before the special tribunal for the ngaruroro and … · 1.1 my full name is xan harding. ... 3.8...

STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF XAN HARDING ON BEHALF OF THE HAWKE’S BAY WINEGROWERS’ ASSOCIATION

& GIMBLETT GRAVELS WINEGROWERS’ ASSOCIATION

STAGE 2 MATTERS

25 JANUARY 2019

Counsel instructed:

J D K Gardner-Hopkins Phone: 04 889 2776 [email protected] PO Box 25-160 WELLINGTON

Solicitors acting:

Alison McEwan Phone: 06 835 8939 Fax: 06 835 3712 PO Box 446 NAPIER

BEFORE THE SPECIAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE NGARURORO AND CLIVE RIVERS WATER CONSERVATION ORDER AT NAPIER

IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 (“Act”)

AND IN THE MATTER of a Special Tribunal appointed

under s202 of the Act to consider an application for a Water Conservation Order

THE SPECIAL TRIBUNAL: Richard Fowler (Chair) Alec Neill (Member)

Dr Roger Maaka (Member) Dr Ngaire Phillips (Member) John McCliskie (Member)

1

1 Qualifications and experience

1.1 My full name is Xan Harding.

1.2 I am a director and water spokesperson of the Hawke’s Bay Winegrowers’

Association (“HBWG”). I am authorised to give evidence on its behalf.

1.3 I hold a Bachelor of Horticultural Science (Hons), a Graduate Diploma in

Banking Studies and am currently enrolled in a Master of Environment Management programme (Massey). I have been a grapegrower in Hawke’s

Bay (Haumoana and Bridge Pa) since 2000.

1.4 I held the role of deputy Chair of HBWG from 2006 to 2018, prior to that

President of Hawke’s Bay Grapegrowers’ Association Inc. as well as being an alternate Director of New Zealand Winegrowers and NZW Board Finance Committee member for a number of years and a current Sustainable

Winegrowing New Zealand (“SWNZ”) committee member. I resigned from my HBWG deputy Chair role in 2018 to avoid any conflict with my new

spokesperson role with the Te Mata Peak Peoples’ Track Society but otherwise continue to represent HBWG on RMA matters.

1.5 I was HBWG’s representative on the TANK group since its inception in 2012 and prior to that its representative in the Tuki Tuki PC6 process, as well as

the HBRC Land and Water Management Strategy and various other regional council and regional TLA processes since circa 2004 (all unpaid apart from

some modest TANK attendance fees).

1.6 My evidence supports the submission by Hawke’s Bay Winegrowers’ and

Gimblett Gravels Winegrowers’ Associations (“Winegrowers”) on the draft Water Conservation Order (“WCO”) for the Ngaruroro and Clive Rivers. The Winegrowers oppose any WCO in regards to its application to the Lower

Ngaruroro River.

2 Scope of evidence

2.1 The purpose of this evidence is to summarise the Winegrowers’ overall position on the WCO and provide an overview of the Winegrowers’ evidence

which will be put to the Special Tribunal at the Stage 2 Hearings in relation to the Lower Ngaruroro.

2.2 This evidence addresses the following matters:

2

i the Winegrowers’ overall position on the WCO and its’ opposition to

a WCO in the Lower Ngaruroro;

ii wine industry sustainability; and

iii the current and future needs of the Hawke’s Bay wine industry.

3 Executive summary

3.1 The Winegrowers consider that the Applicant has not made their case that there are outstanding values in the Lower Ngaruroro that warrant the

protection of a WCO;

3.2 Despite considerable efforts on the part of Winegrowers, the Applicant has

failed to address a number of matters of detail in draft Order which the Winegrowers consider are incompatible with a workable Order in the Lower Ngaruroro

3.3 The TANK Plan Change should be the preferred planning instrument governing the Lower Ngaruroro as it provides for all significant values in the

catchment and does so in a more effective and efficient way than a WCO would.

3.4 Sustainability and the SWNZ scheme area central pillars of the New Zealand wine industry, holding members to high and continuously improving

environmental standards.

3.5 S.212 (b) of the RMA requires the Tribunal to have regard to the current and

future needs of the Hawke’s Bay wine industry, those needs are not provided for by Version 3 of the draft Order, especially in relation to certainty for

existing discharges (both point-source and diffuse), maintenance of existing points of direct surfacewater takes and future access to high-flow storage.

3.6 Approximately 97% of wine sector water use is for irrigation/frost protection,

approximately 95% of irrigation is by the most efficient drip method, vineyards use approximately 1/3rd the amount of irrigation per hectare as other irrigated

crops and have the lowest diffuse discharge profile of any intensive land-use activity.

3.7 Paradoxically, whilst vineyards have a low overall environment footprint, the wine sector stands to be most affected by controls on water quality and

3

quality, as vineyards generally occupy the lightest soils closest to rivers,

including the Ngaruroro.

3.8 Availability of high-flow water storage will be critical to the future development

of the Hawke’s Bay wine industry, particularly in the elevated plateaux adjacent to the Ngaruroro.

3.9 The wine industry is increasingly seen nationally as a future low-carbon landuse alternative to pastoral farming and this aspect deserves

consideration in having regard to the wine industry’s future needs.

3.10 The high-flow water storage provisions of the TANK plan change are pivotal

in achieving a rebalancing of the extractive uses of water in the Ngaruroro catchment towards greater use of high-flow storage and lesser reliance on groundwater resources, whilst improving catchment environmental values

and providing for sustainable growth in primary production.

4 Overall Position on the WCO

4.1 Recapping the Winegrowers’ Stage 1 evidence, based on discussions with Fish & Game NZ in December 2015 and verbal assurances received from

them about lack of impact on land-users, the Winegrowers have supported some form of WCO in principle but stressed that that the ‘devil would be in

the detail’. In particular, the Winegrowers supported a WCO in the Upper Ngaruroro – provided that the effects on the needs of the winegrowers’

industry are not significantly affected in the Lower Ngaruroro, and that consideration is given to allowing some water storage in the tributaries of the

Upper Ngaruroro. The Winegrowers in their submissions opposed the WCO in respect of the Lower Ngaruroro – and continue to do so, for the reasons to be given in evidence and legal submissions.

