Groundwater Consent Are Acceptable for Both Bores (These Are to Be Provided to the Applicant in Draft Form for Final Acceptance)

Medstone Dairy Limited

Resource Consent Application To Renew Consent CRC084945.2 To Take and Use Groundwater

Assessment of Environmental Effects

November 2018

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 3 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ...... 3 2.1 Cultural and Ecological Values of the Hurunui River and Surrounds ...... 3 2.2 Flow and Allocation Regime ...... 4 2.3 Waitohi River ...... 4 2.4 Groundwater ...... 5 2.5 Water Quality ...... 5 2.6 Biodiversity and Dryland Habitat ...... 8 3.0 PLANNING MATTERS ...... 8 3.1 Resource Management Act 1991 (the Act) ...... 8 3.2 Hurunui Waiau River Regional Plan (HWRRP) ...... 9 3.3 Land Water Regional Plan (LWRP) ...... 9 3.4 Case Law ...... 9 3.5 Duration Sought ...... 10 4.0 ASSESSMENT OF ACTUAL AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS ...... 10 4.1 Effects of an Inefficient Take and Reasonable Need...... 11 4.2 Effects of Take on Hurunui River and Waitohi River Flows ...... 11 4.3 Effects on Tangata Whenua Values ...... 12 5.0 PROPOSED CONSENT CONDITIONS ...... 14 6.0 OVERALL ASSESSMENT AGAINST RELEVANT PLANNING DOCUMENTS ...... 14 6.1 Hurunui and Waiau River Regional Plan ...... 14 6.2 Regional Policy Statement ...... 15 6.3 National Policy Statements, Environmental Standards, Regulations...... 16 6.4 Resource Management Act - Part 2 ...... 17

APPENDICES

Appendix 1 Resource Consent CRC084945.2 Appendix 2 Consent Location Map Appendix 3 Bore Logs Appendix 4 Flow Meter Data Appendix 5 Irrigated Area

Appendix 6 IrriCalc Appendix 7 Stream Depletion Assessment

Bowden Environmental Assessment of Environmental Effects Groundwater Abstraction

November 2018

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Medstone Dairy Limited currently holds consent CRC084945.2 (Appendix 1) located on Medbury Road, Medbury, in North Canterbury (Appendix 2). The consent expires on 26 May 2019 and Medstone applies for a replacement at the same rates and volume, i.e. no changes to the current consent.

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

The applicant’s property is located within the Hurunui River Catchment. The Hurunui River drains numerous tributary rivers and lakes. Below the Mandamus recorder site it broadens out into a wide braided river and crosses the Amuri Plains. It then narrows into a single channel where it passes through the Lowry Peaks Gorge, before widening out again and crossing the “Domett Plains” before finally discharging to the sea.

The Hurunui River is characterised by rapid changes in flow and floods at any time of the year, but particularly in winter and spring. Flow data, recorded at the Mandamus recorder site, shows a mean flow of 53 cumecs, a seven day MALF of 16.8 cumecs, a lowest recorded flow of 7.8 cumecs and a highest recorded flow of 1,140 cumecs. The main tributaries of the river below the Mandamus recorder site are the Mandamus River, Waitohi River, Dry Stream, Pahau River, Waikari River and Kaiwara River. A good summary description of the catchment is contained in the HWRRP.

2.1 Cultural and Ecological Values of the Hurunui River and Surrounds

The Hurunui River has statutory acknowledgement pursuant to Section 206 of the Ngai Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998, Schedule 20 for Hoka kura (Lake Sumner) and Schedule 21 for the Hurunui River. There is a strong cosmological link with regards to the formation of the lakes of the Te Wai Pounamu, and it is believed that the lakes were dug by the chief Rakaihautu.

The Hurunui River is a traditional route to the west coast (via the lakes and upper river). Below the confluence with the Mandamus River to the coast the river has medium value for Te Ngai Tuahuriri Rūnanga, otherwise it has high value.

Mauri of the river includes the capacity of the river to renew groundwater flow and surface water stocks; maintaining mahinga kai species and freshwater habitats, including fish passage for migratory fish species; flow variability including floods so that the river “cleanses” itself; continuity of flow from the source to the sea; and naturalness of water quality.

Wahi tapu and urupa sites are found in the area. Waters of the Hurunui were used for rituals. Maori Gully is a section of the greenstone trail to the west coast. Nohanga (settlement) were located at points along the length of the river. Traditionally the Hurunui River was an important tuna (eel) and inanga fishery. This is not so important now as a result of the modified nature of the river, and the depleted fish stocks.

Ecological values of the Hurunui River are also influenced to some extent by anthropogenic factors. During times of low flow periphyton biomass can increase to nuisance levels, probably as a result of increased water temperatures and an increase in nutrients such as dissolved organic nitrogen (DIN) and dissolved organic phosphorus (DRP). Drainage from both the Balmoral Scheme and the Waiau Irrigation Scheme carry contaminants into the Hurunui mainstem. These contaminants affect water quality from the confluence with the Pahau River to the sea. During summer and autumn “algal blooms” come to dominate the riverbed, and comprise filamentous green algae and thick mats of mucilaginous algae. This growth smothers macroinvertebrate habitat, decreases dissolved oxygen concentration (as a result of a breakdown of the algae) and as a consequence decreases the abundance of fish life through a loss of habitat and food. Abstractions draw the river down faster and hold it lower for longer, and therefore exacerbate the frequency and duration of nuisance algal growth.

