ECtrR10 36

Integrated study of
surface water and

shallow groundwater
resources of the Orari
catchment
Report No. R10/36

ISBN 978-1-877574-06-1
Lee Burbery
Jen Ritson
March 2010
Report R10/36
ISBN: 978-1-877574-06-1
58 Kilmore Street
PO Box 345
Christchurch 8140
Phone (03) 365 3828
Fax (03) 365 3194
75 Church Street
PO Box 550
Timaru 7940
Phone (03) 687 7800
Fax (03) 687 7808
Website: www.ecan.govt.nz
Customer Services Phone 0800 324 636
Integrated study of surface water and shallow groundwater resources of the Orari catchment
Executive summary
Between 2006 and 2007, an intensive field investigation was made of the Orari hydrological
catchment, for the purpose of gaining knowledge of the surface water – shallow groundwater inter-
relationships. The field study integrated a variety of practical techniques, and, as a first for
investigations within Canterbury, involved measuring water usage at a large scale.
The dynamics of the Orari River along its path across the coastal plain have been characterised,
together with the flow path of shallow groundwater. The results provide technical support for the
general preconception that the Orari hydrological catchment is complex. The hidden historic channel
of the Umukaha River plays a significant role in routing water from the Orari River to adjacent river
basins.
By constraining flow data with water chemistry data we have characterised the source for all the
spring-fed water systems in the catchment and have mapped the lateral extent of the Orari
hydrological catchment to just beyond the banks of Coopers Creek, and as far south as Temuka. This
equates to an area of 206 km2.
Oxygen-18 isotope chemistry proved a highly effective tool for characterising the hydrological system.
Repeat δ18O analysis would improve the reliability of our conclusions made about the catchment size
and understanding of spring-fed streams. Furthermore, there is scope for δ18O analysis to be applied
to reliably determine the inter-relationship between water sourced from the Rangitata River and/or the
Orton plain, and the Orari River.
It is concluded that base-flows along various sections of Coopers Creek are supported by water from
differing sources. Our findings suggest alternative options could be explored for managing flows in the
upper reaches of Coopers Creek, beyond the existing method that links abstractions to creek flows
recorded at SH72.
On the whole, flows between separate surface waters within the catchment do not correlate well.
Moreover, only a limited number of reliable correlations were identified for flows within individual rivers
themselves. In some cases we have identified discrepancies between historic and modern correlations
that we have been unable to compensate for. We believe these may be related to an upset of the
catchment hydraulics attributed to increased groundwater abstraction. As a consequence, flow
correlations need to be questioned if incorporated in water resource management objectives in the
future.
Mean annual low flow statistics were assessed for all the surface waters in the catchment, based on
data collected during the investigation. Results suggest that in many cases, minimum flow thresholds
are significantly lower than MALF(7d) flows and may therefore be ineffective at protecting in-stream
ecological values. To correct for this, we recommend a review be made of the minimum flows within
the catchment.
All of our assessments have signalled that surface and groundwater resources in the Ohapi Creek
basin are heavily reliant upon water supposedly “lost”, from the Orari River. Our findings indirectly
support conclusions drawn from previous investigations of the Ohapi Creek system: that the
groundwater – surface water interaction for Ohapi Creeks is likely to be significant, yet spatially
variable. A reliable understanding of the hydraulics of the Ohapi Creek basin can only be obtained
from future, practical field measurements.
We are of the opinion that it is useful to include the Waihi basin in any Orari catchment water balance,
albeit the water resources in the Waihi catchment remain poorly understood. In particular, knowledge
of Waihi River and shallow groundwater contributions to the Temuka River would be helpful for the
purpose of constraining the shallow groundwater flux leaving the Orari catchment. Further
hydrochemical analyses of water within Raukapuka and Worners Creeks would improve the strength
of our predictions about these spring-fed systems being independent from the Orari River.
Environment Canterbury Technical Report i

