The Cultural Health of the Opihi Catchment

Source: David Wall Photography (www.davidwallphoto.com)

Working with: Te Runanga o Arowhenua

Prepared by: Tipa and Associates Ltd

Updated June 2018

2 | P a g e

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART 1: INTRODUCING THE CULTURAL HEALTH OF THE OPIHI TODAY 1.1 THE OPIHI CATCHMENT ...... 5 1.2 INTRODUCTION TO THE REPORT FOR THE OPIHI ...... 5 1.3 THE STRUCTURE OF THIS REPORT ...... 5 1.4 A NEW LEGAL IDENTITY ...... 6 1.5 THE KAITIAKI RUNANGA ...... 6 1.6 HOW TO USE THIS REPORT ...... 6 1.7 REPORT FOR THE SUB-CATCHMENTS OF THE OPIHI ...... 6 1.8 THE FUTURE SOUGHT BY AROWHENUA ...... 7

PART 2: OUR CULTURAL FRAMEWORK 2.1 AN ECO-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE ...... 9 2.2 CULTURAL KEYSTONE SPECIES ...... 9 2.3 WAHI TUPUNA ...... 9 2.4 DATA SOURCES ACCESSED...... 9 2.5 THE ECOLOGICAL SYSTEM ...... 10 2.6 THE ECO-CULTURAL SYSTEM IN THE OPIHI ...... 11

PART 3: AN INTRODUCTION TO THE OPIHI RIVER 3.1 WATERWAYS OF THE CATCHMENT ...... 15 3.2 CULTURAL LANDSCAPES ...... 16 3.3 THE OPIHI RIVER ECOSYSTEMS ...... 17 3.4 CONNECTIVITY AND CORRIDORS ...... 18 3.5 WAHI TAPU / TAONGA ...... 18 3.6 MANAWHENUA LAND AND FISHING INTERESTS IN CANTERBURY ...... 19 3.7 MAHINGA KAI ...... 19 3.8 SUSTAINING MAHINGA KAI ...... 21 3.9 LINKING IMPACTS OF CHANGING WATER MANAGEMENT ON THE ATTRIBUTES OF MAHINGA KAI ...... 23 3.10 OTHER TAONGA SPECIES ...... 25

PART 4: TE MOEMOEA -A HEALTHY OPIHI CATCHMENT 4.1. A HEALTH AND WELL OPIHI CATCHMENT ...... 27 4.2 THE CHANGING ENVIRONMENT - ISSUES IDENTIFIED BY WHANAU ...... 27

PART 5: THE CURRENT HEALTH OF THE OPIHI CATCHMENT 5.1 INTRODUCTION ...... 29 5.2 DATA INFORMING OUR RIVER ASSESSMENTS ...... 30 5.3 SUMMARY OF CULTURAL HEALTH ASSESSMENTS ...... 58

PART 6: SUMMARY OF ISSUES IDENTIFIED BY WHANAU 6.1 SUMMARY OF ISSUES IDENTFIIED BY WHANAU ...... 59 6.2 AN UNHEALTHY OPIHI CATCHMENT ...... 63 6.3 THE FUTURE SOUGHT BY TE RUNANGA O AROWHENUA ...... 63

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDICES

3 | P a g e

4 | P a g e

PART 1: INTRODUCING THE CULTURAL HEALTH OF THE OPIHI TODAY

1.1 THE OPIHI CATCHMENT The focus of this report is the Opihi catchment. Figure 1 shows the catchment boundaries and many of the streams discussed within this publication. Traditionally for Ngai Tahu, the rivers were important sources of food, key transportation routes, and a source of spirituality. Following European settlement, the landscapes were modified, the rivers manipulated, lands alienated, and an reserve system, which is inadequate, was not implemented. Ngai Tahu were left struggling to cope with the sense of loss of important catchments which featured so strongly in their physical and spiritual wellbeing. Today the rivers of South Canterbury remain a landscape, valued by many different groups, each claiming a piece of it, including Ngai Tahu, who as Manawhenua, continue to view the river as integral to their cultural identity and wellbeing.

Figure 1: The Opihi catchment (map supplied by Dan Clarke, ECAN)

1.2 INTRODUCTION TO THE REPORT FOR THE OPIHI This report seeks to bring together information about the Opihi and present it in a framework that increases understanding of the whole system, including natural processes, human needs and aspirations, and some of the cultural rights and interests of Manawhenua. The focus of this report is therefore the state of the Opihi River catchment today, and the management recommendations in response to the current state. The assessment of current state, must encompass a broad variety of terrain, climate, historic use, and flora and fauna – all of which underpin the cultural identity of Ngai Tahu whanui. We also acknowledge that the catchment is highly significant to its many residents and communities. In the remaining sections of this part we explain how we developed the conceptual framework to guide this report.

1.3 THE STRUCTURE OF THIS REPORT This report has been divided into a number of parts: Part 1: Sets out the purpose and scope of the report, and explains its structure. Part 2: Introduces the catchment. Part 3: Provides a description of the framework that guided the assessments. Part 3: Presents the data that was collected. Assessments are grouped under the different sub-catchments of the Opihi. Part 4: Discusses key issues. Part 5: Concludes the report.

5 | P a g e

1.4 A NEW LEGAL IDENTITY The legal identity of Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu (TRONT) was established in the Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu Act 1996. Section 15 of the Act states “Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu shall be recognised for all purposes as the representative of Ngai Tahu Whanui”. The mandate of TRONT is further defined by section 15(2) - Where any enactment requires consultation with any iwi or with any iwi authority, that consultation shall, with respect to matters affecting Ngai Tahu Whanui, be held with Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu. However, this right to speak is not unfettered. Section 15(3) imposes an obligation on TRONT. When exercising its mandate to speak on behalf of Ngai Tahu whanui: Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu, in carrying out consultation under subsection 2 of this section a) Shall seek the views of such Papatipu Runanga of Ngai Tahu Whanui and such hapu as in the opinion of Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu may have views that they wish to express in relation to the matter about which Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu is being consulted; and b) Shall have regard, among other things, to any views obtained by Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu under paragraph (a) of this subsection; and c) Shall not act or agree to act in a manner that prejudices or discriminates against, any Papatipu Runanga of Ngai Tahu or any hapu unless Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu believes on reasonable grounds that the best interests of Ngai Tahu Whanui as a whole require Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu to act in that manner. There still remains a need to define how this obligation is to be implemented. Papatipu runanga representatives were involved in the assessments that inform this report. The TRONT Act 1996 was followed by the Ngai Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998. We refer to a number of the provisions from the Settlement Act in this report.

1.5 THE KAITIAKI RUNANGA The members of Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu are the 18 papatipu Runanga, each of which is defined in the TRONT Act 1996, as is the takiwa for each1. Te Runanga o Waihao and Te Runanga o Arowhenua, are two such Runanga.

• Te Runanga o Arowhenua - The takiwa of Te Runanga o Arowhenua centres on Arowhenua and extends from Rakaia to Waitaki, sharing interests with Ngai Tuahuriri ki Kaiapoi between Hakatere and Rakaia, and thence inland to Aoraki and the Main Divide. The office of Te Runanga o Arowhenua is based at the marae at Temuka.

• Te Runanga o Waihao - The takiwa of Te Runanga o Waihao centres on Wainono, sharing interests with Te Runanga o Arowhenua in the Pareora, and extends inland to Omarama and the Main Divide. Te Runanga o Waihao has its offices at the marae at Morven. Pursuant to section 3 of Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu Act 1996, “the Act binds the Crown and every person (including any body politic or corporate) whose rights are affected by any provision of this Act”. This Act, together with Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu (Declaration of Membership) Order 2001, establishes who holds manawhenua rights over specific lands and waters within the rohe of Ngai Tahu. The Orari, Opihi, Waitarakao Catchments and the small streams south of Timaru down to the Pareora lie solely within the takiwa of Te Runanga o Arowhenua. The Pareora catchment is an area of shared responsibility with lands and waters of the catchment found within the takiwa of Te Runanga o Arowhenua and Te Runanga o Waihao.

1.6 HOW TO USE THIS REPORT Reports that contain or “scores” are a valuable tool for tracking and communicating catchment and site condition to tangata whenua, residents, stakeholders, and decision-makers. We structured the assessment by: • Identifying the geographic sub-units to be assessed (e.g., reporting sub-catchments); • Using the Cultural Health Index to assess a section of sites; • For each site assessed, compiling and analysing the data, and calculating the CHI score; and • Aggregating the scores in a matrix to give an overall impression of catchment health.

Scores range from 1 (red) reflecting poor condition, to 5 (green) which reflects excellent condition, for each indicator within each sub- catchment.

1.7 REPORT FOR THE SUB-CATCHMENTS OF THE OPIHI

Consistent with the mountains to sea reporting structure, we provided five report card sub-units;

• Upper Opihi catchment;

• Mid Opihi Catchment

1 See Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu (Declaration of Membership) Order 2001 6 | P a g e

• The Lower catchment;

• The lagoon and river mouth area; and

• The streams to the north and south of the Opihi including the Orari, Waitarakao, and the Pareora.

1.10 THE FUTURE SOUGHT BY AROWHENUA

After we have worked through the assessments, we conclude by describing the future sought by Ngai Tahu. The Zone Committee include in their assessment framework a series of outcomes. Each scenario will be evaluated against this future.

7 | P a g e

8 | P a g e

PART 2: OUR CULTURAL FRAMEWORK

This chapter summarises the process used to prepare this document. It starts by explaining how the principles of Kaupapa Maori Research and a qualitative methodology enabled this output to be responsive to Ngai Tahu needs and aspirations and hopefully of benefit to them. It also highlights the many challenges that were faced, of which the most significant concerned the need for increased emphasis to be placed on examining the catchment in social, cultural and economic terms rather than bio-physical terms.

2.1 AN ECO-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE The concept of eco-cultural” management includes an explicit link between ecosystems and cultural health. Assessing the state of valued environs recognises that the attributes of wellbeing can be adversely impacted. If the nature of the resources changes, (i.e. becomes depleted, polluted, or inaccessible), then the culture, health and wellbeing of the communities who have strong and extensive relationships with such resources may also be affected. On the other hand, the very ability to hold on to values in the face of change may be a sign of a culture’s resilience, since values that have endured in a cultural group over a number of generations suggest significant adaptive potential for the group. The data collected for this report card confirms the Opihi continues to be, a dominant ‘environmental’ context for Ngai Tahu. A powerful sense of belonging to whanau and hapu has been nurtured over many generations that reinforces connections to whenua, turangawaewae, and particularly their connection with their river. Consistent with tikanga Māori, the relationship with the Opihi and Temuka Rivers also brings responsibilities and obligations. However, the data also confirmed that the relationship between Ngai Tahu and the Opihi has undergone changes. Some of these have occurred over the lifetimes of today’s generations and others are the result of incremental change over several generations. There are concerns that traditional motivations, mātauranga Maori, learning/teaching opportunities, cultural practices and processes are slowly being eroded. Some of the reasons for this relate directly to physical changes in local environments (e.g., pollution, agricultural and horticultural developments, electricity generation, stock depletion), and the alienation of lands and access from whanau. In additional to the concept of eco-cultural management, two other concepts guided the management recommendations of whnaau, specifically: • Cultural keystone species; and • Wahi tupuna – significant cultural landscapes.

2.2 CULTURAL KEYSTONE SPECIES Garibaldi and Turner (2004) explain that there are species that are embedded in the cultural beliefs, values and uses of indigenous peoples which can legitimately be considered as cultural icons. More specifically they describe cultural keystone species as: "the culturally salient species that shape in a major way the cultural identity of a people, as reflected in the fundamental roles these species have in diet, materials, medicine, and/or spiritual practices…" and "Keystone species may serve a particular culture materially in a host of different ways: as a staple food or a crucial emergency food, in technology, or as an important medicine." In relation to the New Zealand context, many iwi will define specific species as taonga. Ngai Tahu was able to negotiate the inclusion of a number of taonga species into Schedule 97 of the Ngai Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998. It should be noted, that these were a small set agreed upon by the Government of the day. Many other species are referred to as taonga by Ngai Tahu. When considering the Opihi, the eels in the catchment are a taonga and could be considered a cultural keystone species. The concept of cultural keystone species has been vital to the development of the recommendations in this report.

2.3 WAHI TUPUNA Maori infuse natural and physical resources within their lands with spiritual and cultural dimensions, and in setting management priorities are likely to seek to maintain, protect, and/or restore the attributes that comprise culturally significant landscapes. This report assesses the state of the eco-cultural system in the Opihi. We conclude this report by identifying some of the stressors impacting the health of the system, which is shown in Figure 4.

2.4 DATA SOURCES ACCESSED Vuorela (2000) supports the analysis of changes to environments over time, arguing that it requires information of both natural and human induced variables to be obtained from several sources, such as landscape descriptions, maps, historical records and photographs. Table 1 provides a summary of the data sources yielding information about Ngai Tahu utilisation of the Opihi Catchment that provide insights to cultural belief, value or practice associated with this.

9 | P a g e

CULTURAL BELIEF, VALUE, DATA SOURCES WhakapapaPRACTICE • Whanau manuscripts. • Iwi resource management plans. • Maori Land Court Records. Te Taiao • Original survey maps. • Maps drawn by explorers. • Journals of early explorers and surveyors. • Examples of indigenous cartography. • Paintings (sourced from National Library). • Photographs (sourced from national and regional. • Libraries. • Historic texts. • NZAA site records. Rangatiratanga • Original Purchase Agreements. • Maori Land Court minute books. • Original land titles. • Evidence submitted to hearings including Waitangi Tribunal. • Petitions to Government (found in AJHR). • Legal descriptions for lands found in the New Zealand Gazette. Mahinga kai / resource base • Cultural maps (e.g the 1880 map). • Whanau manuscripts. • Text from early ethnographers (e.g. Beattie). • Paintings (sourced from National Library). • Photographs (sourced from national and regional libraries). • NZAA site records. Socio – economic • Petitions to Government (found in AJHR). • Journals and reports of Government employees tasked with allocating reserves and assessing living conditions of Ngai Tahu. • Evidence submitted to hearings including Waitangi Tribunal. Table 1: Some of the Written Data Sources that helped us understand Ngai Tahu Utilisation of the Lands, Waters, and Resources of the Opihi.

Some of the information gathered in included in the Appendices to this report rather than the main text.

2.5 THE ECOLOGICAL SYSTEM Although seeking to do an assessment of cultural health and wellbeing, we have been guided, in part, by the need to take an overview of the ecological system, which we have shown in Figure 2.

Climate and Time Atmospheric Condition

D Geology

Riparian Zone Condition Landform Biological E Processes Riparian and I Landscape Aquatic Biota

Condition F A

Stream Flow Water B Quality

Stream Instream Geomorpholo Habitat gy

Figure 2: An Overview of the Ecological System

10 | P a g e

2.6 THE ECO-CULTURAL SYSTEM IN THE OPIHI The term “eco-cultural restoration" was introduced by Dennis Martinez (1995) to overcome the artificial divide between culture and nature, or between humans and the environment, and to reinforce the need for collaboration between indigenous knowledge and western science. Driscoll (2003) and Underwood et al (2003) explain that eco-cultural initiatives range from initiatives involving tribal lands and waters, utilising solely indigenous knowledge and involving indigenous peoples, to partnerships involving government and / or NGOs in the restoration of tribal lands and waters. As the term “eco-cultural” suggests, both ecosystems and cultures are to be managed. This concept of reciprocity or reciprocal benefits is acknowledged by the Indigenous People’s Restoration Network (2005) who stated that the goal of eco-cultural restoration is to enhance the survival of indigenous people and culture in conjunction with restoring damaged landscapes. Before detailing the results of the assessments we want to explain how a selection of wahi taonga found in the valley are dependent on healthy aquatic ecosystems. We start with a consideration of the mahinga kai of the valley.

Mahinga Kai2

WATER RELATRED DEPENDENCIES RELATED NEEDS • Oxygen – fish get this from water. • Physical access to sites to enable gathering that is safe. • Food – for plants, birds and fish. • Legal access to sites and to gather lawfully. • Plants need nutrients. • Knowledge of sites, species, and the practice of gathering and • Fish eat algae, invertebrates, worms. processing. • Birds eat fish, invertebrates, worms, seeds etc from riparian • Certainty – knowing that kai gathered is safe to eat. plants. • Tikanga associated with species. • Habitat (a place to live) – riparian, channel structure, patterns • Opportunities to share experiences and teachings. and quantity of sediments, contaminants, interactions between fish and invertebrates, competition with predators (fish, birds, plants, invertebrates etc). • Temperature of water. • Cover in aquatic ecosystems – protects species from predators, high temperatures, high turbulence. • Life cycle stages triggered by flows. • Gathering methods dependent on flows. • Transportation – if access dependent on boating etc. • Turbidity – linked to oxygen and nutrient concentrations. Suspended matter affects feeding, movement, prey avoidance etc, and affects stream-bed.

Tuhituhi nehera – rock drawing areas

WATER RELATED DEPENDENCIES • Ground water levels changing. • Development / land-use change (e.g. irrigation) can create new micro climates. • Patterns and location of infiltration. RELATED NEEDS • Access to sites. • Knowledge of sites and management needs. • Management plans and support from landowners for their implementation.

2 Photo of eels supplied by John Clayton, NIWA 11 | P a g e

Taonga Species

WATER RELATED DEPENDENCIES RELATED NEEDS • Groundwater / surface water interactions sustain wetlands, • Physical access to sites. seepages, springs, bank-side habitats. • Legal access to sites and to gather. • Food. • Knowledge of sites, species, and the practice of gathering and • Habitat (a place to live) – riparian habitats important –Flows processing. create conditions for growth; keep water tables high; supplies • Certainty – knowing that kai gathering is safe to eat / resources nutrients etc; variation establishes site specific conditions e.g. are safe to use. high flows move seeds. • Cover – flows provide protection, clear weeds. • Riparian vegetation provides woody debris to rivers, intercept sediments & nutrients etc. Vegetation lessens velocities and helps reduce flood peaks by facilitating infiltration to groundwater during high flows and releasing back to the channel as flows subside. • Life cycle stages. • Movement corridors – Reduces risk of getting stranded.

Wahi ingoa3

WATER RELATED DEPENDENCIES • Names could describe an entire waterway, a reach of a waterway, and/or physical characteristics of a waterway. • Names could describe flow dependent features within the catchment – wetlands, puna, rocks, cliffs, etc. • Can become dislocated – the description and meaning in the name is no longer relevant given the changes to a site or loction.

Wähi täpuke (buried taoka)

WATER RELATED DEPENDENCIES • Low levels and flows increase the risk of exposure. RELATED NEEDS • Knowledge of wahi tapuke. • Respect from landowners / community for protection of wahi tapuke.

3 Names were sourced from an undated map in the Hocken Library. 12 | P a g e

Puna

WATER RELATED DEPENDENCIES • Groundwater / surface water interactions sustain wetlands, seepages, springs, bankside habitats. • Specific waterbodies may be valued for combination of flow related characteristics. • Spring fed streams have a shape, channel, floodplain, and a reliable flow. • Movement of sediment linked to stream energy (velocity, turbulence, slope and flow). • High quality of water may sustain taonga species. RELATED NEEDS • Competition with other users of high quality spring fed waters.

Ara tawhito (ancient trails)

WATER RELATED DEPENDENCIES • Land and water based trails link to water quality and quantity. • Links to boatability, safe access, and connections. • Trails needed to be supported by fresh water supplies and nearby mahinga kai. • Location dependent on specific water characteristics, including access to: • Traditional tauranga waka, and or • Contemporary boat ramps.

Pä Tawhito (ancient pä sites), Käinga Nohoanga (occupation, settlement sites)4

WATER RELATED DEPENDENCIES • Links directly to mahinga kai and water quality. • Mahinga kai – could only reside at location because resources were available to sustain whanau. • There was a potable water supply.

RELATED NEEDS • Knowledge of wahi taonga. • Respect from community for promotion of use of wahi ingoa.