NIWA freshwater fish database has been searched for fish species present in the Hurunui River. Results gave a list of 14 different species and include; Brown trout, Upland Bully, Longfinned eel, Canterbury galaxies, Torrentfish, Chinook Salmon, Common Smelt, Yelloweyed Mullet, Koaro, Shortfinned eels, Perch, Alpine Galaxias and unidentified galaxiid and salmonid. Fish species found between the Lowry Peaks gorge downstream to the coastal marine boundary include; Upland bully, Canterbury galaxies, Long and shortfinned eels, Common bully, Stockell Smelt and Yellow eyed mullet.

The Hurunui River has medium value habitat for resident brown trout and migratory sea-run brown trout and Chinook salmon. However, it provides only low value habitat for rainbow trout, hence why they are generally not present. Tributaries of the Hurunui River are listed as having low value habitat for salmonid species.

2.2 Flow and Allocation Regime

Floods and freshes play a very important role in maintaining the form, character and habitats associated with the Hurunui River. It is important that abstractions do not reduce the frequency and magnitude of freshes and floods, to ensure removal of vegetation that has colonised gravel bars, prevent nuisance growth of periphyton and provide for salmonid migration.

Reports commissioned by Environment Canterbury indicate that the minimum flow set for the river during the 1980s is inadequate for aquatic ecosystems and flow variability, and further complicated by two different flow regimes, one for Balmoral Scheme irrigators, and one for other abstractors. Therefore, to protect the values of the river and to rationalise the flow regime, the HWRRP has set a new flow and allocation regime. This new regime separates the main stem of the Hurunui River into three areas with separate flow and allocation regimes in Table 1: Environmental Flow and Allocation Regime which sets a minimum flow of 15 m3/s from September to April and 12 m3/s from May to August as measured at the Mandamus recorder site.

2.3 Waitohi River

The property is also located within the Waitohi River Catchment Area, a tributary of the Hurunui River, with the Waitohi River being located on the property’s southern boundary. There is no other recorded surface water on the property. The Waitohi River drains mountain lands to the west of Hawarden. It leaves the hills at Lake Sumner Road and is a braided shingle river where if crosses the plains to the south of Medbury Forest before discharging into the Hurunui River about 2km upstream of the SH7 Hurunui River bridge. In common with many rivers of its type in North Canterbury, its bed has been invaded by exotic plants, willow, broom and gorse.

The report Inventory of Instream Values for Rivers & Lakes of Canterbury New Zealand A Desktop Review (Daly, 2014) outlines that the Waitohi River has moderate to low natural character values with the riparian margins being heavily modified by human activities and exotic plants are predominant. The Waitohi River has moderate values for small game hunting and low value for other recreational activities, including salmon and trout angling.

The Waitohi also has its own environmental flow and allocation regime set in the HWRRP. The minimum flow site is at Lake Sumner Road Bridge and is an all year round flow of 130 l/s with an allocation limit of 500 l/s. There is no further allocation above this “A” allocation limit.

2.4 Groundwater

Groundwater within the area of the Culverden/Hurunui Groundwater Allocation Zone has an allocation limit of 52.8 million cubic meters per year under the HWRRP. The current allocation is thought to be much less than this. Within two kilometres of the subject property there are several recently installed deep bores located on the southern bank of the Hurunui River. These deep bores are highly productive and appear to be separated from the Hurunui River by layers of aquitards (as determined by aquifer tests). The degree of hydraulic connection is required to be determined in accordance with the regime set out in the HWRRP, and highly connected groundwater is to be managed under the relevant river flow regime.

2.5 Water Quality

The HWRRP aims to balance the reduction of the nutrient load in the mainstream and tributaries, while still allowing for additional land to be developed and intensified. There is a catchment nutrient load limit in the upper Hurunui River catchment (i.e. above SH1). Water quality limits are as follows:

 The 95th percentile of monthly periphyton biomass measurements in the mainstem of the Hurunui River shall not exceed 120 mg/m2 chlorophyll a or 20% cover of filamentous algae more than 2 centimetres long  The 95th percentile of monthly periphyton biomass measurements in the Pahau and Waitohi Rivers shall not exceed 200mg/m2 chlorophyll a or 30% cover of filamentous algae more than 2 centimetres long  The average annual dissolved reactive phosphorus concentrations in the mainstem of the Hurunui River shall not exceed 0.0044 mg DRP/L  The annual median and 95th percentile nitrate-nitrogen concentrations in the mainstem of the Hurunui River and its tributaries above the Mandamus flow recorder site shall not exceed 1.1

and 2.0 mg NO3-N/L respectively, these being the chronic nitrate-nitrogen toxicity thresholds for maintaining a 99% level of species protection  The annual median and 95th percentile nitrate-nitrogen concentrations in the mainstem of the Hurunui River, and in its tributaries at their confluence with the mainstem, below the Mandamus

flow recorder site shall not exceed 2.3 and 3.6 mg NO3-N/L respectively, these being the chronic nitrate-nitrogen toxicity thresholds for maintaining a 95% level of species protection  Only allowing land use changes that will not result in a breach of the water quality limits set above, and additionally will not result in a breach of the nitrogen load limit set in Schedule 1, being 963 t/year DIN at the State Highway 1 Flow Recorder site.  While not specified in a policy, there is also a phosphorus load limit of 10.7 t/year at the same site.

There are a number of surface water quality sites in the Hurunui River catchment. The most relevant sites are at the SH1 flow recorder and at SH7 Bridge, i.e. sites SQ34420 and SQ30065 respectively. In addition, NIWA collect samples from the SH1 Bridge area.

Water samples taken at site SQ34420 include a visual assessment of periphyton. Samples were unable to be taken in September 2012 due to high flows. However, older records of weed growth for this site recorded low to nil weed growth, except for a moderate weed growth in February 2001.