4.2 The Winegrowers were, and continue to be, conscious of:

a a general appreciation of the near-natural state of parts of the upper

catchment and community expectations for it to be upheld;

b the NPSFM imperative to ‘maintain or improve’ freshwater, and awareness

of Ngati Kahugnunu’s views thereon;

c the implications of ‘King Salmon’ in giving planning policy greater ‘teeth’;

4

d the wine industry’s own sustainability values; and

e the role of the TANK process and ensuing TANK plan change in addressing the community’s interests in the Ngaruroro River.

4.3 Since the completion of the Stage 1 hearings, the Winegrowers have expended considerable effort and financial resources in continuing to engage

with the Applicant in the spirit of co-operation over the Draft Order, with limited effect. To assist the Tribunal, the Winegrowers filed a memorandum

dated 28 September 2018 registering ongoing concerns about Version 3. Regretfully, the Applicants have chosen to ignore many of the Winegrowers’

concerns with the Draft, which the Winegrowers consider are incompatible with a workable Order in the Lower Ngaruroro.

4.4 Whilst the Winegrowers continue to support some form of WCO over the

Upper Ngaruroro, we oppose the current Draft Order and any Order in respect of the Lower Ngaruroro. The key reasons are that:

a there are no nationally-outstanding values in the Lower Ngaruroro that require the protection of an Order – the Applicants have not made their

case in this regard;

b the WCO in respect of the Lower Ngaruroro will have little practical effect

in protecting the values that do exist, but will have significant impacts on the current and future needs of the winegrowing industry. In simple terms,

the significant costs of the WCO will far outweigh the benefits (little or none); and

c the TANK Plan Change should be the preferred planning instrument governing the Lower Ngaruroro as it provides for all significant values in the catchment and does so in a more effective and efficient way than a

WCO would, because TANK addresses all significant values in an integrated manner and by reference to one set of rules. Introducing a

WCO in the lower would add an extra layer of regulatory complexity which would need to be referenced (and likely contested) on an ongoing basis

but without adding any environmental protections that are not already included in the TANK plan change.

5

5 Needs of the Sector in terms of S. 212(b)

5.1 The Winegrowers’ Stage 2 submissions focus on describing the current and future needs of the wine industry so that the Tribunal may take this into

account. To do so, the Winegrowers’ evidence focusses in particular on needs as they relate to irrigation, discharges and tourism through the

following evidence and submissions:

Domain Submitter Summary Water Use – Irrigation and Frost

Mark Krasnow (Expert) Critical reliance of Hawke’s Bay vineyards on water for economic production and to avoid vine death on light soils.

Daniel Watson, Craggy Range Wines

Hawke’s Bay irrigation good practice, water use efficiency and innovations.

Adam Evans, Constellation Brands

Description of Te Tua frost protection system design/operation, explanation of role that water plays cf. frost fans.

Graham Bartleet, Pernod Ricard

User perspective on role of storage for frost protection and irrigation (Crownthorpe)

Discharges Peter Callendar (Expert) Implications of draft Order provisions for winery direct discharges.

Xan Harding (these submissions)

Overview of diffuse effects of viticulture.

Wine Business/ Tourism

Fabian Yukich, Villa Maria

Current and future importance of Hawke’s Bay as NZ’s second-largest wine region from a national perspective

Peter Robertson

Boutique winery & wine tourism perspective on necessity of irrigation/winery/discharge water to sustain an industry.

Sustainability Xan Harding (these submissions)

Role of sustainability in NZ wine industry in relation to water.

Future Needs Xan Harding (these submissions)

Opportunities for future expansion of HB wine industry & implications for water needs.

Planning Mark St.Clair Planning considerations for wine industry needs and assessment of the relevant planning instruments.

Legal James Gardner-Hopkins (barrister) Alison McEwan (instructing solicitor)

Overall legal representation.

6

6 Wine Industry Sustainability Programme

6.1 The New Zealand wine industry is recognised internationally for global leadership in its national wine sustainability programme (“SWNZ”), which

originated in 1996 and now encompasses 98% of the total New Zealand vineyard area.

6.2 SWNZ is a voluntary, externally-audited programme based on continuous improvement and adherence to standards and guidelines issued by OIV

(International Organisation of Vine and Wine). It covers 9 pillars – Soil, Air, Water, Biodiversity, People, Energy, Byproducts, Pest & Disease

Management and Business,

6.3 An understanding of the SWNZ programme is essential in considering the current and future needs of the Hawke’s Bay wine industry. As a member of

the New Zealand Winegrowers Inc. committee overseeing SWNZ, I am well-informed to assist the Tribunal in this regard.

6.4 Attached at Annexure 1 is the SWNZ water sustainability pillar document, which summarises the requirements and expectations on SWNZ members.

The document encapsulates these in the statement that “it is vital that wine

businesses minimise water use and protected [sic] the purity of waterways to

ensure our supply remains clean and sustainable in the future”.

6.5 Attached at Annexure 2 is the SWNZ National Water Use Report 2018,

compiled by independent consultants from the latest annual information submitted by SWNZ members. This provides a useful snapshot of vineyard

and winery water usage.

6.6 Extracted from the Water Use Report and reproduced below are some key statistics in relation to Hawke’s Bay. Overall the Report shows that 77% of

the Hawke’s Bay vineyard area (3502ha) relies on irrigation and that the amount of irrigation used in the sector varies by region, soil type and season.

To produce quality wines, grape growers must actively manage and monitor their water usage, both as a matter of viticultural necessity and under the

terms of SWNZ membership.

7

6.7 Note that annual water usage in the above graphic is quite variable, with

year-to-year variation within a region due primarily to the amount and timing of seasonal rainfall. Variation between regions is primarily due to regional

differences in varietal mix, soil type and windrun.