4 Map was sourced from Land Information New Zealand. 13 | P a g e

Taniwha5

WATER RELATED DEPENDENCIES • Taniwha reflect an in-depth knowledge of waterbodies and flows. • Dwelling place of taniwha are found in and around waterway. • Taniwha protect certain features of the river - shape e.g. bends in river, rapids, headwaters. • Taniwha may have a history of moving throughout the catchment. • Taniwha may be protecting a wahi tapu. • Taniwha describe the creation of and interrelationships between landforms comprising a cultural landscape.

When undertaking our assessments, we were conscious that whanau had to assess the attributes of the respective taonga and identify any specific management needs.

In the river summaries in Part 4 we try to relate the current state of the Opihi catchment to the cultural outcomes sought by Ngai Tahu, one of which is the protection of wahi tapu and wahi taonga. We start, however, with a brief overview of the catchment.

5 The Taieri River between Outram and Allanton is associated with the movements of the taniwha called Matamata. 14 | P a g e

PART 3: AN INTRODUCTION TO THE OPIHI RIVER

3.1 WATERWAYS OF THE CATCHMENT The Opihi River flows from the foothills of the Southern Alps at elevations of up to 2200 metres (de Joux, 1982 through the Timaru downlands and over the Canterbury Plains (i.e. including the Levels Plains area) to the coast. The entire catchment of the Opihi River is made of three additional rivers or tributaries (Figure 1). These tributaries are the

Te Ana Wai River,

Opuha River

• North Opuha

• South Opuha Rivers

Temuka River.

• Waihi,

• Hae Hae Te Moana

• Kakahu Rivers

• Taumatakahu

• Dobies.

The total catchment area of the Opihi River and its tributaries is approximately 245,000 hectares. Table 2 details the sub‐catchment areas that make up the catchment of the Opihi River. Within this catchment area there are a range of land uses:

• extensive grazing on the foothills,

• intensive dairy farming and cropping on the downlands and Levels Plains.

While agriculture predominates the land use of the catchment there is also some plantation forestry and a small conservation area of native forest, wetlands and swampland (Environment Canterbury, 2000). Historically, wetlands and swampland were far more prevalent in the Opihi River catchment (Scarf, 1984). These wetlands and swampland once provided a natural storage of water to the catchment and represented a significant mahinga kai resources for Ngai Tahu. However they were significantly reduced through drainage and the ongoing pressure for such land to be made agriculturally productive.

Table 2: The sub‐catchment areas (hectares) for the Opihi River catchment.

Sub - catchment Area (ha) Area percentage Opihi 62,857 26 Opuha 64,192 20 Te Ana Wai 48,811 26 Levels Plains 8,702 3 Temuka 61,101 25 Total catchment area 245,663 100

Te Ana Wai flows east for 35 kilometres before joining the Opihi River 20 kilometres north of Timaru. The Te Ana Wai has occasional pools over two metres deep. It substrates are bedrock, boulders, and cobbles, with mainly bedrock in the gorge. But there are some areas of mud and silt. Macro-invertebrates observed in upland areas indicate that these habitats are in good condition. Within the Te Ana Wai catchment:

• The Little Opawa flows generally east from a ridge 20 kilometres southwest of Fairlie, joining with its southern neighbour, the Opawa River very close to their joint outflow into the Te Ana a Wai, close to the settlement of Albury.

• Other tributaries include Tramway Stream - These tributaries flow through grassland, shrubland, scrub, forest and at higher altitudes, tussock land. Forest occurs in four main areas: a large area adjacent to the Te Ana a Wai River gorge, Cherry Tree Stream, in the valley immediately east of Cherry Tree Stream and in Tramway Stream. Stock and wild animals have access to streams, though access is restricted in the steeper gorges. The streams vary in width. Most of the permanent streams were approximately 300 mm deep at the time of the survey, although pools of over one and a half metres deep were present in Tramway Stream. The substrates of all permanent streams are mainly boulders and cobbles, with areas of bedrock and silt. Macro-invertebrates observed in this area indicate that these habitats are in good condition.

The Opuha River - The Opuha River has two branches that flow southeast for 35 kilometres before joining the larger river between Geraldine and Fairlie. • The South Opuha River flows south down a valley between the Two Thumbs Range and the Sherwood Range from its origins northwest of Mount Misery before turning southeast around the southern end of the Sherwood Range to reach the western shore of Opuha Lake, of which it is a major inflow.

15 | P a g e

• The North Opuha River flows south from its sources in the Sherwood Range, and drains into the northern end of Opuha Lake, 15 kilometres north of Fairlie.

Temuka River - The Temuka River is one of numerous rivers which meet close to the south Canterbury town of Temuka. The Temuka River flows into the Opihi River about 4 km from the sea (Hudson, 2005). The Temuka River is of particular significance to whanau.

The Temuka River (Source: Sir George Grey Special Collections, Auckland Libraries, 35- The Temuka River (Source: Te Papa) R1410)

• Waihi - The Waihi catchment covers an area of 166 km (Hudson, The Waihi River at Winchester 2005). The Waihi River flows southeast for 46km from its sources in the Four Peaks Range, flowing through the town of Geraldine to reach the Opihi River close to Temuka. The water from this sub- catchment is used for irrigation, stock and domestic water supply, dairy use, effluent dilution, industrial use, and recreation such as fishing, swimming, picnicking, camping and passive recreation, crops and berry fruit (De Joux, 1981). Throughout the catchment, wetland areas (including backwaters and swampy areas) are inhabited by native pukeko, herons, and bitterns. However, extensive land drainage has destroyed many former wetlands and consequently the abundance of those birds (De Joux, 1981).

The lower 30 km of the Waihi flows across the plains. The lower gradient, and hence a slower mean flow velocity, increases sediment deposition and contributes to broader floodplains, and thus a greater water volume. According to Lyrm et al. (1997), extensive channel clearing, stop banking and berm planting commenced in 1956. Southeast of Geraldine the river is largely confined by stopbanks built on the natural boundary banks on both sides of the river. This has led to a reduction of the river meander width from ~ 700 m to an active channel width of ~ 50 m. Moderate floods occur mainly in the winter.

Hae Hae te Moana - The Hae Hae te Moana River originates in the Four Peaks Range of the Southern Alps, with a North Branch and South Branch merging to the north of Pleasant Valley. The river runs south-east to join the Waihi River near Winchester. The combined river is called the Temuka River, which flows past Temuka to join the Opihi River shortly before it runs into the Canterbury Bight.

Kakahu River - The Kakahu River is a river that flows east and then southeast from its source 15 kilometres east of Fairlie, joining with the Hae Hae Te Moana River before flowing into the Waihi River close to the town of Temuka. Its total length is 33km.

3.2 CULTURAL LANDSCAPES There are many valued cultural landscapes found in the Opihi catchment, including gorges, rock formations, rock art etc. Five of particular significance are noted below.

16 | P a g e

Awarua - The springs at the marae – known as Awarua – are vitally important to whanau. It is an integral part of the cultural landscape of Arowhenua. It is imperative that the water quality is protected and the supply of water to this secured. Whanau have observed illegal extraction in the past and are keen to ensure that levels in the springs are also protected. A priority is protection of this spring from any alteration.

Orakipaoa - The creation of the Ōrakipaoa wetlands is associated with a tipuna (ancestor) Tū Te Rakiwhānoa and his shaping of the island to make it habitable for humans. Ōrakipaoa was created as Tū Te Rakiwhānoa arranged the debris from the Waka o Aoraki while forming the harbours and plains and heaping up mountains of the interior. For Ngāi Tahu, traditions such as this represent the links between the cosmological world of the gods and present generations, these histories reinforce tribal identity and solidarity, and continuity between generations, and document the events which shaped the environment of Te Wai Pounamu and Ngāi Tahu as an iwi. From the time of our tupuna, the lower catchment has been occupied in succession by Waitaha, Ngāti Mamoe and Ngāi Tahu, who established a number of settlements and pā at Ōrakipaoa. The old pā site of Te Waiaruatī was occupied as a strong defensive position during the time of Te Rauparaha and earlier periods. The kāinga of Te Rehe was on an island (Harakeke Tautoro) which was once surrounded by extensive swamplands, through which ran numerous creeks and waterways. Other pā and settlements within the Ōrakipaoa wetland complex include Ōrāhui and Hawea. As well as being an area of permanent occupation, Ōrakipaoa formed part of numerous trails. Trails followed river valleys into the interior, as the populous settlements in the area required regular excursions to gather mahinga kai and other resources from further afield. Ōrakipaoa was also a tauranga waka and one of the stopping-off places for those travelling between Te Taumutu and Ōtākou.

The wetlands were an integral part of a network of trails which were used in order to ensure the safest journey and incorporated locations along the way that were identified for activities including camping overnight and gathering kai. The traditional mobile lifestyle of the people led to their dependence on the resources of the wetlands. Mahinga kai resources were gathered from Ōrakipaoa over many generations. A wide range of mahinga kai were found within the complex, including coastal and estuarine as well as freshwater resources. The area was renowned for its eeling and bird hunting. Other fisheries for which the area was known included inaka (whitebait) and wet fish, minnows, the now-extinct grayling, giant kōkopu, flounders, mullet, and small fish known as panako, pipiki and paraki. The complex was also a source of tī kouka (cabbage tree).

Te Ana Wai - This catchment has multiple rock art, shelters that comprise valued landscapes. Protecting these landscapes is a priority for whanau.

The Opihi lagoon and river mouth - This area is heavily used by whanau. The dependence of whanau on the resources of the lower reaches was recognised by the Crown in the mid 1800s when the reserves were allocated. Whanau continue to reside in the lower reaches of the catchment and many continue to be reliant on the kai gathered. Ensuring the lagoon and river mouth is of sufficient quality to sustain abundant populations of valued kai that are in good condition, is a priority for tangata whenua.

3.3 THE OPIHI RIVER ECOSYSTEMS When you get a healthy river, you would expect to get a range of species present. When you see the different parts of the river riffle, run, pool you know the species to be found and know where to catch - kanakana in native bush tributaries, in riffles, broken surface can set traps and weirs, koura clean flowing water free of sediment, adult eels – in tributaries well upstream

I’d be looking at what is actually in the water - the species. …We consider what we get from it – what mahinga kai. What is in the stream and what is in the ecosystem surrounding it

Maori will benefit from gaining access to ecosystem knowledge. However non Maori should also recognise that they will benefit from Maori. Enhanced outcomes will come from the complementarity of worldviews not from playing one off against the other.

A distinguishing feature of the Opihi River is the lack of dams on the mainstem although a tributary of the Opuha is dammed). This has two main effects on the river ecosystem, in particular fish communities. The first is that the fish communities are more likely to have diadromous species present (species with a sea phase in their lifecycle). The second effect is that fish are able to migrate between streams, allowing colonisation of previously dewatered streams. Fifteen fish species recorded from the Opihi River catchment include short fin eel, long fin eel, kanakana, koura, torrent fish, mullet, flounder, inanga, banded kokopu, Canterbury galaxias, upland bully, common bully, common smelt, Alpine galaxias, blue gill bully. Banded kokopu are an uncommon species in South Canterbury (R.M. McDowall, pers. comm., 2003).

The migration times for the respective fish species are listed in Table 3 below. It is essential that there are sufficient flows are maintained in the mainstem Opihi River and the tributaries to enable fish passage through the river system during these periods.

17 | P a g e

Table 3: Key migration periods for selected New Zealand indigenous freshwater fish species ( = upstream,  = downstream). Map Provided by E. Williams (NIWA) FRESHWATER FISH SUMMER AUTUMN WINTER SPRING COMMON SPECIES LIFE DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV NAME STAGE

Anguilla australis & A. Juvenile      Tuna / Eels dieffenbachii

Short fin A. australis Adult    

Long fin A. dieffenbachii Adult       

Common smelt Retropinna retropinna Juvenile          (riverine)

Adult       

Īnanga Galaxias maculatus Larvae         

Adult            

Kōaro G. brevipinnis Juvenile       

Adult a    

Common bully Gobiomorphus cotianus Juvenile           

Torrentfish Cheimarrichthys fosteri Larvae        Adult a         a, More research is needed to confirm the migration period.

3.4 CONNECTIVITY AND CORRIDORS The richness and variety of habitats are what make the Opihi catchment so valuable. Many species depend on different aspects of the Opihi for different life stages, and they need to be able to move freely throughout the catchment. Many of the small headwater streams are seen by whanau as a refuge for taonga species. Species need space that is undisturbed by human activity. Intact inland streams are particularly important, as they offer unfragmented habitat for animals to move around in. However, undisturbed land is relatively scarce, and so it is important that links connect one fragmented patch to the next. These connections are called corridors, and contribute to overall habitat connectivity. Important features in corridors include wetlands, rivers, riverbanks, pools, riffles and vegetative cover, all of which the Opihi catchment should offer. Maintaining depth in many of the streams is seen as fundamental to maintaining connections.

3.5 WAHI TAPU / TAONGA Since 1999 Ngai Tahu has identified a range of wahi tapu / wahi taonga. Those found in the Opihi system include:

• Ara tawhito (ancient trails) • Umu ti (earth ovens associated with preparation of kauru)

• Kaika Nohoanga (occupation, settlement • Ikoa Tawhito (place names) sites)

• Mahinga Kai (places where resources • Wähi kaitiaki (resource indicators from the including food were/are procured) environment)

• Mauka (important Mountains) • Wahi kohatu (rock formations)

• Pa Tawhito (ancient pā sites) • Wahi paripari (cliff areas)

• Tauranga Waka (canoe mooring sites) • Wahi raranga (sources of weaving material)

• Tuahu (sites of importance to identity) • Wahi taonga (treasured areas generally)

• Urupa (human burial sites) • Tuhituhi nehera (rock art)

• Repo Raupo (wetlands and swamps), puna • Wai tapu (scared waters) and Wai Maori (important freshwater areas

• Taniwha • Reserves, easements, entitlements

18 | P a g e

3.6 MANAWHENUA LAND AND FISHING INTERESTS IN CANTERBURY The lifestyle of Ngai Tahu changed irrevocably with settlement. With promises of the retention of fishing and hunting rights, and allocation of a series of reserves, Ngai Tahu were persuaded to surrender title to significant tracts of land and the pattern of kai gathering was disrupted. According to the Government’s policy of setting aside reserves, small tracts of land were identified as reserves to protect Ngai Tahu from new immigrants. In practical terms however reserves enabled all lands beyond the boundaries of reserves to be opened for settlement.

Many of the reserves and fishing easements can be traced back to Crown Grants to Ngai Tahu whanui which stem from the Southern Purchase Deeds negotiated between 1844 and 1857. For lands that were granted to enable the continuation of a food gathering lifestyle, certain guarantees were provided with respect to the nature of natural resources that were to sustain this lifestyle. The key point with respect to the Opihi and the Orari catchments is that whanau were granted reserves in the catchment. Their papatipu marae and their lands are found in the catchment. Many whanau continue to reside in the catchment and in part derive their livelihood from the river.

Table 4: A list of the native reserves in the South Canterbury Region6

Reserve Name Size Interest (acres) Arowhenua 376 Reserved in 1848 by Mantell in terms of Kemps Purchase Waipopo 187 Reserved in 1848 by Mantell in terms of Kemps Purchase Te Upoko o Rakaitaweka 20 Reserved in 1848 by Mantell in terms of Kemps Purchase Rakipaua 20 Reserved in 1848 by Mantell in terms of Kemps Purchase Arowhenua 2 Award of the NLC, 1868, in fulfillment of Kemps Deed of June 1848 Arowhenua 150 Award of the NLC, 1868, in fulfillment of Kemps Deed of June 1848 Arowhenua 30 Award of the NLC, 1868, in fulfillment of Kemps Deed of June 1848 Arowhenua 20 Award of the NLC, 1868, in fulfillment of Kemps Deed of June 1848 Kapunatiki 600 Award of the NLC, 1868, in fulfillment of Kemps Deed of June 1848 Orari River (north) 10 Award of the NLC, 1868, in fulfillment of Kemps Deed of June 1848 Orari River (south) 20 Award of the NLC, 1868, in fulfillment of Kemps Deed of June 1848

The focus of this report is the Opihi River and the impact of water management on those values. The rights of Manawhenua are perhaps best understood in relation to their rights to fish and the more recent debate about the rights to water. Ngai Tahu continue to hold in high value their time honoured inherent rights to fish. Although Ngai Tahu thought they had protected their mahinga kai in the sales agreements of the nineteenth century (most notably Kemps Purchase), they were denied access and the right to self manage and were forced to fight for recognition of their rights in legal forums resulting in the Crown Grants. Table 5 therefore extracts from the tables in the previous section the reserves that relate to Fenton Orders of 1868 and highlights their relationship to the waters of Canterbury.

Table 5: Some of the Fenton Orders of 1868 (from Kemps Deed of 1848)7

Location Association with water 450 acres Waitangi District (Arowhenua Maori Adjacent to Temuka and Opihi Rivers. Reserve) 600 acres Timaru District – Kapunatiki The southern boundary skirting the edge of the swamp 10 acres Timaru District – south bank Orari River Fishing easement - Having 10 chains frontage to the south bank of the river 20 acres Timaru District – north bank Orari River Fishing easement - Having 10 chains frontage to the north bank of the river 2acres Fishing easement - A square block of land from the stream from Waitarakao Lagoon (near Washdyke) 150 acres Timaru District – Kapunatiki Creek 72 acres Part of island near Harereatou Lagoon in the mouth of the Umukaha River 20 acres Timaru District – Orakipaoa (to include Within the Orakipaoa wetland complex. old pa site)

Ngai Tahu continued to assert their rights during intense Treaty negotiations with the Government resulting in a range of redress in the Ngai Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998. They continue to hold that stance now as the debate enters other natural resource forums. The aspirations of Te Runanga o Arowhenua are reflected in their application for a mataitai to enable management of the customary fishery. Whanau are concerned that, by the time rivers emerge onto the lowlands – the lowest places on the landscape, they have collected everything unhealthy that is unseen in the catchment and eventually make the ill-health visible. Often it is accepted that a lesser standard can be applied to the management of these waters – yet they are places valued so highly, and heavily used, by whanau.

3.7 MAHINGA KAI

Mahika kai is a practice and a principle. It includes a developmental aspect. We should not be limited to 1840 sites and species. We know the sites but the species change

6 Alexander Mackay (1872) A Compendium of Official Documents relative to Native Affiars in the South Island, Memorandum on the origination and management of native reserves in the Southern Island Pages 338 and 339 of Volume 2 7 This information was sourced from Taylor (1959) and from descriptions found in a report titled Research into Maori Fishing Reserves: Establishment of Rights – Objections and Complaints from 1840”. The writer was given a copy of the report by Kelly Davis. 19 | P a g e

I’d be looking at what is actually in the water - the species. …We consider what we get from it – what mahinga kai. What is in the stream and what is in the ecosystem surrounding it

Ngai Tahu fished extensively in the wetlands, streams, creeks and the many braids and backwaters of the main Canterbury rivers. Despite the development of farming following the arrival of settlers many Ngai Tahu continued to rely on their traditional resources for their existence. The value of mahinga kai from the Opihi specifically, has been well documented and significantly has been acknowledged by successive governments most recently in the Ngai Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998 provisions. As Table 6 illustrates, more than 30 different foods and materials were gathered from across South and Mid Canterbury (between the Waitaki and the Rakaia and extending inland to the main divide).

Table 6: Species traditionally gathered from across South and Mid Canterbury8. SPECIES Eels Smelt Flounder Potato Turnip Rats Seals Whitebait Whale Aruhe Sea nuts Kanakana Patete Kauru Flax honey Flax Panako Kumara Shark Groper Shellfish Paua Sea urchins Tutu Kōkopu Koareare Weka Kahawai Cabbage Kokopara Kanaka Pakihi Minnows Taramea Birds Mullet Puha Watercress Koura Kakahi

It must be acknowledged that traditionally rights had to be maintained through continual usage. Through an annual cycle of fishing, gathering and hunting, whanau and hapu “kept the fires burning” in many locations across a large tract of the South Island. Intermarriage between hapu and subsequent rights of inheritance and succession mean that for many Ngai Tahu today they now hold rights to lands across much of the southern region.