While the HWRRP outlines clear thresholds for surface water quality, no specific groundwater quality thresholds have been set; other than to ensure that under Rule 10.1, condition (d) land use shall not cause or contribute to any measured breach of the Resource Management (National Environmental Standards for Human Drinking Water) Regulations 2007 or the guideline values or maximum acceptable values for determinands in the Drinking Water Standards of New Zealand 2008 for any registered drinking water supply

takes. The nearest community drinking water supply take is the Karaka Rural Water Supply bore located 2 kilometres to the southeast of the property and on the opposite side (southern) of the Waitohi River, with the drinking water supply protection zone being located on the south side of the Waitohi River.

The closest water quality site for groundwater is bore M33/0345 and nearby shallow bore M33/0082 (5.6m bgl). Nitrate-nitrogen readings have been taken in 2016 and 2017 for both sites. The readings indicates that nitrate-nitrogen within the shallower groundwater is more highly concentrated with readings ranging from 2.6mg/L to 4.6mg/L compared to the deeper groundwater with concentrations from less than 0.002mg/L to 0.016mg/L (Table 1). The groundwater quality records indicate that the levels of nitrate-nitrogen in groundwater are below the MAV of 11.3mg/L set by Drinking-Water Standards for New Zealand.

Table 1: Water quality records of bores on the property Value Sample Site Collection Date (mg/L) M33/0082 26/06/2017 4.6 M33/0082 9/03/2017 2.8 M33/0082 13/01/2017 2.6 M33/0082 14/10/2016 4.4 M33/0354 9/03/2017 0.016 M33/0354 11/01/2017 < 0.002 M33/0354 14/10/2016 0.004

The property lies within the Waitohi River catchment, a tributary of the Hurunui River. Policy 5.3 seeks to mange water quality in the Hurunui River and its tributaries by setting water quality limits outlined in policy 5.3(a) to 5.3(e). Of these, the relevant water quality limit for the Waitohi River catchment is that the annual median and 95th percentile nitrate nitrogen concentrations shall not exceed 2.3mg NO3/L and 3.6mg NO3/L respectively, at the confluence with the mainstem of the Hurunui River. These thresholds are the chronic nitrate-nitrogen toxicity thresholds for maintaining a 95% level of species protection. Water quality records held by Environment Canterbury for the Waitohi River Catchment are available for both upstream (near the recorder site at Lake Sumner Road Bridge) and downstream of the existing irrigation area (water quality site SQ34865 1.6km upstream of the confluence with the Hurunui River). Water quality site SQ34865 started recoding in April 2005 with the most recent sample being taken in October 2017. At this site, the highest recorded nitrate-nitrogen plus nitrite-nitrogen concentration was 3.3mg/L in July 2014 while the most recent sample recorded 0.78g/m3. Table 2 displays the annual median and 95th percentile values for nitrate nitrogen concentrations in the Waitohi River; these have continuously been less than the 2.3mg/L and 3.6mg/L limits set in Policy 5.3(e).

Table 2: Annual median and 95th percentile nitrate nitrogen concentration readings, Waitohi River. Water Quality Samples for site SQ34865

annual Median Collection Date Parameter Name 95th Percentile (mg/L)

2017 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 1.89 2.78

2016 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 1.16 1.9985

2015 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 1.55 1.909

2014 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 1.585 2.915

2013 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 1.905 2.145

2012 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 1.15 2.1

2011 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.9 1.6

2010 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 1.55 2.19

2009 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 1.15 2.3

2008 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 1.6 2.54

2007 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.93 1.58

2006 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.77 1.445

2005 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 1.2 1.48

2005-2017 (12 yrs) 1.3 2.3

Policy 5.3(e) of the HWRRP states that an annual median and 95th percentile nitrate-nitrogen concentrations in the mainstem of the Hurunui River and in its tributaries at their confluence with the mainstream shall not exceed 2.3 and 3.6mg N/L respectively. Long-term water quality records were obtained from the NIWA National River Water Quality Network (Davies-Colley et al. 2001). The raw data is displayed in mg/m3 which has been converted to mg/L so that the samples are expressed in the same units which are referred to in the HWRRP (1 milligram/cubic metre = 0.001 milligrams/L). Table 3 displays that annual records and indicates that the annual median and 95th percentile nitrate-nitrogen concentrations in the Hurunui River have continuously been less than the 2.3mg/L limit set in Policy 5.3(e).

Table 3: Annual median and 95th percentile nitrate nitrogen concentration readings, Hurunui River at State Highway One (NIWA dataset).

Water Quality SH1 (NIWA data)

Collection Date Parameter Name annual Median (mg/L) 95th Percentile

2017 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.425 0.7166 2016 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.265 0.464 2015 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.229 0.289 2014 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.388 0.65595 2013 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.404 0.73625 2012 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.373 0.62275 2011 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.312 0.5328 2010 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.4925 1.13495 2009 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.366 0.65885 2008 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.497 0.93665 2007 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.3305 0.54475 2006 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.281 0.3592 2005 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.3055 0.5082 2004 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.259 0.39505 2003 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.306 0.5193 2002 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.2085 0.5655 2001 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.347 0.64965 2000 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.304 0.5288 1999 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.3605 0.7654 1998 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.262 0.41375 1997 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.263 0.33505 1996 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.2505 0.42365 1995 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.219 0.5427 1994 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.1785 0.45425 1993 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.1925 0.31125 1992 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.23 0.391 1991 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.205 0.3855 1990 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.1975 0.36225 1989 Nitrate/Nitrite (mg/L) 0.3225 0.66025 1989-2015 (26 yrs) 0.3214 0.6542

2.6 Biodiversity and Dryland Habitat

A review of the Canterbury Regional Council GIS database has been undertaken for the affected environment. This review has indicated that there are no Recommended Areas of Protection, sites of special wildlife significance, wetlands of representative importance, land of outstanding regional significance, land of national significance, or New Zealand Archaeological Association sites within the affected environment. The closest site of importance is the Washpen Stream Flaxland which is recorded as both an area of national significance and a DOC wetland area, located approximately 2.2 kilometres east of the property. In relation to Ngai Tahu values, there are no statutory acknowledgement areas, silent file areas, or runanga sensitive areas within the affected environment.

