Integrated Catchment Management

What's New

Title Description Date
"Upper Motueka river gravel management (including new Gravel Envelope assessment method)" presented by David Stephenson, TDC at MCC workshop, Tapawera 29 September 2022 "Upper Motueka river gravel management (including new Gravel Envelope assessment method)" presented by David Stephenson, TDC at MCC workshop, Tapawera 29 September 2022 1/12/2022
"Alternative Approaches to River Management and how they may relate to the Motueka River" by Mike Harvey and Seb den Doncker. Presentation to Motueka Catchment Collective on 27 June 2022 Alternative Approaches to River Management and how they may relate to the Motueka River” by Mike Harvey and Seb den Doncker. Presentation to Motueka Catchment Collective on 27 June 2022 5/07/2022
MCC Forestry in the upper Motueka catchment - Heather Arnold OneFortyOne - May2022 MCC Forestry in the upper Motueka catchment - Heather Arnold OneFortyOne - May2022 31/05/2022
Presentation to Motueka Catchment Collective – River Gravel Management (by David Stephenson, Tasman District Council), 11 April 2022 Presentation to Motueka Catchment Collective – River Gravel Management (by David Stephenson, Tasman District Council), 11 April 2022 11/04/2022
Presentation to Upper Motueka Water Users and MCC Nov 2021 - Water allocation update and monitoring review (J Thomas, A Fenemor) Presentation to Upper Motueka Water Users and MCC Nov 2021 - Water allocation update and monitoring review (J Thomas, A Fenemor) 1/11/2021
Upper Motueka Flood Management and the July & Sept 2021 Flooding - TDC presentation to MCC 11 Oct 2021 (M Doyle, B Scoles, R Lowe) Upper Motueka Flood Management and the July & Sept 2021 Flooding - TDC presentation to MCC 11 Oct 2021 (M Doyle, B Scoles, R Lowe) 1/09/2021
Presentation to Motueka Catchment Collective, July 2021 – ICM: Insights for the Motueka Catchment Presentation to Motueka Catchment Collective, July 2021 – ICM: Insights for the Motueka Catchment 13/07/2021
A Summary of Outcomes and selected formal publications from the Integrated Catchment Management (ICM) research programme: 2000 – 2011
Available under Publications tab on this website 30/11/2012
ICM special issue NZ Journal Marine & Freshwater Research September 2011 Contains 16 papers from the ICM research programme ranging across ICM conceptualisation to land, water, coastal and human components of ten years of ICM research 30/09/2011
ICM videos – bringing the science to life These six videos provide an overview of several aspects of the ICM programme. 3/06/2011
The Sherry Catchment Group´s story A 44 page illustrated story of the efforts of the Sherry River Catchment Group to improve water quality in their tributary of the Motueka River has been compiled by Barbara Stuart of the NZ Landcare Trust, assisted by scientists working in the Motueka ICM research programme, and other stakeholders.

You can find it on the ICM website under Publications or on the website of the NZ Landcare Trust.

22 December 2010 was the public launch of the book at Sherry River.

Also see the catchment group´s story at the Landcare Trust website:–groups/landcare–groups/sherry–river–group/
Contaminant fluxes from mountains to the bay Radio New Zealand interviews ICM programme scientists Les Basher (Landcare Research), Roger Young & Paul Gillespie (Cawthron Institute) about catchment impacts downriver and into Tasman Bay on "Our Changing World". Podcast available at 10/02/2011
CD Rom ICM Toolbook for the Motueka Catchment The final version of the CD Rom "Integrated Catchment Management for the Motueka River" was completed and distributed to end users and interested parties in January 2011.
Limited quantities of additional CD´s are available by contacting Chris Phillips.
ICM Research Profiled in "Discovery" Check the link to see a copy of the Landcare Research newsletter Discovery for December 2010 – it is dedicated to our Integrated Catchment Management research, and notes its relevance to the recent findings of the Land & Water Forum 14/01/2011
Hot Topic #28 – Review of 10 years of ICM Research Achievements In October, FRST completed an end–of–programme review of the Integrated Catchment Management (ICM) research. The FRST review panel´s report was supportive of the integrated and transdisciplinary research approach used throughout the last 10 years, as timely and highly relevant to the recommendations of NZ´s Land and Water Forum released just a month earlier.

The panel comprising academic, international, regional council and Maori representatives scored the ICM research 5/5 for Science Quality & Productivity, 4/5 for Impact on Catchment Management & Policy Development, and 5/5 for Knowledge Transfer.

The December 2010 edition of the Landcare Research newsletter Discovery describes some of the specific research that has come out of the ICM programme.

For a copy of the review panel´s report and associated stakeholder/research end–user survey, contact ICM programme leader Andrew Fenemor, Landcare Research, Nelson
Winners of the ICM schools art competition annnounced. The winners of the ICM schools art competition, sponsored by Landcare Research and Cawthron, were announced on the 28th April 2010 during an ICM fieldtrip, the final day of the Connecting Research and Practice Workshop 26–28th April 2010. The competition was a great success with 69 entries. 28/04/2010
Hot Topic #27 – Summary of the ´Connecting Research and Practice´ Workshop April 2010 At the Connecting Research and Practice Workshop the team from the Integrated Catchment Management (ICM) programme celebrated 10 years of FRST–funded research. Researchers from Landcare Research and Cawthron coordinated the 3–day public workshop that attracted over 135 participants. 26/04/2010
Catchment Connections Issue 6, April 2010 Catchment Connections Issue 6, April 2010 14/04/2010
WATYIELD model update The original WATYIELD model that hasbeen usd for calculating land use effects on water resources was updated in 2009 as part of IDEAS scenario development.
The new downloadable zip file is now available. See the "Tall vegetation effects on water" in the research section on land.
Motueka River plume in Tasman Bay revealed The aim of this investigation was to estimate and visually demonstrate the area of seabed strongly influenced by the river outwelling plume in order to contribute to development of a river plume ecosystem concept for management of the coastal resources of Tasman Bay.
The figure in the exec summary shows the spatial extent of river plume effects based on multiple seabed indicators. Note that the affected area has now been shown to be ~180 km2, ie twice the size previously reported.
Cawthron ICM researchers were fortunate to have the use of a robotic submarine (through US colleagues) to provide a detailed snapshot of the Motueka plume, which was shown on TV3 news on 22 January 2010
Water governance research Improving Water Governance – Stakeholder Views Of Five South Island Catchment Management Processes.
Abstract and slides from a talk to 2009 Hydrological Society conference, Whangarei, available on this website.
Hot Topic #26 – ICM2, integrated land and water research for the future to be reloaded

(the ICM2 funding proposal was not able to be submitted in 2009 FRST Freshwater Funding round)

ICM2 planning workshop – Mapua, 19–20 February 2009
Hot Topic #25 – Watershed Talk book published Participation, consultation, engagement; these have been buzzwords for a decade or more. But beneath the cliches many people are asking ´can we do it better, can we be more effective in mobilising change, and if so, how?´

Watershed Talk is an action research project that distills the ingredients of effective dialogue processes for building community resilience. Conversations that encourage our learning through complex problems will enhance our potential for active citizenship and leadership – the heart of a resilient future. But what would a resilience approach to problem solving look like, compared to traditional approaches?

The book is available via the weblink to Manaaki Whenua Press, and the summary is available as a PDF on the Community Resilience page of this ICM website.
Sherry Catchment Group Field Day 1 October 2009 Join the Sherry Catchment community for a morning riparian planting day (9.30 start at Dennis & Trish Meade´s Nelson Monitor Farm) and afternoon talks on progress with water quality improvement (12.30 BBQ at Anglesey´s woolshed, finishing 3pm) 1/09/2009
Catchment Connections Issue 5 Catchment Connections Issue 5 9/06/2009
2008 ICM–AGM with NZ Assn Resource Management: 13–15 October 2008 The ICM programme organised and hosted the NZARM National Conference: Integrated Catchment Management – are we wiser than we were? Themes: Bold governance; Committed Communities; Out of the silos, into the landscape – science for ICM; Catchment Futures – Wisdom for the Transition. Motueka catchment field trip. 28/11/2008
Catchment Connections Issue 4 issue 4 of the Catchment Connections newsletter 18/11/2008
Catchment Connections Issue 3 Issue 3 of the Catchment Connections newsletter 24/06/2008
Catchment Connections Issue 2 Issue 2 of Catchment Connections, the ICM newsletter, is now available online. has been reactivated to share learning about ICM. The newsletter is primarily a forum for sharing research experience from the FRST–funded ICM research programme. The programme is led by Landcare Research in partnership with Cawthron Institute and Tasman District Council, in collaboration with other researchers. We would also love to include your contributions to enable wider sharing of the ICM experience among practitioners – whether from regional and district councils, NZ Landcare Trust, iwi groups, sector groups, catchment and community groups, or the wider research community. 8/04/2008
Hot Topic #24: ICM Newsletter "Catchment Connections" launched. Catchment Connections, the ICM newsletter, is now available online. This newsletter has been reactivated to share learning about ICM. Issue 1 available here – look for Our Newsletter under the About Us tab.

Catchment Connections is primarily a forum for sharing research experience from the FRST–funded ICM research programme. The programme is led by Landcare Research in partnership with Cawthron Institute and Tasman District Council, in collaboration with other researchers. We would also love to include your contributions to enable wider sharing of the ICM experience among practitioners – whether from regional and district councils, NZ Landcare Trust, iwi groups, sector groups, catchment and community groups, or the wider research community.

The Hot Topic series will diminish as our research efforts move into wider dissemination of rseearch results now emerging from the programme, via Catchment Connections.
Hot Topic #23 – balancing humility and leadership for achieving ICM to be reloaded 12/12/2007
ICM AGM 2007: 27–29 November Details of the 2007 are posted on the ICM Online Discussion group Confluens:

Tuesday 27 November 10–4.30 at TDC Richmond

Wednesday 28 November 9–4.30 at TDC Richmond

Thursday 29 November 9–3.30 at Cawthron Institute
ICM FUTURE DIRECTIONS: What are the outstanding issues for integrated land & water research across NZ?

Please contact Andrew Fenemor on 03 545 7710 for more details.

New pages added to website A number of new pages have been added to the ICM website including – Sherry River Community, flood gate design and management, river bank styles, community resilience and farm environmental planning. 12/11/2007
ICM website enhancements Addition of a new section on BMP´s, BEP´s and guidelines plus minor tweaking and fixing of upload bugs. 4/09/2007
Hot Topic#22 – Genesis and themes of our Motueka ICM Research Hello folks

Welcome to the new improved ICM website. Thanks to Chris Phillips and his IT support team for pulling it all together. As we enter Year 5 of the current 6–year research programme, having a tool like this website to manage and make available our research within a logical structure becomes more important.

