Info message
Successful operation message
Warning message
Error message

led1970

42 comments · +504 / −71 · rank #2432 of 40,276

Dont even suggest that. This is only the start of the shortfalls - theres roading, site clearance, unstable rocks, new bores inside the stopbanks, land purchase, consultants fees, you name it this is only the beginning and TDC are happy for ratepayers to cover any cost overruns.

+28−1

Nobody should pay for it. Not the tax payers or the ratepayers. As Peter Fraser said right at the beginning the dam does not fit the bill. Too big, too expensive. If anybody had listened another alternative of which there are plenty at less cost would have been considered and worked on to help water mismanagement. Shame on council staff and misinformed irrigators.

+24−0

My comments are based upon 4years of reading, researching and attending council meetings.There no requirement, legal or otherwise, to augment river flow.Pond can be filled during most flows.Current grants, $12M may be lost. Better than wasting much more than that.The dam is not needed by anyone, except possibly WEIC. Certainly not needed by TDC.The real Q is why do we think there is a water problem. Our aquifers have a huge capacity. The problem is stupid/illogical rationing triggers created by TDC staff. There in lie the issue.Murray Dawson

+26−3

Rubbish. There are no pipes from this dam. 95% of released water will flow to sea. The Richmond urban water supply is We sit on one of the largest aquifers inNZ. The water problem is TDC mismanagement and ridiculous triggers. Its not people who live in nice houses we worry about, it is people on fixed incomes, families stretched to pay for overpriced houses. Our rates are the second highest in nz now and water rates the highest.

+19−6

Fishing is using less water as they are now processing on the high seas. WIL is using less water as urban expansion uses much less water than farming. Fix the leaks and cooperate with Nelson. What about helping Nelson to fix the Maitai which is full of sludge and organic matter and cant be used for urban supply. Now theres a cheaper option!

+9−0

Tama we live on one of the biggest aquifers in NZ. Ratepyers just want the council to manage the water properly. In a 12 week summer 60 million cubes of groundwater flows over the plains to the sea of this TDC uses 3million cubes. ( info from TDC website). There is plenty of water there for irrigators. Get the triggers put at Appleby Bridge and use a modicum of common sense. Stop bullying the irrigators factories and rate payers.

+6−2

Wrong. Irrigator bores draw from groundwater that flows over the top of the unconfined aquifer. Over a 12week summer when water is most needed 60 million cubes of groundwater flow over the plains to the sea, of this all bores TDC and irrigators draw 3 million cubes. These numbers are from the TDC website. Also increase in homes equals decrease in water use as homes use only a fraction of of water irrigators use. The problem is an illogical trigger regime for cease takes. This means TDC scares the hell out of everybody by telling them there is a shortage of water when in fact we live on top of one of the biggest aquifers in nz and have plenty of water. Im not surprised you have misinformation as this is the line your Council tells you.

+3−0

Hello RealisteveYou have criticised â˜environmentalists in a distorted way. Leaving that aside most ratepayers opposing paying for the dam do not fit your characterisation. The biggest issue in this debate is that too much misinformation, and selective information, has been presented to councillors and the public. If a more accurate understanding of our water had been presented then the dam would never have been suggested. Our water resource is ample for our foreseeable needs.Murray Dawson

+0−0

It is absolutely not 1 to say any other water supply options would cost more than the proposed dam. They have not been properly costed by staff. secondly the rationing trigger regime is illogical. Severe restrictions are not necessary. Lesley Dawson

+0−0