Search Sort Posts:  Oldest to newest Newest to oldest

03-07-2006, 4:51 p.m. UDS Moderator Joined on 03-06-2006 Posts 5 Welcome to our discussion on water “The preservation of our water supply is of the utmost importance.” The importance of protecting the aquifer supplying Christchurch and water quality was raised in 47 submissions and 350 comments in the UDS Options consultation. In the feedback forms 96% of respondents rated water quality and protection as either important or very important. “The most important area that needs security are our waterways and aquifer zones.” Most submitters identified urban sprawl as a key threat to water quality and submissions from environmental organisations requested stronger environmental protection mechanisms for regulating water quality. “Limiting high/moderate density urban sprawl will help to protect our aquifers in terms of maintaining recharge and reducing the risk of contamination.” As wells run dry in parts of Canterbury this year, who should get priority for water? If protecting water quality takes top priority, what does that mean for planning future development?      Report

03-17-2006, 11:13 a.m. Rob Joined on 03-16-2006 Posts 4 Re: Welcome to our discussion on water The thing that amazes me is the fact that giant  dairy factory farms were ever permitted on the plains. Most of us don't know much about water flows and aquifer levels etc but all of us know that the plains are a great place to grow a number of things but grass isn't one of them. A least not the amount of grass needed to feed 1000's of cows.  We also know from the Southland experience that intensive dairy has a major adverse pollution effect on waterways. Those dairy farms should not have been allowed to start there in the first place. E-Can opught to be ashamed.  Now that they are there, they're whining that they haven't enough water. Surprise.  I say absolutely no further water rights to the dairy factory farms- they'll get the message eventually and move to Southland or the Waikato where it's easy to grow grass. The other big draw is household use - in particlar - toilets. Keep putting in those bloody awful "townships" and we'll have more and more problems with water.   The "right" to cut up your property and put i 100's of houses  where there used to be sheep has to be addressed. Because there is a responsibility to think about the future as well.    Report

03-21-2006, 2:31 p.m. Ruth Joined on 03-20-2006 Posts 1 Re: Welcome to our discussion on water Hi. 96% of respondents rate water highly, as they should. Protecting this precious resource should begin in each of our homes if we feel so strongly about it. How many of these 96% actually do anything in their own homes to protect water quality/quantity. On the outside of the home people could be encouraged to use plants that need less water, e.g. native species. If you plant things that are naturally from this environment then they will thrive better than introduced species (the council is currently doing some excellent native plantings which sets a brilliant example). If your plants do need water why not collect rainwater for this purpose. There are many excellent rainwater collection systems available now. Encourage people to let their lawns die off as this is natural in Canterbury. It is so frustrating to see people wasting my precious water on their front lawn/verge that they never go on - unless it is to water it. Inside the home (particularly in new homes) you can buy toilets that use less water or even better there are self composting toilets which are incrediably efficient these days and run on no water (and no you don't have to be a greenie hippie to have one). To me it is a no brainer that new subdivisions should be made to employ the latest sustainable technology instead of the poorly designed and built lego houses that you see now. If these new subdivisions must go ahead but people were able to make use of rain falling on the huge roofs of their huge houses this could reduce the negative impact on the aquifers. Many people I am sure do not mean to waste water they are just unaware that their practices are wasteful. If people are unable to rein in their usage I would not be opposed to water meters (provided rates were reduced in other areas and it was not simply a revenue gathering exercise). When you have to pay for something people will think twice about how they use that resource. As for dairy farming in Canterbury, they only do it because legislation allows them to get away with it. If city dwellers control their usage then farmers need to consider the positioning of their farm - should they really be trying to produce lush feed in what seems the completely wrong environment in Canterbury. They not only use massive quanities of water for animals and crops but a by product is very significant environment impact.    Report

04-13-2006, 8:57 a.m. andrewjg Joined on 04-12-2006 Posts 2 Re: Welcome to our discussion on water Well said, Ruth. I completely agree that water conservation begins at home - how about a charge for excess water use above an amount that will prevent water restrictions in summer ? If it's free, you will not respect it and will waste it. If I conserve it but are still faced with water restrictions in summer due to others profligate use of it, why should I bother trying to conserve it ? Appeals to save water to the 5% of the population who actually care will get the expected result. Disincentives for 100% of the population to waste water will go a lot further. Andrew Groom Reurbanise (www.reurbanise.co.nz)    Report

04-15-2006, 6:51 a.m. peterquixote Joined on 03-12-2006 Posts 9 Re: Welcome to our discussion on water hey peoples, how come a discussion on water gets to be screwed into  pc babble about ugly  native plants. What a load of drivel..  What  The problem is those stupid cows at regional council who handed out permits to the cow farmers to use water for one farm equivalent to about 50,00 people. The answer does not begin at home it begins and ends at the political level.    pq    Report