The Continuing Importance of mahinga kai resources

Tuna was a major part of our diet. Most people didn’t have the money to go out and buy food so they would use the awa as much as possible. They would go through the seasons from eeling in the summer through to March. Then move to kanakana in June / July / August in the colder parts of the season and whitebait as well. Then tuna would start to come back into season between September onwards

Changing landuses over the last century, in particular the intensification of farming activity, resulted in mahinga kai losses. Despite these changes, it is important to emphasize that the cultural values and traditional mahinga kai behaviours have survived. Mahinga kai remains a cornerstone of Ngai Tahu culture and identity. Table 6 identifies the species that are still gathered by whanau today. It is vitally important that the flow needs and water quality requirements of these species is recognised and provided for. As whanau explained:

My favourite eeling spot is between the Temuka Road Bridge and the Manse Bridge and beyond. In that stretch of water when we were young we could catch around 50 eels and it was no hassle. You would see as many go past you as you spear but today in that same stretch of water you would see 5 eels that were not able to take

Mainly around here I go to the Opihi. But lately in the last few years I wouldn’t go floundering there because of the smell as the lagoon would get built up and water get stagnant and really bad smell. To me it goes to the fish and you couldn’t eat it.

The prime area being the Temuka and Opihi River and Awarua River (Joined the Temuka straight across from the Marae). Awarua river was where we get a lot of watercress and we still do and freshwater koura. And tuna those were the basic ones we took from there

Tuna we are more worried about now because its the only thing left to us. The kanakana I go further afield because the habitat is not there anymore. The rivers are so low there is no soil banks they used to settle in to. Likewise with eel there is no real place for them anymore so their habitat has changed

Because of low levels of river when gathering kai, like kanakana, you have to make sure the mouth is open and if its not to get same kai you have to go to Arowhenua

Around the Waipopo area, from the Opihi River up, to Pleasant Point we would use the river for eeling, kanakana, floundering, yellow eyed mullet, herring. Around the mouth we would fish for kahawai

Temuka, Opihi area is what we used for eeling. Right the way out to Winchester

It was all year round because the kai gathered from awa and moana were not supplementary but were essential.

Eel have become lesser quantity and hard to get. We believe it’s from commercial fisherman and they [eels] are smaller.

About twice a year for eels and it really just to see what’s there, its information gathering, because I just want to see if it’s come back or if its better or if size of eels increased. I went out twice last year and you wouldn’t spear as it wasn’t big enough and it would be criminal to take. We just had a look around above lagoon to Railway Bridge in a night and it was a sad state of affairs. We hope things will get better.

8 This comes from analysis of the 1880 map and accompanying manuscript, commonly referred to as the “Taiaroa reports” by Ngai Tahu, represent a highly valued “cultural map” (Poole 2004). It was an initiative by kaumātua from neighbouring hapu and facilitated by H.K. Taiaroa, to map their collective territory, their mahinga kai interests and values associated with particular sites8.These records allow a more complete examination of the food gathering system within the Canterbury and Otago regions. Two thousand sites were listed. 20 | P a g e

Kanakana is a little different as they are on a migratory thing as they in to breed in the mountains and they don’t muck around. Between here and Railway Bridge (Opihi) it’s a nights travel so if they come through early in night they will get to the Opihi Bridge and if they come in later then that’s where I get them down here and stay in that ground so that why we go out at that time. Same thing at Washdyke they travel that quickly so anything in that line it only has come in that night so hopefully it’s not polluted when we gather. Kanakana again it’s sad it’s hard to get and if you do get one it’s a treasured source of food but more than that it good to see they are still there.

The special significance of eels South Canterbury was known for its tuna resources. Hundreds of South Canterbury sites marked on the Taiaroa map, more than two thirds were sites from which eels were taken.

They [tuna] were the main staple of our diet. Getting eel to supplement the table….putting them in the deep freezer for the winter.

Anyway bring home tuna and clean it up myself.… I smoke some of mine and some I boil up in pot with watercress.

In the South Canterbury Waitaki Eel Management Plan (Ministry Fisheries 1996) the following observations were made:

• The Opihi and the Waitaki were the best river fisheries in the Management Area. It was very productive, producing high quality eels. The lower half of the catchment supported a god fishery of mixed species.

• Many of the tributaries, such as the Kakahu, Te Ana Wai and Temuka are very good fisheries.

• There are three closed areas – German Creek, Opihi River Mouth Reserve, Orakipaoa Creek conservation area.

• The sustainable removal was estimated at 10 tonnes.

• The river was classed as being under pressure from increased fishing effort and habitat degradation.

• In the past the river was classed as an excellent customary fishery. When the plan was prepared it was classed as average, with most fishing focussed on the mouth. Traditionally eels were large; at the time of plan preparation they are of average size.

• There was significant habitat modification at the mouth, and water quality problems in the Kakahu and Hae Hae Te Moana.

• Excessive water extraction was identified as a problem.

• Mouth closures is an issue.

• Excessive willow control was listed as a concern.

3.8 SUSTAINING MAHINGA KAI Identifying how water management impacts mahinga kai requires the identification of attributes that can be studied and tracked over time. The measures need to reflect essential attributes or dynamics that can be tracked to identify changes, especially detrimental impacts. Table 7 that follows details the essential attributes of mahinga kai that Councils are to recognise and provide for.

21 | P a g e

TABLE 7: THE ATTRIBUTES OF MAHINGA KAI TAONGA ATTRIBUTES Taonga species – including A. Ecological integrity of aquatic habitats

• Oxygen – fish get from water • mahinga kai (places where foods • Food – for plants, birds and fish and all parts of the food chain are procured and or produced). “Kai • Habitat – riparian, channel structure, patterns and quantity of sediments, contaminants, interactions awa” and “kai roto” refers to the foods between fish and invertebrates, competition with predators (fish, birds, plants, invertebrates etc.). Flows create conditions for growth; keep water tables high; supplies nutrients etc.; variation establishes site and resources sourced from rivers specific conditions e.g. high flows move seeds etc. Flows work channels, banks, alter soil moisture etc. and lakes respectively. • Temperature of water • Cover in aquatic ecosystems – protects species from predators, high temperatures, high turbulence. Flows provide protection especially for riverbed bird species, clear weeds etc. • Turbidity – linked to oxygen concentrations. Suspended matter affects growth rates, movements etc., affects streambed • Riparian vegetation provides woody debris to rivers, intercept sediments & nutrients etc. Vegetation lessen velocities helps reduce flood peaks by facilitating infiltration to groundwater into the ground during high flows and releasing back to the channel as flows subside. • Movement corridors – free movement for life cycle stages or to move to better habitats. • Water quality

B. Abundance and good health of cultural materials and kai (iconic to place)

C. Gathering

• Ability to gather • Desirability of gathering • Legal permission to gather

D. Access

• Physical access to sites • Legal permission to access

E. Historic and significant sites

• Recognising of relationship of whanau with specific sites (based on whakapapa) • Historic associations • Knowledge of sites retained and transferred

F. Traditional techniques/sites known, practiced and knowledge transferred • Able to use G. Spiritual connections and respect for the waterway and the koiora it sustains

H. Pursue whānau/ marae/ hapū/ iwi aspirations to use resources and sites

22 | P a g e

3.9 LINKING IMPACTS OF CHANGING WATER MANAGEMENT ON THE ATTRIBUTES OF MAHINGA KAI

To flesh out the linkages between changes in water quality and the impacts on the attributes of mahinga kai we have chosen to use a series of concept maps. We start with a concept map that ties together water management impacts on the attributes of mahinga kai, and some of the values of Ngai Tahu whanui. Waterway management changes

Habitat changes – Temperature Habitat quality Changes to Changes to Flow changes availability & changes & rate of changes oxygen levels success of feeding diversity change

Changes to metabolic rates, stress Changes to population structures of levels, growth rates, reproduction, Invasive species – taonga species behaviours of species weeds, pests

Commercialisation of Changes to quantity and species quality of kai & cultural materials available for use Loss of commercial fishery Infrastructure Changes to placement quantity and quality of sites from which to Loss of economic Land alienation Changes to gathering Changes to activity levels gather development opportunities

Changes to processing, Changes to nutrition levels Loss of access distribution and eating

Whanaungatanga Manaakitanga Cultural learning opportunities

Turangawaewae (and identity) Physical health status

Hapu wellbeing

23 | P a g e

24 | P a g e

Summary of mahinga kai

Eels have diminished in number and they are probably the last species to be affected. You were once able to get crayfish you can’t get crayfish in the local area. Paua again have diminished in number and size…..We now go to Moeraki to get them or elsewhere. Same thing for mussels they are virtually gone

Tuna are slowly disappearing

Our very best catchers can’t get our customary take, as you can’t get it. It’s down to commercial eelers. Even 10 to 15 years ago if there was a tangi you could walk from the Temuka Bridge to the Manse Bridge which is about 800m and you would get at least a full bag of eel. Now you would be lucky to get two. You may get a dozen if three or four people were out with torches

• Ngai Tahu have always asserted that the term “mahinga kai” means a place where food and other resources are gathered;

• For hundreds of years mahinga kai has been a necessity of life to Ngai Tahu in and around South Canterbury.

• Mahinga kai still has immense cultural significance and underpin core cultural values of whanaungatanga, manaakitanga, and kaihaukai.

• There is still a need not only for food resources, but for natural dyes and fibres, wood for carving, plants for rongoa; and

• The fresh water and sea fisheries continue to be of great importance.

• The establishment of the Mataitai and closure of parts of the catchment from commercial eel fishing represents and opportunity to enhance the mahinga kai values of this catchment.

• Te Runanga o Arowhenua have aspirations to manage the mahinga kai resources of their takiwa.

• For whanau living in the Opihi, many depend on the river for their livelihood.

3.10 OTHER TAONGA SPECIES Te Rünanga o Arowhenua also referred to the bats that are known to live in the limestone caves. There are also numerous bird species within the catchment, many of which are classed as taonga species in the Ngai Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998.

Waterfowl • Feeding breeding and roosting in the Opihi from the Fairlie Basin downstream • Feeding, roosting and breeding in the Temuka • Found in Hae Hae Te Moana

Bittern Feeding breeding and roosting in the Opihi from the Fairlie Basin downstream

Banded dotterel • Feeding breeding and roosting in the Opihi from the Fairlie Basin downstream • Present in Orakipaoa

Black bill gulls • Feeding breeding and roosting in the Opihi from the Fairlie Basin downstream • Feeding, roosting and breeding in the Temuka • Feeding and roosting in Hae Hae Te Moana

Black front terns • Feeding breeding and roosting in the Opihi from the Fairlie Basin downstream • Feeding, roosting and breeding in the Temuka • Feeding and roosting in Hae Hae Te Moana

Black front Feeding breeding and roosting in the Opihi from the Fairlie Basin dotterel downstream

Swamp rail Feeding and roosting in the Opihi from the Fairlie Basin downstream

White winged • Feeding breeding and roosting in the Opihi from the Fairlie Basin black tern downstream • Feeding, roosting and breeding in the Temuka • Feeding and roosting in Hae Hae Te Moana

Feeding and roosting in the Opihi from the Fairlie Basin downstream

25 | P a g e

Australasian bittern Marsh crake Newly seen in catchment

Caspian tern Newly seen in catchment. Present in Orakipaoa.

Pied stilt Feeding habitat in Hazelburn ponds

Pukeko Feeding habitat in Hazelburn ponds

Whio Kakahu River Sugarloaf Stream, Frazer Stream, Waihi Gorge

Marsh crake Australian Bittern

Caspian Tern Black fronted dotterel

Whio Banded dotterel

Protection of taonga (indigenous fish, birds and plant) species is a priority from the perspective of whanau.

26 | P a g e

PART 4: TE MOEMOEA -A HEALTHY OPIHI CATCHMENT

4.1. A HEALTH AND WELL OPIHI CATCHMENT Pulling all the strands together from the previous paragraphs, we are able to illustrate, in Figure 3, what a healthy and well Opihi catchment would look like.

Figure3: A Healthy and Well Catchment (adapted from Tipa, 2014)

A HEALTHLY & WELL OPIHI CATCHMENT

ECOLOGICAL An Intact River System HEALTH Floodplains, riparian habitats & rivers linked (retrofitting floodgates (Orari))

Upstream & downstream linked by visible connected flow

Sensitive instream management (flood control reviewed) reviewed) Knowledge & perception Abundant taonga species, confirm that the river is healthy, Variety of healthy habitats Physical and cultural especially mahinga kai used for a range of activities & across a range of ecosystems, parameters confirm (eels, kanakana and respected by all especially instream habitats waters fit to swim in, whitebait) & cultural gather safe to kai & water materials safe to drink

ECONOMIC Sustainable use of lands & Fishing, where customary Wahi taonga form the basis Partnerships and joint DEVELOPMENT resources (e.g. use of prioritised over commercial of tourist development e.g. ventures reserves, fishing easements) rock art tours

CULTURAL A whakapapa based Preferred uses, SOCIAL Inter WELLBEING HUMAN HEALTH & WELLNESS WELLBEING right to place & right to sites, species & experience respected methods Whanaungatanga Recreation Access to sites (swimming) along lakes, rivers, streams Continued Interaction Catchment provides Whānau living at home with community context for and engaging with the Free of water- borne intergenerational marae and the Exercise from illness learning & interaction catchment interacting with the Interaction with marae awa & kainga

4.2 THE CHANGING ENVIRONMENT - ISSUES IDENTIFIED BY WHANAU Places change over time. In the Opihi River there have been natural changes like erosion, forest succession, as well as human-induced changes, including land-clearing, damming, and natural resource extraction. Ecosystems are flexible, and are constantly shifting to balance the changes that are occurring. However, it is important for people to recognize the critical points at which the changes that we induce are no longer sustainable – the points that put too much pressure on the Opihi River for it to continue surviving as it has for millennia.

Rivers change – a fact that Ngai Tahu informants can attest to. Te Runanga believe that the river is very quickly approaching a “critical point”. In the sections that follow we present the results of our assessments.

27 | P a g e

28 | P a g e

PART 5: THE CURRENT HEALTH OF THE OPIHI CATCHMENT

5.1 INTRODUCTION Assessments have been completed for sites within the following catchments: 1. The Opihi system as a whole, 2. The Upper Opihi sub-catchment, 3. The mid Opihi sub-catchment, 4. The Lower Waitaki sub-catchment, 5. The lagoon and river mouth.

Each site summary is formatted so that it can be a “stand alone” summary of the cultural health. This means that people need only take the assessment relevant to them. However, it also means that anyone reading all the report may find some repetition. Set out below are some of the provisions from the Te Runanga o Arowhenua Iwi Management Plan which provide a context for the aspirations of whanau.

IWI MANAGEMENT PLAN PROVISIONS The Takata Whenua say that the management of Mahika Kai recognises and accounts for the traditional values and uses of resources by the Takata Whenua

Issues of use, control and ownership of Mahika Kai resources are resolved on the marae.

Any management plans proposed be drafted in consultation with the Takata Whenua.

Traditional values include the recognition of rahui. Seeding of shellfish (including freshwater shellfish), the protection of habitat and breeding areas.

Restocking of coastal (kai moana) areas and the protection of habitat and breeding areas.

Record of sites for the protection and/or restoration of Mahika Kai in riverbeds, coastal areas, the margins of waterways, natural water, which is subject to Canterbury Regional Council Rules. All sewage, all waste discharges out of the rivers, lakes, sea, all natural waters

All waters to be the highest classified standard of water quality with no waste discharges

No spraying of pesticides, any toxic chemicals in or near rivers, lakes, sea, all natural waters.

No dumping of rubbish in or near rivers, lakes, sea, all natural waters.

All rubbish, solid waste should be removed from rivers, coastline, wetlands, all natural waters.

All local authority waste disposal areas in wetlands, riverbeds and adjacent to rivers, lakes, sea, all natural waters.to be phased out and relocated away from waterways, wetlands and coastal areas

No grazing animals in rivebeds, wetlands or margins of coastal waters, creeks streams, rivers lakes any natural waters

No dumping of waste, dredging any contaminants in coastal waters The taking of Mahika Kai ceases until it is proven that the quantity, type and size of resources taken is sustainable and does not prevent the exercise of traditional uses by the Takata Whenua.

Traditional uses include the erection and use of eel weirs and other traditional means of taking Mahika Kai and the opening of river mouths.

All food taken from natural waters to be fit for human consumption.

Restocking of rivers, lakes, wetlands with indigenous fish and protection of habitat and breeding areas.

Corridors of undisturbed vegetation be maintained along al rivers and between rivers and forests, any areas of indigenous flora and habitats of indigenous fauna to maintain the seasonal migration and movement of birds, all creatures

The restoration of existing wetlands and the construction of new wetlands be encouraged.

The protection and restoration of natural habitats be encouraged.

Where plantings are required to protect the margins for farmland adjacent to rivers, local native species should be used to restore habitats and depleted natural areas The panting of flax and other native species which are a source of traditional materials be encouraged

29 | P a g e

5.2 DATA INFORMING OUR RIVER ASSESSMENTS

Our summaries are informed by cultual assessments, and from the data that have been collected by scientists. We have completed two types of cultural assessments to date: • Cultural Health Index has been appleid at a number of sites; and • Cultural Flow Preference studies have been completed for three sites.

We have gathered western scientific data from: • information that has been presented to the Zone Komiti, specifically ECan published reports and presentations to the Zone Komiti. • the LAWA site and extracted data specific to the Opihi catchment.

In Table 8 below we ilustrate how the data we use our report cards aligns with the attributes of mahinga kai.

TABLE 8: THE DATA SOURCED AND THEIR ALOGNMENT TO THE ATTRIBUTES OF MAHINGA KAI ATTRIBUTES DATA USED A Ecological integrity of aquatic habitats • Trends in water quality (from LAWA website) • State of river (from LAWA website) • Nutrient levels (from LAWA website) • WQI (Ecan) • Habitat / biotic scores from Ecan • Flow data (from Ecan) • Component 3 of the Cultural Health Index assesses stream health from a cultural perspective. B. Abundance and good health of cultural materials and kai (iconic to The results of the habitat assessment for one river reach of place) significance to whanau is still to come. C. Gathering • Cultural use is assessed as part of the Cultural Health Index. • Ability to gather • E-coli (ECan and LAWA) • Desirability of gathering • Recreation grades (from Ecan) • Legal permission to gather

D. Access Access is one of the indicators within the cultural use component 2 • Physical access to sites of the Cultural Health Index. • Legal permission to access

E. Historic and significant sites The sites that were assessed are all of significant to whanau and • Recognising of relationship of whanau with specific sites (based sustained cultural use historically. The ability of the river to sustain on whakapapa) values and uses given its current state is assessed as part of • Historic associations component 1 of the CHI. • Knowledge of sites retained and transferred

F. Traditional techniques/sites known, practiced and knowledge The ability of the river to sustain values and uses given its current transferred state is assessed as part of component 1 of the CHI. • Able to use G. Spiritual connections and respect for the waterway and the koiora it - sustains

H. Pursue whanau/ marae/ hapū/ iwi aspirations to use resources and The ability of the river to sustain values and uses given its current sites state is assessed as part of component 1 of the CHI.

Although sub-catchment report cards are presented we have not been able to assess all streams in the catchment. The streams assessed as part of the respective parts of the catchment are as follows.

