Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Joan DeMartin's avatar

Very interesting piece! I didn't think about the lake versus river issue, but it is important.

Expand full comment
Peter D Trolove's avatar

Canterbury is another region of NZ with both high levels of nitrate in its water and toxic Cyanobacteria in its lowland streams and lakes.

S 30 of the RMA 1991 requires the Environment Canterbury Regional Council (Ecan) to maintain and enhance the region's freshwater quality and quantity by regulating land use.

Ecan however gives priority to GDP.

Increased GDP in Canterbury has been achieved by the irrigation of vulnerable light porous soils to enable intensive dairy farming.

Nitrate leaching comes primarily from cow urine patches with further leaching from excess applications of nitrogen fertilizer.

The Ecan Act 2010 was passed under urgency with the aim of doubling GDP and as a consequence has made the region's freshwater some of the most polluted in the country.

Ecan councilors and staff appear more interested in growing this rather nebulous economic measure while refusing to consider the very real cost to environmental and public health.

The toxic algae warning signs at Te Waihora remain in the red year round.

While councilors who profit from pollution are charged with governance of Ecan, the culture of the staff will reflect the councilors' values.

Your article is just one of many that have yet to achieve a change in values.

Expand full comment
12 more comments...

No posts