6.8 In the above graphic, the ‘Very light – Stoney’ soil requiring the most irrigation would be found principally in areas of very recent soil close to rivers and in

particular in the Gimblett Gravels subregion. This illustrates a paradox of

8

grapegrowing that the lightest soil often most suitable for grapegrowing (and

unsuitable for much else agricultural) are generally located closest to rivers, supporting landuse which uses approximately 1/3rd the water of other irrigated

crops but which by virtue of its location is most likely to be affected by controls over rivers and by groundwater connectivity rules.

6.9 As represented in the figure above, nationally only 3% of wine industry water use is by wineries, the rest is for irrigation and frost protection (separate

figures are not available for the Hawke’s Bay region but are unlikely to differ markedly from the national average).

6.10 The above figure shows that nationally over 85% of vineyards employ specific

soil moisture monitoring techniques, either with their own equipment or via an advisory service. The figure also demonstrates that multiple techniques are the norm, combining objective data with practical viticultural experience.

Separate data is not available for Hawke’s Bay but would be expected to be similar.

9

6.11 As noted in the SWNZ water pillar at Annexure 1, 95% of the SWNZ member

irrigated area employs undervine drip irrigation, which is current best practice with an efficiency of approximately 90% in a well-maintained system.

7 Diffuse Effects of Viticulture

7.1 Information by way of Powerpoint presentation was provided to the Tribunal

during the Stage 1 hearings on the modelled leaching profile of Hawke’s Bay vineyards and this is repeated below for the Tribunal’s convenience. One

member of the Tribunal queried why Hawke’s Bay’s P leaching results exceeded the national average, with no answer available at that time. My

understanding on subsequent enquiry is that this is due to naturally higher P content in some of the Hawke’s Bay soil parent materials. In other words, this is a natural state, rather than one resulting from any industry practices.

7.2 Overall, viticulture should still be seen in the context of the N & P leaching numbers being at the very low end of the spectrum for intensive horticulture

and comparable or better than the low end of extensive agriculture.

10

7.3 Whilst SWNZ does not currently include Overseer or similar leaching

assessments, a SWNZ project is underway with a view to achieving Farm Environmental Management Plan (“FEMP”) equivalency on a region-by-

region/catchment-by-catchment basis, including the use of property-scale nutrient leaching modelling. Such an approach was attempted by SWNZ in

the Tuki Tuki catchment but failed due to drafting constraints in the RRMP. The draft TANK plan change seeks to remove such constraints and

incentivises FEMP equivalence via either industry or catchment collective.

7.4 The Winegrowers support the concept of FEMPs for environmental

compliance but note that as grapegrowing starts from a very low nutrient base and generally in Hawke’s Bay does not involve regular application of any solid fertilisers other than at vine establishment, opportunities for grape growers to

reduce their nutrient footprint are quite limited.

7.5 Moreover, in light of the modest nutrient footprint of grapegrowing, the

Winegrowers find it illogical and objectionable that the draft WCO would put their farming activities in breach in the event of an overall breach of water

quality standards not of our industry’s making.

8 Future Needs of the Hawke’s Bay Wine Sector

8.1 Whilst it is not possible to predict the future growth of the Hawke’s Bay wine industry with any certainty, it is possible to draw some broad conclusions

about the likely general pattern of development (ie what is more likely to happen than not, unless unduly constrained, say, by a WCO).

8.2 In recent years the official figures for Hawke’s Bay vineyard area have plateaued around 4800-5000ha. However, underlying that figure is significant change in the vineyard mix, with mainly smaller uneconomic sites on heavier

soils being converted to apples, whilst at the same time there has been growth in the large corporate vineyard area particularly in the Crownthorpe

subregion which is not yet reflected in the official statistics. Recent new large investments in vineyards (Delegat, Apatu) and new wineries (Villa Maria,

Delegat) indicate overall growth in the Hawke’s Bay industry and a commitment to ongoing growth from some of the largest Hawke’s Bay

players. While Hawkes Bay is still the second largest wine region in New Zealand, its 4,800 Ha of grapes accounts for only 12% of the national grape

plantings, with Marlborough accounting for 68% of the area and the remaining

11

20% split between 6 other regions (see graphic below, source – NZ

Winegrowers’ 2018 Annual report).

8.3 The rate of growth in the Hawke’s Bay vineyard area has been constrained in recent years by industry economics, lack of available land, lack of available

groundwater, the failure of the Ruataniwha water storage scheme, and industry national investment priorities being focussed on planting up the last

available land in Marlborough.

8.4 A key factor in how the wine sector may grow in the future will be the

outcome of the TANK plan change. While the final form of what is ultimately adopted cannot be predicted with certainty, the “starting point” of an

advanced draft now has some clarity. Given the lengthy collaborative efforts in developing the draft, there may well be fewer changes through the

hearings processes than with other plan changes.

12

8.5 In any event, I have been closely involved in the TANK process, and consider

I have a good “working” understanding of what the draft TANK plan change is intended to achieve.

8.6 As drafted, the TANK plan change is expected to cap groundwater resources for irrigation at something approximating actual usage in the most recent dry

year (2012/13), representing approximately 50% of ‘paper’ allocations. Individual consent-holder seasonal allocations are expected in some cases to

further restrict water availability as a result of the application of a new allocation model (‘Irricalc’) and due to reallocation of some of the

groundwater resource to lowland stream augmentation schemes, which are proposed to improve lowland stream conditions. In addition, it is possible that a proportional scaling back of consent volumes may be required to fit within

the proposed groundwater allocation limit.

8.7 In my evidence for the Stage 1 hearings I included a figure illustrating the

expected TANK plan change seasonal water allocations for land-uses comparable to grape growing, showing that the expected modelled water

usage (and hence allocation) for grapes is no more than 1/3rd that of other irrigated land-uses. The figure is reproduced below for the Tribunal’s

convenience.

13

8.8 The additional constraint on groundwater resources is intended to be

mitigated at least in part in the TANK plan change by providing for an increase in the high-flow allocation limit for direct water takes in both the

Ngaruroro and the Tutaekuri Rivers, with such water to be available both for out-of-stream storage on individual properties as well as community

schemes, and for use in augmentation of both lowland streams and groundwater.