3.0 PLANNING MATTERS

3.1 Resource Management Act 1991 (the Act)

Section 14 states that:

(1) no person may take, use, dam or divert any – a) Water (other than open coastal water); or unless the taking, use, damming, or diversion is allowed by subsection (3). b) (3) A person is not prohibited by subsection (1) from taking, using, damming, or diverting any water, heat, or energy if – a) The taking, use, damming, or diversion is expressly allowed by a rule in a regional plan [and in any relevant proposed regional plan] or a resource consent; or b) In the case of fresh water, the water, heat, or energy is required to be taken or used for – i. An individual’s reasonable domestic needs; or ii. The reasonable needs of an individual animals for drinking water, - And the taking or use does not, or in not likely to, have an adverse effect on the environment; or .. e) The water is required to be taken or used for fire-fighting purposes.

Therefore unless expressly allowed by a rule in a regional a resource consent is required. Where there is both an operative plan and a proposed plan the most restrictive rule in either plan defines the need for consent and the type of consent.

Section 104. Consideration of applications

Section 104 of the Act states that subject to Part II, when considering an application for a resource consent and any submissions received, the consent authority shall have regard to a number of matters set out in the sections that follow. In particular, s104 (2A) when considering an application affected by section 124, the consent authority must have regard to the value of the investment of the existing consent holder.

Sect 124. Exercise of resource consent while applying for new resource consent —

(1) Subsection (3) applies when- (a) A resource consent is due to expire; and (b) The holder of the consent applied for a new consent for the same activity; and (c) The application is made to the appropriate consent authority; and (d) The application is made at least 6 months before the expiry of the consent.

(2) Subsection (3) also applies when - (a) A resource consent is due to expire; and (b) The holder of the consent applied for a new consent for the same activity; and (c) The application is made to the appropriate authority; and (d) The application is made in the period that – i. Begins 6 months before the expiry of the existing consent; and ii. Ends 3 months before the expiry of the existing consent; and (e) The authority, in its discretion, allows the holder to continue to operate.

(3) The holder may continue to operate under the existing consent until – (a) A new consent is granted and all appeals are determined; or (b) A new consent is declined and all appeals are determined.

The application for a replacement consent has been made within the timeframes and continuation of use is afforded to the consent under s124(3).

3.2 Hurunui Waiau River Regional Plan (HWRRP)

The Hurunui Waiau River Regional Plan became operative on the 20 December 2013. The proposed activity is not a permitted activity under rule 6.2 as the take is more than 10m3/day, therefore the activity is a restricted discretionary activity under Rule 7.2 as the activity can comply with conditions (a)– (g) as follows:

a) The maximum annual volume in addition to all existing takes does not exceed the allocation limit of 52.8Mm3 for the Culverden/Hurunui Groundwater Allocation Zone. The current allocation is 30% of this volume. b) The bores are not within 50m of any wetland. c) One of the bores, M33/0385 (screened 129 – 150m, bore log in Appendix 3), is greater than 30m deep and will not be direct/high/moderate hydraulically connected to the Hurunui River or Waitohi River (see assessment below). The other bore, M33/0268 (10m deep, wellcard in Appendix 3) is also assessed for hydraulic connection (see assessment below) to determine whether it should be managed for stream depletion. d) The annual volume is specified on the current consent and is not subject to change. However, a fresh IrriCalc volume assessment has been undertaken to confirm it meets the efficient and reasonable criteria (see assessment below). e) An Infrastructure Development Plan is not required due to the combined rate being less than 100 litres/second. f) There is no change to the land or water use. g) Not applicable.

The restricted discretionary activity has 11 matters restricting the exercise of discretion which are addressed below.

In addition to the above rule, the HWRRP controls a “change in land use” under Rules 10.1, 10.2, 11.1 and 11.1A. The definition of a “change in land use” under the HWRRP is calculated on a per property basis and is determined as being an increase greater than 10% in the long-term average release of Nitrogen or Phosphorus to land which may enter water, measured on a kg/ha basis, but calculated on the gross load per property from the date this Plan is made operative (20 December 2013). However, because there will be no change to land and water use, N and P will not increase compared to the baseline land use effects. Therefore, no “change in land use” consent is required. The entire Medstone Farm is covered by a Sustainable Milk Plan (SMP) under the Fonterra scheme.

3.3 Land Water Regional Plan (LWRP)

There are no rules in the LWRP that are relevant to the activity or application.

3.4 Case Law

In Queenstown Lakes District Council v Hawthorn Estates Ltd, the High Court found that the definition of the environment included the effects of those consented activities that have already been granted. Given that the applicant holds existing resource consent CRC084945.2 it is considered that the existing consent forms part of the environment for the duration of the consents. The assessment of effects will assess the effects of this proposal on the environment as defined by the Hawthorne case.

3.5 Duration Sought

Duration of 15 years is sought; this is in line with policy 4.74 of the LWRP. While Policy 9.1 of the HWRRP requires a common catchment expiry date of 1 January 2025, it only relates to surface water takes and groundwater takes hydraulically connected to the surface water resource. This take and use of groundwater is primarily a groundwater take not hydraulically connected; the current total allocation is considerably less than the allocation limit for the groundwater zone; and the exercise of the current consent has not caused any adverse environmental effects. Hence, duration of 15 years is sought.

