Lake Camp, looking across to the Lake Clearwater Village, on 22 September. Photo: Supplied / Vanessa Wright
Vanessa Wright says the council made the right decision not to apply for resource consent to divert water from Balmacaan Stream to the troubled Lake Camp in Canterbury.
Wright, a hut holder at Lake Clearwater Village, has been leading the call for the Ashburton District Council to take action to restore the diversion due to concerns about the popular recreational lake's receding levels.
But she was not surprised by council's decision last week not to proceed with a consent application, which could have cost ratepayers almost $1 million, with no guarantee of success.
Wright had read the report outlining the requirements and potential costs of the process in the lead up to the council meeting where the consent hopes were shut down.
"I knew there would be no way they would spend that much, and they would have been silly to apply under those conditions,'' she said.
"I'm the one who kick started all this and I was sitting there [watching the meeting] saying, 'it's not a smart business decision spending ratepayers' money doing it'.
"The council have done the right thing in the situation as it's not feasible under these conditions.
"It's a higher issue."
Though she understands the importance and history of the lake to the district, Wright said the regulatory frameworks are too restrictive and are impractical.
"The voice of the community is not being heard and it seems to be a common theme."
Wright agreed with comments from councillor Tony Todd, who favoured pursuing the consent until the report highlighted many hurdles and costs.
"It just demonstrates really how our country is becoming quite hard to business with," Todd said.
But it was still a tight call, with the council voting 6-4 in favour of not proceeding with a resource consent application.
Even if it was approved, the consent would have been subject to Canterbury Land and Water Regional Plan minimum flow regulations, which were not in place for the previously consented diversion, and that was a key factor for Wright.
"It's frustrating because the diversion had been in place for over 50 years to top up Lake Camp, and the diverted water remains in the same catchment.
"It seems so simple, but we have complicated layers of bureaucracy and regulations getting in the way."
Environment Canterbury's position has remained the same as when the previous consent was surrendered in 2020.
Any work to take water and create a diversion from Balmacaan Stream would require a new consent under the Resource Management Act and the Canterbury Water and Land Regional Plan. That was because of the taking of water, discharging it to another waterway, and the work to build a structure in a waterway.
Retired hydrologist John Waugh told the Ashburton Water Zone Committee in August that the "most useful thing you could do is do nothing" at Lake Camp.
Agreeing with the stance from ECan and DOC, Waugh said there was no ecological problem, but rather a people problem.
Diverting water would not do anything useful "apart from making water-skiing a bit easier" at the lake, he said.
Wright, though, remains adamant the diversion is needed for the lake to be at a recreationally safe level and the council's decision "isn't the end of this".
"If water is not being flushed out, and sits stagnant, then how can we be so certain there is no ecological concern."
Since Waugh's presentation on 27 August, Lake Camp's level has gone from 5.238m to 5.589m from recent rainfall.
It was a small increase but the lake remains much lower than the others in Otuwharkai, Wright said.
"Lake Emma is full and overflowing, all the other waterways around Lake Camp are full.
"It shows there is plenty of water up there, yet Lake Camp has only risen marginally because of its small catchment."
It needs the assistance of the diversion for people to be able to use the recreation reserve, she said.
LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air.