0.5 Pauatahanui Stream Daily Flow MALF 0.45 90% MALF 0.4 0.35 - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 1 Jan 1981 1 Feb 1981 1 Mar 1981 1 Apr 1981 1 May 1981 1 Jun 1981 Stream Flow (m3/s) Time Pauatahanui Stream Daily Flow MALF 90% MALF

Water allocation Te Awarua-o-Porirua whaitua

• Abundant tuna and fish that are

safe to catch and eat

• Good flows at low tide
• The use of water and waterways

provides for economic

• pportunities and benefits.
• Make sure there’s enough flow in the

stream

• Make sure there aren’t too many

contaminants in the stream

• Make sure there’s good riparian shading

and fish passage

• Make sure people can access water

when they need it

• How do we share out the access to the

water and discharges within the limit?

• Some terms
• MALF – Mean annual low flow
• Minimum flow
• Allocation limit
• Consented, permitted and stock drinking

& domestic use takes

Water allocation recap

Water allocation recap

0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 1 Jan 1981 1 Feb 1981 1 Mar 1981 1 Apr 1981 1 May 1981 1 Jun 1981 Stream Flow (m3/s) Time Pauatahanui Stream Daily Flow Minimum Flow = 90% MALF Residual Stream Flow After 30% MALF Allocation 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 1 Jan 2014 1 Feb 2014 1 Mar 2014 1 Apr 2014 1 May 2014 1 Jun 2014 Stream Flow (m3/s) Time Pauatahanui Stream Daily Flow Minimum Flow = 90% MALF Residual Stream Flow After 30% MALF Allocation

The “90/30” limits

Good habitat protection for native freshwater fish species in the Whaitua Moderate reliability for users of water Need value judgement decision on the balance – you asked for some alternatives to help explore the balance

Value Attribute Effect Alternative minimum flow and allocation amounts compared to 90+30 100+20 90+20 100+25 90+25 100+30 90+30 100+40 90+40 Ecosystem health and mahinga kai Habitat protection Intensity

• f

‘human induced’ stress Better Same Better Same Better Good protection Better Same Additional days of stress at

• r below minimum flow

Better Better Better Slightly better Same Worse Worse Economic use

• f water

Supply reliability Time with full access to allocation amount Same Better Slightly worse Slightly better Worse Moderate reliability Worse Worse Time on total restrictions Worse Same Worse Same Worse Worse Same Availability of water for economic use Amount of water that can be taken from a stream Less More

Alternative limits

• Recognise there is a trade-off between these
• Higher minimum flows & smaller allocation limits are slightly more

precautionary with better habitat protection, less water available and similar

• r better reliability for those with it
• Need value judgement decision on the balance

CONSENTED WATER TAKES

OTHER PERMITTED ACTIVITY WATER USE STOCK DRINKING WATER & DOMESTIC USE

ALLOCATION LIMIT

THE WATER ALLOCATION BUCKET

MALF Alternative limits Consented Stock & domestic Existing allocation 20 25 30 40 TG Other With TG Without TG Pauatahanui Stream 96 19 24 29 38 14 13 4 31 17 Horokiri Stream 89 18 22 27 36 21 2 2 25 4 Porirua Stream 151 30 38 45 60 2 2 2 Duck Creek 15 3 4 5 6 4 1 5 1