It´s worth taking stock of how much we´ve achieved. We continually remind ourselves that ICM research needs to benefit catchment managers and groups across NZ, as well as locally where we work. That will be an increasing focus over the next 2 years.

So what´s the big picture of this research programme?

Integrated Catchment Management (ICM) is as much a social and political process as one requiring technical understanding of a biophysical system. In this programme we research both these elements. Our work areas are collaborative learning, biophysical process, tools and models for integrating land and water management from the mountains to the sea. Research themes spanning our research questions are:
* integration
* multiple disciplinary perspectives
* dynamics
* the human dimension
* a search for functional relationships.

We are a partnership between Landcare Research, the Cawthron Institute and Tasman District Council, with other contributors NIWA, Ensis, IGNS, Common Ground Ltd (Dr Glen Lauder), Tiakina Te Taiao, Pansophy Ltd (Dr A Cole) and NZ Landcare Trust.

The ICM process for our research catchment, the Motueka, began with a stakeholder process of prioritising environmental issues, which led the research design. Major issues were water available for allocation, river–aquifer linkages, river gravel extraction, economics of water uses, land–water and catchment marine impacts, uptake of science knowledge for decision–making, and riparian management.

These research issues coalesce under the ´4 BIG Issues´ for which we reviewed progress at the 2006 AGM:
1. Building Human Capital and Opportunities for Community Participation
2. Allocation of Scarce Water Resources among Competing Land Uses
3. Managing Land Uses in Harmony with Freshwater Resources
4. Managing Land and Freshwater Resources to Protect Marine Values

The programme scoped current knowledge (Basher (ed), 2003) and makes this and research results available on the ICM website Priority issues have been mapped into TDC´s Tasman Resource Management Plan to inform their policy development, where of policy relevance.

FRST as our primary funder requires research to be directed to high level outcomes. For us we have two. The first is to demonstrate and learn about collaborative approaches and the management of knowledge for Integrated Catchment Management.

In this first outcome area, we have demonstrated social learning approaches including online discussion groups, a Community Reference Group, a collaborative learning group, iwi capacity building, an art–science collaboration, a council focus group and subcatchment farmer group. Interaction with regional councils, for example through our 2005 national ICM and Pacific HELP workshop, has led to uptake via Envirolink projects and commercial work. In the knowledge management arena, we demonstrated an AGM concept, the ICM website, iwi GIS, participatory field days and the Motueka Toolbook CD–Rom.

The second outcome area is about understanding processes across the land–water–coast and developing tools and models which allow management of resources and their impacts from subcatchment up to catchment scale. In the Motueka, this emphatically includes catchment impacts into the coastal zone.

Highlights of this second outcome area include the development of our river plume ecosystem concept, contributions to the Government´s planning on water allocation policy, leadership in the area of water quality benefits of bridging herd crossings of streams and catchment–scale farm environmental planning, creation of the most complete NZ dataset on below–ground characteristics of our native riparian plants, and modelling of water yield. The linking of catchment scale hydrology, water quality, freshwater ecology, sediment and marine models within a social and economic context – labelled IDEAS – is now showing promise and is exciting our stakeholder group.

Research findings are being applied by a range of audiences including TDC policy (eg water allocation, river gravel, riparian management, aquaculture planning, Long Term Council Community Planning), state–of–the–environment monitoring, national policy (eg the Sustainable Water Programme of Action, Ministry of Fisheries FRIAs), with catchment landcare groups, and in related commercial work.

Building the big picture at catchment scale, and integrating across scales, organisations, disciplines and personalities is not easy. It´s easy to lose sight of the big picture and how all the parts connect. Exploring those connections is just the start of a journey.

One of the tenets of ICM is for scientists and policy–makers to find ways in their work to collaborate with people in the catchment. We hope our research helps people to do this. We think that ´walking alongside´ people as the science is done will demonstrate its validity and will build commitment to use it to achieve more sustainable land and water management.

Update on riparian plant trial in Sherry River Update on riparian plant trial in Sherry River. Diary notes from July 17 visit. 24/07/2007
Hot Topic #21: New ICM website goes live This site replaces the "old" ICM web site which has served us well from 2000. This new site has been designed and structured based on feedback and evaluation from our stakeholders.

Following a review and evaluation of the ICM web site in 2005 we have been working towards a re–designed website to incorporate many of the findings and suggestions raised.

The major improvements are improved navigation to make it easy to find things; more explicit "connectedness" of related project/research areas; the addition of useful links; more functionality around information management for project staff (staffroom); and so on.

Thanks to Dr Chris Phillips and IT staff for the redesign and implementation.
RSS Feed for ICM news is now available! You can now subscribe to the most recent ICM news using RSS feed in the ICM front page, Please Use Internet Explorer 7 above, Firefox or any of your favourite RSS reader. 31/05/2007
Hot Topic #20 – Water is the Sink! to be reloaded 1/09/2006
Hot Topic #17 – ICM research news ICM updates on recent happenings 10/08/2006
Hot topic #19 – ICM AGM 2006, art–science, Sherry water quality improvement, dam sites and more... Hello friends and colleagues

ICM AGM 2006
Please mark your calendars for this event to be happening Tuesday 7 November to Thursday 9 November inclusive. This timing fits with a planned Landcare/Cawthron meeting on Friday 10th. Paul Gillespie is investigating whether we can organise an ICM marine field trip for the Thursday showing us the ICM monitoring buoy and sampling equipment, though this will be weather dependent and may necessitate an early start.

We ran an extended Community Reference Group meeting on 29 June 2006 where Dr Anthony Cole briefed us on his operational Motueka Catchment Futures model, which sits within the IDEAS modelling framework.
Anthony has made great progress in demonstrating the power of Vensim to model catchment–scale response to changing population, primary production and economic activity, including associated changes in environmental parameters. Notes from the CRG meetings are elsewhere on the ICM website.

The final of 3 publications from this collaboration has just been published. Margaret Kilvington and Chrys Horn, facilitators and social scientists of the art–science team, have completed an evaluation of the collaboration titled Mountains to the Sea: Reflections on an arts and science collaboration about the Motueka River catchment. A PDF of the report is available through the ICM website.

Maggie Atkinson, Margaret Kilvington and I are working on a follow–up social science project – in conjunction with others involved the programme – exploring people´s ethics of care for the environment.

The new Nelson office of Landcare Research was opened last Friday with a blessing from kaumatua Andy Joseph and mihimihi from Barney Thomas, as well as speeches from CEO Warren Parker, Board member Willie Te Aho and Wakatu Incorporation board member Paul Morgan.

Nick Ledgard (Scion), Barbara Stuart (NZ Landcare Trust)and I have discussed running a community–oriented workshop around the Sherry River/Tapawera riparian and water quality research when farmers are less busy, probably February 2007.

Barbara and I are seeking funding to progress the idea of developing farm environmental plans with the Sherry River Farmers Group who are keen to be local ‘guinea pigs’ to improve river water quality further.

In conjunction with the Motueka ICM research, Landcare Research is leading a water augmentation feasibility study with Tonkin & Taylor to identify irrigable land, likely water demand, available stream flows and potential dam sites in the Motupiko Valley. Andrew Fenemor, Tim Davie, Les Basher, Alex Watson, James Barringer and Jagath Ekanayake are all working in the project, with Joseph Thomas as TDC project manager. The project is part–funded by MAF´s Sustainable Farming Fund.

A field day with local farmers was held on 9 June to look at a shortlist of dam sites. Joseph is also managing the big SFF–funded Waimea Water Augmentation project, which Roger Young and other Cawthron staff have been working on, plus Andrew in a peer review role.

Best wishes
Presentations added Recent conference/workshop presentations added 18/07/2006
CRG minutes Minutes of CRG meeting 11 May 2006 10/07/2006
Arts-Science evaluation report Evaluation of Arts-Science project report by Margaret Kilvington and Chrys Horn 10/07/2006
Hot Topic #18 – On Scale for Effective Land & Water management to be reloaded.... 30/11/2005
Hot Topic #17 – Water Quality, Trout Tracking, River Gravel Volumes and more Hello friends and colleagues

June is typically a busy month as we approach the end of the financial year. Highlighted below are only a few of the events and progress being made within and in conjunction with the Motueka ICM research programme. There´s much more elsewhere on the ICM website.

Trevor James (TDC) has organised two public seminars that will summarise the results of a recently completed report on the State of Water Quality and River Health in the Tasman District. The first seminar will be held at the TDC chambers in Richmond on Wed 22nd June at 7:30pm. The second seminar will be at the Senior Citizens Hall in Takaka at 7:30pm on Thursday 23rd June.

The report summarises the results of TDC´s State of the Environment monitoring programme, which samples water quality, macroinvertebrate and periphyton at sites throughout the District, and also includes similar data from the ICM programme and NIWA´s National River Water Quality Network. Roger Young (Cawthron) is a co–author of the report and will also be participating in the seminars.

ICM FIELD TRIP AS PART OF 2005 Freshwater Sciences/Ecological Society conference

A joint meeting of the NZ Freshwater Sciences Society (formerly NZ Limnological Society) and NZ Ecological Society is being held in Nelson from 28th August to 1st September 2005. The conference theme is ´Ecology at the Water´s Edge´ and so will have a focus on topics such as river and lake margins, riparian management, and wetlands.

One of the conference fieldtrips (held on Thursday 1st September) will concentrate on the Motueka River Catchment and ICM research. This will be an opportunity to show–case some of the work that we´ve been doing in the Motueka to a nationwide audience. Roger Young is organising the fieldtrip.

The study of adult trout movement in the Motupiko/Motueka catchment has had some unexpected outcomes. A team led by Roger Young of Cawthron Institute initially tagged 49 adult trout in the Motupiko River in Sept/Oct 2004. Most of the trout have remained within the Motupiko River throughout the summer, although 3 fish have been relocated further down the catchment. Flows were relatively high throughout this summer, and so retained adequate habitat. However, almost half of the trout have gone missing, despite researchers searching most of the catchment by plane.