Upper catchment • Opuha River • Opihi River (data for Rockwood, Raincliff) • Coal Stream • Station Stream Mid catchment • Ta Ana Wai • Opihi River (Saleyards data) • Haehae te Moana • Temuka • Kakahu • Waihi • Dobies Lower catchment • Opihi River (State Highway data and Grassy banks) • Taumatakahu Lagoon • Orakipaoa • Opihi River (Waipopo)

30 | P a g e

THE HEALTH OF THE HEADWATERS OF THE CATCHMENT

SUMMARY

Valued characteristics of reach Te Moemoea Issues of concern to whanau Headwaters – including • Upper reaches of Opihi catchment are • Abundant populations of taonga species, • Invasive plants alter the hydrology • Opihi down to gorge largely unmodified with tussock lands especially abundant mahinga kai (most e.g. willows • North and south and remnants of native bush. notably eel fishery) restored to their • Weeds on riverbed shelter Opuha • Mix of wetlands of varying sizes still historic range – this requires predators and create a treat for • Opuha down to found in the headwaters, some have o Access to traditional sites restored taonga bird species Opihi been protected. o Ability to camp and gather and use • Riparian areas at risk through resources • Opihi River • Source waters therefore are considered incremental vegetation clearance to be largely unmodified o Protect existing wetlands • Stock are still able to access some (Rockwood or o Restore lost wetlands using historic Raincliff) • Only the Opuha is dammed which headwater streams including spring means that the fish populations in the distribution as a reference. fed streams. • Station Creek Opihi reflect access throughout most of o Protect headwater streams as refuges. • The regulated system in the Opuha • Coal Creek the system. There is a need however to • Prioritise maintaining and or restoring below the dam impacts the

examine the impact of culverts, bridges connections and river flow ki uta ki tai downstream catchment. etc. o No further hydrological alteration to • Diverse habitats – instream, riparian streams in the headwaters and in the and terrestrial are generally of good inland basin quality with some tributaries being o Protect all spring heads. classed as high quality fisheries. • Retain existing indigenous vegetation – • Still a long fin eel population – although riparian and terrestrial size and numbers are seen to be in • Retain landscape features that are decline. largely unmodified and important to • Water appears to be clear and of good cultural landscapes. As a priority retain quality. character of rivers – pools, riffles, runs, • The limestone rock features create rock features, gorges etc. No important cultural landscapes with rock impoundments in traditionally significant shelters and rock art found throughout streams and reaches the catchment. • Provide sufficient flows for fish passage - • Source waters give appearance of requirements need to be determined at limited hydrological alteration the shallowest riffle in the stream. • There is a mix of pools, riffles, runs. • Protect the features of the gorges. • Modifications don’t really start until come • Retain water quality and clarity through the Fairlie Basin. • Retain the cultural symbolism of the landscapes and landforms in this part of the system (values of mahinga kai, taonga species, rock art, rock shelters, wetlands, trails etc). • Protect streams from the introduction of glacial flour.

RECOMMENDATIONS

FLOWS & ALLOCATION WATER QUALITY BANDS

• The flow in the Upper Opihi needs to be sufficient to Nitrate Ammonia E-coli E-coli 95th percentile • Enable sufficient depth for safe swimming by adults toxicity toxicity median during the summer period CURRENT ? ? ? ? • Sufficient depth for use of non-motorized water craft e.g. kayaks etc • Is to be sufficient to enable a connected flow of water WHANAU A A A A downstream PREFERENCE • Passage for migratory species – ki uta ki tai • Restore the braided character of the river • Variability is recommended

31 | P a g e

32 | P a g e

OPUHA RIVER

Opuha River Opuha (bottom right) joining the Opihi River

TE MOEMOEA

• Water quality to be drinking water quality • Retention of the variety within the river channel – deep pools, riffles, runs • Increased minimum flow with greater flow variability especially mid-range flows

VALUED FEATURES WAHI TAONGA TAONGA SPECIES Braided river character retained Wai Maori Long tail bat,

There are pockets of remnant indigenous vegetation in the Taonga species Common bully, Torrentfish, Longfin eel, Upland bully, catchment Upland and Canterbury galaxias, short fin eels Mahinga kai

THREATS • Flow regime is impacted by Opuha Dam, and the adverse effects from the flow regime • There is the risk of further storage in the upper catchment. need to be addressed • Vehicle tracks cross several of the waterways in this area.

Cultural assessment (Skipton Bridge) The stream is assessed as being in a state that continues to sustain cultural uses. However, all the stream health indicators received average scores, reflecting the Status site Cultural use Stream Health need to address the effects of damming. A-1 3.0 2.52

STATE OF RIVER TREND RECREATION NUTRIENTS DRP In the best 25% of like sites Clarity (Turbidity) – meaningful Skipton bridge Nitrogen TP In the best 25% of like sites degradation Ecoli – 46/100mls • TN – 0.3865 g/ms3 pH In the best 25% of like sites • • TON- 0.2165 g/ms3 Nitrogen (AN) –– meaningful Dam - Contact recreation grades: 2012- • AN – 0.006 g/ms3 degradation 13 was very good; 2013-14 was very Phosphorus good; 2014-15 was very good • DRP – 0.001 g/ms3 FLOWS (SKIPTON BRIDGE) WATER QUALITY • TP – 0.01 g/ms3 • Mean flow – 9.5ms/3 Using the Water Quality Index Ewarts Crossing - Contact recreation • • Median flow –6.5ms/3 grades - 2012-13 was fair; 2013-14 was • 7 day MALF – 2.6ms/3 • 2011-13 = Good fair; 2014-15 was fair • Allocation (NES) – 1.3ms/3 • 2013-14 = Fair Recreation Reserve - Contact recreation • Cultural flow preference 2.5 to 3.0ms/3 • 2014-15 = Very Good grades: 2012-13 were good; 2013-14 were good; 2014-15 were very good

RECOMMENDATIONS

FLOWS & ALLOCATION OTHER WATER QUALITY BANDS

• Variability is to be introduced to the Opihi system. • Water quality to be drinking water Nitrate Ammonia E-coli E-coli 95th • The adverse effects of the residual flow from the Opuha quality toxicity toxicity median percentile is to be addressed. CURRENT ? ? ? ? • Minimum flow at Raincliff is to be more than 2.0 cumecs, preferably above 2.5 cumecs. • Allocation is to be no more than 1.2 cumecs. WHANAU A A A A PREFERENCE

33 | P a g e

34 | P a g e

OPIHI RIVER (ROCKWOOD)

Opihi River Opihi River VALUED FEATURES WAHI TAONGA TAONGA SPECIES (FOR THE OPIHI SYSTEM) • Braided river Wai Maori, Wetlands, Springs • Long tail bat, • Spring fed streams contribute to the flow in the upper • Black billed gulls, open water divers, swamp rail, Australasian reach. Taonga species bittern, deep and shallow waders, waterfowl, gulls, terns, • There are pockets of remnant indigenous vegetation in riparian species Banded dotterel and Black front terns, Black the catchment Wahi tupuna (landscapes and formations) fronted dotterels, White winged black terns, Marsh crake, Caspian tern, Pied stilt, Pukeko, Mahinga kai • Upland bully, Common bully, Torrentfish, Bluegill bully, Longfin eel, Canterbury galaxias, Shortfin eel, Lamprey, Common smelt, Yellow eye mullet, Freshwater mussel, Dusky galaxias, Freshwater shrimp, Koura

TE MOEMOEA • Sufficient quantities of high quality water to retain a variety within the river channel • Migratory species are able to migrate from the upper catchment to the sea and return (deep pools, riffles) that sustain valued taonga species. , CULTURAL HEALTH ASSESSMENT Using the Cultural Health Index (Raincliff) The stream is assessed as being in a state that continues to sustain cultural uses. All indicators for the cultural use component scored above average. However, all Status site Cultural use Stream Health the stream health indicators received average scores, reflecting the need to address A-1 3.79 2.83 the effects of damming and declining water quality.

THREATS TO CULTURAL BELIEFS, PRACTICES • Broom, gorse, willows are present along the margins • Low flows in summer, and the increased temperature of water is a risk for instream • Vehicle tracks cross several of the waterways in this area. It is heavily used by 4WD species vehicles • Protecting of springs feeding the Temuka is a priority. • There is the risk of water from the Waitaki entering the upper catchment. • Commercial eeling, including people fishing illegally within the Mataitai area. STATE TREND WATER QUALITY NUTRIENTS @ ROCKWOOD Ecoli – Measurable improvement Using the Water Quality Index Nitrogen Turbidity In the best 25% of like sites • TN – 1.2155 g/ms3 TN In the worst 25% of like sites Clarity (Black disk) - Measurable • 2011-13 = Poor • TON- 1.074 g/ms3 DRP In the best 25% of like sites improvement • 2013-14 = Poor • AN – 0.006 g/ms3 TP In the best 25% of like sites • 2014-15 = Fair Phosphorus pH In the best 25% of like sites DRP –Meaningful degradation • DRP – 0.005 g/ms3 • Rockwood • TP – 0.0085 g/ms3 Ecoli – 70/100mls FLOWS • HABITAT HEALTH Saleyards Bridge9 TREND • Ecoli – 32/100mls • Rec Standard – Caution • Contact recreation grades - 2012-13 was fair, 2013-14 was good, 2014-15 was good • Toxic benthic cyanobacteria (there have been warnings in the past)

RECOMMENDATIONS

FLOWS & ALLOCATION OTHER WATER QUALITY BANDS

• At Rockwood, the cultural flow preference is • Water quality to be drinking water quality Nitrate Ammonia E-coli E-coli 95th 1.7 cumecs • Flood control and river engineering practices toxicity toxicity median percentile • Variability is to be introduced to flow regime are amended to take account of instream ? for the Opihi system. The adverse effects of values such as habitat and mahinga kai. CURRENT ? ? ? the residual flow from the Opuha are to be Protection of the quality and quantity of spring addressed. fed water that flows into the river. Source WHANAU A A A A • Allocation is to be no more than 0.60 waters are to be identified and protected. All PREFERENCE cumecs spring heads are to be identified and protected by a buffer zone and plantings.

9 These scores are included in the report card for the mid Opihi but are included here so that there is a complete summary of results above State Highway 1. 35 | P a g e

36 | P a g e

THE HEALTH OF THE MID OPIHI CATCHMENT

SUMMARY

Valued characteristics of reach Te Moemoea Issues of concern to whanau Mid catchment –the • Many reaches of tributary streams • Abundant populations of taonga • Increasing pressure to extract tributary catchments appear unmodified – for example Te species, especially abundant mahinga water including Ana Wai have reaches surrounded by kai (most notably eels) restored to their • Increasing pressure to store water • Temuka indigenous vegetation historic range in tributary catchments • Te Ana Wai • The tributaries were highly productive • Access to traditional sites to gather kai • River character has changed • Waihi mahinga kai – for example of the and natural resources • Water quality in the Lower Opihi, • Hae Hae te Moana Temuka and the Kakahu have been • Flow variability re-introduced Te Ana Nga Wai and Hae Hae Te • Opihi to SH (includes significant eel fisheries historically • Through restoration connect the Moana is only average. Water Saleyard results) • Variety of habitats present sustaining mosaic of very healthy sites and quality in the Temuka is poor • Dobies Stream many taonga species including long fin extend these downstream o Agricultural contaminants eel, koura, waterfowl • Maintain passage so that species can entering system • River channel comprises pools, reach habitats in headwaters. Provide o Concern at risks of pollution chasms, rocky outcrops, waterfalls, sufficient flows for fish passage. from land intensification (e.g. drops etc. – all contributing to the • Protect the features of the gorges. dairy farms) cultural landscape • No impoundments in significant o Legacy contamination issues. • Numerous taonga bird species. streams and reaches e.g. Te Ana Wai • Mahinga kai habitats have been • Upper reaches of streams give lost in mainstem and tributaries. appearance of limited hydrological • Reduced numbers of mahinga kai alteration. species • Pool is tributaries can be 2m deep. • Removal of wetland areas • Good swimming holes. • Duration of low flows (minimum • Banded kokopu in Te Ana Wai becomes the maximum) • Upper Waihi good water quality. • Connections – ki uta ki tai - at risk through culverts, drains, diversions, extractions, • Riparian margins become more modified as move downstream

RECOMMENDATIONS

FLOWS & ALLOCATION OTHER WATER QUALITY BANDS

• The flow in the Mid Opihi need to be sufficient • Rules are to protect landscape features that Nitrate Ammonia E-coli E-coli 95th toxicity toxicity median percentile to are largely unmodified and important to • Enable sufficient depth for safe swimming by cultural landscapes – flows, clarity, quality, CURRENT ? ? ? ? indigenous vegetation, taonga species, and adults during the summer period channel morphology. • enable a connected flow of water downstream • Restore access to resources gathered WHANAU A A A A PREFERENCE • enable passage for migratory species – ki uta historically ki tai • Retain indigenous vegetation especially on • restore the braided character of the river riparian margins • Variability in river flows is recommended • Through restoration connect the mosaic of very healthy sites and extend these • Groundwater levels are to be protected to downstream ensure that springs along the riparian margin continue to provide inflows to the mainstem Opihi.

37 | P a g e

38 | P a g e

TE ANA A WAI

Looking inland – Te Ana a Wai (left) joining in the Opihi River (centre) Te Ana a Wai Gorge – a feature that TRA want to see retained TE MOEMOEA • The significant rock art in the catchment is protected. • No damming or regulation of the flow is to be permitted. • The variability in the Opihi comes from this system, so flows are managed to • Landscapes comprising rock features, art, river patterns etc are protected. provide for this • Improvement in water quality to drinking water quality • Fencing the length of the catchment prevents stock access. • Increased minimum flow with greater flow variability especially mid-range flows • This river supports a lot of kai species and provides a refuge for eels. • Protection of the gorge from damming • Retention of the variety within the river channel – deep pools, riffles, runs VALUED FEATURES WAHI TAONGA TAONGA SPECIES • The Te Ana a Wai varies in width and is generally between Rock art Long tail bat, 200 and 300 mm deep, with occasional pools over two metres deep. The tributary streams are between 100 and Rock shelters Open water divers, deep and shallow water waders, gulls, terns, 400 mm in depth, with occasional pools over one metre Wetlands deep. The Te Ana a Wai substrates are bedrock, boulders, Canterbury galaxias, long fin eels, banded kokopu, and cobbles, with mainly bedrock in the gorge. The stream Rock formations (gorge) short fin eels, upland bully substrates are mainly boulders and cobbles. Retaining this character is Taonga species • The gorge is highly valued. Wahi tupuna (landscapes and formations) • Te Ana a Wai Tributaries include Tramway Stream, and

several ephemeral streams that flow through grassland, Nohoanga shrubland, scrub, forest and at higher altitudes, tussockland. Forest occurs in four main areas including a large area Pa adjacent to the Te Ana a Wai gorge and some in Tramway Stream. Mahinga kai

• The tributary streams vary in width from four metres in

Tramway Stream to less than one and a half metres in other streams. The substrates of all permanent streams are mainly boulders and cobbles, with areas of bedrock and silt. The ephemeral stream substrates are mainly silt with areas of bedrock and boulders. • The diversity of landscapes and landforms have led to many taonga being found in the catchment THREATS • The base flow needs to be increased. • For the tributaries to Te Ana a Wai, Monkey musk is present along some of the • Broom is present along the margins of the Te Ana a Wai, along with other permanent streams. exotics such as broom. • Stock and wild animals have access to all streams, though access is restricted • Stock and wild animal access is unrestricted, though the steeper forested gorge in the steeper gorges. sides are less accessible. • Vehicle tracks cross some streams. There appear to be informal stopbanks • Vehicle tracks cross several of the waterways in this area. that will interfere with the flow. • The Te Ana a Wai Gorge is at risk. It has already been identified as a potential storage site. It is not to be dammed. Cultural assessment for Te Ana River (at Cave) • Highly valued as a mahinga kai. It is also highly valued because of the high concentration of rock art. It was a pathway to Manahune. Status site Cultural use Stream Health • Stream health scores highly for water quality and water clarity. Lowest scores A-1 3.16 3.52 are for riparian health, as the margins are covered with exotics.

• The mahinga kai scores are only average because in places the river is difficult to access. • When the site was assessed, the flow was higher than usual.

39 | P a g e

STATE OF RIVER INFRASTRUCTURE WATER QUALITY FLOWS Using 3 chemical measurements” There are stopbanks as part of Using the Water Quality Index • Mean flow – 3.9ms/3 regional flood protection • Median flow – 1.8ms/3 Ecoli In the best 25% of like sites scheme • 2011-13 = Good • 7 day MALF – 0.53ms/3 Turbidity In the best 25% of like sites • 2013-14 = Fair • Allocation (NES) – 0.16ms/3 DRP In the worst 50% of like sites There are no dams on the Te • 2014-15 = Good • Allocation NRRP – 0.09ms/3 Ana Wai mainstem

RECOMMENDATIONS

FLOWS & ALLOCATION OTHER WATER QUALITY BANDS

• Cultural flow preference is at least 1.2 m/s3 • Water quality to be drinking Nitrate toxicity Ammonia E-coli E-coli 95th • Variability is to be maintained. water quality toxicity median percentile • Allocation is to be no more than 0.160 cumecs. • No damming or regulation of CURRENT ? ? ? ? the flow in the Te Ana Wai is to be permitted. WHANAU A A A A PREFERENCE

40 | P a g e

WAIHI RIVER

Waihi River near Winchester Waihi River near Winchester TE MOEMOEA • The main tributaries of the Temuka River (Kakahu, Waihi, Haehae te Moana, Dobies) are • Protection of the gorge from damming managed to provide good flows of high quality water to downstream reaches nearer • Retention of the variety within the river channel – deep pools, riffles, runs townships, • Increased minimum flow with greater flow variability especially mid-range flows • Improvement in water quality to drinking water quality

VALUED FEATURES WAHI TAONGA TAONGA SPECIES • The upper reaches are in good condition. Rock art, rock shelters, formations Upland bully, Canterbury galaxias, Longfin eel, Shortfin • Waterway flows through open river channel which consists Wetlands eel, Koura, Freshwater mussel, Freshwater shrimp mainly of exposed riverbed gravels on both sides. Taonga species • It should be a lovely spot for a stop over and paddle. Mahinga kai • It is an important contributor to the flows and quality in the Temuka.

THREATS • Sign above water advising people not to swim in places. • There are legacy contamination issues (mill, flax mill, wool scour) • Lack of kai visible. Maybe an eel under willows • Low flows are a concern as the river should never run dry.

Cultural assessment • “It looks like a lovely piece of water. Clean clear shallow running is to be retained”. Status site Cultural use Stream Health • Clean flowing of water was observed on the day of the assessment. A-1 2.45 3.3 • Vegetation growing all around looks healthy. Vegetation is to be maintained and enhanced. • Water is clean. Little slime. Flow appears to be okay. • Can hear the sound of water movement and birds • A lot of vegetation on riverbed but sadly, it is all exotic STATE OF RIVER NUTRIENTS WATER QUALITY FLOWS Ecoli In the best 25% of like sites Nitrogen Using the Water Quality Index • Mean flow – 0.89ms/3 Turbidity In the best 25% of like sites • TN – 0.1955 g/ms3 • Median flow – 0.44ms/3 TN In the best 25% of like sites • TON- 0.1515 g/ms3 • 2011-13 = Very Good • 7 day MALF – 0.13ms/3 DRP In the best 25% of like sites • AN – 0.005 g/ms3 (MD) • 2013-14 = Very Good • Allocation (NES) – 0.04ms/3 TP In the best 25% of like sites Phosphorus • 2014-15 = Very Good pH In the best 25% of like sites • DRP – 0.0043 g/ms3

• TP – <0.008g/ms3

RECREATION Waihi Gorge Waimarie Geraldine • Ecoli – 120/100mls • Ecoli – 27 /100mls Toxic benthic cyanobacteria – • Recreation risk – Caution there have been warnings in the past.

RECOMMENDATIONS

FLOWS & ALLOCATION OTHER WATER QUALITY BANDS

• A minimum flow should be set that recognises • Water quality needs to be managed so that Nitrate Ammonia E-coli E-coli 95th that the Waihi is an Important contributor of it does not contribute to the degraded toxicity toxicity median percentile flows to the Temuka. At Waimarie the flow quality in the Temuka River should be at least 0.250cumecs CURRENT ? ? ? ?