8.9 In order to achieve this rebalancing of the extractive uses of water in the TANK catchments towards greater use of high-flow storage and lesser

reliance on groundwater resources, it will be essential that sensible operation of the TANK plan change is not constrained by a WCO.

8.10 Unfortunately, despite significant effort on our part, the Winegrowers have

been unable to resolve numerous matters of detail in the Applicant’s current Version 3 of the draft Order which, if adopted in its current form, would

preclude successful implementation of the TANK plan change. The detail of the concerns is provided by others (planning, and legal) but the key concerns

are:

i inclusion of hydraulically-connected groundwaters, regardless of

actual effect of activities on the values sought to be protected;

ii fundamental incompatibility between the proposed restrictions on

alterations of river flow and form and the proposed TANK approach to provision for high-flow storage – TANK employs 3x median flow

as a benchmark to assess the amount of sustainable high-flow extraction, whilst the draft WCO seeks to employ various multiples of median flow as controls for operational storage decisions;

iii failure to provide for in-stream works to maintain permitted points of take;

iv definition of damming appearing to preclude any practical means of storing water from any part of the Upper catchment to support

activities in the Lower Ngaruroro;

v failure to provide for ‘grandfathering’ of existing property nutrient

footprints, such that all discharge activities both point source and

14

diffuse would be non-complying in the event of an overall catchment

water quality standard breach;

vi drafting that appears to preclude granting of all new consents;

vii failure to provide for ‘grandfathering of “use” and “store” consent provisions;

viii failure to acknowledge that the waters between Kuripapango and Whanawhana, whilst in a very good state, are not in their natural

state; and

ix prohibition on new infrastructure, which may be necessary to

support future development.

8.11 Assuming the current TANK plan change is ultimately adopted in a similar form as the current draft, the Hawke’s Bay wine industry could expect to

experience additional growth as the TANK plan change’s constraints on water allocation and diffuse discharges improve the relative attractiveness of grape

growing, due to our sector’s relative water and nutrient use efficiency.

8.12 Beyond the growth that the Hawke’s Bay wine industry can expect through its

competitive advantage in use of natural resources, I also expect climate change to increase the attractiveness of grapegrowing in the cooler more

elevated parts of the TANK catchments, providing further impetus for pastoral conversions to grapegrowing in areas where soil, slope, contour and river

proximity allow, including the elevated terraces on both banks of the Ngaruroro River above the Heretaunga Plains (eg. Crownthorpe, Kereru).

8.13 The wine sector is also seen nationally as a low-carbon land-use alternative to pastoral farming, a factor that is expected to become increasingly relevant in the wine industry’s future prospects and needs as New Zealand transitions

to a low-carbon economy.

8.14 Thus any Ngaruroro WCO would need to have regard to the needs of the

Hawke’s Bay wine sector in providing for the ability to develop new vineyards, particularly on the elevated terraces above the Heretaunga Plains, subject of

course to overall environmental limits.

8.15 The Winegrowers maintain that, contrary to the apparently entrenched belief

of some of the applicant parties, water storage is not inextricably linked to

15

water degradation and that even under the current economic paradigm, new

water storage for vineyard development can proceed whilst maintaining or even improving catchment environmental values. I understand that Dr

Rengasamy Balasubramaniam on behalf of Delegat Limited will give evidence in support of this proposition, in relation to Delegat’s recent

conversion of a large-scale dairying operation in Crownthorpe, which has significantly reduced both water use and diffuse discharges relating to the

property.

8.16 If wine sector growth is prevented by a WCO, the expected result will not only

be the decline of the existing wine industry through the loss of new entrants bringing innovation & new investment but also the loss of opportunity for land-use change to reduce catchment contaminant load and for climate change

adaptation. In particular, access to new high-flow storage will be a critical limiting factor to future wine industry growth.

8.17 The threat to the development of the Hawke’s Bay wine industry from the draft WCO Order’s contrary approach to high-flow storage is mirrored by the

threat to other regional primary sectors and by extension the Hawke’s Bay community in general (although arguably without such strong attendant

benefits in catchment contaminant load reduction and climate change adaptation as with the wine sector). This reinforces the point that the TANK

plan is intended to achieve a rebalancing of water extraction in the Ngaruroro catchment away from groundwater and towards high-flow storage, whilst

providing both for improved environmental values and sustainable growth. The WCO sought by the Applicants in the Lower Ngaruroro does not achieve such a purpose, rather it frustrates it.

Xan Harding

25 January 2019

16

Annexure 1: SWNZ water sustainability pillar document

COMMITTED TO PROTECTING THE UNIQUE PLACES THAT MAKE OUR EXCEPTIONAL WINES nzwine.com/sustainability 1

Lake

Forsy

th V

ineya

rd, C

ante

rbur

y

SOIL, WATER, AIR — WATER

PILLARS OF SUSTAINABILITY

Many vineyard operations demand a careful balancing act between minimising water use and providing enough irrigation to assure fruit quality. The Resource Management Act 1991 has required viticulturalists to improve how they manage water and improve water budgeting skills. Viticulturalists are now are expected to monitor rainfall, evaporation and transpiration and soil moisture.

In the winery, where the demand for water is mostly for processing and cleaning, water management is focused on minimisation and wastewater management. A secondary benefit of decreasing water use is a reduction in the associated energy costs required to pump water around or dispose of it.

REGULATORY REQUIREMENTSWater access rights are granted in the form of resource consents by local government bodies under the Resource Management Act 1991. The Resource Management Act 1991 covers all of the country’s natural resources,

and includes water usage, water drainage and wastewater dispersal.

Members must review their local or district area plans to ascertain whether their activities are:

• Permitted activities but with some limitations

• Discretionary (require a consent)

• Prohibited

Resource consents are required in most areas for water-take and storage dams. Members must comply with any resource consents to take and use water, to discharge water and to store water.