In the process of evaluating land surface recharge estimates, we have identified that to make reliable
and meaningful use of water usage data in the context of modelling the water resources, information
pertaining to the area of irrigated land at any specific time must also be known. Although the use of
fixed, centre-pivot irrigators helps mitigate this uncertainty, it is an issue that should be given
consideration in the collection of water metering data and future water resource management.
A water balance was attempted for the Orari hydrological system based on the 2006 – 2007 field
dataset and using a systems model that compartmentalised the catchment into six sub-basins. It is
certain that water resources in the catchment are heavily dependent upon supply from the Orari River
and are less influenced by rainfall contributions - we estimate the Upper Orari River contributed 74%
to the total water inputs to the hydrological catchment compared to 20% rainfall contribution.
The application of the current systems model to determine water fluxes within and out of the
catchment is marred with uncertainty relating to: simulated river flows; assumptions about
groundwater levels and; failure to capture aquifer storage dynamics. There is potential for this
uncertainty to be reduced with further research, after which the model may provide reliable and useful
information that could be used towards integrated catchment management. Notwithstanding,
indications are that significant proportions of water sourced from the Orari River supply the Ohapi
basin and potentially supply the Waihi / Temuka River systems also.
There remains potential for information regarding hydraulic connectedness between groundwater and
surface water to be quantified from further mathematical analysis of the 2006 – 2007 field datasets.
This could be useful for evaluating the storage potential of the shallow groundwater resource and
timing of effects. However, at this stage it would appear from water level data that generally, the
shallow aquifer and surface water resources are highly interconnected. Recharge of the shallow
groundwater resource is closely tied to flows in the Orari River system and statistical analysis of these
records might prove a useful approach to predicting reliability of water supply.
ii Environment Canterbury Technical Report

Table of Contents
Executive summary .................................................................................................... i
1 Introduction ..................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background .....................................................................................................................1
1.2 Previous investigations ...................................................................................................1
1.3 Aims of the Orari Hydrological Catchment Investigation ................................................2
1.4 Report structure ..............................................................................................................2
2 Environmental setting .................................................................................... 3

2.1 Location ..........................................................................................................................3
2.2 Topography .....................................................................................................................5
2.3 Geology...........................................................................................................................5
2.4 Soils and land-use ..........................................................................................................9
2.5 Surface water hydrology ...............................................................................................12
2.6 Groundwater hydrology ................................................................................................16
2.7 Water use......................................................................................................................24
3 Investigation methodology .......................................................................... 27

3.1 Weather ........................................................................................................................27
3.1.1 Rainfall .............................................................................................................27
3.1.2 Evapotranspiration ...........................................................................................29
3.2 River flow measurements .............................................................................................29
3.2.1 Flow recorders .................................................................................................29
3.2.2 Concurrent flow gaugings ................................................................................29
3.3 Groundwater level monitoring .......................................................................................32
3.4 Hydrochemistry .............................................................................................................34
3.4.1 General hydrochemistry ...................................................................................34
3.4.2 Isotope chemistry .............................................................................................36
3.4.2.1 Oxygen-18......................................................................................36
3.4.2.2 Groundwater age ...........................................................................36
3.5 Water usage..................................................................................................................37
4 Investigation results ..................................................................................... 39

4.1 Weather ........................................................................................................................39
4.1.1 Rainfall .............................................................................................................39
4.1.2 Evapotranspiration ...........................................................................................39
4.2 Surface water flows ......................................................................................................40
4.2.1 Putting the investigation period into context ....................................................40
4.2.2 Naturalising surface water flows ......................................................................42
4.2.2.1 Surface water abstractions ............................................................43
4.2.2.2 Surface water diversions ................................................................43
4.2.2.3 Surface water discharges ..............................................................43
4.2.2.4 Groundwater abstractions ..............................................................45
4.2.3 Hydrographs.....................................................................................................48
4.2.4 Flow correlations ..............................................................................................52
Environment Canterbury Technical Report iii