It´s not clear if the transmitters have failed,or if the trout have been caught and removed from the river, or if the fish have gone beyond the search area. The ´Good Friday´ flood had a big impact on the 22 trout that were still alive and well in the Motupiko River. Almost 40% of them were definitely killed during the flood, while a further 18% disappeared during the flood. The latest download from the permanent tracking station indicated that two trout that went missing early in the study appear to have swum back into the Motupiko River, presumably to spawn.

Setting limits on gravel extraction from the Motueka River relies on an estimate of the long–term gravel transport rate down the river, and short–term estimates of gravel volume changes based on periodic river cross section surveys.

Dr Les Basher and others have begun research to get a better picture of gravel transport and volume changes using detailed annual GPS surveys of one reach of the river near Tapawera, and eventually will be able to assess how well the cross sections represent the changes in morphology of the river (both spatially and temporally).

Ian Fuller of Massey University has just completed the second survey of this reach which has produced some very interesting results. In the last year the GPS surveys show there has been a net loss of about 12,000 m3 of gravel. This compares with a loss of about 2300 m3 estimated from the cross sections in the same area. Between the two surveys there have been 2 major flood events (one of which had a >20 year recurrence interval) which are likely to have transported more gravel than normal (see below).

The ICM Community Reference Group met at TDC on Tuesday evening 14 June. Dr Anthony Cole is building a whole catchment model which links economic activity with ecosystem services and later social indicators in the catchment. Anthony presented his population growth modelling, demonstrated the prototype Motueka Catchment Futures model and suggested a mediated modelling approach in which community and sector people could develop scenarios for future development in the catchment.

CRG members saw considerable potential for this approach for Council policy development and also as a tool that could both educate local people about trends in their catchment, and allow them to experiment with such a model.

Les Basher described the impacts of the 50 year storm on Good Friday in the upper Motueka and Motupiko catchments. CRG members described what they had seen of the flood impacts in their part of the catchment, including some photos of the flooding above the Wangapeka junction contributed by Lloyd Faulkner, and heavy metals detected in Cawthron sampling of fine sediments on the seabed off the Motueka rivermouth. The flood offers an excellent opportunity to research gravel and fine sediment movement through the river system. We are looking to collaborate with TDC to resurvey river cross–sections and acquire upper catchment ortho–photography.

Notes from the CRG meeting are available under Human Dimensions on the ICM website

Our Human Dimensions research area has been producing some publications relevant to the question of how to engage communities in the quest for catchment scale sustainability. Two examples are given below.

Allen W.J. and Kilvington M.J (2005) "A role for integrated and interdisciplinary science: Getting technical environmental information used in watershed and regional–scale decision making." Chapter 3 in (Ed. J.L. Hatfield) The Farmers´ Decision: Balancing Economic Successful Agriculture Production with Environmental Quality Publisher: Soil and Water Conservation Society. pp. 45–61

ABSTRACT: Given the complexity and diverse social perspectives surrounding many watershed and regional–scale resource management issues, the challenge facing science is how, where, and when can it best contribute to developing the understanding that will support more sustainable decision making. This chapter introduces a collaborative learning approach to improve the use of information within environmental research initiatives. It illustrates this approach as a knowledge management cycle that helps different stakeholders access and integrate information more effectively, and ultimately changes how they see a situation and consequently go about managing it. It then looks at a similar cycle of science activities, but casts them into an interdisciplinary approach. Both cycles use examples drawn from resource management case studies in New Zealand. Focus is given to a key component of these cycles – that of improving learning, particularly in getting people to challenge their underlying assumptions. To achieve this it is suggested that interdisciplinary science teams need to broaden their membership to include specialists with integrative social skills.

Garth Harmsworth 2005: Good practice guidelines for working with tangata whenua and Maori organisations: Consolidating our learning. (This report is available on the ICM website)

Excerpt from Garth´s conclusions:
The good practice guidelines given in this report provide the elements to build positive relationships between Maori, Pakeha, and other cultures. They indicate how to work together to achieve desired goals and outcomes for all New Zealanders through effective dialogue and collaboration, particularly through identifying the actions required for sustainable development and sound environmental management. Maori bring to the table a unique set of skills and expertise based on over 1000 years of knowledge, and offer an important perspective in all decision–making. They are an integral part of any collaborative effort to achieve sustainable environmental management.

A reminder for programme participants that future events, field work and meetings should be logged in the Events database on the ICM website. This is a good place to find out what´s coming up too.

Lindsay Vaughan is organising a meeting at TDC of Regional Council land managers the morning of Wednesday 24 August to discuss ICM research relevant to that group. This is likely to include the riparian, sediment and water quality related research, but if you feel your work would also be of interest, or have specific suggestions for a presentation or discussion topic, please let Andrew Fenemor know.

We are also planning both a regional councils workshop and a South Pacific HELP meeting around this year´s ICM Annual Meeting. The regional council workshop, organised in conjunction with TDC, will be held on Tuesday 8 November with a public field trip the following day. The agenda and venue are being developed.

On–Line Collaboration – Confluens
Confluens is there to allow ICM researchers and TDC and other registered participants in the programme to share insights, challenges, uptake of research, resource management issues, and develop interdisciplinary collaboration – in fact, pretty much anything.

Use it or lose it.... Here are some reminders how to easily use this ICM webgroup
Replies to posts that you receive via an online group are addressed to the group by default.
The purpose of this is to make it easy for you participate in group collaboration. If your messages could be relevant or interesting to the whole group, please post it to the group. If you mean to email just one person, please change the "to:" part of your email to go to that person, not the whole group.
You can participate in online group discussion using email but you will get much more value by using the Web interface. It allows you to easily follow and add to conversation topics and is the only way you can share files.
The "login name and password reminder" will send you your login name and password if you have forgotten them
You can have the site let you log in every time you visit so that you can just click a link from the footer of a post and go straight to the right page.
Make sure that you know who is in the online groups that you are in. Each group has a Members page on the website.
All online group posts are organised into "topics" by subject line. To add to a conversation topic, simply use the same subject line as an existing post in that topic. If you are starting a new topic, create a new "post" (email) and give it an appropriate subject line.

Best wishes
Hot Topic #16 – ICM Links to Policy Kia ora

One of the primary applications for research on Integrated Catchment Management is policy, mainly at regional council level but increasingly also at national level. Of course, policy isn´t the exclusive use for ICM knowledge. Within councils, it is also used for environmental education, for infrastructure planning, environmental monitoring and more.

ICM isn´t just for various levels of government either. We see the Motueka ICM research as having 2 primary audiences (1) governments, regional to national and (2) resource user groups including landowners, marine farmers, foresters and stakeholder groups.

Policy is the tool for forward planning. In the Resource Management Act (RMA) context, ICM can be implemented through regional plans. However questions of scale (from regional to subcatchment) and partitioning of issues (e.g. water quality policy disconnected from land management policy or water allocation)often fragment the integrated way we should be seeing the landscape.

Policy comprises outcomes sought and processes for getting there. ICM is not a static process which once achieved is ´done and dusted´. It´s a cyclical process, for which research can contribute biophysical knowledge about state and change across landscapes, as well as guidance on design processes for stakeholder participation and for futuring.

Recognising the importance of policy linkages between the ICM research and TDC policy, we had a brainstorming session at last year´s ICM AGM, to better document the connections between our research strands and policy issues in TDC´s Tasman Resource Management Plan (TRMP).

Trevor James and I extracted Objectives, Monitoring Methods and Performance Monoitoring Indicators relevant to the Motueka catchment from the TRMP, and documented areas where ICM is or could be informing those (the report is elsewhere on the ICM website).

Relevant TRMP issues fall into these policy areas:
* Land – site amenity
* Land – Urban Environment
* Land – Rural Environment
* Land – Margins of Rivers Lakes Wetlands & the Coast
* Land – Landscape
* Significant Natural Values & Cultural Heritage
* Land – Land Transport
* Land – Land Disturbance
* Land – natural hazards
* Land – reserves & open space
* Coastal Marine – effects of craft using water surface
* Coastal Marine – disturbance, structures, occupation, heritage, access, amenity
* Coastal Marine – Natural Hazards & Hazardous Substances
* Coastal Marine – Noise
* Water – Taking, Using, Damming, Diverting
* Discharges – to Land and Fresh water
* Discharges – to air
* Discharges – to coastal marine area.

The list of issues alone shows the breadth of potential research. Not surprisingly, most research issues drawn from our early research scoping with stakeholders are in the Water, Discharge and Coastal areas. Also not surprisingly, most of our social process and uptake research doesn´t feature in a list like this, because policy is about outcomes and seldom prescribes ways to do those things. Yet policy development as a process is changing rapidly. It´s not a technocratic process but a political one. We should be concentrating not just on rules but best practice methods for effecting change on the ground.

Thus a mapping process like this only reveals a relatively small part of the potential research opportunity for the ICM research. On top of that, the structure of many regional plans today does not facilitate integrated decision–making nor encourage big picture thinking about land and water issues at the catchment scale. That´s another challenge for our policy colleagues.

Best wishes
Hot Topic #15 – From InterDisciplinary to TransDisciplinary Kia ora ICM friends and colleagues

ICM research colleague Dr Anthony Cole from Landcare Research in Palmerston North has a broad vision of how the world works. Anthony is working on a system dynamic model to explore futures for the Motueka catchment.

In the process of his research, he drew my attention to a paper by Max–Neef from the Ecological Economics called Foundations of Transdisciplinarity. It struck a bell because it provides a way to think about integration across disciplines, one of our areas of exploration in ICM research.

Anthony is investigating how transD methods might produce more useful and grounded futures models. At the heart of transdisciplinarity, as I understand it, is not only the deep engagement of users and stakeholders in addressing a situation, but a casting aside of our own mindset or worldview (which may be conditioned by our science background, for example) to better appreciate the views and perspectives of others.

This approach resonated with me because I think this way of thinking and acting has power for implementing Integrated Catchment Management. It´s at the roots of collective engagement and decision–making.

By way of history, we older scientists have been solidly (and excellently!) trained in a specific discipline. Working on environmental issues has inevitably required study and understanding across disciplines. Our efforts were initially MULTI–DISCIPLINARY in which individual studies were designed and connected to make a larger research programme, but remained largely independent studies. Sometimes such projects ended up with gaps in knowledge, or the varied disciplinary perspectives simply did not relate well to understanding the whole.

INTER–DISCIPLINARY research involved designing projects from the outset across the relevant disciplines. In such programmes,research components are in constant communication and inform each other. For many research issues today, inter–disciplinary research is exactly what is needed to meld different approaches.