Members are required to comply with the Resource Management Act 1991 and their local regional/district plans.

WATER MANAGEMENTAccess to water and conservation of water quality is of paramount importance. Members are required to employ management practices that result in economic and efficient uses of water, and have no negative environmental impacts.

For some vineyards, water offers a sustainable form of frost management. Frost protection systems use the minimum amount of water possible, and given that frosts generally occur at times of high water supply, this practice has a negligible effect.

In the winery there is a demand on water for processing and cleaning. Water management focuses on minimising water use and wastewater management – from production through treatment, recycling and discharge.

Minimising water use entails:

• On vineyards - applying irrigation according to plant needs and soil moisture.

• In wineries - efficient cleaning and production processes and sound management of waste and wastewater disposal systems, to avoid contamination of water sources.

SUSTAINABLE WATER MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

Practices such as drip irrigation systems and scheduled irrigation are mainstays of the Sustainable Winegrowing New Zealand programme. As well as saving water, they prevent the problems that excess soil water can cause, such as an increase in disease, reduction in fruit quality, and leaching or surface runoff, which degrades ground water.

In the winery, hot water used to sterilise during bottling can be reused for other cleaning activities. This saves energy and reduces water usage, and decreases the amount of wastewater a winery needs to treat before discharging.

Vineyards can use a variety of methods to determine the need for irrigation, including:

• Analysing weather and rainfall data.

• Analysing evapotranspiration measurements.

Water is of critical importance to New Zealand’s wine industry for irrigation, frost protection and winery operations. Although New Zealand has over 50 major rivers, 770 lakes and abundant rainfall, it is vital that wine businesses minimise water use and protected the purity of waterways to ensure our supply remains clean and sustainable in the future.

85% of Sustainable Winegrowing New Zealand vineyard area is irrigated, 95% of this area undervine drip irrigation for more efficient targeted application.

Annexure 1

COMMITTED TO PROTECTING THE UNIQUE PLACES THAT MAKE OUR EXCEPTIONAL WINES nzwine.com/sustainability 2

SOIL, WATER, AIR — WATER

• Analysing soil moisture measurements.

• Computer modeling.

• Visual assessment.

An irrigation calculator is made available to member vineyards, which converts their water measures to standard reporting, and helps them estimate the quantities of water required for vineyard sites.

Templates are made available to member vineyards to record the output of their irrigation systems and ensure they are delivering water efficiently to all vines within the irrigation area.

Vineyard frost protection systems must be checked annually (usually checked before each frost event), water use measured and reported, and records kept to enable long-term tracking.

Minimised water use is achieved in the winery by:

• Using low volume/high pressure nozzles.

• Using nozzles that are attached to the endof the hoses rather than the tap (savingtime when closing off water flow).

• Having a maintenance programme toensure leaks are fixed quickly.

• Removing solid waste by rinsingequipment before cleaning.

Members are encouraged to:

• Reuse and recycle water in the winery,through multiple washes if possible.

• Pre-treat wastewater in the winery bysettling out solids before it is distributedon the land.

MONITORING AND CONTROL• Vineyards should monitor irrigation

systems ensuring the system deliverswater efficiently and audit them annually.Sustainable Winegrowing New Zealandprovides templates to help members toself-audit.

• Vineyards and wineries should report thewater use of each vineyard and winery toSustainable Winegrowing New Zealandannually. This information is used toprovide both personalised and annualnational and regional benchmarkingreports to members.

• Wineries should follow the New ZealandWinegrowers Code of Practice (CoP) forWinery Waste, which provides guidelinesfor water management. Checklisttemplates should be used by members torecord water and wastewater managementpractices, review systems and initiate anychanges required.

BENCHMARKING• National and regional benchmarking

data and personalised reports, includingcomments on suggested practices, andcomplementary information and resources,are supplied to member vineyards andwineries annually.

• Benchmarking helps members improveefficiency by creating a reference pointagainst which their performance may becompared or assessed.

Central to our sustainability policy is a commitment to keep improving, as new research is undertaken and new technologies are developed. The New Zealand wine industry is actively involved in both of these areas, with an ongoing leadership role in research and development projects. Looking to the future, we will continue to protect the places that make our exceptional wines.

For further information contact Justine Tate, Business Manager Sustainability, New Zealand Winegrowers: [email protected]

17

Annexure 2: SWNZ National Water Use Report 2018

nzwine.com/sustainability 1

National Water Use Report 2018Vineyard and Winery – Scorecard Reporting, Benchmarking and Tracking

Prepared by Andrew Barber & Henry Stenning

for Sustainable Winegrowing New Zealand

Annexure 2

2 National Water Use Report 2018

National Water Use Report 2018Vineyard and Winery – Scorecard Reporting, Benchmarking and Tracking

1.0 Overview 03

2.0 Vineyard Water Use 04

2.1 Scorecard Response Rate 04

2.2 Quantity of Irrigation 05

2.2.1 Marlborough 07

2.2.2 Hawke’s Bay 07

2.2.3 Irrigation Optimisation 08

2.2.4 Primary Water Source and Types of Irrigation 08

2.3 Quantity of Irrigation by Soil Type 09

3.0 Full Production Winery Water Use 10

4.0 Winery Bottling Water Use 13

5.0 Individualised Report Examples 13

Appendix 14

Cover image courtesy of Wild South


SNAPSHOT

• The sector average irrigation rate is 96 mm, which is 21% less than in 2016/17 (122 mm).

• Otago has the highest average application rate at 202 mm, followed by Hawke’s Bay at almost half that at 104 mm.

• Rainfall in Marlborough (Marlborough Research Station) between October 2017 and April 2018 was the wettest since 1934. This is following on from 2016/17 which was also a very wet season. This has led to a low level of irrigation in Marlborough, resulting in a marked decrease in total vineyard water use.

• In 2017/18 approximately 63% of vineyards were irrigated. Which was 77% of the area, or just over 28,600 ha. In 2017/18 27,522,900 m3 of irrigation was applied.