4.2.4.1 Orari River ......................................................................................52

4.2.4.2 Coopers Creek ...............................................................................53
4.2.4.3 Ohapi Creek ...................................................................................53
4.2.4.4 Waihi River .....................................................................................54
4.2.4.5 Dobies Stream ...............................................................................54
4.2.4.6 Worners Creek and Raukapuka Creek ..........................................55
4.2.4.7 Station Stream ...............................................................................55
4.2.4.8 Lowland springs .............................................................................55
4.2.5 Flow profile - losses and gains.........................................................................56
4.2.5.1 Orari River ......................................................................................56
4.2.5.2 Coopers Creek ...............................................................................58
4.2.5.3 Ohapi Creek ...................................................................................59
4.2.5.4 Waihi River .....................................................................................59
4.2.5.5 Dobies Stream ...............................................................................60
4.2.6 Minimum flows and reliability of supply ............................................................61
4.2.6.1 Orari River ......................................................................................61
4.2.6.2 Coopers Creek ...............................................................................61
4.2.6.3 Ohapi Creek ...................................................................................62
4.2.6.4 Waihi River .....................................................................................62
4.2.6.5 Dobies Stream ...............................................................................62
4.2.6.6 Lowland springs .............................................................................62
4.3 Groundwater levels .......................................................................................................63
4.3.1 Groundwater contours .....................................................................................63
4.3.2 Changes in groundwater levels........................................................................66
4.4 Hydrochemistry .............................................................................................................69
4.4.1 General hydrochemistry ...................................................................................69
4.4.2 Oxygen-18........................................................................................................76
4.4.2.1 Temporal patterns ..........................................................................76
4.4.2.2 Spatial patterns ..............................................................................77
4.5 Hydrological catchment boundaries..............................................................................82
4.6 Water usage..................................................................................................................84
4.6.1 Abstractions .....................................................................................................84
4.6.2 Irrigated areas ..................................................................................................90
5 Catchment water budget .............................................................................. 92

5.1 Conceptual hydrological systems model ......................................................................92
5.1.1 Irrigation use and land surface recharge estimates .........................................95
5.2 Mathematical model inputs and assumptions...............................................................96
5.2.1 Surface water fluxes ........................................................................................96
5.2.2 Groundwater inputs/Land Surface Recharge ..................................................97
5.3 Model results.................................................................................................................98
5.3.1 Groundwater inputs/Land Surface Recharge (LSR) ........................................98
5.3.2 Modelled water use vs. actual water use .......................................................102
5.3.3 Estimated fluxes and overall water balance ..................................................103
5.3.4 Errors and uncertainty in model results .........................................................104
6 Conclusions and recommendations ......................................................... 109

6.1 Surface waters ............................................................................................................109
6.1.1 Correlations ....................................................................................................109
6.1.2 Losses, gains and dry reaches ......................................................................110
6.1.3 Minimum flows and reliability of supply ..........................................................111
6.2 Water usage................................................................................................................111
6.3 Surface water – Groundwater inter-relationships .......................................................111
6.3.1 Hydrochemistry ..............................................................................................111
iv Environment Canterbury Technical Report

6.3.2 Piezometric levels ..........................................................................................113

6.3.3 Hydrological catchment area .........................................................................113
6.4 Catchment water budget.............................................................................................113
7 References................................................................................................... 115
8 Acknowledgements .................................................................................... 116
Appendix 1 Rainfall results................................................................................ 117
Appendix 2 Flow duration curves ..................................................................... 118
Appendix 3 Timaru District Council discharges .............................................. 123
Appendix 4 River hydrographs ......................................................................... 124
Appendix 5 Flow correlations (yellow highlight indicates most significant

of strong correlations, where applicable) .................................... 130
Appendix 6 River Losses and Gains ................................................................. 150
Appendix 7 Minimum flows ............................................................................... 156
Appendix 8 Water chemistry ............................................................................. 161
Appendix 9 Maps of water chemistry................................................................ 167
Appendix 10 Temporal variations of selected ion determinands in

groundwater.................................................................................... 171
Appendix 11 Land Surface Recharge Model – coded in Fortan ....................... 173
Appendix 12 Land surface recharge model outputs ......................................... 180
Appendix 13 Catchment water budget results ................................................... 183
Environment Canterbury Technical Report v