However, where research is so dependent on human actions and outcomes, as for most applied environmental research, and certainly in the land–water domain, I think we must go to the next level, which is TRANS–DISCIPLINARY research. Here researchers devise and implement projects within a systems frame, and sharing all perspectives on the problem set to devise a collective approach to its resolution. I think this is a necessary skill in our ICM research.

Some of our constituent research projects, for example on marine or riparian functioning, may remain in the inter–disciplinary arena. Any project where we want to maximise engagement and uptake by stakeholders though, I think will best achieve that via a TransD approach.

The best example I can think of so far for a trans–disciplinary project within the ICM programme is the Travelling River art–science project, with Margaret Kilvington, Maggie Atkinson, Suzie Peacock and others. It has been a wonderful way to see the catchment through new eyes and opens opportunities particularly for new social science on how to engage catchment landowners in ICM on the ground.

Best wishes
Hot Topic #14 – Sediment Group, EU Water Framework Directive and more Hi folks

At a meeting at TDC convened by Dr Will Allen on 2 February, it was agreed the programme will form a Collaborative Learning Group to explore the issues, perceptions, processes and research gaps around sediment in the Motueka catchment.

The group would comprise people from farming, forestry, angling, conservation, and other sectors working alongside ICM researchers and TDC resource managers to understand their varied perspectives on sediment generation, sediment effects in the rivers and coast, and river gravel dynamics.

This dialogue is intended to help develop shared understanding of sediment processes and issues, and help guide the sediment–related research being carried out by Les Basher, Chris Phillips, Roger Young and others. The aims of the group will be defined when it first meets, probably late April.

Will Allen and Margaret Kilvington have collated a list of sectors and names of people who may be interested in sediment issues in the Motueka. The group needs to be kept to a manageable size of 15 or fewer.

Once people have been approached to join it, Will will speak to them individually prior to the first meeting.

There are some fantastic new Motueka/Riwaka catchment maps forming the ICM Atlas on the website, courtesy of James Barringer and Chris Phillips. These cover subcatchments, rivers and streams, landforms, geology, soils, land cover, hydrology, groundwater, fish and other features. Have a look at

There are also photos of recent events including the Water Conservation Order celebrations, the 150th Settlers Reunion, forest windthrow from last October´s windstorm, the ICM AGM and more at


Here´s the abstract of a recent talk to be given at the Coastal CRC in Australia about UK environmental management: sounds familiar?

The EU Water Framework Directive requires member states to achieve good status in all water bodies (lakes, rivers, estuaries and coastal waters) by 2015. They must develop monitoring programs and measures of ´ecosystem health´ to evaluate the chemical, ecological and hydromorphological quality of water bodies. Member states are also required to develop Integrated Catchment Science management plans at the scale of ´River Basin Districts´ in close consultation with local residents.

British environmental managers need to develop scientifically credible, social acceptable classification, monitoring and restoration measures. The learning curve and political timeline are daunting.

This presentation examines progress in developing a strategic framework for implementing the WFD at the national scale. It also explores some planned attributes of a catchment–scale conceptual model and critically evaluates the level of social learning required – and the need for more robust conceptual models for decision–making.

The Landcare Research business services group (of 4) is meeting 7–8 February in Nelson, and part of their time will be spent discussing opportunities for selling ICM research (e.g. as consultancy), including potential collaborative bids, not just Landcare opportunities. The visit includes brief presentations by me and Roger Young plus a field visit on Monday afternoon looking at horticulture expansion around Tapawera, forest windthrow from last October, the Paratiho hydrological installation and Motueka Plains. If you have any specific suggestions about ICM research we could be offering, say to regional councils/government/forestry/industry, drop an email to me or Confluens.

Hei konei ra – regards
Hot Topic #13 – ICM AGM 2004, some Baltimore BES news, and Motueka Water Conservation Order gazetted Kia ora ICM friends and colleagues


A big thanks to all participants for making last week´s ICM Annual Meeting a success.

Below is a list of posters presented at this year´s AGM, and those presented first at the 2003 ICM AGM last year.

Poster titles ICM AGM 2003

• Basher, Sriboonlue, Verstappen: What´s happening in the Motueka riverbed: preliminary results from analysis of river cross–section data
• Shearer and Young: Is the Motueka river healthy? Insights from invertebrates
• Davies–Colley, Nagels, Smith, Young, Phillips: Cows and creeks: water quality impacts of cows crossing the Sherry River
• Davies–Colley, Nagels, Merrilees: Cows out of creeks: water quality improvement following bridging of crossings on raceways
• Kilvington, Allen, Harmsworth: Integrated Catchment Management: bringing research and management together
• Young, Hayes, Deans, Basher: What do we know about the impacts of sediment on trout in the Motueka River
• Langer: Riparian zone classification,Sherry catchment
• Cao, Bowden, Davie, Fenemor: Modelling impacts of land cover on critical water resources in the Motueka River watershed, New Zealand
• Harmsworth et al: Maori community goals for enhancing ecosystems
• Harmsworth et al: Waiapu Koka Huhua and Art Competition 2004
• Davie, Stewart, Thomas, Hong, Jackson, Basher: If Moutere groundwater is 20,000 years old why does current land use matter? Research into Moutere aquifer recharge mechanisms
• Fenemor & TDC: From the Ridgetops to the Sea – Integrated Catchment Management from St Arnaud to Motueka

Poster titles ICM AGM 2004

• Langer, Rodgers: Riparian vegetation classification and enhancement opportunities
• Clothier–Cowley: Ngatimoti School, a special place
• Marden, Basher, Barringer, Ferris: Progress in identifying sediment sources in the Motueka catchment
• Crowe, Hay and Young: Effects of fine sediment on invertebrates: a review
• Gillespie, Robertson, Strickland, Thompson, Hopkins, Clarke, Keeley: Catchment–built habitats hidden by the sea: Habitat mapping of the intertidal and subtidal Motueka delta.
• Gillespie, MacKenzie, Tuckey, Gibbs, Hatton, Barter: Catchment nutrient discharges: Good and bad news for the management of fish and shellfish resources in Tasman Bay.
• Krausse and Fenemor: Costs and benefits of the Tadmor valley water augmentation scheme
• Willoughby: Land Cover Change in the Motueka Catchment 1996–2001
• Watson and Marden: Root tensile strength as an indicator of performance of riparian plants – How do they rank?
• Marden, Rowan, Phillips: Performance of native riparian plants – how different are they?
• Cole, Allen, Kilvington, Fenemor, Bowden: Challenges for Sustainable Development in the Motueka Catchment – Participatory Modelling with an Influence Matrix
• Phillips: Riparian zone classification Motueka–Riwaka catchments

Chris Phillips also circulated the first draft Motueka Toolbook CD–Rom for further input and comnment.

For those of you who are registered users, the pilot trial of our online collaboration web–space Integrum has ended, but we should continue making use of this online sharing facliity.

After discussion with Dan Randow of GroupSense who provide technical support, I´m proposing that we concentrate on using Confluens for ICM discussions. The other 3 ´Tributums´ (KnowledgeSocial, ModelIDEAS and LandWaterMarine) will not be disabled and can still be used. But concentrating conversation threads into Confluens may be a bit simpler for everyone.

Note that the ICM website is still the permanent repository for our research, while Integrum/Confluens is for work in progress and discussion threads. I hope we can more effectively merge the two as a next step.

Research programme participants – Please continue to use the ICM staffroom Events calendar and Outputs database (project leaders update this 3 monthly, as requested earlier).

Edwin Newport from Korere has joined the Community Reference Group replacing Gloria Higgins who has moved to Picton. The Community Reference Group discussed Community Learning and Local Knowldege at a meeting on 18 October and explored views of their future vision for their lives in the Motueka catchment. My notes from these CRG meetings are available on the ICM website.

Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment Dr Morgan Williams will present and discuss his report on farming impacts on the environment 2–3.30 pm at Tasman District Council on Friday 26 November. One of his recommendations is that there should be more ICM–type research...

Catchment Impacts on an enclosed bay – Chesapeake, September 10, 2004
HARRISBURG, Pa. –– A new report suggesting the best and cheapest ways for Maryland, Virginia and Pennsylvania to improve the health of the Chesapeake Bay directs nearly all of its recommendations at farmers.
The staff of the Chesapeake Bay Commission presented its findings yesterday to the panel, made up of legislators from the three states.
The report concluded that farmers who manage nutrients and conserve soil are the most cost–effective hope for restoring the ailing bay.
"We basically asked the question, ´Which practices would deliver the largest result for the least cost?´" said commission Executive Director Ann P. Swanson. "And what we tried to do was have the guts to say, ´Let the cards fall where they will.´"

The report is based on a review of 34 "best management practices" that federal environmental officials have said could help curb the nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment clogging the bay. The commission staff selected seven as the most cost–effective practices available.
Six involved agriculture; one, a recommendation to curb nitrogen at sewage treatment plants, addressed the effect of population growth on the watershed.

The six agriculture strategies include common practices such as planting cover crops like winter wheat to absorb nutrients and tilling soil with an eye toward minimal disturbance. But they also recommend some newer methods, such as reducing the diet of farm animals so they produce less manure and encouraging farmers to plant grass crops instead of row crops, a technique known as carbon sequestration.
Commissioners agreed to discuss the report again today. If the panel agrees to endorse the report, its findings would likely influence environmental policy in the three states.

Pennsylvania state Rep. Russell H. Fairchild, a Republican, said he expects tough questions about the report´s conclusions from his rural constituents, who might wonder why they are being targeted while a 400–home subdivision gets a pass.
"They might ask, ´What about that tanker truck that comes into the subdivision and sprays fertilizer on the yard?´" Fairchild said.
"And they deserve an answer."

But Sen. J. Lowell Stoltzfus, a Republican farmer from Maryland´s Eastern Shore and the commission´s chairman, said he was surprised that the panel hesitated in adopting the report.

"I thought it would pass pretty handily," he said. "I didn´t expect that level of concern."

The report is a departure from the commission´s usual practice of choosing one target each from areas such as urban runoff, sediment control or wastewater treatment plants and making a recommendation.
Instead, Swanson and her staff decided to choose what they saw as the best seven, regardless of the sector they affected.
The report includes no cost figures. Swanson said that assessing a price wasn´t the goal and would be hard to determine because some of the measures would save money in the long term.

Nor does it outline who would pay for implementation, though the study and commission members made it clear that the costs would not be passed on to the farmers.