WHANAU A A A A PREFERENCE

41 | P a g e

42 | P a g e

TEMUKA RIVER (MANSE BRIDGE)

Temuka River – looking downstream from Manse Bridge Upstream and downstream of Manse Bridge TE MOEMOEA • The Temuka is restored as a mahinga kai • Retention of the variety within the river channel – deep pools, riffles, runs . • The braided river returns VALUED FEATURES WAHI TAONGA TAONGA SPECIES • This was a highly valued and productive part of the river system • Wai Maori, Wetlands, Springs Upland bully, Koura, Freshwater shrimp, that is spring fed. • Taonga species Freshwater mussel • In close proximity to the marae so it is heavily used. • Wahi tupuna (landscapes and formations) • Has always been a highly valued and remains heavily used part of • Papakainga housing, pa, marae, reserves the Temuka River • Mahinga kai CULTURAL HEALTH ASSESSMENT Using the Cultural Health Index (Temuka River at Manse Bridge) • Stream health was average across most indicators, with water clarity scoring higher that site Cultural use Stream Health others on the day of assessment when flows were higher than usual. A-1 3.63 2.82 • However, whanau believe the water quality is now degraded. The pollutants are believed to • This river has always been a focal point for whanau and heavily used as am come from the Kakahu and Raupo Creek. Willows need to be removed. mahinga kai and for recreation. Its proximity to marae and papakainga reinforces its • The shingle needs to be managed so that the braided character can return. importance. • The depth and velocity of water needs to be restored. There are no longer deep pools. It • The high mahinga kai score reflects the heavy use by whanau members. needs to be restored as a mahinga kai.

Using the Cultural Health Index (Dobies Stream) • The low mahinga kai score reflects the high level of modification. • Stream health was below average for most indicators. Status site Cultural use Stream Health • Whanau are aware of the springs that rise in the paddocks but were concerned that there was A-0 2.37 2.18 no protection. • However, whanau believe the water quality is now degraded. The pollutants are believed to • Cows were adjacent to the stream and there was a very narrow riparian margin. come from the Kakahu and Raupo Creek. Willows need to be removed. • This stream needs to be managed as a source of reliable water to the Temuka. • Two years ago this stream ran dry. This is to be avoided. • This stream is to be prioritised as a native fishery. THREATS TO CULTURAL BELIEFS, PRACTICES • Monkey musk is present throughout the reach • Low flows in summer, and the increased temperature of water is a risk for instream species. • Broom, gorse, willows are present along the margins of the Temuka The Dobies should not run dry. • Vehicle tracks cross several of the waterways in this area. It is heavily used by • Compounding effect of extracting water from tributaries and from groundwater affects the 4WD vehicles flows in the Temuka. Protecting of springs feeding the Temuka is a priority. • The risk of algae growth – and the impact on human health - is of concern to • Flood control practices are seen to be adversely impacting instream habitats. whanau • Commercial eeling, including fishing illegally within the Mataitai area, is a risk. • Inappropriate gravel management is a risk to instream habitats.

NUTRIENTS TREND WATER QUALITY FLOWS Nitrogen Ecoli – Meaningful degradation Using the Water Quality Index • Mean flow – 3.18ms/3 • TN – 1.9 g/ms3 • 2011-13 = Fair • Median flow – 3.42ms/3 • TON- 1.44 g/ms3 • 2013-14 = Poor • 7 day MALF – 0.29ms/3 • AN – 0.006 g/ms3 • 2014-15 = Fair

Phosphorus Recreational water quality • DRP – 0.009 g/ms3 • Ecoli – 134/100mls (above swimming threshold) • TP – 0.011 g/ms3 • Toxic benthic cyanobacteria (there have been warnings in the past) • There is a caution for recreational users at State Highway 1.

43 | P a g e

RECOMMENDATIONS

FLOWS & ALLOCATION OTHER WATER QUALITY BANDS

• The minimum flow needs to be above • Together with Timaru District Council manage Nitrate toxicity Ammonia E-coli E-coli 95th 1.60cumecs with variability above this level this waterway as a significant cultural toxicity median percentile • Allocation is to be no more than 0.650cumecs landscape CURRENT ? ? ? ? • Investigate the extent of leaching from the rubbish dump that was “closed and sealed”. • Water quality is to be drinking water standard. WHANAU A A A A • The Temuka River is to be restored as a PREFERENCE mahinga kai • Security of supply of good quality drinking water for whanau residing around Arowhenua • Flood control and river engineering practices are amended to take account of instream values such as habitat and mahinga kai. • Protection of the quality and quantity of spring fed water that flows into the river. Source waters are to be identified and protected. All spring heads are to be identified and protected by a buffer zone and plantings. • Gravel takes in the Temuka catchment are reviewed and rationalised. An agreed code of practice is needed and its implementation audited.

44 | P a g e

KAKAHU

The willow lined Kakahu River The willow lined meandering Kakahu River

TE MOEMOEA

• The main tributaries of the Temuka River (Kakahu, Waihi, Haehae te Moana, Dobies) are • Protection of the gorge from damming managed to provide good flows of high quality water to downstream reaches nearer • Retention of the variety within the river channel – deep pools, riffles, runs townships. • Improvement in water quality to drinking water quality • Increased minimum flow with greater flow variability especially mid-range flows

VALUED FEATURES WAHI TAONGA TAONGA SPECIES • Remnants of native bush in upper catchment Rock art Long tail bat, • Gorge • Meandering pattern across the plains. Rock shelters Upland bully, Shortfin eel, Longfin eel, Common bully, • Is an important contributor to the Temuka catchment. Koura, Taonga species

Wahi tupuna (landscapes and formations)

Mahinga kai

THREATS • River is at risk from surrounding landuses. Flood control narrows the river channel. • Forestry impacts

STATE OF RIVER INFRASTRUCTURE WATER QUALITY Using 3 chemical measurements” No dams on the Kakahu mainstem Using the Water Quality Index • but there is an established forest in Ecoli In the best 25% of like sites the headwaters that may impact • 2011-13 = Good Turbidity In the best 25% of like sites flows in the catchment. • 2013-14 = Fair DRP In the worst 50% of like sites • 2014-15 = Good

RECOMMENDATIONS

FLOWS & ALLOCATION OTHER WATER QUALITY BANDS

• A minimum flow should be set that recognises • Water quality needs to be managed so Nitrate toxicity Ammonia E-coli E-coli 95th that the Kakahu is an Important contributor of that it does not contribute to the toxicity median percentile flows to the Temuka. At Mulihills the minimum degraded quality in the Temuka River CURRENT ? ? ? ? flow is to be at least 0.050 cumecs.

WHANAU A A A A PREFERENCE

45 | P a g e

46 | P a g e

HAEHAE TE MOANA

The Haehae te Moana River

TE MOEMOEA • Improvement in water quality to drinking water quality • Protection of the gorge from damming • Increased minimum flow with greater flow variability especially mid-range flows • Retention of the variety within the river channel – deep pools, riffles, runs

VALUED FEATURES WAHI TAONGA TAONGA SPECIES • High water quality in the upper reaches. Taonga species Upland bully, Canterbury galaxias, Freshwater mussel, • Gorge Nohoanga Freshwater shrimp, Koura, Freshwater mussel • Is an important contributor to the Temuka catchment Mahinga kai

THREATS • Flow issues in the Haehae te Moana compound effects experienced downstream • Forestry in the headwaters has potential to impact stream health. CULTURAL HEALTH ASSESSMENT Cultural assessment (Haehae te moana above Leishman’s Road) The stream scored slightly above average for most stream indicators. There were concerns about the effect of the forest on this tributary. There is a need to remove exotic plants e.g. Status site Cultural use Stream Health gorse, broom, willows. This needs to be managed as a mountain stream with no takes from A-0 3.45 3.28 the Haehae te moana or Hinekura above Leishmans Road. Mahinga kai values were only average but whanau did identify this as a potential camping site or a place they would be to recreate. Ease of access contributed to the high value for cultural use.

Cultural assessment (Hinekura above Leishman’s Road) The stream provides pathway through to Manahune. A culvert near the junction with the Haehae te moana may limit passage to this stream. Sediment on the riverbed was not Status site Cultural use Stream Health expected in a stream this far up the catchment. Like with the Haehae te moana whanau did A-0 2.56 3.25 identify this as a potential camping site or a place they would be to recreate. Ease of access contributed to the high value for cultural use. Whanau did note however it was a long way to travel.

STATE OF RIVER NUTRIENTS WATER QUALITY FLOWS Turbidity In the best 25% of like sites Nitrogen Using the Water Quality Index • Mean flow – 1.11ms/3 TN In the best 25% of like sites • TN – 0.14 g/ms3 • Median flow – 0.45ms/3 DRP In the best 25% of like sites • TON- 0.07 g/ms3 • 2011-13 = Good • 7 day MALF – 0.07ms/3 TP In the best 25% of like sites • AN – 0.005 g/ms3 • 2013-14 = Very Good • Allocation (NES) – 0.05ms/3 Phosphorus • 2014-15 = Very Good • DRP – 0.004 g/ms3 • TP – <0.008 g/ms3 HABITAT HABITAT RECREATION • Te Moana Gorge • • Contact Recreation Grades - 2012-13 = Fair, 2013-14= Fair, 2014-15= Fair • Glentohi • • Ecoli – 42/100mls •

RECOMMENDATIONS

FLOWS & ALLOCATION OTHER WATER QUALITY BANDS

• A minimum flow should be set that recognises • Water quality needs to be managed so Nitrate toxicity Ammonia E-coli E-coli 95th that the Haehaetemoana is an Important that it does not contribute to the toxicity median percentile contributor of flows to the Temuka. degraded quality in the Temuka River CURRENT ? ? ? ? • At Glentohi the minimum flow is to be at least 0.200 cumecs. WHANAU A A A A PREFERENCE

47 | P a g e

48 | P a g e

THE HEALTH OF THE LOWER OPIHI CATCHMENT

SUMMARY

Valued characteristics of reach Te Moemoea Issues of concern to whanau Opihi and Temuka below • Awarua spring is vitally • Abundant mahinga kai populations, • Unnatural gravel build-ups in the river. State Highway 1 which significant to the cultural especially eel fishery • Litter and debris includes Grassy Banks. landscape that includes the • Provide sufficient flows for fish passage • Discharge of human waste into waterway

marae. Protecting its quality is - requirements need to be determined at It includes the health of the is very offensive Taumatakahu (a tributary fundamental. Its levels are to the shallowest riffle in the stream. • Concern at risks of pollution from land that enters the Lower be protected. The runanga is • Access to traditional sites to gather kai intensification (e.g. dairy farms) Opihi) restoring the adjacent wetland. and natural resources • Mahinga kai habitats have been lost • Water generally appears clear • Water quality improvements to enable • Reduced numbers of mahinga kai species even though quality safe use and kai safe to eat. • Reduced habitats in tributaries deteriorating • Environmental flows that address flow • Removal of adjacent wetland areas • Historically area covered by variability • Habitat destruction has significantly significant wetlands. Restoring – the maximum cannot be the affected the eel fishery the marae wetland is a priority. minimum • Connections – ki uta ki tai - at risk through • Eels still found both shortfin – flows trigger crucial life cycle culverts, drains, diversions, extractions, and longfin. stages infrastructure. As a results large parts of • Drains managed as mahinga kai upper catchment no longer provide habitats with flows and quality standards habitat set • Increased periphyton growth creating • Connections restored (culverts etc all nuisance examined to ensure passage not • Increasingly unsafe water quality as move impeded) downstream inhibits use • Reestablishment of lost wetlands – • Whanau stop using the river which using historic distributions as a creates pressures in other river systems reference • Loss of use leads to loss of practice, loss • Enhance the water quality to make it a of tikanga associated with the practice desirable place to visit,gather from, and and over time matauranga. for whanau to swim and enjoy • Water quality concerns. • Ability to use reserves and whanau • Risks to Awarua – including levels owned lands. changing, illegal extractions, and threat of • Management of the lower part of the contamination. Opihi by Te Runanga o Arowhenua Mataitai Komiti – their application for a mataitai is successful.

RECOMMENDATIONS

FLOWS & ALLOCATION WATER QUALITY BANDS

The flow in the Lower Opihi need to be sufficient to Nitrate Ammonia E-coli E-coli 95th • Enable sufficient depth for safe swimming by adults during the summer period toxicity toxicity median percentile • enable a connected flow of water downstream CURRENT ? ? ? ? • enable passage for migratory species – ki uta ki tai • restore the braided character of the river • Variability in river flows is recommended WHANAU A A A A • Groundwater levels are to be protected to ensure that springs along the riparian margin continue to PREFERENCE provide inflows to the mainstem Opihi.

49 | P a g e

50 | P a g e

OPIHI RIVER (BELOW STATE HIGHWAY 1)

Opihi River – looking downstream from the State Highway Bridge Opihi River – looking downstream from the State Highway Bridge TE MOEMOEA • Improvement in water quality to drinking water quality • Protection of the quality and quantity of spring fed water that flows into the river. • Security of supply of good quality drinking water for whanau residing around Source waters are to be identified and protected. All spring heads are to be identified Arowhenua and protected by a buffer zone and plantings. • Increased minimum flow with greater flow variability especially mid-range flows • Retention of the variety within the river channel – deep pools, riffles, runs • Flood control and river engineering practices are amended to take account of instream • Gravel takes in the Temuka and Opihi catchments are reviewed and rationalised. An values such as habitat and mahinga kai. agreed code of practice is needed and needs to be audited. VALUED FEATURES WAHI TAONGA TAONGA SPECIES (FOR THE OPIHI SYSTEM) • It a productive part of the river system that is Wai Maori, Wetlands, Springs • Long tail bat, supplemented by spring fed flows. • Black billed gulls, open water divers, swamp rail, • In close proximity to the marae so it is heavily used. Taonga species Australasian bittern, deep and shallow waders, waterfowl, • Has always been a highly valued and heavily used part of gulls, terns, riparian species Banded dotterel and Black the Opihi River Wahi tupuna (landscapes and formations) front terns, Black fronted dotterels, White winged black terns, Marsh crake, Caspian tern, Pied stilt, Pukeko, Pa, reserves • Upland bully, Common bully, Torrentfish, Bluegill bully, Longfin eel, Canterbury galaxias, Shortfin eel, Lamprey, Mahinga kai Common smelt, Yellow eye mullet, Freshwater mussel, Dusky galaxias, Freshwater shrimp, Koura THREATS TO CULTURAL BELIEFS, PRACTICES • Broom, gorse, willows are present along the margins • Low flows in summer, and the increased temperature of water is a risk for instream • Vehicle tracks cross several of the waterways in this area. It is heavily used by 4WD species. “It needs its variability back”. vehicles • The risk of algae growth – and the impact on human health - is of concern to whanau • The quality diminishes as you move downstream. Serious concerns at the estuary re • Compounding effect of extracting water from tributaries and from groundwater affects contaminants, mouth closures, smells, and temperature changes. the flows in the Temuka and then the Opihi. • Gravel takes in the lower river have destroyed instream habitat. • Commercial eeling, including people fishing illegally within the Mataitai area. • Stopbanks have dislocated river from floodplain. Instream flood protection works destroy instream habitats. STATE TREND WATER QUALITY NUTRIENTS At Grassy Banks Clarity - Black disk – Meaningful Using the Water Quality Index Grassy banks Turbidity In the best 25% of like sites improvement Nitrogen Grassy banks TN In the worst 50% of like • TN – 0.5845 g/ms3 • 2011-13 = Fair sites Turbidity – Meaningful degradation • TON- 0.4715 g/ms3 • 2013-14 = Fair DRP In the best 25% of like sites • AN – 0.006 g/ms3 • 2014-15 = Very Good TP In the best 25% of like sites Nitrogen Phosphorus pH In the best 25% of like sites • TN – Meaningful degradation • Opihi Mouth • DRP – 0.005 g/ms3

• TON – Meaningful degradation • 2011-13 = Fair • TP – 0.008 g/ms3 • AN – Meaningful degradation • 2013-14 = Fair FLOWS @ SH1 RECREATION • 2014-15 = Fair • Mean flow – 15.05ms/3 Waipopo10 Phosphorus Recreational water quality • Median flow – 8.90ms/3 • Ecoli – 61/100m • DRP – Meaningful degradation • Ecoli – 134/100mls (this is above the • 7 day MALF – 2.21ms/3 • Recreation standard – Caution • TP – Meaningful degradation swimming threshold) • Cultural flow preference – 2.60ms/3 • Contact recreation grades: 2012-13 • Toxic benthic cyanobacteria (there was Good; 2013-14 was Fair; 2014- pH – Significant improvement have been warnings in the past) 15 was Fair • Toxic benthic cyanobacteria (there have been warnings in the past) Grassy Banks • Ecoli – 45/100m

10 We have included this result here to give an indication of the health of the lower Opihi. However, the scores contribute to the result for the lagoon. 51 | P a g e

RECOMMENDATIONS

FLOWS & ALLOCATION OTHER WATER QUALITY BANDS

• Cultural flow preference at State Highway 1 is • Water quality needs to be managed so that Nitrate toxicity Ammonia E-coli E-coli 95th at least 2.60ms/3 it does not contribute to the degraded toxicity median percentile • Allocation is to be no more than 1.6 cumecs. quality in the Temuka River CURRENT ? ? ? ?

WHANAU A A A A PREFERENCE

52 | P a g e

TAUMATAKAHU

Taumatakahu (left) joining the Temuka River (right) Taumatakahu (left) joining the Temuka River (right)

TE MOEMOEA • Improvement in water quality to drinking water quality • Protection of this stream has a native fishery. It is not to be modified to benefit the needs of • Increased minimum flow with greater flow variability especially mid-range flows trout and salmon. • As the take consents expire, they are to be retired until there are no takes from this sub- • Try to recreate character and variety within the stream channel – e.g. some pools. catchment.

VALUED FEATURES WAHI TAONGA TAONGA SPECIES • This is a highly valued spring fed tributary Springs Koura, Canterbury galaxias, long fin eels, banded kokopu, • It contributes reliable flows to the Temuka and Lower Opihi short fin eels, upland bully, catchments. Taonga species

Mahinga kai

THREATS • Stock are in close proximity and put the creek at risk. The riparian margins vary in size - • Sediment covers the bottom of the stream. some are very narrow putting at risk restoration efforts. • Whanau are worried that spring fed streams are at risk of being modified to benefit exotic • The stream is highly modified. It flows in drains along the side of roads and will receive species. Streams such as Taumatakahu and Dobies are to be prioritised as native contaminants. fisheries. • Cultural assessment This is a historic gathering site. This is a reliable source of water to the lower Temuka (and lower Opihi). Restoration has started but it needs to be completed. When the site Status site Cultural use Stream Health was assessed, sediment on the riverbed was an issue. Cows in the adjacent paddock A-1 3.22 2.17 with a small riparian buffer added to the concern. All stream health indicators were slightly below average. If the flow is maintained

STATE OF RIVER NUTRIENTS WATER QUALITY HABITAT HEALTH Ecoli In worst of 25% of like sites Nitrogen Using the Water Quality Index • TN In worst of 25% of like sites • TN – 1.83g/ms3 DRP In worst of 50% of like sites • TON- 1.7 g/ms3 • 2011-13 = Poor TP In worst of 50% of like sites • AN – 0.021 g/ms3 • 2013-14 = Poor pH In best of 25% of like sites Phosphorus • 2014-15 = Poor

• DRP – 0.013 g/ms3

• TP – 0.0255 g/ms3 Recreational water quality • Ecoli – 290 /100mls (this is above swimming threshold)

RECOMMENDATIONS

FLOWS & ALLOCATION OTHER WATER QUALITY BANDS

• There is to be no more allocation/extraction • Water quality needs to be improved so that Nitrate toxicity Ammonia E-coli E-coli 95th from this springfed system. it does not contribute to the degraded toxicity median percentile quality in the Temuka River and Lower CURRENT ? ? ? ? Opihi

WHANAU A A A A PREFERENCE

53 | P a g e

54 | P a g e

THE HEALTH OF THE LAGOON

SUMMARY

Valued characteristics of reach Te Moemoea Issues of concern to whanau Lagoon including • Important mahinga kai • Abundant mahinga kai populations – • The size of the lagoon has reduced. Orakipaoa • Short fin eels and black flounder birds, plants and fish Coastal erosion is a concern. important. • Enhanced water quality make it a • Concern about human waste entering • It has a history of use that needs to be desirable place to visit and gather from lagoon from septic tanks and recognised and re-established. o quality is fit for gathering and contact longdrops at Waipopo, Milford • Reserves in the area mean that whanau recreation • Concern also at risks of pollution still live in the catchment and the river is a • Flow variability ensures the river mouth from dairy farms – risk that toxins, key feature in their livelihood. Clean is open at crucial life cycle stages antbiotics etc could all be included in water of sufficient quality, supporting • Management of the lower part of the the waste stream. abundant populations of kai species is Opihi by Te Runanga o Arowhenua • Mouth closes for long periods, vital. Mataitai Komiti – their application for a potentially impacting migration and • Orakipaoa represents a significant mataitai has been successful recruitment of migrating species cultural landscape. especially eels • Shape of the mouth has changed • The freshwater / salt water interface is changing with an impact on the biodiversity in the lagoon. • Mahinga kai habitats have been lost - Reduced numbers of • Loss of use leads to loss of practice, loss of tikanga associated with the practice and over time matauranga. • Algae blooms are now a threat and limit use by whanau. • Smell is offensive • Temperature is also of concern.