List of Figures
Figure 2-1: Location map of Orari hydrological catchment. ................................................................4
Figure 2-2: Geology map of Orari region (GIS shape files supplied by GNS). ...................................7
Figure 2-3: Map of Rangitata fan surfaces and remnant Orari river channels. .................................8
Figure 2-4: Example of shallow geological features in the Orari-Rangitata coastal plain. ..................9
Figure 2-5: Map of profile available water (PAW) for soils within the Orari region. ...........................11
Figure 2-6: Land-use on the Orari coastal plain ................................................................................12
Figure 2-7: Surface waters and springs of the Orari hydrological catchment ....................................13
Figure 2-8: The Orari River course in a) 1849 and b) 1856...............................................................15
Figure 2-9: Vertical profile of piezometric water levels, as measured (concurrently) at clusters of
wells across the Orari hydrological catchment ................................................................17
Figure 2-10: Yield values reported for shallow wells between the Rangitata and Waihi Rivers..........21
Figure 2-11: Specific capacities reported for shallow wells between the Rangitata and Waihi
Rivers. ...........................................................................................................................22
Figure 2-12: Aquifer transmissivity values reported from aquifer tests performed between the
Rangitata and Waihi Rivers. ............................................................................................23
Figure 2-13: Consented daily water use in the Orari catchment: 1980 and 2009. ..............................25
Figure 3-1: Rain gauges used in the Orari investigation. .................................................................28
Figure 3-2: River flow gauging locations of the Orari investigation ..................................................30
Figure 3-3: Locations of wells utilised for groundwater level monitoring ...........................................33
Figure 3-4: Map of water sampling locations for hydrochemical analysis .........................................35
Figure 3-5: Consented surface water and groundwater abstractions in the investigation area with
indications whether consent was exercised or not over the 2006-2007 investigation
period, or failed to be measured......................................................................................38
Figure 4-1: Monthly observed regional rainfall separated into coastal, central, and upland areas. ..39
Figure 4-2: Plot of daily potential evapotranspiration (PET), together with list of monthly totals. .....40
Figure 4-3: Comparison of flow statistics for the Orari River measured at the Gorge during the
investigation period (2006 - 2007) versus entire data record (1964 - 2008) ...................41
Figure 4-4: Monthly Orari River flows, recorded at the Gorge: comparison of flow patterns
observed during 2006 - 2007 field investigation, versus monthly statistics based on
long-term records ............................................................................................................42
Figure 4-5: Monthly Waihi River flows, recorded at the DOC reserve: comparison of flow
patterns observed during 2006 - 2007 field investigation, versus monthly statistics
based on long-term records ............................................................................................42
Figure 4-6: Map of Timaru District Council’s stock-water race’s discharge points and gauging
sites .................................................................................................................................44
Figure 4-7: Hydrographs for the 9 recorder sites (naturalised for surface water only) September
2006 - August 2007. ........................................................................................................49
Figure 4-8: Hydrographs for the 9 recorder sites (naturalised for both surface water and
groundwater) September 2006- August 2007. ................................................................50
Figure 4-9: Map of dry stream reaches observed during the 2006 - 2007 field investigation. ..........51
Figure 4-10: Flow losses and gains down the Orari River mainstem ..................................................57
Figure 4-11: Flow losses and gains down Coopers Creek ..................................................................58
Figure 4-12: Flow losses and gains down the Waihi River mainstem .................................................59
Figure 4-13: Average river flow losses and gains in the Orari Catchment, measured from gauging
runs conducted between September 2006 and September 2007...................................60
Figure 4-14: Piezometric contours determined from monthly well recordings.....................................64
Figure 4-15: Streamlines for shallow groundwater system..................................................................65
vi Environment Canterbury Technical Report