• Winery water use averaged 2.7 L/L wine, and came down to an average of 2.4 L/L wine in wineries over 4mL.

• Total winery water use increased by 9% from the 2017 value of 743,500 m3 to 813,700 m3 in 2018.

• Total industry water use in 2017/18 was 28,336,600 m3, 97% of which was used for irrigation. This is a 25% decreased compared to the 36,617,000 m3 used in 2016/17.

1.0 OVERVIEWThis national water use report, for vineyards and wineries

2018, builds upon the previous Sustainable Winegrowing

New Zealand reports since 2011. Individualised reports

are sent to all Sustainable Winegrowing NZ members,

benchmarking their performance and providing links to

learning resources.

The analysis and reports are based on the information

that was extracted from the Sustainable Winegrowing

NZ database as of 12th September 2018. The 2018

database contains 210 active wineries and 1,830 active

vineyards.

The vineyard analysis included irrigation and rainfall data

from multiple locations in each region. The individualised

reports show results from the closest station to the

vineyard, or a default station if the vineyard location was

not provided. This is the fourth year where soil type has

been collected and used for irrigation benchmarking.

The 2018 season was also compared to all previous

seasons since the 2003/04 season for total seasonal

rainfall.

Winery water use for the 2018 vintage has been

compared to the 7 previous vintages. Bottling facility

water use has been separated out in the Scorecard, this

year no bottling only report was prepared as the data

quality and quantity was too low for any meaningful

analysis.

Industry averages (i.e. total water used divided by total

wine produced) are used in this report as opposed to

the individualised reports where vineyard and winery

averages are used.

Examples of the individualised benchmarking reports

are included in the appendix.


2.0 VINEYARDWATERUSE

2.1 SCORECARDRESPONSERATEBased on the Scorecard returns that include irrigated

area, there were 1,152 irrigated vineyards covering 28,614

ha, or 77% of the total vineyard area included in the

Sustainable Winegrowing NZ (SWNZ) Scorecard return.

1,805 vineyards submitted Scorecards, covering 37,311

ha. Fifty-two percent of irrigated vineyards included

water use in their Scorecards. By area the return rate

was higher at 63%, similar to previous years (Table 1).

A change to the Scorecard question layout in 2013/14

saw returns plummet to 43%, from a previous high of

almost 90%. While the layout was improved the following

season returns slipped again in 2015/16, most notably

in Marlborough. The rate of returns have remained

consistently around 63% for the past three years (Table 1).

Figure 1 displays the relationship between vineyard

size and the percentage of those that provided water

use figures in their Scorecard. Vineyards of less than

10ha are less likely to meter and record water use. The

difference across the whole industry by vineyard size is

almost 25%. In the future, most vineyards are likely to be

required to monitor and record water use; either through

their irrigation consents, through their WiSE Scorecard,

or as part of their Farm Environment Plan.

The proportion of irrigated vineyards reporting water

use has remained stable since 2016/17 at 52%. By area

63% of irrigated vineyards have recorded water use. The

proportion of total vineyards by area reporting water use

is 33%, and 50% by area.

Wateruseincludedinscorecard(%ofirrigatedarea)

2017/18 2016/17 2015/16 2014/15 2013/14 2012/13

Auckland 100% 100% 88% 100% 35% 94%

Gisborne - 27% 100% - - -

Hawke’s Bay 55% 75% 63% 64% 49% 92%

Wgtn / Wairarapa

48% 100% 37% 46% 43% 71%

Nelson 49% 72% 76% 87% 26% 96%

Marlborough 65% 61% 61% 80% 40% 89%

Cant. / Waipara 76% 54% 85% 96% 57% 91%

Otago 66% 55% 62% 49% 55% 98%

NewZealand 63% 63% 62% 76% 43% 89%

Table 1. Vineyards including water use in scorecard across regions

Figure 1. Proportion of irrigated vineyards in different size categories with Scorecard submitted water use records


a The area and volume is for those that submitted that voluntary Scorecard question.b Regional and national average (total water use divided by total irrigated area).c There is a small conversion difference between millimetres and litres per vine as not all vineyards provided their planting density.d The rainfall period for the North Island regions is between October and March, and South Island regions are between October and April.

Irrigated vineyards

(ha)a

Irrigated area (%)a

Irrigated area with recorded water use

(ha)

Scorecard recorded water use

(m3)a

Water use (mm)b

Water use (litres/vine)

Planting density

(vines/ha)c

Total rainfall (mm)d

Auckland 14 5% 14 988 7 10 3,096 523

Gisborne 20 2% - - - - 1,866 376

Hawke’s Bay 3,502 77% 1,916 1,996,213 104 429 2,428 343

Wgtn / Wairarapa

753 86% 361 270,497 74 264 2,806 333

Nelson 719 65% 355 284,971 80 382 2,117 712

Marlborough 21,176 81% 13,744 12,368,940 90 376 2,217 438

Cant. / Waipara

1,139 83% 869 827,271 95 356 2,624 409

Otago 1,291 74% 846 1,715,252 200 648 3,064 292

NewZealand 28,614 77% 18,106 17,464,132 96 394 5,067 -

The irrigated area in Table 2 is calculated using a

voluntary question in the Water Management section of

the Scorecard.

2.2 QUANTITYOFIRRIGATIONOn average irrigated vineyards applied 96 mm of

water in the 2017/18 season which is a 21% decrease

compared to the previous season. The regional results

are summarised in Table 2. Water use is also reported on

a litres per vine basis, averaging 394 L/vine (522 L/vine

in 2016/17 season).

Table 2. Irrigated area, water use, planting density and rainfall by region for 2017/18


On average across New Zealand irrigation rates

dropped this year by 21% to 96mm from 122mm in

2016/17, and by 41% since the peak in 2015/16 (Table 3).