4.0 ASSESSMENT OF ACTUAL AND POTENTIAL EFFECTS

The HWRRP Rule 7.2 contains 11 matters restricting the exercise of discretion are as follows:

i) The relevant matter in Policy 6.5 of the HWRRP relates to the area to be irrigated. The groundwater abstraction provides efficient and reliable irrigation of the farm, and will increase the economic and social benefits through better production compared to a non-irrigated block. An assessment against the Objectives of the HWRRP is provided below. ii) There is no change to land and water use, meaning that N and P losses will not increase. Therefore, nutrient limits in Schedule 1 of the HWRRP or nitrogen toxicity limits will not be exceeded. iii) Not applicable. iv) The reasonable need for the quantity of water for irrigation is calculated with the IrriCalc methodology (see assessment below). The use will be continued irrigation. The bores have been in operation for many years and adequately supply the volume required for the pivot irrigator. The deep bore is primarily used and the attached screenshot of the flow meter data for the past few years shows that the rate typically reaches the consented rate of 30 l/s (Appendix 4). It is considered that a step test is not necessary to confirm what the flow meter shows. The shallow bore has been used in the past but is not used at present. It is a large diameter bore and the rate of take is only 15 l/s. Medstone Dairy Ltd has recently purchased the property and is considering options for future irrigation and whether the shallow bore will continue to be used. In the meantime, Medstone wishes to keep options open. There is no storage associated with the irrigation. v) There are no alternative sources of water due to the Hurunui River “A” block and Waitohi River “A” block being fully allocated. vi) The technical efficiency of pivot irrigators has been proven in Canterbury. The IrriCalc annual volume meets the application efficiency requirements. The existing take is currently metered. vii) The take is from groundwater and an assessment of effects on other lawfully established groundwater takes need not be carried out due to it being an existing take. The effects of the renewal will be the same as the existing effects due to there being no change to rates and volumes. The relevant policy in the HWRRP is Policy 4.3 which references the drawdown interference methodology in the Natural Resources Regional Plan. The NRRP specifically excludes the necessity of a drawdown interference assessment for a “renewal”. The current region-wide plan is the Land and Water Regional Plan (which replaced the NRRP) and this also provides for existing takes to be exempt from drawdown assessments (in Rule 5.128). The current consented drawdown effects are the existing environment, and the renewal will not change those effects. viii) The stream depletion assessment is detailed below. ix) Interference effects on surrounding bores need not be carried out due to the take being an existing take (see vii above). Note that the current consent locates the shallow bore with a map reference “at or about”. This type of reference has been used in the past to reflect the fact that hand-held GPS units have not been accurate to the nearest metre, and also that prior to GPS becoming freely available, map references were approximated by locating by eye on a map. The actual hard copy location map that was provided with the original application locates the shallow bore in the correct place, as does the consent map. The “at or about” map reference on the consent is 15 metres from the actual location. It is considered that this is a negligible difference for any of the effects being considered. x) The take is already metered. 10

xi) The consent duration of 15 years is sought for the groundwater take.

The following detailed assessments of effects are considered to be relevant for this renewal application:

 Effects of an inefficient take and reasonable need  Effects of groundwater abstraction on Hurunui River and Waitohi River flows and allocation regime  Effects on Tangata Whenua values.

The following effects were considered but are less than minor for this renewal application:

 Effects on groundwater quality and surface water quality from nutrients arising from farming – no change in land and water use, therefore N and P losses will not increase from the baseline.  Cumulative effects of take on groundwater resource – total current allocation is 30% of limit specified in HWRRP, and the continued volume from the two bores will not cause this limit to be exceeded.  Effects on seawater intrusion – not close enough to the coast to have any effects.  Effects on aquifer stability – gravel and sand sediments not subject to subsidence.  Effects on water quality from cross-connection of aquifers – only one aquifer screened in each bore.

4.1 Effects of an Inefficient Take and Reasonable Need

The use of water is required to be reasonable for the intended purpose and applied at a rate that adequately meets evapotranspiration rates. The overall irrigation practice for the 65 hectares that are irrigated (Appendix 5, which excludes the house and surrounds) is to apply water at 40 l/s and 3,456 m3/day which provides 5.3 mm/day, which is in line with good practice.

The seasonal volume for the 65 hectares is calculated using the IrriCalc method as follows:

 Average PAW(60cm) = 60mm for 20ha, and 80mm for 45ha, from soils maps on ECan GIS  Using the Irricalc maps of SWHC of 60mm and 80mm, and 9 out of 10 years reliability gives a seasonal requirement of 664mm and 649mm, respectively (Appendix 6)  Calculate the seasonal volume = (20ha X 10 X 664mm) + (45ha X 10 X 649mm) = 424,850 m3/year.

The currently consented annual volume is 413,680 m3/year and this was assessed several years ago using different methodology. The updated IrriCalc methodology is slightly greater than this. However, the current seasonal volume is still considered reasonable and the annual volume applied for in this replacement is therefore 413,680 m3/year.

4.2 Effects of Take on Hurunui River and Waitohi River Flows

The methodology to assess stream depletion is set out Schedule WQN7 of the HWRRP.

A stream depletion linkage to either the Hurunui River or Waitohi River for the 150 metre deep bore M33/0385 (screened 129 – 150 metres) is extremely unlikely due to its depth. No further consideration of stream depletion is considered necessary for this bore.

