Pulling the plug on West Coast wetlands

Forest and Bird, Volume 17, Issue 1, 1 February 1986, Page 10

Pulling the plug on West Coast wetlands

by

Society West Coast

conservation officer

Kevin Smith,

G™ kokopu by the bucketful! Several years ago that was the haul when Fisheries scientists sampled deep, flaxshrouded pools on the edge of the huge Rotokino Swamp in South Westland. However, this event will only be remembered in Fisheries folklore. In 1982 a heavily subsidised Westland Catchment Board drainage scheme drained these pools and much of the remainder of the 400 hectare swamp. Rotokino was an important habitat for the giant kokopu. Arguably the most beautiful of our native freshwater fish, its body mottled by delicate gold markings, the endemic giant kokopu is one of the whitebait species and the largest galaxiid in the world. Because its preferred home, lowland swampland, has been destroyed on a massive scale throughout New Zealand, it is now regarded as a potentially threatened species. It has vanished almost entirely from developed parts of the country; the West Coast is its last stronghold. But

even there it is at risk, for generous tax-payer-funded drainage subsidies have led within just the last seven years to the loss of 1000 hectares of fertile West Coast swampland. During this period 15.6 percent of the fertile swamps of Buller-North Westland were lost. Sadly the problem is not restricted to the West Coast. Between 1979 and 1983 the Wildlife Service in Northland found that 3176 hectares of freshwater wetlands were drained — 14.4 percent of these type in Northland. Most of these, too, were the victims of taxpayer-funded drainage subsidies. Exceptional Rotokino Westland’s Rotokino Swamp had exceptional natural values. Along with giant kokopu, its waterways contained an abundance of inanga, the small galaxiid fish on which New Zealand's world renowned whitebait fishery is based. Hidden amongst the dense swamp vegetation were good numbers of three declining wetland birds: bittern, fernbird and spotless crake. White herons from the nearby Waitangiroto nesting colony used the swamp as an occasional feeding ground. And travellers on the adjacent South Westland state highway enjoyed glimpses of the swamp’s dark waters, especially in early summer when the surrounding flax battalions raised their spearlike flowering Stalks. The Wildlife Service sought the complete reservation of Rotokino which they rated as a high value wildlife ‘habitat of note’. They managed to buy the bottom corner of the privately-owned swamp for reserve but were unable to prevent drainage of the remainder. Obviously their reserve is jeopardised by adjacent development. Although the drainage was subsidised with public money, no environmental assessment was. prepared; a comprehensive fishery survey was conducted only after the kokopu areas had been destroyed; the

controlling authority, the Westland Catchment Board, did not even bother to obtain the legally required water right! Wetland conservation ignored Sagas of this kind have been all too prevalent in New Zealand. Wetland conservation has been ignored here to an unforgiveable degree. Over 90% of our natural wetlands have been destroyed since European settlement. Vast swampy plains, once sucha distinctive feature of the landscape, no longer exist. Swamp drainage may well have been justified in the pioneering era as these plains yielded some of our richest farmland. Over the last 30 years, however, as swamplands have been eliminated in some regions and reduced to pathetically tiny remnants in others, the wisdom of expanding agricultural production at the expense of the remaining wetlands has increasingly been brought into question. Numerous seminars, field trips, reports, inventories and policies havé focussed public concern on the plight of wetlands and the specialised plants and animals dependent on them for their survival. This outpouring of concern by scientists, officials, politicians and wetland conservationists has achieved only stuttering progress towards legal protection for the remaining wetlands. But then it has hardly been a fair contest: the few environmental controls have been ineffective in checking the subsidy-fuelled drainage mania of agriculturalists, water engineers and farmerdominated Catchment boards. Surveys show that 160,000 ha of wetland, most of it freshwater swampland, was drained between the mid-1950s and 1960s. Since then, despite the steadily worsening economics of land development, the rate has probably increased because of the introduction of a variety of land development subsidies by Governments keen to boost agricultural production and appease rural constituents. Even when the new Labour Government came to power in 1984 and quickly slashed

