There can be no doubt that the water debate is heating up. Concerns in Hawke's Bay about consents for water takes for export bottling plants are being matched in the South Island where the Ashburton District Council recently sold a property with attached water consents. The Ashburton community is expressing loud concerns.
This new commercial use for water - bottling it for export - has sparked a long-overdue debate on the prioritisation of water use, and who, if anyone, should be charged for it. So I believe this debate is needed and welcome it.
Throughout the country the debate is largely focusing on our inability to charge for water. My concern is more fundamental than this. I am concerned about the sustainability of our water resource - the Heretaunga acquifer. The response from the Hawke's Bay Regional Council to such concerns has been that the supply is adequate to meet current and future demands and that they have a good understanding of the science to support this. Being a "non-scientist" I don't have the expertise to argue with HBRC scientists and experts but I do know that our acquifer is a precious resource and that is behoves us to use the water wisely and with a long-term vision that will not disadvantage future generations.
It is therefore of concern for me to read an agenda item from last week's HBRC Regional Planning Committee meeting "Groundwater level changes in the Heretaunga and Ruataniwha Basin from 1994 to 2014". This report confirms the significance of our groundwater resource in the Hawke's Bay region. It is the second largest in the country and, to be fair to HBRC decision makers, it does not appear to be under the same level of pressure from water consents as the largest groundwater resource in Canterbury. This does not give us reason to be complacent.
The reason for my concern about the report and the current state of play with our acquifer is the apparent gap in HBRC knowledge. Do they in fact have the level of knowledge and science that they are claiming?
For example, while there has been some long-term systematic monitoring of groundwater levels since 1968, most continuous groundwater records contain less than 30 years of data. Can we say that we fully understand the acquifer when we have less than three decades of data? The report uses language that does not engender a sense of confidence that the groundwater resource is fully understood. Words such as "appear to have been", "the cause of change is unknown", "the absence of any significant loss of storage in this area suggests that pumping effects may be minor. This however, is probably not the case." And "how and where this is occurring as a result of the confined acquifer is not yet fully understood". My quotes have been taken at random from the report but they illustrate the root of my concerns - how much do we really know about this precious resource or, what don't we know that we should know? I have been advised that a moratorium on the issue of any further consents for water bottling plants cannot be put in place unless a change is made to the Regional Plan. The best avenue to achieve this is though the work currently being undertaken by TANK and this is not due to be completed until December 2017.
Twenty months is a long time to wait to get certainty but perhaps this timeframe could be shortened. This issue is unlikely to be addressed by the Government as both John Key and Dr Nick Smith have made it clear that exporting our precious water with little value added doesn't bother them. If we can lead the way in Hastings District with a ban on GMOs then why can't we also lead the way by banning the export of our water, at least until the long-term sustainability of the resource is proven beyond doubt? The solution is in our hands.
Note: There are nine resource consents issued for water bottling. The businesses who own these consents have a right to take water. In my view it would be wrong, indeed illegal, to revisit the terms of these consents unless they are breached.
- Cynthia Bowers is Deputy Mayor of Hastings.
- Views expressed here are the writer's opinion and not the newspaper's. Email: editor@hbtoday.co.nz.