The shallow bore M33/0268 (10 metres deep) is 2.5km from the Hurunui River and 780 metres from the Waitohi River. It is located outside both of the Rivers’ defined “River Zones”. Note that the current consent locates the shallow bore with a map reference “at or about”. This type of reference has been used in the past to reflect the fact that hand-held GPS units have not been accurate to the nearest metre, and also that prior to GPS becoming freely available, map references were approximated by locating by eye on a map. The actual hard copy location map that was provided with the original application locates the shallow bore in the correct place, as does the consent map. The “at or about” map reference on the consent is 15 metres from the actual location. It is considered that this is a negligible difference for any of the effects being considered. In addition, information provided by ECan suggests that the shallow bore is within a stream that is shown on 11

Topo maps. The so-called stream is actually a swale that only carries water during storm events. There is no perennial flow. This swale is not relevant for any stream depletion assessment.

A stream depletion assessment is required under standard and term (c)(ii) of Rule 7.2 to determine whether the take from this bore is to be managed as a direct, high or moderate degree of hydraulic connection and to comply with the Waitohi River flow regime set out in Table 1 of the HWRRP. The distance to the Hurunui River means that hydraulic connection will be negligible if at all. For the Waitohi River located 780 metres from the shallow bore, a stream depletion assessment is provided in Appendix 7. The Q7 = Q150 = 15 l/s, and the unconfined Jenkins/Theis model is used with conservative aquifer parameters as follows:

 S = 0.01 which will produce a conservative depletion rate. The alternative for an unconfined aquifer is S = 0.1, but this will reduce the calculated depletion rate.  T = 2,000 m2/d for the shallow aquifer which is in permeable surface gravels. This T value will produce a conservative depletion rate. The alternative is a smaller T = 500 m2/d which will reduce the calculated depletion rate.  Two assessments are provided in Appendix 7 showing the range in depletion from a low of 8 l/s (Moderate classification) to a high of 14 l/s (High classification).

The Moderate classification is unlikely due to the nature of the shallow gravels. It is also only just within the Moderate classification. The High classification is most likely and the depletion rate of 14 l/s doesn’t vary too much with changing parameters. The abstraction from the shallow well is therefore subject to minimum flow conditions of the Waitohi River and the allocation from the River is 14 l/s. The groundwater zone should have 25% of the annual volume allocated to the shallow bore, i.e. 48,600 cubic metres per year. This sensitivity assessment to determine the stream depletion is considered sufficient. There is little difference in the stream depletion rate with changing aquifer parameters.

4.3 Effects on Tangata Whenua Values

Chapter 2 of the Council’s Regional Policy Statement 2013 outlines the issues and concerns of significance to the Ngai Tahu, while Chapter 4 outlines provisions for the relationships that Ngai Tahu has with resources in Canterbury. These chapters seek to:

1. Identify who are the relevant organisations representing Tangata Whenua in the Canterbury region. 2. Set out natural resource issues of significance to Ngai Tahu, and provide a culture context for those issues. 3. Set out the relevant matters recognised in part 12 of the Ngai Tahu Claims settlement Act 1998, including fulfilling the Canterbury Regional Councils obligations to note the existence of statutory acknowledgements of statutory areas. 4. Recognise and provide for the relationship between Ngai Tahu and natural and physical resources.

The applicant’s property and site of abstraction lies within and adjacent to the rohe of Te Rununga o Kaikoura and the rohe of Te Ngai Tuahuriri Rūnanga. Therefore the relevant Iwi management plans are the Ngāi Tahu Freshwater Policy Statement and the Te Poha o Tohu Raumati Management Plan and the Mahaanui Iwi Management Plan. The applicant’s property is also near to the Statutory Acknowledgement for the Hurunui River as set out in Schedule 21 of the NTCSA 1998, and listed in Appendix 7 of the Mahaanui Iwi Management Plan.

The replacement activity has been assessed against, and is not considered to be contrary to the relevant policies as assessed below.

Ngāi Tahu Freshwater Policy Statement

Wahi Tapu - Policies 1 and 2: No areas of Wahi Tapu have been identified within the area of effects for this application.

Mauri - Policies 1, 2, 3, and 4: The applicant will ensure no stock enter waterways, and apply irrigation water in an efficient manner to ensure soils are not over saturated, preventing the potential of nutrient loss via leaching into groundwater or runoff into surface water ways.

Mahinga kai - Policies 1, 2, 3, and 4: No areas of critical mahinga kai habitats have been identified in the area of effects. The applicant will exclude stock from waterways by way of fencing any streams on the property and allowing a buffer between pasture and the flowing water, thus reducing risk of contaminants entering water ways via runoff, and the activity will not adversely affect water quality or quantity of water bodies within the area of effects.

Te Poha o Tohu Raumati Management Plan

The property is located in the area of Okarahia ki te Hurunui and the relevant policies are:

Section 3.5.8 – Water abstractions – Surface water

The take from the shallow well may affect the Waitohi River and is managed appropriately, and is already included in the relevant groundwater allocation block and will be metered (Policy 11) thus complying with relevant policies in this section by ensuring no more than the consented rate of take and annual volume is taken. Pivots are installed thus it is not contrary to Policy 8. Therefore I consider the proposed activity will not be contrary to the policies of section 3.5.8.

Section 3.5.10 – Minimum flows

Policies 1-13 refer to the setting of minimum flows in order to protect the river health, appearance, quality and cultural values of the river.