"This report could be spun into a 30–second attack ad on agriculture. Nothing could be further from the truth," said Del. Albert C. Pollard Jr., a Democrat who represents the rural northern neck of Virginia in that state´s legislature.
Some commission members were concerned that the report did not address urban air pollution, runoff from development or any of the other population–control issues that factor into the bay´s troubles.
The staff replied that, although such urban tools are crucial to restoring the bay´s health, they are also expensive to implement and are not necessarily cost–effective.


A Water Conservation Order for the Motueka River catchment has been approved by the government.

"Parts of the Upper Motueka River and other tributaries are to be retained in their natural state for their wild and scenic features," Environment Minister Marian Hobbs said.

Among its many outstanding features are special parts of the Motueka River, Wangapeka River, the Rolling River and the Skeet River, which will be protected to retain the natural habitat for blue ducks and the brown trout fishery.

The Order also protects specific streams in the Arthur Range because of the scientific and recreational values associated with the karst geological formations.

"It is important that these characteristics are protected by the Order so that everyone, now and future generations, can enjoy the many natural features of the river," Marian Hobbs said.

The Order was gazetted on Thursday 26 August 2004 and came into force on 24 September 2004.

The Order also restricts certain activities, including damming and altering river flows and quality, which would have a detrimental effect on the Motueka River. But it will not prevent the exercise of current consents and water can still be taken for domestic needs, the needs of animals and fire fighting.

Marian Hobbs acknowledged the length of time the process had taken since the original application for an order in 1990 by the then Nelson Acclimatisation Society (now the Nelson Marlborough Fish and Game Council) and the Council of South Island Acclimatisation Societies (now the New Zealand Fish and Game Council).

The minister congratulated all the parties involved in the public process for their work in reaching agreement on the content of the order.

Best wishes
Hot Topic #12 – OnLine Collaboration and more Some of these ´Hot Topics´ will be in the nature of a round–up of news from and for the research team, and this is one such item.

This May 2004 update has been distributed initially to the research team via Confluens, our ICM on–line collaboration group. We are about half way through a 6 month pilot trial of this form of collaboration. The ICM pilot area is called Integrum, comprising 4 discussion groups:
Overall ICM discussion group [Confluens] with Participation Coach Andrew Fenemor
Knowledge Management and Social Science [Knowledge Social tributum] with Participation Coach Glen Lauder
Land, Water, Marine science projects [Land Water Marine tributum] with Participation Coach Les Basher
Modelling and IDEAS integrating framework [Model IDEAS tributum] with Participation Coach Tim Davie

This trial is an opportunity for the ~75 members of the active ICM research group to join in group discussion about any ICM issues they want to raise or respond to. There has been an excellent recent series of exchanges in [Land Water Marine] about potential environmental factors driving trout numbers in the Motueka River.

If you are enrolled in any of these 4 groups, you can access all the past messages at

Many of you will have heard that Les will transfer from Lincoln to the Nelson office of Landcare Research during July his year. This will help boost Landcare´s local presence in the Motueka ICM programme, and should open more opportunities for collaboration between Les´s sediment research and Cawthron freshwater and marine research in ICM.


A successful overnight workshop was held 10–11 May 2004 with Motueka sector group representatives at Bridge Valley Christian Camp. The workshop mapped out a structure for the prototype ICM ´Knowledge Delivery´ Toolbook which Chris Phillips will put together during his visit with Prof Hans Schreier in Vancouver starting 19 June. Thanks to Chris Phillips and Linda Lilburne for their presentations on toolbook options, to Glen Lauder for facilitating the discussion, and to the Landcare, Cawthron, TDC and sector people who stimulated the debate.

The workshop agreed Terms of Reference for an ICM Sector Liaison Group. Notes from the workshop are elsewhere on the ICM website, and Chris and Linda have posted the draft ICM toolbook structure on Confluens for comment. Please be prepared to contribute some concise text, images, graphics to Chris and Linda from your ICM area of work, once the structure is finalised.

* Will Allen has been asked by the International Water Management Institute to co–lead a team of international experts in developing a cross case study learning framework which can be used to support and improve dialogue and other multi–stakeholder catchment initiatives around water, food and environment. He will do this work with Irene Guijt of Wagenin University in the Netherlands. The initial experts workshop will take place in South Africa in July 2004.
* Margaret Kilvington, Chrys Horn, Chris Phillips and Andrew Fenemor along with other members of the Landcare Research art–science team met in Nelson on April 7th with Anne Noble from Massey University in Wellington to discuss the Nelson–based art science project. Discussions concentrated on how to involve the communities living in the Motueka catchment in our Travelling River exhibition, which will go ahead in August if we manage to get funding for the event.
* On 14 April, Andrew Fenemor and Michael Krausse interviewed both the initiator and current chairman of the Tadmor Valley Irrigation Scheme, and visited the scheme diversion from the Hope River. This is a water augmentation scheme built in 1985. This ICM project is assessing the costs and benefits projected at the time the scheme was proposed and comparing these with the actual outcome 20 years later. The research is intended to provide some guidance for council and government policy on water augmentation and irrigation schemes.
* A meeting of the ICM Community Reference Group on 26 April discussed a presentation by Dr Tim Davie on two hydrological models developed for the Motueka catchment, and their varying predictions of the changes in river flows in response to changes in the forest cover across the catchment. Andrew Fenemor also presented results (since adopted by Council) of recommended water allocation limits for upper Motueka subcatchments.

The following information is provided by Ed Stevens of Ngatimoti. I had considered running the ICM AGM straight after these 150th anniversary celebrations at Ngatimoti, but some ICM folks will not be available.

Lower Motueka Valley Settlers 150 Years Commemoration
Labour Weekend October 22nd – 24th 2004
Lower Motueka Valley at Ngatimoti

Friday 22 October:
Billets for those from away – by prior arrangement. Evening visit to selected site of interest with host.

Saturday 23 October:
10 – 12: Introduction to general history of the valley.
12 – 12:45 Light Lunch/Cuppa.
1– 2:30 Selected early family profiles 1854–63.
3 pm Guided tour, Waiwhero Road/Orinoco– self drive.
Photograph display at Ngatimoti Memorial Hall.
6:30 pm Light Tea at Ngatimoti Memorial Hall,
Evening Slide show and entertainment by Lyricist/Balladeer.

Sunday 24 October:
9 – 10:30 Display and sale of local landscape art for Registrants.
9 a.m. All Day. Ngatimoti School Festival – food available. Motueka Genealogy Booth will be there featuring "Introduction to Research."
PM Guided tour, Motueka River Valley. Baton Bridge/Alexander Bridge
back to Hall. Self drive.
Canoe landing re–enactment.
Photographic display continues.
Further historical research at Hall.

Monday 25th Tuesday 26th (and further if required):
Motueka and Districts Historical Society research room will be staffed by management.

For those with interest but who may not be able to attend, we welcome a contact. To assist planning, please advise family or area of interest. We propose that descendant family representatives will have priority for registration.

Expressions of interest are invited at this stage and by the end of June we will have a website established with continuing updates and registrations will open. Depending on the initial expressions of interest, we may be able to include family representatives of the 1864 – 1880´s era.
Costs should be minimal for the light tea and $2 for entry to the School Festival.

The present addresses are email:
Ed Stevens,
MOTUEKA. (Please send SAE if requesting information by mail)

Hei kona ra
All the best
Andrew Fenemor
ICM Programme Leader
Hot Topic #11 – A secured future for our ICM research
Kia ora ICM friends and colleagues

It was a relief to hear from the Foundation for Research, Science and Technology that, effective 1 October 2003, Landcare Research had been awarded a 50% increase in Government funding to continue this Integrated Catchment Management programme for a further six years.

The new ICM research programme mirrors the policy development process applied by councils and sector groups in developing environmental management plans and systems, namely "What do we know already and how do we use it?" through understanding catchment processes, to developing specific tools to address environmental management problems, and visioning futures by testing scenarios through a modelling framework.

The ICM approach is to carry out these tasks collaboratively with stakeholders and affected communities. The process is iterative, with understanding of land–water–coast–community interactions improving as the research proceeds.

Objective 1 (Knowledge management) is the growing knowledge platform upon which stakeholder decision–making is built. Social research in Objective 1 seeks to understand how science information and community perceptions affect decision–making processes and to understand how science can better serve decision makers through improved communication among stakeholders (especially Maori), resource managers, and scientists.

Objective 2 (Catchment Connections) examines at large–catchment scale the processes by which land and water uses affect down–gradient freshwater and coastal resources, and the redistribution processes occurring once these flows and contaminants reach Tasman Bay. A key currency is sediment, its generation, transport and impacts in the rivers and coastal zone.

Objective 3 (Tools for Management) addresses resource managers´ needs for methods to avoid, remedy or mitigate the cumulative effects of resource use, focussing on questions of water allocation in small streams, riparian management at large catchment scale, sediment control and including the economics of interventions.

Finally, Objective 4 is the Integrated Distributed Environmental Assessment System (IDEAS) framework within which modelling tools are developed to answer real catchment questions about cumulative causes and effects of a mosaic of catchment developments. IDEAS is a framework for visualising outcomes of future development scenarios, operating at a range of scales, and including the innovative new approach of ecosystems services modelling.

Following discussions with Environment Waikato and NIWA, we are planning to base some of our sediment modelling research in the Raglan Harbour catchments in the North Island.

Of course, in the complex nature of ICM, there are links across all the objectives just described – by currency (e.g. sediment, $), by issue, by discipline and more. This complexity is healthy because it mirrors real life. We can sometimes over–simplify in seeking The Answer when we know there are many answers.

Having received the green light of funding, one of our challenges is to better achieve an integration of all these research strands, and to further strengthen our links with catchment communities and councils.

It was heartening to see so much interest in this year´s AGM of the ICM programme in late October, when around 100 people attended our public field day in the Motueka catchment. In addition to our existing partnerships and research subcontracts, we have also enlisted the support of the Motueka Tangata Whenua Resource Management Advisory Komiti and the NZ Landcare Trust for building those links in and beyond the Motueka catchment.

Thanks for everyone´s efforts in helping compile such an effective bid.

Hot Topic #10 – Revisiting...Why ICM, why the Motueka? Kia ora friends and colleagues

New Zealand has a proud history of catchment–based resource management, reaching back to the catchment boards set up under the Soil Conservation and Rivers Control Act of the 1940s. Since then the focus of land and water management has expanded into water allocation, pollution control, biodiversity protection, control of plant and animal pests and long–term sustainability.

