Water classification disputed

Press, Volume CXIV, Issue 33625, 29 August 1974, Page 16

Water classification disputed

It was untenable for waters in the mountain watersheds not to receive the highest classification, said Dr. I. D. Blair, a microbiologist, in submissions to the Water Resources Council. “Heavy reliance has been placed in the water classifications on standards which have been set in other countries,” he said. "One suspects that American experience may have been drawn on rather heavily. “In Canterbury, we should have a classification which is very largely based on the actual state of affairs. Most of the waters are now much

higher than the provisional classification imposed upon them, or being considered.” Dr Blair said it was quite unjustifiable for the waters to be judged on the basis of possible occurrence of coliform organisms. These bacteria in fast-flowing mountain streams were of no significance, while the reverse was true for slow-flow-ing lowland streams. He said the upper tributaries of the Rakaia. Waimakariri, Hurunui and Waiau rivers were snow-fed’ and would have the highest levels of quality. Speaking for 1500 members of tramping clubs, Mr K. L. Rasmussen, of the University club, said the groups thought C was not a good enough classification for high-country

waters. The natural waters were of high quality, in their natural state, and were fully appreciated as such. It should not be hard to control discharges on skifields, he said. This should be done at the cost of the ski clubs.

"How do you know you can drink from these streams?’’ asked Mr B. W. Spooner, the chairman.

Mr Rasmussen said that any pollution would be by natural causes, rather than from, say, sewage. The water was in its natural state and should be so classified. The Federation of Mountain Clubs said that the down-grading of natural water contravened the law, which required the council to "maintain and improve” the quality of natural water.