RECOMMENDATIONS

FLOWS & ALLOCATION WATER QUALITY BANDS

The flow in the Lower Opihi need to be sufficient to: Nitrate Ammonia E-coli E-coli 95th • Maintain toxicity toxicity median percentile • Enable sufficient depth for safe swimming by adults during the summer period CURRENT ? ? ? ? • enable a connected flow of water downstream • enable passage for migratory species – ki uta ki tai • restore the braided character of the river WHANAU A A A A • Variability in river flows is recommended PREFERENCE • Groundwater levels are to be protected to ensure that springs along the riparian margin continue to provide inflows to the mainstem Opihi.

55 | P a g e

56 | P a g e

ORAKIPAOA

Looking inland – Orakipaoa Looking seaward - At the mouth of Orakipaoa

TE MOEMOEA • Improvement in water quality • Managed as a wahi tupuna – recognising linkages between river, marae, old pa site, • Whole of catchment restoration springs and wetlands.

VALUED FEATURES WAHI TAONGA TAONGA SPECIES This area is represents a significant coastal wetland. It is part Wetlands “Full of eels” of a significant wahi tupuna. common bully, Inanga, Lower Orakipaoa Creek is the best remaining example of a Taonga species meandering coastal stream in Canterbury, south of the cultivations Rakahuri Wahi tupuna (landscapes and formations)

Plants present include flax/harakeke, wire rush, saltmarsh Taonga species ribbonwood, three square rush, Carex secta, Carex coriacea, raupo, Juncus gregiflorus, Scirpus caldwellii, gorse and shrub Nohoanga lupin. Pa The creek and wetland are used by wading and coastal birds, many classed as taonga species. Mahinga kai

Threatened Species known to frequent the area include the banded dotterel/pohowera, black fronted tern/tarapirohe, white heron/kotuku and Caspian tern/tara (threatened in NZ).

THREATS • Water quality has declined. • Is at risk from surrounding land uses. STATE OF RIVER WATER QUALITY HABITAT HEALTH Using 3 chemical measurements” • Using the Water Quality Index Ecoli In the best 25% of like sites Turbidity In the best 25% of like sites • 2011-13 = Poor DRP In the worst 50% of like sites • 2013-14 = Poor • 2014-15 = Fair

RECOMMENDATIONS

FLOWS & ALLOCATION OTHER WATER QUALITY BANDS

• There is to be no more allocation from this • Water quality needs to be improved so that Nitrate Ammonia E-coli E-coli 95th catchment. it does not contribute to the degraded toxicity toxicity median percentile quality in the lagoon CURRENT ? ? ? ? • Together with Timaru District Council manage this waterway as a significant cultural landscape WHANAU A A A A PREFERENCE

57 | P a g e

5.3 SUMMARY OF CULTURAL HEALTH ASSESSMENTS

Using colour coding, we have provided a matrix to show how the respective sites scored for the cultural use and cultural stream health components.

It should be noted that there were a number of streams that whanau were not able to assess as there was no visible flow, and in some instances there was no discernible channel. Raupo Creek was one example of a stream visited that had no visible flow.

In terms of environmental flows: • Minimum flows for the Opihi, Temuka, Te Ana Wai, and Orari are to be raised. • Variability needs to be incorporated into the regime, especially mid-range flows. • A step up is also requested for when the minimum is breached (e.g. such a regime is in place for the Kakanui River in Otago). • Flow regimes and allocation limits are to be set for spring fed streams to stop them running dry (e.g. Dobies, Kotare, Taumatakahu, Raupo Creek, Ohapi) • There is to be no more extraction from the Taumatakahu and Dobies catchments. • There is to be no extraction from the Awarua for the purpose of irrigation. Any existing takes for irrigation are to be phased out. • There is to be no new water introduced into the zone unless Te Runanga o Arowhenua agrees • Over-allocation is to be “clawed back”.

In the section that follows, we expand on some of the issues that arise from the site assessments and discussions with whanau.

58 | P a g e

PART 6: SUMMARY OF ISSUES IDENTIFIED BY WHANAU Places change over time. In the Opihi catchment there have been natural changes like erosion, forest succession, as well as human-induced changes, including land-clearing, damming, land use intensification, and water extraction. Ecosystems are are constantly shifting to balance the changes that are occurring. However, it is important for people to recognize the critical points at which the changes that we induce are no longer sustainable – the points that put too much pressure on the Opihi River for it to continue surviving as it has for millennia. Te Runanga o Arowhenua believe the river is very quickly approaching a “critical point”. “We are precariously close to the tipping point – we have pushed rivers to the edge… they may not be able to recover naturally”. The issues identified by whanau are introduced below.

1.1.1.2 6.1 SUMMARY OF ISSUES IDENTFIIED BY WHANAU

Changes in water quantity or flow

One of the most extreme forms of disturbance to waterways has been the allocation of water for extractive uses. Reduced flows leave insufficient water to sustain biodiversity. A river is not a river without sufficient amounts of water. As informants explained: A healthy river flows

To me a healthy river is a river that has, first and foremost a full complement of water. It has a quantity of water that retains a high fishery resource in terms of a number of varieties of fish can live in it. A river that has the quantity that will maintain quality of water

We take too much out and don’t consider what the river actually needs

The rivers are lower than they’ve ever been … and they stay low for much longer. Climate change might be doing something … but they have changed the river.

Inappropriate flow regimes are perceived as adversely impacting the mauri of river systems. When exploring this with whanau, they explained that mauri is about life in and around a river. A river is not a river without sufficient amounts of flowing water. Each stream can be characterized by the speed of the flow, be it slow, sluggish, or swift. Whanau believed that river flows were too low. Some believed that mainstem flows were lower because flows in the tributaries had also been intercepted.

Concern was expressed that Environment Canterbury were granting consents to take water from the small tributaries without any data about flows in these tributaries. “They allocated without knowing what is there”. Whanau believe flows need to be addressed but are quick to stress that increased flows alone will no address the adverse impacts on the mauri of freshwater systems. The single focus on increasing stream flows needed to be complemented by the restoration of stream function, and riparian biodiversity therefore restoring their utility and amenity for whanau.

Environment Canterbury in the Canterbury Strategic Water Study (CSWS) confirm that the greatest pressure from water currently allocated for extraction occurs in the smaller foothill streams, which includes for example the Opihi and the Ashburton. They explain that the larger alpine rivers are generally less pressured particularly, the Waitaki, Rakaia and the Waimakariri11. However, as Tau commented when addressing the Waitangi Tribunal he stressed the importance of the smaller streams -

It is important to understand that the eels, flounders and crayfish which were such an important part of our diet flourished in the side streams, drains and lagoons, which were much more important to us that the main rivers. These smaller water bodies are the first to disappear…

This clearly has the potential to place Ngai Tahu in confrontation with development interests:

• the streams valued and utilised by Ngai Tahu are stressed.

• Currently 88% of water allocated is used for irrigation.

• Ngai Tahu believe some of the current land uses are unsustainable.

Te Runanga o Arowhenua contend that summer withdrawals of water for irrigation leave some stretches of riverbed almost dry. The water is left dribbling in channels that get lethally warm or are polluted with agricultural runoff. Fish migration – upstream and downstream – is also compromised. In some catchments fish survival is dependent on access to isolated and disconnected large pools.

We have fishing reserves – so what? Can you fish with no water? No water and no fish…where are the fish to live when there is no water? … We have to do it for ourselves

Ngai Tahu expressed concern that both the regional council and Government seem to support the beneficial use of waters and comment that these uses are defended vigorously. In contrast, non-agricultural purposes such as leaving water instream to protect instream values was and is still designated by some as wasteful12. Ngai Tahu informants argued that the prejudice in favour of agricultural usage can still be evidenced.

It is interesting to note that with respect to surface water flows, the following rivers are classified by Environment Canterbury as flow sensitive13:

11 The Waitaki and Rakaia provide 48% of the region’s measured surface run off. When the major alpine rivers are included - Waitaki, Rakaia, Waimakariri, Waiau, Rangitata, Hurunui and the Clarence – they represent 88% of the measured surface run off. 12 Sentiments expressed directly to whanau members – one by an Environment Canterbury staff member but more commonly by agricultural interests. 13 Flow sensitive is defined in the Natural Resources Regional Plan as “a catchment that is vulnerable to reductions in summer low flows as a result of a change in the vegetation cover from short to tall vegetation. 59 | P a g e

Opihi • Opuha (inflow to the lake) • Opihi • Temuka River (Hae Hae Te Moana) • Kakahu River (upstream of Hall Road) • Te Ana a Wai River (whole catchment)

Ngai Tahu rather than calling these “flow sensitive” argued that these six sub-catchments are stressed from excessive extractions.

A lot of attention is placed on setting minimum flows. As well as questioning the minimum levels set, Ngai Tahu are concerned that overall flow regimes are not considered” The minimum becomes the maximum”. As another informant observed, “Don’t talk minimum flows…. The minimum becomes the norm”.

Ngai Tahu when discussing flow regimes observed that flow variability is an issue with patterns of freshes and floods changing as a result of higher flows being stored and / or intercepted as part of water harvesting schemes. Floods are seen by Ngai Tahu as a natural feature of a balanced system. Floods clean out spawning gravels, trigger spawning and migrations, and flush accumulated leaves and organic matter from the floodplain into the river. Rivers build and rebuild habitats during floods.

Those of us who claim to be Manawhenua need to stand up for our rivers. We have to demand flows be returned to the rivers

Modification of channel and riparian morphology As flows scour headwaters they carry downstream the boulders and sediments that shape and structure the lower reaches of a river. In the context of braided rivers of Canterbury, channels are rearranged and islands are cleared of vegetation including noxious weeds as a result of floods and snow melt. Change brought about by flooding, is natural and needed. As a consequence, infrastructure that intercept floods, sediments and nutrients that should be moving downstream, may be viewed negatively by Ngai Tahu. The water stills flows downstream but the river is robbed of the energy and material that is needed to renew its channel and habitats.

Across Canterbury, rivers and their tributaries have been dammed and straightened and constrained within stop banks that break connections and destroys riparian and instream habitat. Whanau believe that the protocols for maintaining the flood control infrastructure needs to be revisited to ensure that the needs are balanced with instream habitat needs.

Gravel takes Whanau are concerned at the impact that gravel extraction has on instream habitats. Whanau believe that the protocols for managing gravel takes need to be revisited to ensure that the needs of extraction are balanced with instream needs.

Risks to security of waters at Arowhenua. Whanau live in and around the marae at Arowhenua. Water security is an immediate issue. Whanau need to be able to live in and around the marae and have access to sufficient supplies of drinking water.

Sea level rise implications for whanau in the lower catchment Whanau live on the reserves in the lower catchment. The implications of climate change need to be discussed with whanau.

Contamination of kai Resources that are gathered need to be fit to eat.

Rubbish Dump in Temuka Whanau believe the dump is still leaching contaminants to the Temuka River. This needs to be investigated.

Damaging land use practices Ngai Tahu believe some land uses, such as dairying, are unsustainable. It is therefore of concern for whanau who perceive the focus of contemporary studies being the provision of water for irrigation, with a significant proportion being tagged for dairying or dairy support.

There is overhang – vegetation (ferns or tussocks) overhang the bank and into the water. This provides food and clears the sediment away

The other thing about healthy rivers, they need to be rivers that have the vegetation that is appropriate for the shelter and the habitat for those animals that live and I’m not just talking about fish, I’m talking about the micro-organisms and the insects … and even those animals that frequent it for whatever reason they want to be there

Vegetation on the river margin provides shelter and food for what is in the river. The river supports a range of species. Fish in the water, trees and vegetation growing beside the water, birds on the water and in the trees. A full range of life is supported – linked by water

60 | P a g e

Degraded water quality (point and non-point)

We should be able to use our lands and reserves without getting sick. “The water is good quality when the only discolouration is when the river is in flood” Pollutants get into waterways in three ways: point source discharges; in place sources (from landfills and pits); and non point sources – from farmlands, city streets, and other lands. With the enactment of the Resource Management Act 1991 many point source discharges across New Zealand have been or are in the process of being addressed. However, the concern confronting many communities, including lands and rivers valued by Ngai Tahu, is the threat of non-point source pollution.

Scientists and health workers contend that contemporary agricultural practices in combination with modified waters represent potential health risks – with a particular risk to Ngai Tahu (and indeed other stakeholders) that interact and source kai from these waters. Reports identify an increase in the number of people affected by waterborne diseases14. Ngai Tahu are cognizant of this risk and as one informant explained, “The mahinga kai would be safe to eat. We consider the health of mahika kai. If it supports life, is that life in a healthy state? If a tuna has abscesses on it, we won’t take it home for the pot

One whanau member, contends that all streams, wetlands and springs need to be fenced, with buffer zones created and riparian vegetation replanted.

If one farmer can fence off his streams why can’t they all do it? Why doesn’t the Council demand it?

Decline of native populations / introduction of exotic species Eels are one species that are highly prized by Ngai Tahu whanau. Large quantities were historically gathered across South Canterbury, yet one informant advised that “last year commercial fishers could not fill their quota… If eels are there they are getting harder and harder to catch”.

For Ngai Tahu a high class fishery is one that also sustains abundant eel populations. In 2008 Te Runanga o Arowhenua applied to Ministry of Fisheries for a mataitai to cover the lower reaches of the waterways between Washdyke Creek and the Orari River. A key driver for them was the desperate need to protect mahinga kai, especially eel populations.

Whanau were able to identify changes to different species -

The species mix has changed. We can’t always access and catch what we want. With eels, we used to fish the lowland areas. These are now fished out. How far do we have to go to get a feed?

We can’t access our traditional sites and if we could is there anything to catch? The species have changed and the numbers have changed

I have a right…I have a reserve. But I don’t have an eel to catch from that reserve. There is something drastically wrong. Why is it only us that can see it?

The eels are gone from the coastal streams.

I went out twice last year and you wouldn’t spear as it wasn’t big enough and it would be criminal to take. We just had a look around above lagoon to Railway Bridge in a night and it was a sad state of affairs. We hope things will get better.

Kanakana is a little different as they are on a migratory thing as they in to breed in the mountains and they don’t muck around. Between here and Railway Bridge (Opihi) it’s a nights travel so if they come through early in night they will get to the Opihi Bridge and if they come in later then that’s where I get them down here and stay in that ground so that why we go out at that time. Same thing at Washdyke they travel that quickly so anything in that line it only has come in that night so hopefully it’s not polluted when we gather. Kanakana again it’s sad it’s hard to get and if you do get one it’s a treasured source of food but more than that it good to see they are still there.

A species that disappeared from when we were younger is koura. You would be lucky to see one. When we were young we would play in the creeks right down to the pa and we would take them home in jars. We can blame it on pollution in the Temuka River and they don’t like that.

White bait ….river systems have altered the breeding ground along the side where they traditionally laid there eggs is just not there anymore and that’s major reason.

Farming has changed this with drains being cleared out and the native grasses on edges are gone from banks and all you have now is a stream running through shingle.

The size of the lagoon has decreased because of drainage. At Temuka it used to be made up of 99% of swamplands and streams and places where eels used to be and watercress up the side but it’s all drained and dry now. Creeks around the farms have been drag-lined and they clean them out every two or three years so there is no place for the eels no habitat and whitebait have no breeding ground. So that is why they are going down

14 Notifiable diseases are reported and published annually by ESR on behalf of the Ministry of Health. 61 | P a g e

The [taint] its worse with flounder and whitebait that’s why I go to Orari now for whitebaiting. I would rather whitebait at Opihi but if water sits there for weeks and you catch it you can taste it and smell it when you eat it. Since the dams been up there the water quality down here has been bad

There are flounders we are finding now because of the quality of water in the lagoon and unless the mouth is open constantly then the patiki is muddy are horrible to taste. We don’t even bother going out when the mouth is closed. It’s tainted

Whitebait has dropped off in quantity with sometimes having a reasonable season but 99% of time it has diminished and more whitebaiters.

Loss of access to sites

We can’t use our methods. We can’t go to our sites – we need to ask permission. The species we used to catch have changed

We know what the river supported. The traditional methods of managing/harvesting are not permitted e.g. they cull swans and geese – we would take the eggs. That will limit numbers. We are limited to having an interest in traditional species but there have been impacts. We should be able to develop and take species that have replaced our traditional ones

Whanau can no longer gather food and materials where and how they did historically because of the private property rights of landowners which are often enforced by fences and trespass notices. This loss has been intensified by the inability to traverse many riverbeds which should be accessible to the public because of obstacles and / or willow growth. It also reinforces the need for high quality “useable” waters in the river reaches that are still accessible.

Loss of opportunities to utilize reserve lands and waters Some whanau expressed their anger at being denied the opportunity to derive an economic benefit from their reserves. For example, the potential for the development of land based aquaculture initiatives was identified by one member. However, that informant explained that for any initiative that involves controlled fish propagation to work, one critical factor that needs to be resolved is water. Steady supplies must be maintained. Without good quality water of sufficient quantities, aquaculture remains a dream.

Another whanau simply asked if water would be available to enable use of Maori reserve lands in the future. The observation was made that it is easy to quantify the amounts of water that might be needed if lands were to be developed.

Adverse effects on groundwater and the loss of springs Ngai Tahu believe that managers must recognize the interconnections of different waters within a catchment and manage as a whole integrated system rather than applying separate allocation regimes. As one informant explained

“Flows in rivers depend on rainfall and springs, springs depend on groundwater, groundwater depends on rainfall and flows to replenish – you can’t take water from the river, the spring and the ground…how is that sustainable”

Whanau are concerned at the lowering groundwater levels which has impacted springs in the riparian margin. There are numerous springs in the Lower Opihi, Temuka, Dobies and Taumatakahu that whanau believe are essential to sustaining the health of the system. Groundwater levels need to recover.

Adverse effects on coastal resources. So long as the rivers flow, water will find its way to the sea. The coasts of Te Wai Pounamu are highly valued, as evidenced by the commonly used phrase “mana whenua, mana moana” – which confirms the right to gather from the land and the sea. Kai moana (foods gathered from the sea) was, and continues to be, sourced around the coast.

Ngai Tahu whanau were adamant that having insufficient quantities of water, that is often of poor quality, reaching the coast must be affecting the coastal environment. They also contended that this interface is not investigated by resource managers and researchers.

Introducing “new water” to the catchment. In order to meet future demands, water needs to be made available where it is needed and when it is needed. This statement suggests that water is to be stored and conveyed from its source to where it is needed. Whanau fear that a new wave of infrastructure development is on the horizon. Whanau from Arowhenua have been faced with the prospect of transferring water from the Waitaki over Burkes Pass since 1992. Tangata whenua hold serious concerns for the Opihi if glacial fed water from the Waitaki system or any other glacial source is introduced to the catchment. Discussions about “new water” need to involve Te Runanga o Arowhenua.

