Rakaia River

Press, 7 June 1982, Page 12

Rakaia River

Sir—lt appears as if the National Water and Soil Conservation . Organisation is trying to play “Wellington Rules," a game which allows one side to determine the rules as it plots its way to victory over an opposition which can become in time, the football, thus giving the game its distinctive character. It is typical of the present state of resource planning in New Zealand that the organisation thinks it can buy time from a Regional Water Board which takes its regional responsibilities seriously. Good resource planning is about wise use of a documented resource and the relationships of people, the land and community goals. This information takes time to bring together and to be reconciled, yet it should be facilitated not by-passed. The organisation should be satisfied that its grant of $110)000 will promote such sound planning rather than bemoan the fact that its use of taxpayers' money is not expediting an issue it seems to be losing patience over. — Yours, etc., RICHARD JOHNSON. June 3, 1982. Sir,—Regarding the irrigation of the Canterbury Plains. Mr A. L. Mulholland claims it is not the farmers’ intention to destroy the Rakaia River, which may well be so, but with the abysmal record of other irrigation and hydro schemes, these words bring little comfort to those trying to protect such a magnificent river. One only has to look at the Rangitata, the Opihi, Waitaki, Clutha, Ashburton, Waiau, Ashley and the Wilberforce diversion, to see what damage has been wrought by these schemes. Once there were 10 rivers with major runs of fish; now there are two. I feel a massive irrigation scheme on the Rakaia would be disastrous. — Yours, etc., LINDA DAVIS. June 4, 1982.

Sir,-The criticism by the National Water and Soil Conservation Authority (“The Press”, June 2) of the North Canterbury Catchment Board’s programme for preparing a water management plan for the Rakaia is scarcely justified. The Authority appears to Believe that its money can buy expediency in plan preparation. This attitude suggests that the Authority has a predetermined position over use of the Rakaia and is impatient that proper public debate will delay the implementation of what I would guess it sees as a de-velopment-oriented future for the river. I think-that everyone involved in the Rakaia debate is grateful for the board's caution and concern that the plan be carefully prepared. The Rakaia management plan is very important to the people of Canterbury and our local board is discharging its responsibilities to the region in a fairminded and enlightened way. Public consultation throughout plan preparation is essential, and the authontx should not

try to buy oti the local board's integrity. — Yours, etc., D. A. RANKIN. Chairman, Wild and Scenic Rivers Action Committee ■ (Canterbury). June 4, 1982.