However given the breadth of the RMA, and its continuing focus on policy to resolve environmental problems, there´s a risk. We risk losing sight of the importance of the catchment as the most useful scale for understanding and resolving land and water management problems, and we risk fragmenting those problems so much that we miss the bigger picture of their interconnections.

A holistic (kaitiakitanga–oriented) and catchment based view is core to the ICM research in the Motueka. Sure, we recognise that economic and social networks seldom operate at topographical catchment scales, but biophysical processes predominantly do.

The Motueka ICM research is built upon a belief that science can develop ways to integrate social, economic, environmental and cultural understanding, and that integrated science as the way of the future. Sustainable land and water management (including waters offshore when relevant) makes sense when seen at catchment scale, but then scale down to farms and paddocks, and up to region and nation.

The Motueka ICM is doing research, not the management, but we recognise that researching Integrated Catchment Management must involve action research approaches, working with stakeholders and across complex networks and issues.

Our work, like most environmental research, is inevitably ´place–based´. I personally believe that success is much more likely only when we as researchers become ingrained with the people and communities where we are researching, whether we´re looking at riparian function or social learning processes.

Aside from the varied geography of the Motueka and Riwaka catchments (geology, climate, land cover etc), the ICM research is built on a range of complex and interconnected resource management issues. One challenge for us is to demonstrate integration across organisations and sectors, to work across those competitive barriers.

A pragmatic reason too why the Motueka was chosen as the base for this research, was Landcare Research´s aim to maintain a research base in the top of the South Island, where we have a memorable history of terrestrial ecosystem research.

The process for selecting Motueka was iterative. As Breck has previously mentioned, we were not looking for a catchment restoration case study. One of NZ´s longer term opportunities in sustainable land and water management is not, like most of the rest of the world, to find out how to repair environmental damage but how to proactively understand and protect what we have.

The Motueka is far from pristine but it does have nationally important values. It won out over Pelorus, Waimea and Takaka as the other shortlisted research catchments because of its breadth of current issues and the commitment from TDC to apply its base of experience and knowledge as a research partner. I think it makes an excellent research base.

Best wishes
Hot Topic #9 – The Motueka and Riwaka catchments: a technical report Kia ora ICM friends and colleagues

What do we already know about our catchment?

The Motueka ICM research programme has completed a major milestone with the publication of our overview report "The Motueka and Riwaka catchments: a technical report summarising the present state of knowledge of the catchments, management issues and research needs for integrated catchment management".

When beginning any new research programme, a key first step is to understand existing knowledge about the topic. One of the recommendations made at the beginning of this programme by peer reviewers Dr Tom Dunne and Dr Gene Likens was to complete such a review. A reference database has been built listing over 350 references on the Motueka catchment, its smaller neighbour the Riwaka and the associated ecosystem in Tasman Bay. The Motueka Technical Report, to use its colloquial name, summarises all that knowledge and identifies where the detailed data can be found.

Extensively illustrated with maps and photos, the report covers topics such as geology, soils, erosion, present and past vegetation, terrestrial and aquatic fauna, freshwater and marine hydrology and water quality, Maori and European history, recreation, and socio–economic characteristics. It also outlines the roles of TDC, DoC and tangata whenua in ICM, and the terms and significance of the Motueka River Water Conservation Order.

The key resource management issues discussed are water quantity and quality, sediment, aquatic ecology, riparian management, and catchment–Tasman Bay interactions. Major research questions identified include:
• how can we best balance competing out–of–stream and in–stream water needs?
• what are the key sources of sediment and how does sediment influence fish populations?
• what determines water quality and is it changing?
• can riparian management be used to improve water quality?
• how does land use affect native and introduced freshwater and marine species?
• how does land use affect marine water quality?

The Motueka River Catchment was chosen as a focus for study, not because its problems are unique, but rather because its problems are common. What we learn about the science of integration and the integration of science with management in Motueka will be transferable elsewhere, in New Zealand and internationally. Indeed, this is happening now.

The Motueka ICM Programme was singled out as a model for UNESCO´s Hydrology for Life, Environment and Policy (HELP) programme. The Motueka River provides an especially suitable case study because the range of management issues is wide and the cost of ´getting it wrong´ in such a special place is high.

Fortunately, the stakeholders in the Motueka area have demonstrated a willingness to develop shared visions and work toward common goals. This development of "social capital" is a critically important component of successful ICM efforts.

This Technical Report is neither a beginning nor an end. Rather, it is an important assessment of state. Hopefully, this document will be treated as a living resource, with the ICM website alongside, to be periodically updated and improved as the participants develop new data and experiences. Ideally this document will serve as a model for other communities, to achieve the outcomes they share.

Finally, a hearty thanks to Les Basher, the co–authors, collaborators and friends who worked together to produce this summary of knowledge upon which our research is building.

Copies of the Motueka Technical Report have been distributed to Tasman District Council, Cawthron Institute, Fish and Game, the Motueka Community Reference Group, key sector people and individuals in the Motueka catchment and Nelson region, iwi, the Landcare Trust, MfE, DoC, FRST, the Landcare Research Board and senior management, libraries and key people involved with the research programme.

Further printed copies are available on loan through local schools and libraries, or upon request from Tasman District Council, or Landcare Research at Nelson or Lincoln.

Best wishes
Andrew Fenemor
ICM Programme Leader
Hot Topic #8 – A Learning Curve Kia ora ICM friends and colleagues

This is my rather belated introduction as new Programme Leader for the Motueka Integrated Catchment Management research programme. Despite some excellent advance planning for the handover of programme management by my predecessor Breck Bowden, there has been a huge learning curve for me in rejoining a research organization after working for 17 years for local government in Nelson on environmental investigations and management.

This learning curve has been steepened by the demands imposed by New Zealand´s competitive funding model for research. Landcare Research, along with other crown research institutes and research organizations, has been bidding for NZ$57m of environmental research funds in the Sustainable Development area. This has included bidding for a further six years of funding for this ICM research programme from October 2003. With New Zealand´s focus this year on a Sustainable Development strategy, and an improved economy, NZ is well placed to contribute ground–breaking research on sustainability issues.

The improved economy in the Motueka catchment has certainly pushed up land values and development pressures can be seen in the booming subdivision and building activity there. We said early on in the ICM research programme that the overall research question is not "what´s broken?" but "how can we manage this scale of catchment sustainably to prevent it getting broken?". Development pressures highlight the importance of this research in identifying sustainable patterns of land and water uses through a collaborative learning approach with stakeholders.

The ICM programme has already demonstrated the value of its holistic approach, and I am personally committed to building the community, council and sector group links with our research.

Our ICM funding bid was lodged with the Foundation for Research, Science and Technology on 24 February. We await the Foundation´s decision on our future with a positive view that our work will provide a template and insights into managing catchments for sustainability.

Finally, I would like to welcome Jane Hewitt, my successor as Manager Environmental Information at Tasman District Council, which with the Cawthron Institute is one of the three core partners in the ICM programme. Jane has a recent corporate background and thus brings a fresh approach to the ICM programme. She, like me, is keen to see our research produce "runs on the board" for integrated catchment management.

Best wishes
Andrew Fenemor
ICM Programme Leader
Hot Topic #7 – Programme Leadership Changes Dear ICM Friends and Colleagues,

It is with a mixture of both regret and anticipation that I step down today as the Programme Leader for the Motueka Integrated Catchment Management Programme to assume new duties as the Robert and Genevieve Patrick Professor of Watershed Science and Planning at the University of Vermont in Burlington, Vermont, USA.

It has been my privilege to have served as the Programme Leader during a period of extremely important transition in catchment and hillslope hydrological research, both here in New Zealand and around the world. New Zealand scientists can be justifiably proud of the contributions they have made for over half a century, to better understand the effects of various types of land use on water quantity and water quality. These contributions have been internationally recognised.

And now, at a time when it is increasingly apparent that integrated management of land and water resources is essential to maintain environmental integrity, economic productivity, and social well–being, New Zealand scientists are again showing the way.

The Motueka ICM programme is a direct response to government´s emerging interest in integrated environmental management and the outcomes it promises. Through a number of related initiatives – for example the Taieri initiative in Otago, the Whatawhata initiative in the Waikato, and the Waitakere initiative in Auckland – scientists, policy makers and stakeholders are working together to ensure that New Zealand continues to be productive, attractive, and spiritually fulfilling.

These collaborative efforts have come to the attention of major international initiatives, such as UNESCO´s Hydrology for the Environment, Life, and Policy (HELP) programme and the Global Water Partnership (GWP). Thus, New Zealand scientists are leading both by intellect and by example.

I am pleased to announce that my successor in the Motueka Integrated Catchment Management Programme will be Andrew Fenemor. Andrew is currently the Manager of Environmental Information in the Tasman District Council, one of the three core partners in the Motueka ICM programme. He has been a key proponent of the programme and, indeed, helped to develop its current directions.

Andrew was trained as a scientist and engineer and has served the Tasman District well in environmental investigations and policy, helping to develop scientifically justifiable, environmentally responsible, and socially equitable resource management decisions. He is, therefore, in a particularly good position to understand the needs and aspirations of the Motueka ICM programme.

Andrew will assume his new duties on 7 October 2002 and will be based in the Nelson offices of Landcare Research. I hope you will join me in welcoming Andrew to his new role in the programme.

I´ll look forward in anticipation to the future achievements of the Motueka ICM collaborators. You should look forward to continued improvements and contributions to this web site, that will be of direct use to you.

And I hope that we can all look forward to a future that is prosperous, healthy, and fulfilling.

Breck Bowden
Hot Topic #6 – The Importance of Cross–Sector Sustainability Science Dear Friends and Colleagues

What is ´sustainability´ and how does it relate to ICM?

There is considerable discussion these days about ´sustainability´… about what it means, how it can be measured, how we can achieve it. One group is trying to do something about this. The Global Leaders of Tomorrow Environmental Task Force (part of the World Economic Forum) has developed what they call their ´Environmental Sustainability Index´ or ESI. The rationale for the ESI and how it has been developed and applied are explained in a report accessible from the ESI web site.

The ESI Task Force has ranked 142 countries in the world on the basis of 68 variables describing 20 indicators. The indicators are organised in five groups relating to
• Environmental systems
• Reducing environmental stresses
• Reducing human vulnerability
• Social and institutional capacity, and
• Global stewardship.