The average irrigated area in 2017/18 was approximately

77%, ranging between 65% in Nelson (excluding

Auckland and Gisborne), through to 86% in Wellington/

Wairarapa. Based on this and the average regional

irrigation rates described in Table 3, the estimated total

volume of irrigation water in 2017/18 was 27,522,900

m3. This is a decrease of 25% compared to 2016/17, and

a decrease of 44% compared to 2015/16. There was

another large drop in Marlborough irrigation this year,

decreasing by 35% compared to last season and 49%

compared to 2015/16. As Marlborough dominates the

irrigated area this has driven down national water use.

Figure 2. Estimated total irrigation water use (m3).

Water Use (mm)a

2017/18 2016/17 2015/16 2014/15 2013/14 2012/13

Hawke’s Bay 104 78 125 113 93 132

Wgtn / Wairarapa

74 37 66 83 57 100

Nelson 80 109 143 139 219 128

Marlborough 90 131 173 170 139 154

Cant. / Waipara

95 96 158 153 272 129

Otago 202 192 132 159 178 148

NewZealand 96 122 162 160 141 147

a Regional and national average (total water use divided by total irrigated area)

Table 3. Irrigation water use by region since 2012/13

3


Figure 4. Marlborough - Total rainfall (Oct. – Apr.) and irrigation since the 2010/11 season. Averaged across 9 weather stations.

Figure 5. Hawke’s Bay - Total rainfall (Oct. – Mar.) and irrigation since the 2010/11 season. Averaged across 11 regional weather stations.

2.2.1 MARLBOROUGHRainfall in Marlborough (Marlborough Research Station)

between October 2017 and April 2018 was the highest

in the past 15 years. This was driven by an extremely

wet February (181 mm), which was 405% of the average

February rainfall, and the wettest since 1930. This is

following on from 2016/17 which, before this season, was

the wettest season since 2003/04 (Figure 3).

The extremely wet 2017/18 season for Marlborough is

reflected by the fact that irrigation use was the lowest

in the past 8 years at 89 mm, which is a 32% decrease

on the 2016/17 season – itself a 24% decrease on the

previous season due to high rainfall (Figure 4).

2.2.2 HAWKE’S BAYTotal rainfall for 2017/18 in the Hawke’s Bay was 3%

higher than 2016/17 at 364mm (2016/167 was 354mm),

and 28% higher than the 283mm in 2015/16. Despite

similar total rainfall compared to 2016/17, irrigation

increased by 30%. This reflects that November and

January were dry and that around 30% of the rain

arrived in March when irrigation had stopped or was

being reduced.

Figure 3. Marlborough Research Station irrigation season rainfall (Oct. to Apr.) since the 2003/04 season.


2.2.3 IRRIGATION OPTIMISATIONThrough the WiSE Scorecard all growers were asked

about their irrigation optimisation techniques. The

results are shown in Figure 6, which is based on the

proportion of irrigated vineyards.

By area, eighty six percent of irrigated vineyards

indicated that they use soil moisture monitoring, with

42% using a monitoring service and 45% doing their

own measurements. Seventy nine percent of irrigated

vineyards indicated that they metered and recorded

water use, up slightly from 76% last season. This seems

consistent with the figure of 52% providing their water

use records through the Scorecard (63% of the irrigated

area), however it is below the peak level of submissions

in 2012/13 when 89% of irrigated area provided their

water use records. National water measuring regulations,

that now require all takes greater than 5 litres per

second (18 m3/hr) to be recorded, does not seem to

have had an impact on completing the water quantity

question in the Scorecards as was anticipated last year.

Figure 6. National proportion of irrigated vineyards using various irrigation optimisation techniques. The light blue bar represents those using a soil moisture monitoring service to differentiate those that are doing their own soil moisture monitoring.

Figure 7. Water source amongst irrigated vineyards by area. Note – the combined water sources exceed 100% as many vineyards have multiple water sources.

2.2.4 WATER SOURCE AND TYPES OF IRRIGAAn analysis of the irrigation water source recorded in the

Scorecard by vineyard area has found that the majority

of irrigating vineyards (52%) draw their water from

bores, followed by rivers at 32%. Communal irrigation

schemes and dams then make up the balance (Figure 7).

The overwhelming majority (95%) of irrigated vineyards

use under-vine drip line irrigation only, with the bulk of

the remainder using this system alongside overhead

sprinklers or travelling irrigation.

TION


Figure 8. Irrigation applied by soil type.

Figure 9. Proportion of soil types by region

In the individualised irrigation use reports, vineyards

were benchmarked against averages for their region as

well as by their most dominant soil type if there were at

least four similar vineyards to compare to.

Figure 8 shows the average irrigation use by soil type

in the three main irrigated regions. There is a general

pattern, most pronounced in Hawke’s Bay, of the

quantity applied varying with soil type from the greatest

quantity of irrigation being applied to the very light

stony soils, through to the least on heavy silty clays.

This pattern has been consistent in previous years but

has diverged somewhat due to far larger variation in

the quantity of irrigation applied this year. While this

is as expected, it does underscore the importance of

benchmarking not only by region but also by soil type.

Results showing the irrigation applied by region and soil

type is included in the appendix.

HAWKE’S BAY MARLBOROUGH OTAGO

2.3 QUANTITYOFIRRIGATIONBYSOILTYPE


3.0 FULLPRODUCTIONWINERYThe number of wineries submitting Scorecards

continues to increase, from 200 in 2017 to 210 in 2018

(9 were bottling or crushing only). The quantity of

production from those full production wineries that

provided included water use data decreased by 4% from

2017, and total included water use stayed consistent at

around 819,300 m3 (Table 4).

Winery water use was recorded, and benchmarks

established as L/L wine and L/t grapes for similar sized

wineries. The results are compared to the previous eight

vintages (Table 5). Overall there was a 4% increase

in water use per litre of wine between 2017 and 2018

vintages.

Generally average water use per litre of wine decreases

with winery size (Table 5). However, there is an

enormous amount of variation, hence a poor correlation

between water use and winery size (Figure 10). This

follows the same pattern seen previously.

