ENM provided a response to the PNCC Nature Calls Consultation in May 2026. A summary of our response is provided below, and our full response can be accessed through our website here.
The ENM membership expressed frustration and disappointment in the diminished range of options offered at this stage of consultation. In particular, the removal of any option to avoid or reduce discharge into the Manawatū river. Full or partial discharge to land has always been the preferred course of action due to the reduced stress on aquatic ecosystems. The wise utilisation of water resources for appropriate irrigation presents a solution on two fronts: (i) we live in an age of climate disruption, which in Manawatū manifests in increased prolonged dry spells and heavy rain events, (ii) investing now in infrastructure that can cope with these predictable extremes while minimising harm to the river is the responsible course of action.
Furthermore, the estuary at the mouth of the Manawatū river has been appointed RAMSAR status of international biological significance, qualifying under seven of the nine criteria relating to rare and threatened animal and plant species. It is the duty of all people dwelling near the river and tributaries to care for its health, for the sake of preserving and restoring native biodiversity across the catchment.
The primary barrier to a land discharge option is the alleged higher cost. Our membership has been provided no evidence that the costings are grounded in real world quotes or in-depth research, and feels that the range of options was prematurely constricted and does not offer a meaningful choice to the community.
Of the two options now provided, Environment Network supports option 2 which includes a second discharge option at Ōpiki, enabling better river health outcomes in times of low rainfall. The point has been raised that the tidal effect on the river does reach Ōpiki, so the timing of discharge must account for the very low level of flow seen at high tide.
Our members have expressed support for the inclusion of funding for adaptive management; however, questions have been raised of its potential effectiveness at the seemingly low rate of 1 million per year. More clarity is needed on how potential adaptive strategies will be investigated and administered within this funding structure.
The list of potential adaptive strategies includes diverting wastewater from the river and using it for irrigation. Our membership feels that the time to make these changes is now, not after a huge investment in a river discharge system has already been made.
ENM on Facebook