In-catchment storage. Over the year a number of sites have been suggested for in-catchment storage. Of particular concern to whanau was using Te Ana Wai for in- catchment storage of water which would cause significant cultural losses. Traditional lands and archaeological sites (rock art and shelters) would be at risk of being flooded and/or destroyed. Given these detrimental impacts, there are major concerns that the potential sites will irreversibly alter the cultural landscapes of the Opihi River catchment.

62 | P a g e

6.2 AN UNHEALTHY OPIHI CATCHMENT

Pulling all these concerns together from the previous paragraphs, we are able to illustrate, in Figure 4, what an unhealthy and well Opihi catchment would look like.

AN UNHEALTHY & DEGRA DED OPIHI CATCHMENT

ECOLOGICAL A system with connections broken DEGRADATION Low/no flows break downstream connections Riparian margins cleared. Willows/gorse/weeds now present. Wetlands drained, springs lost Stopbanks present Floodgates (Orari) Knowledge & perception Declining populations of native confirm that the river is Instream habitat in lower Unnatural discharges lead to flora & fauna, some lost from unhealthy and unfit for a range reaches lost poor quality (e.g., algal blooms, historical gathering areas of uses sediment, e-coli, nutrients) Other habitats degraded Eels aare in decline cautions against recreation

ECONOMIC Fear that opportunities Customary fishing impacted by Fish farming could be Waih taonga and tourism OPPORTUNITIES to use Māori lands & over-exploitation, low flows, necessary to restore impacted by degraded assets may be lost poor water quality, loss of stocks in degraded areas river. Inappropriate LIMITED forever habitats, impacted recruitment management impacts taonga

CULTURAL SOCIAL IMPACT HUMAN ILLNESS IMPACT & Environmental (river) change led to relocation of whānau, Loss of sites Opportunities for LOSS loss of physical connections & species whanaungatanga & to awa, marae resulted interacting with Recreation unsafe, e.g., communities limited water quality, algae, Loss of access swimming to waterways Loss of opportunities Whānau and hapū leaving for intergenerational and losing opportunities to learning & interaction engage with the marae and No exercise from being Rashes, sores, illness catchment in and around awa

6.3 THE FUTURE SOUGHT BY TE RUNANGA O AROWHENUA

The Opihi – Temuka system restored as a mahinga kai.

• Water flows in rivers increased, especially lowland streams.

• Flow variability (especially higher flows seasonally) to restore passage for migratory native fish species

• Allocation of water for cultural purposes (for Opihi, Temuka, Orari, Rangitata)

• Water quality protected where currently high, and where degraded improved to drinkable quality, especially around Arowhenua Marae (surface and groundwater)

• Increased native fish populations, especially mahinga kai species

• Awarua protected as a wai taoka

• Valued characteristics of waterways protected e.g. gorges, springs etc.

• Instream habitats restored in the Temuka and Opihi: artificial habitats installed in the short term

• No algal blooms in lower reaches of Opihi and Temuka Rivers (incl. tributaries)

• Streams fenced off and stock excluded – a priority for the lowlands.

• Water quality (contaminants, temperature, algae etc) in the lagoon is improved

• Flows / levels in springs in riparian margins are restored and protected, especially the lower reaches

63 | P a g e

• Rock art sites protected from damage due to inappropriate water management (irrigation, drainage, microclimates)

• Water security (quantity and quality) for the marae and papakainga at Arowhenua

• Kotare restored, Te Ana Wai protected from damming / storage, Opihi flow regime revisited (higher with seasonal variations), Temuka River flows increased, Orakipoua protected from its source to sea.

• Needs of indigenous fish species are prioritised.

• Floodgate at Orari mouth retrofitted and connected to the old river channel and mouth to restore the indigenous fishery.

• Use of reserves and easements enabled by flow allocations and good water quality

• All spring heads protected with a buffer zone (& statutory provisions) in place.

• Species are free of heavy metal contamination and safe to eat.

• Ecan engineers change their instream management practices to protect instream functioning (including habitats)

Mo tatou a mo ka uri a muri ake nei

64 | P a g e

BIBLIOGRAPHY Canterbury Regional Council (1990). Opihi-Temuka River and Catchment: Issues and Options. Canterbury Regional Council: Christchurch.

Canterbury Regional Council (1995). Opihi River Augmentation. Canterbury Regional Council: Christchurch.

Dacker, W. (1990). Belonging here/Toi Taketake. The People and the Place: Mahika Kai. New Zealand Commission: Wellington.

De Joux, R. T. (1982). The water resources of the Opihi and Temuka Rivers. South Canterbury Catchment Board and Regional Water Board: Timaru.

Dodson, J. Steel, K. (November 2016) Current state of surface water hydrology in the Opihi and Temuka catchments Report No. R16/46 ISBN 978-0-947511-71-5 (print) 978-0-947511-72-2 (web)

Hayward, S. Clarke, G. Dynes, K. Barnden, A. Arthur, J. Barbour, S. (November 2016) Orari, Temuka, Opihi and Pareora Zone: state and trends in water quality and aquatic ecology Report No. R16/63 ISBN 978-0-947511-14-2 (print) 978-0-947511-15-9 (web)

Harris Consulting (2006). The Opuha Dam: An ex-post study of its impacts on the provincial economy and community. Environment Canterbury: Christchurch.

Harris Consulting (2009). Modelling the Canterbury Water Management Strategy area: Draft report prepared for Environment Canterbury. Environment Canterbury: Christchurch.

Hearnshaw, E. J. S. (2009). A post-classical economic approach to ecosystem management. Unpublished PhD thesis, Lincoln University: Christchurch.

Hearnshaw, E. J. S., Cullen, R. and Hughey, K. F. D. (2010). Ecosystem services review of water storage projects in Canterbury: The Opihi River case. Faculty of Commerce Report, Lincoln University: Christchurch.

Harding, J. S., Mosley, M. P., Pearson, C. P. and Sorrell, B. K. (eds.). Freshwaters of New Zealand. New Zealand Hydrological Society and New Zealand Limnological Society: Christchurch.

Scarf, F., Waugh, J. R. and Swete, K. N. (1984). Opihi River Water Management Plan 1984-1990. South Canterbury Catchment and Regional Water Board: Timaru.

Worrall, J. (2007). A Dream Fulfilled – The Story of the Opuha Dam. Opuha Dam Limited: Timaru.

Zarour, H. Aitchison-Earl, P. Scott, M Peaver, L. De Silva, J. (August) 2016Current state of the groundwater resource in the Orari-Temuka- Opihi Pareora area Report No. R16/41 ISBN 978-0-947511-62-3 (print) ISBN 978-0-947511-63-0 (web)

65 | P a g e

66 | P a g e

APPENDIX 1 SUMMARY MAPS

67 | P a g e

68 | P a g e

MANAWHENUA LAND INTERESTS

Nohoanga are found throughout the catchment.

17. Haehae te Moana River – Trails inland to the Upper Waitaki

19. Temuka River (lower reaches) - Proximity to Marae, proximity to papakainga housing, and proximity 23 Te Ana Wai - Nohoanga to urupa resulting from the settlement

22. Orakipaoa - Historic pa 1 Kotare – Stream flows (Waiteruati) within the wetland, through reserve lands puna and stream complex. proximity to reserve lands

Waitarakao - fishing easement awarded 10. Opihi River at lagoon – Lower Opihi River is adjacent to reserve lands

Orari - fishing easements awarded 1868 1. Kotare Stream 13. Station Creek 2. German Creek 14. Opuha River 3. Totara Valley Creek 15. Waihi River 4. Rocky Gully 16. Dobies Stream 5. Little Opawa River 17. Haehaetemoana 6. Coal Stream 18. Kakahu 7. Strathconan Stream 19. Temuka River 8. Halls Stream 20. Raupo Creek 9. Welshot Stream 21. Orakipaoa 10. Opihi River 22. Taumatakahu 11. Firewood Stream 23. Te Ana Wai 12. South Opuha river

Manse Bridge across the Temuka SH1 Bridges across the Opihi and Temuka Rivers

69 | P a g e

11. Firewood Stream - It is a feeder stream in beautiful condition. 13. Station Stream - Very good stream that is still in good quality. ISSUES & ASPIRATIONS There is a concern re the potential impact of stock. It needs to be It is to be protected. fenced off. No alteration is to be permitted. 14. Opuha - Contamination is a concern for whanau. Lack of variability in the flow impacts the river downstream of the 10. Opihi River incl. lagoon - The quality diminishes as you dam. Mid range flows are needed. No further modification to move downstream. Serious concerns at the estuary re tributaries upstream of the Opuha. toxicity, mouth closures, smells, and temperature changes.

The effects of low flows in the tributaries is compounded in the Opihi. “It needs its variability back”. Mid range flows are needed. 15. Waihi - There are legacy contamination issues (mill, flax mill, wool scour). Low flows are a concern but the river never runs dry. The upper reaches are in good condition. Contamination issues need to be addressed. Low flows need to be addressed. 6. Coal Stream It is a beautiful stream that whanau want to see protected. Taonga species are present. No alteration is to be permitted. Bush is to be retained. Springs in the hillside are to be protected. 17. Haehae te moana - There is a part of the catchment that is spring fed and flows into a rock pool. There is deep cold water 7. Strathconan It is a beautiful stream near Coal and a chasm. It is a valued site for Stream. The source springs are to be protected. rejuvenation, swimming, picnicking. It is a valued cultural landscape that needs to be protected. Rock features in the catchment need to be protected. The depth of water 5. Little Opawa - These are and its temperature are to be protected. important feeders to Te Ana Wai. Two of the feeders flow all year round. This stream links to the rock art sites in Manahune. Quality is 18. Kakahu - Blue green algae can be a adequate at present. It currently problem. It is augmented by Opuha water. supports eels and other fish species. Whanau want to see upper reaches Source waters need to be protected. protected as a priority. Remnant patches of

native bush are to be protected. This stream is seen to be in need of some “TLC”. The 23 Te Ana Wai - Significant rock art in the upper reaches of the catchment are in very catchment. The variability in the Opihi comes good condition. It is on record as from this system. Parts are degraded because of supporting a population of whio although stock access so This river supports a lot of kai the status of this today is uncertain. species and provides a refuge for eels. Water

quality is average but is seen as being “at risk”. No damming or regulation is to be permitted. Exclusion of stock is a priority. Landscapes 16. Dobies - Whanau are concerned at the comprising rock features, art, river patterns etc contaminants in this creek. It is known for need to be protected. sustaining fat eels along its entire length. It has a 20. Raupo Creek - It provides some good year round flow. It is heavily silted. Water refuges for eels as in place it is too quality improvement is a priority. Sources of silt deep to use. It flows into the Temuka need to be identified and the impacts mitigated. 1. Kotare - This is spring fed and it is of good providing poor quality water. It is quality. Whanau believe the stream to be at risk important to retain its depth and the from nearby human influences. It is good for pools in particular. eeling and gathering watercress. It is adjacent to a reserve. It is important to retain the depth of 19. Temuka River - This river is degraded. The water and the temperature. Issues of pollutants are believed to come from the Kakahu and contamination from septic tanks and long drops Raupo Creek. Willows need to be removed. The need to be investigated. Protecting eel habitat shingle needs to be managed so that the braided needs to be a management priority. character can return. The depth and velocity of water needs to be restored. It needs to be restored as a mahinga kai.

22. Orakipaoa - This is a significant 21. Taumatakahu - It feeds into the Rathole - It is highly degraded. It is very deep. It cultural landscape, associated with lagoon. Its condition impacts the is on Millers Farm. It is an important mahinga the pa. it is to be protected. health of the lagoon. Its quality and kai historically. The site should be restored as a its flow need to be restored and mahinga kai. Whanau are concerned at this protected. sites poor condition. The area is to be fenced

so that stock are excluded.

11. Firewood Stream 1. Kotari Stream 12. South Opuha river 2. German Creek 13. Station Creek 3. Totara Valley Creek 14. Opuha River 4. Rocky Gully 15. Waihi River 5. Little Opawa River 16. Dobies Stream 6. Coal Stream 17. Haehaetemoana 7. Strathconan Stream 18. Kakahu 8. Halls Stream 19. Temuka River 9. Welshot Stream 20. Raupo Creek 10. Opihi River 21. Orakipaoa 22. Taumatakahu 23. Te Ana Wai 70 | P a g e

Manse Bridge across the Temuka SH1 Bridges across the Opihi and Temuka Rivers

11. Firewood Stream

TAONGA SPECIES, INCL. MAHINGA KAI Alpine galaxias, Canterbury galaxias, 12. South Opuha

Longfin eel, Canterbury galaxias, Upland bully, Shortfin eel

10. Opihi River system - Long tail bat, Black billed gulls, open water divers, swamp rail, Australasian bittern, deep and shallow waders, waterfowl, gulls, terns, riparian species Banded dotterel and Black front 14. Opuha - Long tail bat, terns, Black fronted dotterels, White Common bully, Torrentfish, winged black terns, Marsh crake, Caspian Longfin eel, Upland bully, tern, Pied stilt, Pukeko, Upland bully, Upland and Canterbury galaxias, Common bully, Torrentfish, Bluegill bully, short fin eels, 15. Waihi Longfin eel, Canterbury galaxias, Shortfin Upland bully, Canterbury galaxias, eel, Lamprey, Common smelt, Yellow eye Longfin eel, Shortfin eel, Koura, mullet, Freshwater mussel, Dusky galaxias, Freshwater mussel, Freshwater Freshwater shrimp, Koura shrimp

6. Coal Stream - Canterbury 17. Haehae te moana galaxias, upland bully Upland bully, Canterbury galaxias, Freshwater mussel, Freshwater shrimp, Koura, Freshwater mussel

18. Kakahu

4. Rocky Gully Long tail bat, Upland bully, Canterbury galaxias, upland Shortfin eel, Longfin eel, Common bully, bully, Koura,

23 Te Ana Wai 19. Temuka Bridge - Manse Bridge

Long tail bat, open water divers, Upland bully, Koura, Freshwater deep and shallow water waders, 22. Orakipaoa shrimp, Freshwater mussel gulls, terns ,Canterbury galaxias, “Full of eels”, common bully, long fin eels, banded kokopu, Inanga, cultivations short fin eels, upland bully,

1. Kotari Stream 13. Station Creek 2. German Creek 14. Opuha River 3. Totara Valley Creek 15. Waihi River 4. Rocky Gully 16. Dobies Stream 5. Little Opawa River 17. Haehaetemoana 6. Coal Stream 18. Kakahu 7. Strathconan Stream 19. Temuka River 8. Halls Stream 20. Raupo Creek 9. Welshot Stream 21. Orakipaoa 10. Opihi River 22. Taumatakahu 11. Firewood Stream 23. Te Ana Wai 12. South Opuha river

Manse Bridge across the Temuka SH1 Bridges across the Opihi and Temuka Rivers

71 | P a g e

SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY TRENDS

14. Opuha @ Skipton

Clarity (Turbidity) – meaningful degradation

Nitrogen (AN) –– meaningful degradation

10. Opihi River (Rockwood) 15. Waihi @ Waimarie Ecoli – Measurable improvement Clarity (Turbidity) – meaningful degradation Clarity (Black disk) - Measurable improvement Nitrogen (AN) –– meaningful degradation DRP –Meaningful degradation

19. Temuka River @ Manse Bridge

Ecoli – Meaningful degradation 10. Opihi @ Grassy Banks Clarity - Black disk – Meaningful improvement

Turbidity – Meaningful degradation

Nitrogen

• TN – Meaningful degradation • TON – Meaningful degradation • AN – Meaningful degradation

Phosphorus

• DRP – Meaningful degradation • TP – Meaningful degradation

pH – Significant improvement

11. Firewood Stream 1. Kotari Stream 12. South Opuha river 2. German Creek 13. Station Creek 3. Totara Valley Creek 14. Opuha River 4. Rocky Gully 15. Waihi River 5. Little Opawa River 16. Dobies Stream 6. Coal Stream 17. Haehaetemoana 7. Strathconan Stream 18. Kakahu 8. Halls Stream 19. Temuka River 9. Welshot Stream 20. Raupo Creek 10. Opihi River 21. Orakipaoa 22. Taumatakahu 23. Te Ana Wai 72 | P a g e

Manse Bridge across the Temuka SH1 Bridges across the Opihi and Temuka Rivers

14. Opuha

• Skipton bridge - Ecoli – 46/100mls PUBLIC HEALTH • Dam - Contact recreation grades - 2012-13 = Very Good, 15. Waihi 2013-14 = Very Good, 2014-15 = Waihi Gorge Very Good • Ewarts Crossing - Contact • Ecoli – 120/100mls recreation grades - 2012-13 = • Recreation risk – Caution 10. Opihi (Rockwood) Fair, 2013-14 = Fair, 2014-15 = Waimarie Ecoli – 70/100mls Fair • Recreation Reserve - Contact • Ecoli – 27 /100mls

recreation grades - 2012-13 = Geraldine Good; 2013-14 = Good; 2014-15 = Very Good • Toxic benthic cyanobacteria 10. Opihi (Saleyards) warning

Ecoli – 32/100mls

Rec Standard – Caution 17. Haehaetemoana

Contact recreation grades - 2012-13 = Fair, Te Moana Gorge 2013-14 = Good, 2014-15 = Good • Contact Recreation Grades - Toxic benthic cyanobacteria warnings 2012-13 = Fair, 2013-14= Fair, 2014-15= Fair

Glentohi

• Ecoli – 42/100mls

10. Opihi (SH1)

Ecoli – 34/100mls

Rec Standard – Caution 19. Temuka (Manse Bridge) Toxic benthic cyanobacteria warnings Ecoli – 134/100mls

Toxic benthic cyanobacteria warnings

10. Opihi (Waipopo) 19. Temuka (SH1 Bridge)

Ecoli – 61/100m Overall recreation risk – Caution

Rec Standard – Caution 10. Opihi (Grassy banks) Ecoli – 43/100mls

Contact recreation grades - 2012-13 = Ecoli - 45/100mls Good; 2013-14 = Fair; 2014-15 = Fair

Toxic benthic cyanobacteria warning

22. Taumatakahu

Ecoli – 290 /100mls

1. Kotare Stream 12. South Opuha river 2. German Creek 13. Station Creek 3. Totara Valley Creek 14. Opuha River 4. Rocky Gully 15. Waihi River 5. Little Opawa River 16. Dobies Stream 6. Coal Stream 17. Haehaetemoana 7. Strathconan Stream 18. Kakahu 8. Halls Stream 19. Temuka River 9. Welshot Stream 20. Raupo Creek 10. Opihi River 21. Orakipaoa 11. Firewood Stream 22. Taumatakahu 23. Te Ana Wai

Manse Bridge across the Temuka SH1 Bridge across the Opihi River 73 | P a g e

14. Opuha (Skipton Bridge)

Nitrogen NITROGEN & PHOSHORUS • TN – 0.3865 g/ms3 15. Waihi (Waimarie) • TON- 0.2165 g/ms3 • AN – 0.006 g/ms3 (MD) Nitrogen

Phosphorus • TN – 0.1955 g/ms3 • TON- 0.1515 g/ms3 • DRP – 0.001 g/ms3 • AN – 0.005 g/ms3 (MD) • TP – 0.01 g/ms3 • Phosphorus 10. Opihi (Rockwood) • DRP – 0.0043 g/ms3 • TP – <0.008g/ms3 Nitrogen • • TN – 1.2155 g/ms3 • TON- 1.074 g/ms3 • AN – 0.006 g/ms3 17. Haehaetemoana (Glentohi)

Phosphorus Nitrogen

• DRP – 0.005 g/ms3 (MD) • TN – 0.14 g/ms3 • TP – 0.0085 g/ms3 • TON- 0.07 g/ms3 • AN – 0.005 g/ms3 Phosphorus

• DRP – 0.004 g/ms3 • TP – <0.008 g/ms3 •

19. Temuka (Manse Bridge)

Nitrogen

• TN – 1.9 g/ms3 • TON- 1.44 g/ms3 10. Opihi (Grassy Banks) • AN – 0.006 g/ms3

Nitrogen Phosphorus

• TN – 0.5845 g/ms3 (MD) • DRP – 0.009 g/ms3 • TON- 0.4715 g/ms3 (MD) • TP – 0.011 g/ms3 • AN – 0.006 g/ms3 (MD) •

