Environmental failure over nitrates could 'ruin' Christchurch drinking water

Friday, 13 September 2019

The Government has announced a new governing body to regulate New Zealand's drinking water (First published in August 2019).

Canterbury's regional council has been accused of 'environmental vandalism' by failing to protect drinking water supplies from nitrate pollution.

Environment Canterbury (ECan) is working through two complex plan changes that aim eventually to reduce nitrate levels, improve drinking water quality and provide cleaner waterways for fish and aquatic species.

There are concerns nitrates could travel under the bed of the Waimakariri River and increase nitrates in Christchurch's drinking water.

Proposed staged nitrate reductions in an ECan plan change aim to protect Christchurch's drinking water supply from nitrates percolating below the Waimakariri River.

But it has emerged ECan's proposals make no mention of limits for nitrates levels in the city's aquifers, their safety instead reliant on dairy farmers north of the Waimakariri gradually reducing rates of nitrate leaching over the next 60 years.

* Will ECan's proposed nitrate reductions make dairy farming untenable?

* North Canterbury nitrate reductions may cause financial ruin, some farmers say

* ECan councillor says proposed plan changes don't go far enough to protect drinking water

City councillor Vicki Buck has accused ECan of 'environmental vandalism'.

* Farmer-led group lobbying for changes to Waimakariri water plan

* Disgusted environmentalists quit water talks over claims of farming bias**

The discovery was met with widespread incredulity in the council chamber on Thursday, leaving councillor Vicki Buck 'gobsmacked', Mayor Lianne Dalziel 'deeply concerned' and triggering accusations ECan is allowing farmers to line their pockets at the expense of public health.

There are also worries ECan's directives to the farming industry to reduce nitrates – demanding a 15 per cent drop by 2030, 30 per cent by 2040, 45 per cent by 2050 up to 90 per cent by 2080 – are too slow.

But farmers fear orders to cut nitrate levels could ruin them.

ECan's plans appear to impose no penalties on farmers who fail to meet targets, staff told councillors.

Buck said the proposals effectively amounted to ECan seeking to contaminate the aquifers.

'I can't put it any other way. I can totally understand that there are issues with farming, but that does not give anybody the right to contaminate a pure water source for an entire city.'

In a personal submission on ECan's plans, she said she had accused the organisation of 'environmental vandalism', and branded its proposals 'horrific' for 'wrecking the water'.

Waimakariri Irrigation Ltd shareholders have significant concerns about aspects of Environment Canterbury's plan change 7, particularly nitrate levels and the modelling of water quality.

Fellow councillor Pauline Cotter added: 'The economy is winning for farmers, it is not winning for us. We are losing in that department, that is quite clear.'

The lack of protection for Christchurch's aquifers have even left some in ECan's own ranks with 'grave reservations' about the plans.

ECan councillor Lan Pham told Stuff in July the plans 'failed to recognise … the ecological health of the aquifers', causing her to vote against endorsing them last year.

The city council has now demanded ECan set a limit of 1mg/l for nitrates allowed in Christchurch's deep aquifers – where levels currently hover around 0.6mg/l – and bring in tighter timeframes for reducing nitrogen loss from farming.

Environment Canterbury councillor Lan Pham believes proposed plan changes do not go far enough to protect Christchurch's drinking water from nitrates.

In a submission to ECan on Friday, the council said that while it supports the intent to reduce groundwater nitrate concentrations, 'it is considered it does not go far enough to ensure that nitrate levels in the council drinking water do not raise dramatically from where they currently are.

'The council considers that the timeframes proposed for nitrate reductions are far too long, and that Christchurch aquifers will have increasing nitrate levels, with associated negative health effects as a result.'

But while the council can present evidence at a hearing next year, there is no opportunity to appeal against ECan's decision over the plans other than under a point of law in the High Court.

Removing nitrates from drinking water supplies in the decades to come would also have exorbitant cost, with rough estimates of a price tag between $800 million and $1.6 billion.

Economist Geoff Butcher told councillors: 'It's a really big number that won't be incurred for quite a long time and it will be incurred by the residents of Christchurch as opposed to the benefits, which will accrue to the landowners while they do that farming.'

Discussing the proposals – which are so complex both councillors and staff were left struggling to get to grips with them – planner Janice Carter said ECan was 'trying' to do something.

'The plan change does start to get more management of farming practises and is starting to pull in the nitrate leaching that's occurring.

'But it doesn't do it quick enough and it doesn't set targets we think are low enough that will really protect Christchurch's water.'

Councillors were vocal in the condemnation of the plans.

Yani Johanson demanded the council take a stand, saying: 'The pressure we've been put under around chlorinating our water supply when we've got this massive threat of nitrates and so little being done is really alarming.'

Cotter said Christchurch faces a 'crisis' and the farming community needed to 'face the writing on the wall' and diversify by embracing opportunities. Phil Clearwater, who is standing for a seat on ECan at next month's elections, suggested the council could well have considered opposing the plan entirely and asking ECan to stop it.

ECan was contacted for comment on Friday.