nearly a billion dollars of farm support subsidies, wetland drainage subsidies escaped unscathed. $5.6 Million drainage subsidy since 1981! At the time of writing, two specific subsidies exist for new wetland drainage projects: a nationwide community drainage subsidy (50%) — this pays for the large drain down the middle of the swamp; and an additional on-farm drainage subsidy (50%) available only on the West Coast. Under these two schemes total government expenditure on wetland drainage over the last four years totalled $5.56 million. The National Water and Soil Conservation Authority (NWASCA) administers the schemes but only those costing over $20,000 must be referred to them for approval. The regionally approved schemes, while small in economic terms, often have serious environmental consequences by destroying vitally important remnant wetlands. Some of the subsidised works are located on wet pastureland and do not conflict with natural values. Where conflicts do exist, the schemes should adhere to the Wetland Guidelines adopted by NWASCA in 1982. However recent experience has shown that Catchment Boards are often ignoring the guidelines. Drainage schemes are being initiated, promoted and approved for wetlands of indisputably high natural value. This is to be expected since most Catchment Boards are dominated by farmers and are advised by engineers

whose work experience is confined to river control and drainage works. The existence of the drainage subsidies is interpreted as Government support for wetland drainage and the financial inducements overcome environmental constraints. Estuaries, pakihis, swamps The problem has been most acute on the West Coast, home of some of the country’s finest remaining pristine wetlands. Of the region’s three major wetland types — estuarine, infertile (pakihi) and fertile (swampland) wetlands — only estuaries are relatively secure. Pakihi wetlands are still common in South Westland but are rapidly attaining remnant status elsewhere, through losses to farm development and afforestation. Swamps have fared even worse as they are specifically targeted by the drainage subsidies. They can be identified by the presence of nutrient-demanding plants such as flax, raupo, Carex sedges and cabbage trees. Fertility is maintained by water movement through these frequently flooded wetlands. Swamps are the exclusive habitat of bittern, marsh crake and spotless crake, all of which are secretive wetland birds that are silently vanishing: along with their habitat. Fernbirds and waterfowl may be abundant, and the swamp waters provide essential habitat for several native fish. Because of their high productivity, rich fauna and remnant status, swamps possess conservation values out of all proportion to their size. Wildlife Service surveys

have shown that since 1978, 633 ha (15.6 percent) of swampland, out of a total of 4,043 ha, has been lost in Buller and North _ Westland, and 360 ha lost in South Westland. The loss has not been balanced by any significant conversation gains. In fact, the reserve system is virtually devoid of swamps. For example, in Buller County there remain only 12 swamps of sufficient value to wildlife to be rated as habitats of note. Only two of the swamps are larger than 100 ha; none are reserved, all are threatened by development in the short to medium term. Catchment Board empire The remaining wetlands on the West Coast are the legacy of over 100 years of development. Agriculturally, they represent the bottom of the barrel and the impetus for their drainage is wholly dependent on the availability of subsidies. Apart from the obvious financial incentive, subsidies have unduly accelerated wetland drainage in three ways. First, implicit in the existence of any subsidy is its eventual removal, accentuated in this instance by the recent removal of most other agricultural subsidies and by the continuing focus on wetland protection. Farmers are enticed into drainage schemes by the knowledge that they might miss out on the subsidy if they delay. Second, the central involvement of Catchment Board staff in the design, construction and administration of subsidised drainage schemes ensures they have a vested work interest in the promotion of wetland drainage on private land. For