< 200k L 200k - 1m L 1m - 4m L > 4m L Total

2018

Number of wineries

50 33 24 22 129

Production (m3 wine)

3,517 15,386 46,094 238,779 303,776

Water use (m3)

13,807 57,858 174,557 573,043 819,265

2017

Number of wineries

52 35 24 24 135

Production (m3 wine)

4,078 15,402 49,054 247,476 316,011

Water use (m3)

18,995 56,532 148,450 600,184 824,161

Table 4. Total Scorecard recorded water use by winery size in 2017 and 2018.

Figure 10. Water use (per litre of wine) by winery size.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

L/L

Win

e

Production (smallest to largest)

< 200k L

200k - 1m L

1m - 4m L

> 4m L

Whole IndustryTrend

WATERUSE


Vintage < 200k L 200k - 1m L 1m - 4m L > 4m L Total

L/L wine

2011 3.4 3.3 3.3 2.4 2.6

2012 2.9 3.6 2.6 2.4 2.5

2013 3.7 2.7 2.5 2.0 2.2

2014 2.7 3.2 2.3 2.0 2.1

2015 3.2 4.3 3.8 2.7 3.0

2016 3.9 4.6 2.7 2.3 2.5

2017 4.7 3.7 3.0 2.4 2.6

2018 3.9 3.8 3.8 2.4 2.7

L/t grapes

2011 2,400 2,320 2,320 1,690 1,880

2012 1,840 2,350 2,010 2,110 2,120

2013 2,550 1,940 1,770 1,730 1,770

2014 1,880 2,130 1,810 1,615 1,680

2015 2,110 3,210 2,750 2,140 2,320

2016 2,770 2,480 2,040 1,940 2,010

2017 3,220 2,780 2,400 1,990 2,120

2018 2,350 2,880 3,140 1,730 1,400

1 Sector average figures, i.e. total water use divided by total production. The figures presented in the individualised benchmarking reports (see examples below) are the winery averages, so differ slightly.

Table 5. Historical water use by winery size1 (full production wineries).


Figure 11. Change in water use by winery size between 2011 and 2018 vintages.

Figure 12. Total winery water use since 2011.


4.0 TOTALINDUSTRYWATERUSEAcross the whole wine industry irrigation accounts for

approximately 97% of all water use. In 2018 vineyards

used approximately 27,522,900 m3, while full production

wineries used approximately 813,700 m3, summing

to a total sector water use of 28,336,600 m3. This is

a decrease of approximately 24% compared to last

year. Winery water use has stayed roughly consistent,

but vineyard water use has decreased by 25%. This is

almost entirely due to the large decrease in irrigation for

Marlborough, which over the past 6 seasons contributed

around 68-80% of the total irrigation water use. This

year Marlborough contributed only 69%, due to the large

amount of rainfall in the beginning of 2018.Figure 13. Proportion of industry water use between vineyards and wineries.

5.0 INDIVIDUALISEDREPORTEXAMPLESThe following two examples show the individualised

vineyard and winery water reports.


Region Soil TypeAverage Irrigation

(mm)

Hawke’s Bay Very light - Stoney 167

Light - Loamy sand 75

Medium - Loam 71

Heavy - Silty clay a

Wellington / Wairarapa

Very light - Stoney 118


Medium - Loam 37

Heavy - Silty clay 24

Nelson Very light - Stoney 93


Medium - Loam 56


Marlborough Very light - Stoney 92


Medium - Loam 81


Canterbury / Waipara Very light - Stoney 100


Medium - Loam 124


Otago Very light - Stoney 172


Medium - Loam 218

Heavy - Silty clay a

Region 2012/13 (ha)

2013/14 (ha)

2014/15 (ha)

2015/16 (ha)

2016/17 (ha)

2017/18 (ha)

Irrigated Area %a

Hawke’s Bay 4,846 4,774 4,773 4,744 4,858 4,540 77%

Wellington / Wairarapa 991 995 1,006 1,002 221 874 86%

Nelson 1,095 1,123 1,139 1,169 999 1,106 65%

Marlborough 22,819 22,907 23,203 24,020 24,986 26,224 81%

Canterbury / Waipara 1,435 1,488 1,451 1,436 1,336 1,365 83%

Otago 1,959 1,932 1,951 1,943 1,712 1,747 74%

NewZealand 35,182 35,551 35,859 36,192 35,695 37,311 77%

Region 2012/13 (m3)

2013/14 (m3)

2014/15 (m3)

2015/16 (m3)

2016/17 (m3)

2017/18 (ha)

Hawke’s Bay 5,181,300 3,596,300 4,368,700 4,803,300 3,074,000 3,643,500

Wellington / Wairarapa 862,200 493,400 726,400 575,300 70,750 557,400

Nelson 1,121,300 1,967,500 1,266,600 1,337,300 870,400 576,100

Marlborough 31,627,100 28,656,700 35,500,600 37,399,100 29,425,000 19,004,800

Canterbury / Waipara 1,604,900 3,509,000 1,924,800 1,967,100 1,109,000 1,084,400

Otago 2,696,400 3,198,200 2,884,900 2,385,200 3,053,000 2,604,300

NewZealand 43,442,700 42,059,200 48,194,500 49,250,100 36,617,000 27,522,900

Vintage Winery water use (L/L wine)

NZ wine production (m3)

Winery water use (m3)

2011 2.6 235,000 611,000

2012 2.5 194,000 485,000

2013 2.2 248,400 546,480

2014 2.1 320,400 672,840

2015 3.0 234,700 704,100

2016 2.5 313,900 784,750

2017 2.6 285,100 743,500

2018 2.7 301,700 813,700

APPENDIX

a excluded due to minimal data

Note: the irrigated area in Northland, Auckland, Waikato/BOP, and Gisborne is less than 100ha, so is not included in the table or analysis.a Based on the 2017/18 Scorecard return

A1. Irrigation Applied by Region and Soil Type A2.1 Total Irrigation Applied by Regions and Years – Total Area

A2.2 Total Irrigation Applied by Regions and Years – Volume Irrigated

A3. Total Winery Water Use by Vintage

before the special tribunal for the ngaruroro and … · 1.1 my full name is xan harding. ... 3.8...

Documents