04-19-2006, 2:07 p.m. kjmaps Joined on 04-18-2006 Posts 3 Re: Welcome to our discussion on water  UDS Moderator wrote: “The preservation of our water supply is of the utmost importance.” The importance of protecting the aquifer supplying Christchurch and water quality was raised in 47 submissions and 350 comments in the UDS Options consultation. In the feedback forms 96% of respondents rated water quality and protection as either important or very important. “The most important area that needs security are our waterways and aquifer zones.” Most submitters identified urban sprawl as a key threat to water quality and submissions from environmental organisations requested stronger environmental protection mechanisms for regulating water quality. “Limiting high/moderate density urban sprawl will help to protect our aquifers in terms of maintaining recharge and reducing the risk of contamination.” As wells run dry in parts of Canterbury this year, who should get priority for water? If protecting water quality takes top priority, what does that mean for planning future development?      Report

05-13-2006, 3:22 p.m. Geoaction Joined on 05-12-2006 Posts 1 Re: Welcome to our discussion on water Certainly pq there is a pressing need to control the type of land use out in our rural hinterland but the impact of continued traditional growth of our urban form is also vital when considering the issue of water. I would like to see developers having to adhere to a more stringent code when it come to greenfield or brownfields development; they should not be able to tarmac or concrete as much area as they now seem to and the greater use of grey water systems should be encouraged. Until developers, and indeed ordinary citizens, realise just what impact our everyday lives have on our natural water systems as well as on our built water networks we won't see change that reflects the imperatives for more sustainable building practices. I hope that this UDS process will engender more thoughtful planning for our future.      Report

05-18-2006, 2:35 p.m. Rob Joined on 03-16-2006 Posts 4 Re: Welcome to our discussion on water pq says "  The problem is those stupid cows at regional council who handed out permits to the cow farmers to use water for one farm equivalent to about 50,00 people. The answer does not begin at home it begins and ends at the political level." and he's right - it was stupid to allow giant dairy farms on the Plains. However the stupidity was in not getting the plan in place fast enough. It 'sall very well to slag of the politicians and bureaucrats but they didn't have the structures to deny the permission to set up those farms. If they had tried- people like pq would have been the first to complain about politicians trying to bend the rules. It's also intersting how people vary their opinions to fit their prejudices. In the transport forum pq doesn't want the bureaucracy involved in making traffic decisions buit in this forum blames them for not getting involved. I write this not to have a go at pq (although that is fun) but to highlight the difficulty in the consultative process - too many of the population have a "bloody politicians and bureaucrats" attitude which makes it really hard to discuss the issues clearly. It's incredibly hard to come up with solutions to these multifaceted problems despite what absolutists like pq think . We have too many people living in the wrong places but none of us would want a system that says "you can't live there". That would be too totalitarian even for us lefties.   The solution is to be infomrmed about ALL the aspects of an issue and listen to people who know what they're talking about - even if they are bureaucrats.That's what's so good about forums (fora?) like these.    Report

08-03-2006, 6:59 p.m. CleanWaterForAll Joined on 08-02-2006 Posts 1 Your water is being polluted as we speak In all the talk about water shortages, people seem to have forgotten that if the water is not suitable for drinking then it won't matter how much of it there is. The message needs to get out (and quickly) that source of the City's water is not being protected from contamination. By the source I mean the recharge zone. Behind our home, there is a quarry fill pit. It is like a secret rubbish dump and it is sitting over your water supply. It is known to the council and ECAN yet very little is being done about it. The local and regional councils have know for many years that this area is vulnerable to contamination. the current city plan fails woefully to address any of these issues. ECAN and CCC are so busy butting heads on other issues regarding ultimately who will be the all 'powerful' of the two and while all this infighting is going on.. the population of Crhistchurch is being let down. The trouble with ensuring clean water is, unlike the smog problem, you cannot see the damage that is occurring unless you know where to look. Out of sight, out of mind is the policy being applied to your water supply. This message needs to get put out to the general public with the utmost urgency. How can any campaign to plan for the future of the community adequately serve its purpose when there is a fundamental lack of public education and lack of awareness of the most fundamental of issues such as water quality. This lack of public awareness is surely the only reason that the existing city plan is failing to protect the resource and unless the people of Christchurch are properly informed as you would expect them to be, this process of developing a strategy for growth will just be a duplication of the feeble words in the current City Plan. I have photos that concerned people should see. Please email me at CleanWaterForAll@hotmail.com for more information and to help me raise awareness.    Report

» Urban Developme... » Water » Your water is being polluted as we speak