Section 3.5.11 – Water Quality

A number of policies are applicable to the activity. The applicant has fenced all waterways thereby excluding stock which is relevant to Policies 5, 6, & 20. By applying irrigation water only when soil requires it will mean loss of nutrients or fertiliser is mitigated thus complying with Policy 15. The entire Medstone Farm has a Sustainable Milk Plan (under the Fonterra regime) and It is intended to undertake annual Overseer modelling to ensure N and P loss is no greater than 10% above what was occurring in the 2013/14 season (the “base” year of the HWRRP) thus complying with Policies 16 & 17.

By complying with the policies mentioned above, and including Environment Canterbury’s standard suite of conditions for irrigation, I consider any adverse effects will be mitigated and that the water quality policies are not compromised.

The Rūnanga were not advised of this application as the effects on water were assessed as being no greater than minor. Additionally the activity is not within one kilometre of a silent file and the groundwater abstraction does not adversely affect the Hurunui River statutory acknowledgement area.

Mahaanui Iwi Management Plan 2013

The parts of relevance in the Mahaanui Iwi Management Plan are those relating to water quality, water quantity, and water management, and in particular to Section 6.1 of the Plan.

The proposed activity is not considered to adversely affect the Hurunui/Waitohi River water quantity, i.e. the abstraction does not result in allocation limits being exceeded, nor does it adversely affect water quality; therefore the activity is not considered to be contrary to the Mahaanui Iwi Management Plan.

The proposed activity does not result in the over-allocation of the groundwater catchment, hence the activity is not considered to be contrary to the relevant policies on the Mahaanui Iwi Management Plan.

Statutory Acknowledgement for the Hurunui River

The applicant’s property is near to the Hurunui/Waitohi Rivers. Activities on the farm comply with all relevant catchment policies and rules and will not compromise any values identified in the Statutory Acknowledgement for the Hurunui River.

5.0 PROPOSED CONSENT CONDITIONS

The proposed consent conditions are as follows, and a duration of 15 years is sought.

1) Water may be taken from bore M33/0385, 300 millimetres diameter and 150 metres deep, at map reference NZTM:1574443-5252426, at a rate not exceeding 30 litres per second, and bore M33/0268, 1000 millimetres diameter and 10 metres deep, at map reference NZTM:1574437- 5252538, at a rate not exceeding 15 litres per second, with a combined rate not exceeding 40 litres per second and combined volume not exceeding 413,680 cubic metres between 1 July and the following 30 June. 2) Water shall only be used for irrigation on the area of land shown on attached plan (Appendix 4). 3) The taking of water from bore M33/0268 shall be restricted under the Waitohi River minimum flow regime as set out in Table 1 of the HWRRP (ECan’s standard wording for such conditions).

The remaining “standard” conditions for a groundwater consent are acceptable for both bores (these are to be provided to the applicant in draft form for final acceptance).

6.0 OVERALL ASSESSMENT AGAINST RELEVANT PLANNING DOCUMENTS

The relevant planning documents are:  Hurunui and Waiau River Regional Plan  Regional Policy Statement  National Policy Statements, Environmental Standards, Regulations  Resource Management Act – Part 2

6.1 Hurunui and Waiau River Regional Plan

The Objectives and Policies are implemented through the Rules in the HWRRP. The application has been assessed in detail against the relevant Rules and meets their regulatory effect. The following summarises the overall requirements of the Objectives and Policies.

Objective 1 and its Policies 1.1 – 1.5 deal with provision of community and stockwater drinking water. The application will not be contrary to these provisions due to compliance with the environmental flow and allocation regime and the minimal effects on water quality.

Objective 2 and its Policies 2.1 – 2.11 deal with sustainable management and adverse effects on values of the river and catchment. The Policies require adherence to the specified environmental flow and allocation regime which guards against river flows being reduced below the specified minimum and from reducing to zero in any reach, and provides for sharing of available water above the minimums, and protects freshes and flow variability, and protects their mauri. The application will not be contrary to these provisions due to compliance with the environmental flow and allocation regime.

Objective 3 and its Policies 3.1 – 3.6 deal with allocation of river water for economic benefits, and sets allocation and water quality limits and requires instream values to be protected. The application will not be

contrary to these provisions due to compliance with the environmental flow and allocation regime and the water quality limits.

Objective 4 and its Policies 4.1 – 4.5 deal with groundwater allocation to prevent mining of groundwater and depletion of river flow. The Policies set groundwater allocation limits and require stream depleting groundwater abstractions to be managed under river flow and allocation regimes. Interference between bores is managed under a specified regime. The application will not be contrary to these provisions due to compliance with the relevant allocation regime.

Objectives 5.1 and 5.2 and their Policies 5.1 – 5.4A deal with the quality of water in the rivers and potential effects from land uses. The Policies set water quality limits. The application will not be contrary to these provisions due to compliance with the relevant water quality limits.

Objective 6 and its Policies 6.1 – 6.11 (Policy numbers 6.9 and 6.10 appear to be missed) deal with storage and infrastructure in riverbeds. The Policies prohibit damming some rivers while encouraging storage options in other areas while protecting listed values. The application will not be contrary to these provisions due to compliance with the relevant environmental flow and allocation regimes and water quality limits. Storage is not part of the application, and the development will provide for greater economic benefits under irrigation.

Objective 7 and its Policies 7.1 – 7.3 (Policy number 7.2 appears to be missed) deal with the transfer of consents under specified circumstances. There are limits on where the consent may be transferred to, and effects must be acceptable or no greater than the current consented effects. The application is not contrary to these provisions.

Objective 8 and its Policy 8.1 deal with efficient use of water. The application meets the efficiency tests and is not contrary to this provision.

Objective 9 and its Policies 9.1 – 9.4 (Policy number 9.3 appears to be missed) deal with duration of consents. The application is not contrary to these provisions as an appropriate duration is sought.