The ESI scores range from 23.9 to 73.9. The top five countries are (in decreasing order) Finland, Norway, Sweden, Canada, and Switzerland. New Zealand and Australia are at 19th (59.9) and 16th (60.3) place, respectively, with Panama and Estonia between us! For perspective (and some thought) Armenia is 38th (54.8), the United States 45th (53.2), Sri Lanka 55th (51.3), South Africa 77th (48.7), Bangladesh 86th (46.9), the United Kingdom 91st (46.1), Pakistan 112th (42.1), and China 129th (38.5). The United Arab Emirates and Kuwait occupy the bottom of the list.

The exact rankings are not important. What is notable is that three quarters of the world´s countries – including it´s most populated (China, India, Russia, the US) – lie in a 20–point band that is a full 10 points below the highest scoring countries (<3% of the total). It suggests that we have a long way to go if we are to achieve sustainability.

As most of you are aware, the NZ Foundation for Research, Science & Technology is currently engaged in a review of it´s entire $57 million investment in research related to sustainability science. This review is a precursor to the ´advancement´ this coming year of all bids in the various sustainability portfolios. The Foundation is seeking both solicited and unsolicited responses for this review and the Co–operative Research Group for Integrated Catchment Management has decided to make an unsolicited submission which we will distribute when complete.

One of the key questions posed by the Foundation for this review is "Are there differences between sector and cross–sector sustainability and how should the Foundation´s investments reflect these differences?".

There are a wide variety of definitions for sustainability but for the moment let´s assume that a general sense of sustainability includes the notion that the needs and rights of future generations should be considered in current resource use issues.

In the CRG4ICM´s submission to the Sustainability Review we have focussed on the central question of sector versus cross–sector sustainability. In synopsis: we have argued that research on both sector and cross–sector sustainability is necessary, but that true sustainability cannot be achieved through a focus on sector sustainability alone. Achievement of sustainability (to the degree that this is possible) will inherently require a cross–sector approach.

The reason is straightforward and directly relevant to integrated catchment or environmental management. Any discussion of sustainability must consider the scale or level of complexity of the system. At lower levels of system complexity, a sector–based approach is appropriate.

Research needs for viticulture are easily distinguishable from those for dairy farming or petroleum extraction. In addition, the dependencies, supporting disciplines, and expected outcomes are somewhat easier to identify.

It is no wonder then that we can invest in RS&T in these areas with greater confidence. However, it should also be obvious that each level of complexity is inherently dependent on levels below it. Thus, we are not likely to obtain sustainable farming systems without sustainable paddock– or organism–scale (e.g., plant and animal) management. By the same token, we are not likely to achieve global or national sustainability without community and regional sustainability, which depends on farm and industry sustainability, and so on.

Finally, it should be equally apparent that the ways forward toward sustainability at the higher levels of complexity are much harder to fathom. Progress requires the involvement of multiple stakeholders and multiple disciplines. Research investments in this area will be inherently riskier and will take longer to come to fruition. However, the payoffs will be enormous, if not economically, then at least socially.

Thus, in answer to the Foundation´s questions, we believe that there are clearly differences between sector versus cross–sector sustainability science. To best serve the needs of the people of New Zealand, it will be necessary to invest in both areas. However, we should be wary of investing too heavily in sector–based sustainability science because it is easier to visualise, less risky, and has more immediate outcomes.

Time and again we have been reminded – often through disastrous or tragic developments – that the natural systems we depend on for life are intricately inter–connected. If we exploit one component of this critical network, we risk degradation or even irreparable damage to other components. We believe it is logical to extend this expectation from natural systems to human systems. Thus, we believe it is not only appropriate, but necessary, to invest substantially in cross–sector sustainability science.

Making and managing this investment is likely to require greater commitments by all parties and will definitely require new inter–institutional and multi–disciplinary approaches to cross–sector sustainability science.

I believe the Motueka ICM programme partners and associates can take great pride in having initiated this difficult but important and rewarding new work.
Hot Topic #5 – What´s "Broken" in the Motueka catchment that needs fixing?
Dear Friends and Colleagues

On occasion someone will ask with some puzzlement, "What is wrong with the Motueka that needs to be corrected? What´s broken that needs fixing?".

When one looks at Motueka environment today, it is a reasonable question. Visitors to the area are drawn to the impressive mountains clad in green native forest, the sparkling–clear and trout–filled waters of the river and its tributaries, and the warm and productive blue coastal waters. Large portions of the catchment are in productive uses such as forestry, horticulture, and pasture, which add texture and colour to the landscape in a way that many people find attractive.

Residents whose families have lived in the area for generations are reluctant to leave and each year more and more people are attracted to the area. All in all, the Motueka River and Tasman Bay seem to be healthy environments and the Tasman District Council, one of the key partners in Mouteka ICM project, would like to ensure it stays that way as the area continues to develop.

Nevertheless, pressures on the Motueka River and Tasman Bay environments are mounting. For many years the technical details of a draft Water Conservation Order to manage the in–stream values of the Motueka River has been debated by stakeholders in the area and in the New Zealand Environment Court. The key issue is how to fairly allocate water among competing productive sector and ecosystem uses, in an environment in which water is perennially in short supply during the summer growing season. This issue is closely related to concerns about health of the recreational trout fishery in the river, which supports an extremely important international tourist industry and has shown signs of decline in recent years. And management of the land and freshwater resources in the Motueka River catchment are likely to have important effects on the productivity of Tasman Bay, which has become one of the most important recreational and commercial fisheries in New Zealand. The possible consequences of introducing extensive new mussel farming operations in the area is a matter of hot debate, inside and outside of the Environment Court. Indeed, it was for these reasons that the Motueka River/Tasman Bay environment were chosen as a focus for our ICM programme.

While these issues certainly justify our research attention, they don´t quite seem to qualify as answers to the question "What´s broken?". But this question misses the point entirely. Like a machine, failure of one ecosystem component is likely to indicate serious stresses on other components in the system and may cause direct failure of still other components. However, ecosystems are not just complicated machines that can be relatively easily and quickly fixed when a part wears out or is broken. Once an ecosystem component (e.g.; groundwater) is ´broken´ (e.g.; contaminated), it is difficult, expensive and time consuming to repair it...assuming it can be repaired at all.

One of the failings of an ´effects–based´ approach to environmental management is that once an effect can be detected, it may be too late to do something about it. Across the world, there are sobering examples of the financial and human costs of repairing broken ecosystems (e.g.; the Aral Sea in Russia, the Spree River in Germany, the Kissimmee River in the USA, and the Murray Darling in Australia).

One of the principle tenets of integrated catchment management is to take a proactive approach – rather than a reactive approach – to environmental management. This simple shift in perspective has profound influences on the way in which we ´do´ science.

In a reactive approach, the issue and goal are usually painfully clear and repair and re–mediation are likely to be the key responses, and expensive if feasible. These responses usually rely on applied sciences and engineering approaches lead by experts with input from technical stakeholders, but relatively little input from communities.

A proactive approach requires a more holistic response. While the issues and goals may be reasonably clear, the appropriate responses may be far from clear. Applied sciences and engineering technology certainly have a role to play. However, because the best way forward may be unknown, basic exploratory science and informed monitoring are also critical to success.

What is most important, however, is that a wider spectrum of stakeholders must be involved in the process of setting goals and interactions among these stakeholders must be managed sensitively. It is this ´human dimension´ of integrated catchment management that presents the greatest challenge...and consequently accounts for a significant part of our effort in the Motueka–ICM programme.

We believe that the best way to meet this challenge is through a variety of participatory processes that build ´social capital´ – trust, understanding, co–operation – among stakeholders, from scientists and engineers, to regulators and policy makers, to communities and interest groups.

This approach can be uncomfortable because the key hypotheses to test may not be clear to scientists, the appropriate technologies may not be available to engineers, the best practices may not have been developed for managers, and the best sources for relevant information may not be evident to stakeholders. Nevertheless, this shift in thinking from "What´s broken?" to "How can we keep it in good repair?" is critical to the development of successful strategies for sustainable development.
Hot Topic #4 – Trout Habitat in the lower Motueka River Dear Friends and Colleagues

Recent research provides essential information to help protect valuable recreational fisheries in New Zealand.
Dr Roger Young – a freshwater scientist at the Cawthron Institute and key research partner in the Motueka Integrated Catchment Management Programme – has recently completed a new assessment of the trout habitat in the lower reaches of the Motueka River, near Nelson.

This project was jointly supported by the Foundation for Research, Science & Technology, the Tasman District Council, and the Nelson/Marlborough Fish & Game Council.

The Motueka River is widely recognised as one of the best trout fishing rivers in New Zealand and supports an important recreational fishing industry. It is well known that the quality of trout habitat changes as the discharge in a river goes up or down.

Fishing enthusiasts have been concerned for many years that abstractions of water – both intended (e.g., for agriculture) or unintended (e.g., due to afforestation) – might reduce the flow in the river to a point that would impair the trout habitat quality, especially under low–flow conditions in the summer. Dr Young´s results provide valuable information about the relationship between flow level and habitat quality, which can be used to help make management decisions.

Dr Young used a standard method (IFIM) to assess the relationship between flow and fish habitat. Good fish habitat was quantified as a percentage of the available river bottom surface (or m2 of habitat per m of river length).

Dr Young found that the Woodmans Bend reach (above the town of Motueka) has some of the highest quality trout habitat in the nation and appears to be comparable to the Woodstock reach upstream, which had been assessed a number of years ago. The percentage of adult brown trout habitat under low flow conditions (i.e., the 7 day mean annual low flow, MALF) was 35.2 % (cf. 32.0 % at Woodstock) which would place it 2nd out of 64 reaches in New Zealand trout rivers. Only the upper Clutha River has a higher percentage of adult trout habitat.

The percentage of food producing habitat at the median flow was 28.4% (cf. 44.4% at Woodstock) which ranks in the lower 30% of New Zealand trout rivers. However, the sum of adult trout habitat at low flow plus the food producing habitat at the median flow was 63.6% (cf. 76.4% at Woodstock) which ranks in the top 10% of New Zealand trout rivers.

At both Woodmans Bend and Woodstock, adult trout habitat was near optimal, even at the MALF level, which is perhaps one reason these reaches are highly regarded fisheries.

Dr Young concluded that to maintain optimum adult trout habitat, flows at Woodmans Bend should be about 3 m3/s higher than at Woodstock. However, he also concluded that the Woodmans Bend reach does appear to be more resilient to the effects of low flow than the Woodstock reach. For example, if a 15% reduction in adult trout habitat area was considered to be acceptable then a minimum flow similar to the 1 in 10–year low flow could be used at Woodmans Bend. However, at Woodstock a minimum flow higher than the 1 in 5–year low flow would be required to achieve this level of protection.

