‘Plaque should name those ruining river’

Press, 10 December 1983, Page 29

‘Plaque should name those ruining river’

If the Rakaia River were physically altered in any way by “exploitation” a plaque should be erected naming those responsible for the decision, the river’s Conservation Order hearing was told yesterday. A company director and ardent salmon angler, Mr C. S. Hill, asked the National Water and Soil Conservation Authority why the river, which was the last of its kind, “should be exploited for the profit of a few.”

He said that a plaque, which named those responsible for ruining the river, would make sure that their names “would not be lost in the faceless bureaucracy that is blamed for making decisions but has no personality.”

He said that he had met an angler from England who found it more economical to come to New Zealand every two years to fish for salmon than to go to Scotland to fish at a lower success rate.

“I shudder at the thought that this — because of the exploitation of the New Zealand salmon runs — may become the lot of my children who, to obtain the fishing that I have experienced and enjoyed, may have to travel the world to find it,” Mr Hill said. The hearing set yesterday aside to listen to submissions from smaller groups and individuals. One such individual was Mr M. J. Osborne, a farmer, who said that there should be no Conservation Order on the river at all, as there was an alternative system of managing the river, through the North Canterbury Catchment Board and Regional Water Board. Mr Osborne emphasised that although he was the board’s resource committee chairman, the submission was purely personal and could not be connected with the board.

He was representing his family, who owned three farms in the lower central Canterbury plains. “The main thrust of my opposition to this order is that it restricts abstraction from the Rakaia to an unnecessary amount for sufficient irrigation on the upper plains which will, in turn, recharge the lower plains’ well supply,” said Mr Osborne.

He said that groundwater wells in the lower plains were weakening, especially during drought years, and irrigation of the upper plains from the river would adequately supplement the groundwater supply. Although he enjoyed birds and wildlife, Mr Osborne said that in considering their value, the whole idea of balance should be kept in perspective.

“We have heard the plea of the bird-lovers. Someone has to stand up and say, ‘so what’... and it may as well be me,” he said. The river should be recognised as a national treasure, the same as Mount Cook, the Franz Josef Glacier, or such human constructions as the two cathedrals in Christchurch, said the Christchurch author, Mrs Elsie Locke. “I have never lost the

sense of spiritual excitement when, on a crisp frosty morning, I saw this magnificent river for the first time,” said Mrs Jill Locke. “New Zealand has seen too much of its majesty plundered and squandered,” she said. The “wonderful ecosystem” of the Rakaia should not be parcelled out into segments. Sir James Stewart, chairman of the Canterbury Development Corporation, said that if effective ways of reestablishing economic growth and development in Canterbury were not found, the province would face further social decline “of grave proportions.” Sir James said that his submission was a private one and could not be associated with his position as

principal of Lincoln College. An essential cornerstone of such economic growth in Canterbury was the intensification of land use, particularly of that land on the Canterbury Plains.

“While the technical potential of dryland farming has certainly not yet been fully exploited, nevertheless I believe that we are now at the limit of current technology and it is difficult to perceive further major process without removal of

the soil moisture constraint,” he said. He agreed with the applicants (the Acclimatisation Societies) that irrigation planners had a strong obligation to ensure that water was used prudently and at the highest level of efficiency. Intensification of farming with the help of irrigation could provide jobs to the Canterbury region, he said. an enthusiastic angler and former member of the

North Canterbury Acclimatisation Society, Mr S. C. Sparrow, was at the other’ end of the scale. “I seriously question New Zealand’s plans to depend on expansion of agricultural production for the bulk of its export receipts,” he said. While New Zealand agricultural exports were good, this was only because other countries had curtailed theirs. “In 1970, the United States Government paid out

subsidies to farmers not to farm 28 million hectares, which is more than the total land area of New Zealand. “If New Zealand’s future as an agricultural exporting country is to continue, it will depend in large measure on the rest of the world failing to organise itself properly,” he said. Counsel for the Crown, Mr N. R. Watson, said at the hearing yesterday that nobody in ' the New Zealand Electricity Division or the

Ministry of Energy could give any more information on Lake Coleridge than had been already given at the hearing. Further research on the lake was necessary, he said. On Thursday, the Canterbury Chamber of Commerce (Mr D. M. Palmer) called for a top official to be subpoenaed to give some “straight talking” on the lake’s future. The committee accepted Mr Watson's explanation.