Phosphorus 22. Taumatakahu • DRP – 0.005 g/ms3 (MD) • TP – 0.008 g/ms3 (MD) Nitrogen

• TN – 1.83g/ms3 • TON- 1.7 g/ms3 • AN – 0.021 g/ms3

Phosphorus

• DRP – 0.013 g/ms3 • TP – 0.0255 g/ms3

1. Kotare Stream 12. South Opuha river 2. German Creek 13. Station Creek 3. Totara Valley Creek 14. Opuha River 4. Rocky Gully 15. Waihi River 5. Little Opawa River 16. Dobies Stream 6. Coal Stream 17. Haehaetemoana 7. Strathconan Stream 18. Kakahu 8. Halls Stream 19. Temuka River 9. Welshot Stream 20. Raupo Creek 10. Opihi River 21. Orakipaoa 11. Firewood Stream 22. Taumatakahu 23. Te Ana Wai

Manse Bridge across the Temuka SH1 Bridge across the Opihi River

74 | P a g e

MACROINVERTEBRATE (BIOTIC) & HABITAT HEALTH

12. South Opuha river 1. Kotari Stream 13. Station Creek 2. German Creek 14. Opuha River 3. Totara Valley Creek 15. Waihi River 4. Rocky Gully 16. Dobies Stream 5. Little Opawa River 17. Haehaetemoana 6. Coal Stream 18. Kakahu 7. Strathconan Stream 19. Temuka River 8. Halls Stream 20. Raupo Creek 9. Welshot Stream 21. Orakipaoa 10. Opihi River 22. Taumatakahu 11. Firewood Stream

Manse Bridge across the Temuka SH1 Bridge across the Opihi River

75 | P a g e

12. South Opuha - Stoneleigh Road

STREAM FLOWS & ALLOCATIONS • Mean flow – 3.20ms/3 • Median flow – 2.26ms/3 • 7 day MALF – 0.76ms/3

14. Opuha 10. Opihi - Raincliff Bridge • Mean flow – 9.5ms/3 • Cultural flow preference 2.20ms/3 • Median flow –6.5ms/3 • 7 day MALF – 2.6ms/3 • Allocation (NES) – 1.3ms/3 • Cultural flow preference 2.8ms/3

15. Waihi

• Mean flow – 0.89ms/3 4. Rocky Gully (Rockburn) • Median flow – 0.44ms/3 • Mean flow – 0.32ms/3 • 7 day MALF – 0.13ms/3 • Median flow – 0.18ms/3 • Allocation (NES) – 0.04ms/3 • 7 day MALF – 0.08ms/3 •

17. Haehae te moana (Glentohi) Awarua • Mean flow – 1.11ms/3 • No extraction of water • Median flow – 0.45ms/3 • 7 day MALF – 0.07ms/3 • Allocation (NES) – 0.05ms/3

23 Te Ana Wai 18. Kakahu @ Mulvhills

• Mean flow – 3.9ms/3 • Mean flow – 0.49ms/3 • Median flow – 1.8ms/3 • Median flow – 0.12ms/3 • 7 day MALF – 0.53ms/3 • 7 day MALF – 0.03ms/3 • Allocation (NES) – 0.16ms/3 • Allocation (NES) – 0.01 • Allocation NRRP – 0.09ms/3 • Cultural flow preference 1.2 ms/3 19. Temuka Bridge - Manse Bridge

• Mean flow – 3.18ms/3 Opihi - SH1 Bridge • Median flow – 3.42ms/3 • 7 day MALF – 0.29ms/3 • Mean flow – 15.05ms/3 • Median flow – 8.90ms/3 • 7 day MALF – 2.21ms/3 • Cultural flow preference – 2.20ms/3

1. Kotari Stream 13. Station Creek 2. German Creek 14. Opuha River 3. Totara Valley Creek 15. Waihi River 4. Rocky Gully 16. Dobies Stream 5. Little Opawa River 17. Haehaetemoana 6. Coal Stream 18. Kakahu 7. Strathconan Stream 19. Temuka River 8. Halls Stream 20. Raupo Creek 9. Welshot Stream 21. Orakipaoa 10. Opihi River 22. Taumatakahu 11. Firewood Stream 23. Te Ana Wai 12. South Opuha river

Manse Bridge across the Temuka SH1 Bridges across the Opihi and Temuka Rivers

76 | P a g e

Temuka Bridge - Manse Bridge

• Mean flow – 3.18ms/3 • Median flow – 3.42ms/3 • 7 day MALF – 0.29ms/3

CULTURAL HEALTH INDEX 14. Opuha (at Skipton)

Site Cultural Stream status use health A-1 3.79 2.83

15. Waihi 10. Opihi River system at Raincliff Site Cultural Stream status use health Site Cultural Stream status use health A-1 2.45 3.3 A-1 3.0 2.52 17. Haehae te moana

Site Cultural Stream status use health A-0 3.45 3.28

4. Raupo Creek

Site Cultural Stream 16. Dobies Stream status use health Site Cultural Stream A-0 0 0 status use health

23 Te Ana Wai

Site Cultural Stream 19. Temuka Bridge - Manse Bridge status use health A-1 3.16 3.52 Site Cultural Stream status use health A-1 3.63 2.82 10. Opihi River system at Saleyards Site Cultural Stream status use health 22 Taumatakahu Site Cultural Stream status use health A-1 3.2 2.17

10. Opihi River system at Lagoon

Site Cultural Stream status use health

1. Kotari Stream 13. Station Creek 2. German Creek 14. Opuha River 3. Totara Valley Creek 15. Waihi River 4. Rocky Gully 16. Dobies Stream 5. Little Opawa River 17. Haehaetemoana 6. Coal Stream 18. Kakahu 7. Strathconan Stream 19. Temuka River 8. Halls Stream 20. Raupo Creek 9. Welshot Stream 21. Orakipaoa 10. Opihi River 22. Taumatakahu 11. Firewood Stream 23. Te Ana Wai 12. South Opuha river

Manse Bridge across the Temuka SH1 Bridges across the Opihi and Temuka Rivers

77 | P a g e

SUMMARY OF STATE OF WATERWAYS

14. Opuha

DRP In the best 25% of like sites TP In the best 25% of like sites pH In the best 25% of like sites

10. Opihi River (at Rockwood)

15. Waihi (at Waimarie) Turbidity In the best 25% of like sites Ecoli In the best 25% of like sites TN In the worst 25% of like sites Turbidity In the best 25% of like sites DRP In the best 25% of like sites TN In the best 25% of like sites TP In the best 25% of like sites DRP In the best 25% of like sites pH In the best 25% of like sites TP In the best 25% of like sites pH In the best 25% of like sites

17. Haehae te moana at Glentohi

Turbidity In the best 25% of like sites TN In the best 25% of like sites DRP In the best 25% of like sites TP In the best 25% of like sites

23 Te Ana Wai

Ecoli In the best 25% of like sites Turbidity In the best 25% of like sites DRP In the worst 50% of like sites 21. Taumatakahu Ecoli In worst of 25% of like sites TN In worst of 25% of like sites DRP In worst of 50% of like sites 10. Opihi Grassy Banks TP In worst of 50% of like sites pH In best of 25% of like sites Turbidity In the best 25% of like sites TN In the worst of 50% of like sites DRP In the best 25% of like sites TP In the best 25% of like sites pH In the best 25% of like sites

11. Firewood Stream 1. Kotari Stream 12. South Opuha river 2. German Creek 13. Station Creek 3. Totara Valley Creek 14. Opuha River 4. Rocky Gully 15. Waihi River 5. Little Opawa River 16. Dobies Stream 6. Coal Stream 17. Haehaetemoana 7. Strathconan Stream 18. Kakahu 8. Halls Stream 19. Temuka River 9. Welshot Stream 20. Raupo Creek 10. Opihi River 21. Orakipaoa 22. Taumatakahu 23. Te Ana Wai

Manse Bridge across the Temuka SH1 Bridges across the Opihi and Temuka Rivers 78 | P a g e

79 | P a g e

APPENDIX 2 SOME OF THE CHANGES IN THE OPIHI CATCHMENT

80 | P a g e

81 | P a g e

Some of the changes that occurred in the Opihi Catchment

1000 - 1700 Originally much of country was covered in scrub, matagouri, Manuka, ti-tree, flax and cabbage trees. The rivers run in wide beds but little below the level of the land and on much of this type of country water is found not far from the surface. The numerous springs and creeks bear evidence of this and under such circumstances trees flourish and prosper. Settlement at Orakipaoa, pa was called Waiateruati. Other nohoanga were located between this place and the mouth of the Opihi River. Orakipaoa has evidence of occupation. Temuka was a crossing place – fords for Opihi and Temuka Over time Hawea, Rapuwai, Waitaha, Ngati Mamoe lived and used the catchment before Ngai Tahu came south Land tenure and use based on wakawaka and rights Whanau lived on resources from lands and waters, and trade – a resource led calendar of gathering and use Rock art drawn in the catchment 1700 Ngai Tahu came south 1770 Captain Cook sees fires on land (near the mouth of the Waitaki) 1773 Captain Cook introduces potato, cabbage, onions, pigs to New Zealand 1848 Kemps Purchase – the sale of land to the Crown. Mantell identifies reserves to be allocated 1849 Matiaha Tiramorehu lodges the “Ngai Tahu Claim” against the land purchase and the broken promises 1851 Lands are opened up for settlers 1851 Mantell writes of his intent to allocate insufficient lands to Ngai Tahu

1852 The Orari diverted from the Waihi-Temuka systems and established a new course to the sea. Necessary cos the Orari was joined to Waihi / Temuka after flood. 1853 Temuka is considered to have been founded when the first European settler, William Hornbrook, established a camp on the site. 1858 Temuka gazetted as a town 1858 Flood in Opihi Maori settlement called Arowhenua becomes more prominent. Maori moved there to protect bush and gardens. Other nohoanga were located between this place and the mouth of the Opihi River. 1859 First settlers described “paradise and grey ducks in millions and many other birds”. “native pigeons, woodhens, native trout, freshwater crayfish, eels, kiore”. 1859 Settlers observed “the best land was swampy and called for the removal of flax and niggerheads as well as systematic draining and what was more difficult much of it has to be stumped before it could be cultivated. 1859 5000 pigs (released by Captain Cook) killed on Mount Peel 1863 Fire destroyed the bush at Temuka (lying between the Opihi and Temuka) 1863 Samuel Hewlings, a surveyor, bought an area north and west of the present Main South Road adjacent to the Government town of Arowhenua and laid out a town which he called Wallingford after his Berkshire birthplace. Wallingford – which eventually became the principal business part of Temuka – and Arowhenua were later created town districts. 1866 The name Temuka came into more general use as a collective name for Wallingford. The name Temuka, transferred to the town from the nearby river, is stated to be properly Te Umu Kaha. 1866 Magpies released to the district. Temuka was important place in the early days of travelling. It was the principal stopping place south of Christchurch till Timaru was reached. It was the regular place of call for the bullock drivers, as there was plenty of both feed and water for bullocks, more so than at Timaru. The Opihi River in those days was difficult to negotiate, and a punt ferry service had to be maintained. Tommy's creek was a favourite place and the loss of both human and animal life was not unknown in crossing the rivers when in flood. Tommy’s correct name is Tarawhata. The crossing was down by the rail way line after a brawl (Maori won) they wanted it where SH1. But they were pushed them down to Georgetown by the railway line on the east side. 1868 The great flood in Canterbury in February, 1868, seriously affected the new settlement at Temuka. It was made still worse by the Orari River overflowing its southern bank, where the railway line now crosses the river, which added considerably to the volume, of water coming down the Waihi, Hae- Hae-Te-Moana, and Kakahu rivers. Waihi reported to have risen 17 feet. 1868 Fenton decision in the Native land court awarding more reserves to Ngai Tahu Reserves set aside at Arowhenua, Waipopo, Orari, Raukapuka Waitarakao The swamp land towards the sea coast was drained 1869 Trout released into Te Ana Wai 1869 1870 Trout released into Opuha Gorge 1872 Acknowledgement that in relation to Kemps Purchase “a promise of important character was not kept” 1874 South Canterbury Acclimatisation Society established. 1876 Petition by Moeraki and Arowhenua Maori re Kemps Purchase and the failure to honour its terms 1876 Hares released (Levels). Pheasants released. 1877 Deer released 1878/79 Large number of parakeets and kaka flying in Temuka areas destroying crops. Last seen in large numbers. 1878 Stack views rock art 1879 Observation in Temuka Leader that “well cultivated farms and beautiful homesteads” established. 1879 Von Haast views rock art at Weka Pass 1879 HK Taiaroa recorded mahinga kai sites across the Central South Island 1880s Localised works on Orari – Opihi to protect bridge construction 1881 Trout released into the Opuha Gorge 1881 Rangitata – Orari water supply – 100 miles of open races, headworks Orari Gorge (north side), Area watered 4,200acres. 1888 Woodbury water supply, 25 miles open races, headworks Waihi Gorge, Waihi River, Area watered 3400 acres. 1889 Orari-Waihi water supply, 30 miles open races, headworks Orari Gorge, Orari River (south side), Area watered 4100 acres. 1891 Waitohi water supply, 14 miles open races, headworks Opihi River, supplying 8882 acres (until 9141). 1891 Another Royal Commission 1892 Geraldine Flat water supply, 5 miles open races, headworks Hae hae te moana, supplying 2300 acres. 1893 Four Peaks water supply, 20 miles open races, headworks Hear River, supplying 1100 acres. 1899 Royal Commission 1899 The town districts of Wallingford and Arowhenua were amalgamated and constituted the borough of Temuka. At Winchester there was a flourmill, a woolscouring works, a sawmill, a seed-cleaning plant, and a concrete products factory. Early 1900s anglers are using boats to fish for trout in large ponds between SH and sea. 1902 Orari River overflowed in Waihi Temuka system. 1902 Orari River overflowed in Waihi Temuka system. 1904 Rivers “full of fish”

82 | P a g e

1904 Clandeboye Milk Plant opens Orton Dairy Factory Milford Dairy 1904/5 Option of dam in the Opihi first mooted 1914 Kakahu-Te Moana water supply, 15 miles open races, headworks Maori creek, supplying 3800 acres. 1915 Opihi River ran dry 1920 Trout up to 20 pound in the Opihi 9 June 1920 Mouth modified to flow straight out to sea 1925 Quinnat salmon observed in the Opihi. 1926 Geraldine Downs Raukapuka piped supply – 400 acres watered by troughs. Headworks Hare River. 1929 The Opihi River flooded Temuka and Arowhenua 1930s Construction of Levels Plains Irrigation Scheme on rivers flows in the Opihi 1931 SC Acclimatisation Society gave out eel baskets to farmers – 471 eels returned that year. 1931-1932 Opihi River ran dry 1934 Using eel baskets farmers returned 4270 eels 1934 Fertiliser first applied by air 1935 Fisherman query the impact of Levels Plains Irrigation Scheme on rivers flows in the Opihi 1937/1938 Water first flowed from Levels Plains Irrigation Scheme 5600ha (originally 3700ha) 1939 Manse Road built 1941 Downlands Pipe Supply water supply, Area supplied 30,000 acres with troughs, 141 dwellings. 1942 Flax factory operating 1944 Government paid £300,000 for settlement of the Ngai Claim (to be paid over 10 years) 1944 Lime crushing plant was crushed 10 tonnes per day. 1940 50 hill country farms top-dressed. 1945 Widespread flooding affected Geraldine and Temuka and northern half of Levels Plains. Orari overflowed into the Waihi. 1946 Opihi topped the floodbanks at Saleyards Road. 1951 Initiated a stop-gap control scheme. 1954-1968 Major construction of the Orari-Waihi-Temuka flood control scheme 1960s Herds of deer well established in Opihi 1960 Eldon (1960) estimated 90kg/ha of eels in Opihi 1961 Opihi broke its banks at Saleyards Bridge and flooded Pleasant Point and part of Levels Plains 1970s Forest established at Kakahu 1972 Stopbanks constructed on the Opihi – designed to handle 50 year return period. 1972 Observation by anglers that there were lots of eels. 1983 Todd (1983) estimated the lagoon had lost significant lands (58ha) since 1881. 1986 Te Ana Wai flood was 1450 cumecs 1986 Evans (1986) observed that stopbanks and riparian planting had narrowed channel and reduced braids. 1990s Opihi Augmentation Society first mooted transferring water from Lake Tekapo 1986 1986 Huge flood in south Canterbury, Opihi, Temuka and Orari catchments. Pl Point, Winchester and Temuka evacuated 1986 Quota management system. Eels into the QMS. 1989 The Ngai Tahu Claim heard by the Waitangi Tribunal 1990s Opuha Dam Partnership being formed 1992 The Opihi River Regional Plan established an Opuha Environmental Flow Release Advisory Group (OEFLRG) comprising one representative each for the dam, for stakeholders of in-stream values (appointed jointly by Department of Conservation and Central South Island Fish & Game Council), takatä whenua, irrigators (appointed by South Canterbury Federated Farmers), and Timaru and Mackenzie district council 1992 Approximately 10,000 tonnes 1990s Blakely Pacific buy Kakahu Forest (and hold FSC certification over forest). 1994 Te Ana Wai flood was 1030 cumecs. 1995 Totara Valley Irrigation Scheme 1400ha 1995 Consents to build Opuha 1997 Opuha Dam collapse 1998 Opuha Dam operational – irrigates 16000ha 1998 Ngai Tahu Claim Settlement 1998 In June 1998 resource consents were granted to the Opuha Dam Ltd to construct the Ashwick Canal capable of diverting 4 m3/s of water from the Opihi River below Cloudy Peaks Bridge to the South Opuha River above the Clayton Road. In addition to augmenting water stored behind the Opuha Dam, up to 250 l/s of water was to be used to irrigate up to 610 hectares of land adjacent to the proposed canal. The idea was to abstract flood flows and river freshes from the Opihi River and to discharge that water into Lake Opuha, with a portion of that water being used for spray irrigation of Ashwick Flat. 2000 Landuse in the Opihi catchment is 334,416ha. 2000s Didymo found 2004 Construction of Kakahu Irrigation Company (3200ha) 2004 Approximately 94,000 tonnes urea applied across Canterbury. 2005 Clandeboye expansion – processes 12.4million litres per day 2011 Landuse in the Opihi catchment is 512,347ha 2012 Flood in Te Ana Wai 1025m3/s 2014 Opuha Reservoir dry 2014 Mataitai established 2015 Examination of contaminants in the bed of Lake Opuha

83 | P a g e

PPENDIX 2 APPENDIX 3

MAPBOOK SHOWING SOME OF THE CHANGES IN THE CATCHMENT OVER THE LAST 150 YEARS

84 | P a g e

85 | P a g e

Mapbook Opihi Catchment

In the pages that follow we provide a series of maps:

1. Temuka River between Manse Bridge and State Highway Bridge a. As drawn on the Black Map b. As shown currently. c. Showing all water consents d. Showing gravel takes

2. Opihi River at Grassy Banks a. As drawn on the Black Map b. As shown currently. c. Showing all water consents d. Showing gravel takes

3. Orakipaoa a. As drawn on the Black Map b. As shown currently. c. Showing all water consents d. Showing discharge takes

4. Orari a. As drawn on the Black Map b. As shown currently. c. Showing all water consents d. Showing discharge takes

5. Opihi Lagoon a. As drawn on the Black Map b. As shown currently. c. Showing all water consents d. Showing gravel takes

6. Taumatakahu a. As drawn on the Black Map b. As shown currently.

7. Kotari a. As drawn on the Black Map b. As shown currently.

8. Washdyke a. As drawn on the Black Map b. As shown currently.

86 | P a g e

87 | P a g e

88 | P a g e

89 | P a g e

90 | P a g e

91 | P a g e

92 | P a g e

93 | P a g e

94 | P a g e

95 | P a g e

96 | P a g e

97 | P a g e

98 | P a g e

99 | P a g e

100 | P a g e