This type of quantitative information is essential for resource managers, policy makers, and stakeholders to make informed decisions about land, water and fishery management policies.

For further information about this project contact Dr. Young directly at
Hot Topic #3 – Costing Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Dear Friends and Colleagues

I´d like to call your attention to a recent report that is directly relevant to our interests in the Motueka ICM programme.

The report, called "Muddied waters: estimating the national cost of soil erosion and sedimentation in New Zealand" by Michael Krausse, Callum Eastwood, and Robert Alexander, is as notable for what it did find as it is for what it did not – or could not – find.

In summary, Krausse et al. concluded that the annual cost of erosion in New Zealand is on the order of $127 million per annum. The authors are careful to point out that there is enormous uncertainty in these estimates. The true value might only be $12.7 million...or it could be $1,270 million. Nevertheless, their conservative estimate is that this cost is at least $127 million annually.

It is interesting to put this number in other perspectives. For example $127 million is only 0.13% of the 1999 GDP for New Zealand (Statistics New Zealand). A relatively small number. It is, however, 1.5% of the total value of dairy, wood, and meat exports in 1999, the sectors we might expect to be most affected by erosion. Alternatively, $127 million is about 8.7% of the total balance of goods for New Zealand in 1999. Or, it´s over $30 for every man, woman and child in New Zealand.

As Krausse et al. point out, although their estimate is uncertain, it is likely to be on the low side. It is difficult to refine this estimate further, given the paucity of data that would be necessary for a more rigorous calculation. However, it is clear that the real costs of erosion are likely to be non–trivial.

As we consider means to increase the profitability of various land–based activities, it would be well for us to remember that management options that reduce costs are as important to profitability – and sustainability – at a national level, as management options that increase revenues.

Krausse, M., C. Eastwood, and R.R. Alexander. (2001) Muddied Waters: Estimating the national economic cost of soils erosion and sedimentation in New Zealand. Landcare Research Report, Palmerston North. ISBN 0–478–90344–6
Hot Topic #2 – National and International Successes for Motueka ICM Dear friends and colleagues:

In the past weeks, there have been several important developments – at both national and international levels – relevant to our initiatives in the Motueka ICM. Each of these developments underscores the timeliness and the value of the co–operative approach we have developed for the Motueka ICM programme. Congratulations to all of the partners who have made this possible.

The Tasman District Council – one of the key partners in the Motueka ICM – recently received national recognition from the Institute of Chartered Accountants of New Zealand, for the Council´s efforts in Environmental Reporting.

A panel of North Island judges described the Council´s Tasman 2000 state–of–the–environment report as engaging and readable, connecting global and national issues with the role of Council and the local community. The award, sponsored by Gilkison O´Dea Chartered Accountants, was presented in Wellington on 16 May 2001.

One might wonder why an accounting firm would present a prestigious award for a report which is in essence not a financial statement at all. This award recognises an important new development in the business community, called "triple bottom line accounting". Triple bottom line accounting recognises that in addition to economic security, truly progressive businesses and industries need to account for environmental and cultural security as well.

Kudos to the Tasman District Council and their staff led by Andrew Fenemor for this award and to Gilkison O´Dea Chartered Accountants for making this recognition possible.

See Tasman District Council web site to learn more about their activities. Learn moreabout "triple bottom line accounting" at Landcare Research´s web site. And, of course…if you want to know what we are doing, please surf through the rest of our site here!


The New Zealand Foundation for Research, Science & Technology ("the Foundation") has circulated a series of announcements regarding their expectations for the future advancement of research, science and technology (RS&T) in New Zealand. These announcements have been delivered in the form of "Change Messages", which describe and refine a set of 27 strategic statements developed last year by the Foundation. These strategic statements (called "Strategic Portfolio Outlines" or SPO´s) describe in detail the key areas in which the Foundation will invest RS&T funds in the future.

The Motueka ICM programme addresses outcomes that have been identified in several different SPO´s. However, it is most closely aligned with the Sustainable Management of Productive Sector Environments SPO. Those interested in ICM in New Zealand – and in particular the Motueka ICM partners – should be strongly encouraged by the Change Message that the Foundation has recently announced, relevant to this SPO.

In almost every respect, the Motueka ICM programme is addressing the intent and the substance of both the original SPO and the Change Message announced by the Foundation. In particular, the Foundation expects to see substantial progress in three general directions:
• Responsiveness to Maori resource management needs
• Strengthening links between science research and central government policy development, and
• Building capacity within end–user groups
Furthermore, the Foundation as identified four areas ("portfolios") in which it intends to focus its investments. These areas are:
• Resources – processes, state and change (essentially, monitoring)
• Sustainability through integration and innovation
• Advancing the human dimension, and
• Biosecurity across productive sectors
The Foundation has signalled their intention to progressively reduce their investment in the "Resource" portfolio, with an expectation that end–users should be in a position to address this area. The Foundation then intends to reinvest in the other three portfolios. Again, the Motueka ICM programme is well–aligned with the Foundations intentions.

Our direct partnership with the Tasman District Council (TDC) provides an essential link to end–users and the ongoing work of the TDC staff in the area of environmental reporting provides the link to the "Resource" area, which the Foundation wishes to see. This allows the FRST–funded parts of the Motueka ICM programme to focus more effectively on the latter three portfolios, as intended.

The Motueka ICM partners should be strongly encouraged by the Foundation´s new Change Message. We encourage other potential partners – both science providers and science users – to contact one of the existing partners if you are interested in joining us in this collaborative effort.

The Foundation has announced in its "High Level Messages" that "connectivity" – between end–users and science providers and among science providers – is strongly encouraged. Indeed, it will be expected. This SPO will be reviewed by the Foundation in the 2002–2003 period and so this is an opportune time to establish and develop new working relationships.


The Motueka Catchment has been identified as an "A" level reference catchment within a new, international, UNESCO programme called Hydrology for Environment, Life and Policy (HELP).

The goal of the HELP programme is to:
"contribute social, legal, economic and environmental benefits to communities through sustainable and appropriate use of water by deploying hydrological science in support of improved integrated catchment management."

Only 4 of 27 self–nominated catchments world–wide, were given this initial designation as an "Operational HELP Basin". Operational HELP Basins are defined as basins which have:
"…implemented the HELP philosophy, and involved most HELP stakeholder groups in basin management… substantially functioning across several HELP key issues in an integrated manner …demonstrate an active interface between science and water managers, and society … established mechanisms for unrestricted information and data access and exchange, following…an international [resolution on] exchange of hydrological and related data."

The Motueka ICM group can take further pride in the fact that the Research Summary we submitted with our nomination was singled out as "an example of a HELP catchment study" in the HELP publication:
The design and implementation strategy of the HELP initiative (International Hydrological Programme, IHP–V, Technical Documents in Hydrology, No. 44, January 2001, UNESCO, Paris).

This designation means that in due course, the Motueka River catchment may become a World Reference Basin in the HELP Programme. The Motueka ICM group is proud to be a part of this important new global initiative. Thanks to everyone whose hard work has made this designation possible!

Breck Bowden
Hot Topic #1 – ICM & Sustainability Science Dear Friends and Colleagues,

I´m pleased to introduce this website, which describes an exciting new research programme that is focussed on integrated management of water resources in the Motueka River catchment, in New Zealand. There is quite a bit to be excited about.

First, and foremost, the topic itself – integrated catchment management or ICM – is an exciting new development in the way we go about doing science and managing critical resources, like water. There is not a single, accepted definition of integrated catchment management, but to my mind, ICM is…
"…an approach which recognises the catchment or river basin as the appropriate organising unit for research on ecosystem processes for the purpose of managing natural resources in a context that includes social, economic and political considerations."

In this sense, ICM is an application of an emerging, new area of inquiry and action called the "science of sustainability". Sustainability science builds on traditional areas of inquiry, like ecology, economics, social sciences, and engineering. Sustainability science recognises that environmental health and human health are intimately linked and, furthermore, that both are dependent on the development of ecological, social, and economic equity.

These are old words being put to new uses. The notion of "equity" is a sense of "fairness". More precisely, equity comes into play when we apply a sense of conscience or the principles of natural justice to a complex decision or a conflict. We probably all have an opinion about what would be fair or just with respect to various social and economic issues. For example, when faced with competing uses for a scarce resource – like water – what is the equitable way to allocate the resource?

Sustainability science goes a step further and suggests that there are also matters of equity to consider in thinking about environmental issues. Do species other than humans – say fish – have "rights"? What are our obligations to future generations concerning the use of resources today?
These are not easy questions to address, nor are there likely to be "correct" answers. However, we firmly believe that two factors are critical to any discussion of this topic.

First, we believe that it is essential to use or develop the best and most objective knowledge (science) possible, as a foundation for discussion. Second, we believe that it is essential to promote this discussion among a wide range of interested parties, including not just scientists and policy makers, but the wider community.

The programme of research which underpins this website has an ambitious objective…
"…to improve the management of – and social learning about – land, freshwater, and near–coastal environments in catchments with multiple, interacting, and potentially conflicting land uses."

The focus of this research programme and this website is the Motueka River Catchment, on the top of the South Island, in New Zealand. To learn more about the Motueka River Catchment and our general approach, please see About Us.

We believe the Motueka Catchment is a good place to focus this research programme, for a number of reasons. There are a variety of interacting, land and water resource issues that will require an integrated approach if they are to be managed sustainably and equitably. Second, there are a number of research and management partners who are willing to work together to address these issues. And finally – and most importantly – there is a community of stakeholders who are willing to participate in this discussion.

Over the next several years we will be assembling a variety of tools and resources that we hope will assist people in making important decisions about uses of water resources not just in the Motueka River catchment, but in other catchments nationwide. To learn more about what we are doing, click the link to Research.

I encourage you to bookmark this site and return to it frequently. We intend this site to be a "living resource": a repository for existing information, a source for new knowledge, and virtual meeting place for interested parties. While the site is focussed on the Motueka River catchment, we hope that others will learn from our efforts and that we will learn from related efforts elsewhere.

From to time, I will use the Hot Topic space to highlight a key activity in this programme or to describe a relevant effort in other related programmes in New Zealand or overseas. This site is intended to be an interactive resource for a wide community. Your feedback is important and encouraged.

Finally, I would like to thank Chris Phillips, the Computing Services & Support group at Landcare Research, and all of the partners in the Motueka ICM programme for their efforts to get this site up and running.

We all look forward to good things to come!

Breck Bowden
Programme Leader