every dollar spent on drainage (capital works) the Catchment Board receives an additional 30 percent administration grant from Government. If capital works dwindle, so too does the Catchment Board empire. Third, to meet the requirements of both the on-farm and community schemes more extensive drainage works are installed than were often envisaged by the landowners. The other major West Coast casualty of the drainage subsidies was the Kongahu Swamp near Karamea. This large flax swamp had been identified as the outstanding swamp habitat in the north-west of the South Island. Both the Kongahu and Rotokino are difficult and costly development projects. Even some local farmers privately express the opinion that they are unwise investments. Certainly, not all swamp development succeeds, the most recent failure being the Kaniere Farm Settlement near Hokitika. Lands and Survey have abandoned it as a settlement proposition after vainly trying for years to turn an intractable wetland into economic farmland. In the last year there has been a flurry of drainage proposals on the West Coast affecting swamps previously identified by the Wildlife Service as valuable wildlife habitats. These include the Ohinetamatea, South Turnbull, Kini and Mumu Creek swamps of South Westland, the Lake Haupiri wetlands of North Westland; and the Birchfield Swamp north of Westport. Fire fighting by Wildlife The proposals are being fought on a case by case basis by the Wildlife Service, Forest and Bird, and the Acclimatisation Societies through costly, time-consuming objections to water right applications. The rapid-fire drainage initiatives of the Westland Catchment Board have outstripped the capacity of the official conservation agencies to cope with them. Lands and Survey have observed that ‘‘The Wildlife Service are struggling to keep up with the work pressure having only one permanent officer in Westland and are only fighting fires by addressing each drainage application as it arises . . .". Fisheries Research Division is seeking funding for a sorely needed regional survey to identify the important indigenous fish habitats. Botanical and general scientific values of the wetlands are being completely ignored because of a dearth of resource information. Unless the impetus for drainage is curbed on the West Coast and elsewhere, then there is an immediate and legitimate demand for substantial extra funding to the conservation agencies. hey need to be able to document the values of the remaining wetlands, assess the conservation priorities, and purchase critical wetlands in private ownership. Political recognition of the. scarcity of wetlands and of the need for effective conservation policies has been slow.in coming. A major report on wetlands prepared by the Environmental Council in 1984 highlighted the need for urgent political action. It has proven to be a useful catalyst in changing official attitudes. Some of its

‘recommendations were incorporated into Labour's Natural Waters election policy. This promised permanent reserve status for wetlands of natural importance, and approvals for wetland drainage only after catchment wide evaluations show minimal adverse effects on scenic, habitat or hydrological values. Fifteen months after Labour took office these praiseworthy recommendations have not been ratified. However, Internal Affairs Minister Peter Tapsell has been battling hard to have our remaining wetlands protected. In November 1985 he wrote in seeking the removal of drainage subsidies: ‘‘Problems of wetland toss are not confined to the West Coast. It is a national problem most evident in Northland, the West Coast, Otago, the Bay of Plenty, Hawkes Bay and the Waikato. In those areas the local authorities are particularly pro-development ... on the West Coast the Catchment Board and the County Councils have stated publicly that the 100,000 ha of wetlands remaining in private tenure are available for drainage and development." Tapsell notes that since December 1984 his Wildlife Service has investigated 31 applications for water rights to drain West Coast wetlands identified as habitats of note. He also considers the availability of wetland drainage subsidies as the single most important factor encouraging wetland destruction. Ministerial support, no action Conservationists’ efforts to stop the subsidies have been supported by other Cabinet ministers. The Minister of Finance, Roger Douglas, has noted that development subsidies sometimes encourage ‘‘a degree of development that was not justified by the underlying profitability of the investments involved. This may well have militated against the preservation of some resources such as wetlands’’. This view is shared by the Minister for the Environment, Russell Marshall, who stated in April last year that

"the drainage subsidies at the present level do not reflect the national interest and should be removed". In response, the Minister of Works, Fraser Colman, has said he favours the reduction of the 50 percent community drainage subsidy to a 35 percent subsidy, and the phasing out of the special West Coast subsidy over the next five years! This five-year forewarning will guarantee a rush of drainage before the subsidy is removed. Forest and Bird has therefore renewed its efforts to halt subsidies for drainage of natural wetlands. On its own, this removal will not achieve effective long-term wetland conservation, though it is an essential first step. * Government and its agencies’ policy, along with regional and local authorities should recognise the importance of wetlands and the need for their protection. . Wetland protection should be a matter of national importance under the Town and Country Planning Act. * Wetlands of national importance should all receive legal protection in accordance with the Government's election pledge. * Wetlands of regional and local importance should be protected. On private land, protection should be encouraged by financial incentives such as rating relief, tax credits and protection subsidies. Adequate funds should also be available for Crown purchase of such wetlands and Crown-owned wetlands should be given formal protection. To date, ministerial expressions of concern for the plight of our dwindling wetlands have not been translated into action because of intense lobbying by groups with vested interests in wetland drainage. Meanwhile, out in the provinces, the diggers are still clanking their way through the swamps. Wetlands remain an ever diminishing resource. yf Forest and Bird’s Wetland Policy is available from the Society secretary on request.