Farmers seek compromise on use of Rakaia water

Press, 19 December 1981, Page 16

Farmers seek compromise on use of Rakaia water

The provincial president of the North Canterbury district of the Federated Farmers of New Zealand Mr A. L. Mulholland. has written to "The Press” in reply to an editorial which appeared on Thursday. December 10, under the heading "The Rakaia River." Mr Mulholland writes:

"The Press,” in its editorial refers to what is considered to be a major row brewing over the water usage of the Rakaia River. I believe it to be regretable that any suggestion of "major row” should be contemplated. It is an unfortunate fact of life that where an issue becomes “emotive,” common sense tends to fly out the window. I am concerned at the inference in the editorial that all advocates of the various uses of the Rakaia River have “tended to adopt an' all-or-nothing stance.” This is certainly true of the various groups who regard the retention of the river as a wild and scenic resolirce, but not so of the potential irrigation users. Some weeks ago, as provincial' president of Federated .Farmers, I convened a meeting to which I invited representatives of all groups. Four repre-

sentatives of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Action Committee, and the Save the Rakaia Group presented themselves. Unfortunately, the news media were not present, although some of the comments made have since found their way into print. In my opening remarks. I explained that farmers were not insensitive to the fact that each and every one of us has a right to what is one of our major resources and that we recognise that right. A request for the right to a maximum of 70 cumecs of water has been lodged. I stress the word maximum. Current and future technology could , reduce the amount quite dramatically; It is certainly not the desire of farmers to draw off water with no regard to the natural functions of the river.

We have repeatedly made the comment that the traditional low flow of the river is at the period of low irrigation demands, namely the winter period. We have also strongly advocated the multiple use concept, such as power generation, and more recently fish farming. This concept is eminently wise and sensible as it makes better economic use of

the expended capital. A catch cry of the opponents of irrigation from the river is that we should be making more use of underground water. I quite agree, where it is feasible to do so. However, there are considerable areas, particularly in the Central Plains area, where such water does not exist or is top deep for economic pumping? How, for instance, do you persuade a farmer to sink wells several hundred feet into the ground, on the off chance that there may be water there. There may not be. Heaven knows, there is little enough in farm returns without paying for “dry bores." ;

• My main concern is that all interested parties should recognise each others’ points of view. There is plenty of room for compromise. Let us all behave like responsible adults, instead of children, who erroneously believe they are about to be deprived of their ice cream. Others will no doubt delve more deeply into the real advantages of irrigation such as increased, job opportunities and increased overseas earnings to benefit all New Zealanders, including jet-boaters and farmers.