dam versions 1 and 2 could have been used to explore alternative environmentally-sustainable land use options for the catchment.  Let’s not waste more public money on a rerun of this deeply flawed dam proposal.