6.2 Regional Policy Statement

The Canterbury Regional Policy Statement (2013) has Objectives and Policies for the management of fresh water which may be summarised as follows:

 Objectives 7.2.1 and 7.2.4 require the region’s fresh water resources to be managed sustainably  Objectives 7.2.2 and 7.2.3 require that abstraction and use of water is efficient and water quality is not degraded  Policies 7.3.1, 7.3.2 and 7.3.3 require fresh water bodies and biodiversity to be protected  Policy 7.3.4 requires environmental flow and allocation regimes to be adhered to  Policies 7.3.6 and 7.3.7 requires water quality standards to be adhered to  Policy 7.3.8 requires efficient allocation and use of fresh water  Policy 7.3.10 recognises benefits of storage of water to improve efficiency  Policy 7.3.11 recognises existing infrastructure  Policy 7.3.12 adopts the precautionary approach for fresh water management.

The regional plans are developed under this planning framework and implement policies and rules to deliver on these higher level requirements. As such, the application will meet these requirements due to it being in accordance with the specific rules.

6.3 National Policy Statements, Environmental Standards, Regulations

Freshwater Management This NPS was amended in 2014. The NPS must be fully implemented as soon as reasonably practicable, or no later than 31 December 2030. It sets out objectives and policies for the management of water and directs councils to adopt quality and quantity limits in plans.

The freshwater NPS inserts two transitional policies directly into regional plans which require councils to consider specific criteria when making decisions on a resource consent application. The intent is that any more than minor potential adverse effects of activities, in relation to water takes, use, damming and diverting, as well as discharges, are thoroughly considered and actively managed (to the extent that an NPS can achieve that) pending the inclusion of limits in plans. These policies apply to activities that require a resource consent until such time as changes to regional plans to give effect to the NPS are made. Amendments to include the policies should be made promptly. In accordance with the RMA, amendments to existing regional plans are to be made by local authorities without using the process in Schedule 1 of the Act and as soon as practicable.

It is considered that the application complies with these requirements due to it being in accordance with the relevant Plan(s).

Sources of Human Drinking Water Standard This NES came into effect on 20 June 2008. It requires regional councils to ensure that effects on drinking water sources are considered in decisions on resource consents and regional plans. Specifically, councils are required to:  decline discharge or water permits that are likely to result in community drinking water becoming unsafe for human consumption following existing treatment  be satisfied that permitted activities in regional plans will not result in community drinking water supplies being unsafe for human consumption following existing treatment  place conditions on relevant resource consents requiring notification of drinking water suppliers if significant unintended events occur (e.g. spills) that may adversely affect sources of human drinking water.

It is considered that the application will not affect any drinking water sources. The Hurunui District Council bore M33/0234 is 2 kilometres downstream and on the south side of the Waitohi River. The Interim CDWPZ extends up to the property. While there is a very small part of the property within the Interim CDWPZ, it is not likely to adversely affect the HDC bore due to it being on the opposite side of the Waitohi River.

Ecological Flows and Water Levels The proposed NES aims to promote consistency in the way we decide whether the variability and quantity of water flowing in rivers, groundwater systems, lakes and wetlands is sufficient. The proposed NES would do this by:  Setting interim limits on the alteration to flows and/or water levels for rivers, wetlands, and groundwater systems that do not have limits imposed through regional plans or Water Conservation Orders.  Providing a process for selecting the appropriate technical methods for evaluating the ecological component of environmental flows and water levels in rivers, lakes, wetlands, and groundwater systems.

It is considered that the application complies with the relevant allocation regime.

Measurement of Water Takes These Regulations require consent holders to meet minimum requirements to measure their water takes. The regulations also require water use data to be reported to regional councils. It is considered that the application complies with this requirement.

6.4 Resource Management Act - Part 2

Purpose of the Act – Section 5 The purpose of the Act is to “promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources”. Based on the information available, it is considered that the proposed activity is consistent with the purpose of the Act.

Matters of National Importance – Section 6 Section 6 outlines matters of national importance that are to be recognised and provided for in achieving the purpose of the Act. These matters include, but are not restricted to, the preservation of the natural character of rivers and their margins, and the protection of inappropriate subdivision, use and development. The relationship of Maori, their culture and traditions to the environment must also be recognised and provided for. It is considered that the activity can be carried out in a manner that will not adversely affect any matter set out in Section 6.

Other Matters – Section 7 Section 7 of the Act sets out those matters that have particular regard attributed to them in achieving the purpose of the Act. Those matters are as follows:

(a) Kaitiakitanga; (b) The efficient use and development of natural and physical resources; (c) The maintenance and enhancement of amenity values; (d) Intrinsic values of ecosystems; (e) Recognition and protection of heritage values of sites, buildings places, or areas; (f) Maintenance and enhancement of the quality of the environment; (g) Any finite characteristics of natural and physical resources; (h) The protection of the habitat of trout and salmon.

With the mitigation measures proposed, it is considered that this activity will not compromise any of the matters included in Section 7.

The Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi The Act states in s8. that: In achieving the purpose of this Act, all persons exercising functions and powers under it, in relation to managing the use, development, and protection of natural and physical resources, shall take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi).

The Court of Appeal has identified four principles, which form the basis of developing a relationship of partnership and communication. These are the Essential Bargain, Tribal Self-Regulation, The Treaty Relationship, and Active Protection. The third principle, the Treaty Relationship, accords Maori with special status as a Treaty Partner, distinct and separate from status as an ‘affected party’. The Runanga was not contacted regarding this application as they were not considered to be a potentially adversely affected party. A specific assessment against Tangata Whenua values has been carried out, and it is considered that the activity will not compromise any matters in Section 8.