Figure 4-16: Monthly change in shallow groundwater levels.. .............................................................67

Figure 4-17: Hydrographs for selected monitoring wells fitted with dataloggers (15 min
measurement frequency). ...............................................................................................68
Figure 4-18: Stiff plots of surface water chemistry, which show major ion composition of water in
meq/L units ......................................................................................................................70
Figure 4-19: Stiff plots of shallow (<20 m) groundwater chemistry, which show major ion
composition of water in meq/L units ................................................................................71
Figure 4-20: Stiff plots of deep (>20 m) groundwater chemistry, which show major ion
composition of water in meq/L units ................................................................................74
Figure 4-21: Ca/Mg ratio (mg Ca/L / mg Mg/L) in shallow groundwater and surface waters.. ............75
Figure 4-22: δ18O values for surface waters sampled multiple times during field study. .....................76
Figure 4-23: δ18O values for shallow groundwater in wells sampled multiple times during field
study. ...............................................................................................................................77
Figure 4-24: Historic δ18O data pertaining to Rangitata River and Orari River. ...................................78
Figure 4-25: δ18O values measured in surface water and groundwater. .............................................80
Figure 4-26: Hydrological zones of the Orari hydrological catchment, as defined for this study. ........83
Figure 4-27: Average daily water usage within individual hydrological zones for the 12 months of
the investigation period ...................................................................................................87
Figure 4-28: Upper Orari averaged daily water use as a percentage of consented daily volume .......88
Figure 4-29: Mid Orari averaged daily water use as a percentage of consented daily volume ...........88
Figure 4-30: Lower Orari averaged daily water use as a percentage of consented daily volume .......89
Figure 4-31: Ohapi averaged daily water use as a percentage of consented daily volume ................89
Figure 4-32: Waihi averaged daily water use as a percentage of consented daily volume ................89
Figure 4-33: Map of irrigated land within the investigation area (associated with used and
unmeasured irrigation water take consents) ...................................................................91
Figure 5-1: Systems model of the Orari hydrological catchment, based on discretisation of the
catchment into six sub-basins (upper/mid/lower Orari; Waihi; Station Stream; Ohapi). .94
Figure 5-2: Conceptual water balance model showing fluxes equated in each basin. ......................95
Figure 5-3: Modelled monthly irrigation water use versus actual, recorded water use for
individual basins of the catchment model. ....................................................................103
Figure 5-4: Results of annual catchment water balance, based on 2006 – 2007 dataset. .............106
Figure 5-5: Annual catchment water balance, based on 2006 – 2007 dataset. ..............................107
Figure 5-6: Annual catchment water balance, based on 2006 – 2007 dataset. ..............................108
Appendices
Figure A1-1: Isohyets of monthly rainfall (mm) for 2006-2007 investigation period...........................117
Figure A2-1: Flow duration curve for the Orari River, recorded at the Gorge ....................................118
Figure A2-2: Flow duration curve for the Orari River, recorded at SH1 .............................................118
Figure A2-3: Flow duration curve for the Orari River, recorded upstream of confluence with Ohapi
Creek .............................................................................................................................119
Figure A2-4: Flow duration curve for Coopers Creek, recorded at SH72 ..........................................119
Figure A2-5: Flow duration curve for Coopers Creek, recorded upstream of confluence with Orari
River ..............................................................................................................................120
Figure A2-6: Flow duration curve for Ohapi Creek, recorded at Milford-Clandeboye Road ..............120
Figure A2-7: Flow duration curve for the Waihi River, recorded at DOC reserve ..............................121
Figure A2-8: Flow duration curve for the Waihi River, recorded at SH72 ..........................................121
Figure A2-9: Flow duration curve for Dobies Stream, recorded at Woolscours Road, near
Winchester.....................................................................................................................122
Environment Canterbury Technical Report vii

Figure A4-1: Hydrograph for Orari River at Gorge (69505), September 2006- August 2007 ............124
Figure A4-2: Hydrograph for Orari River at SH1 (69510), September 2006- August 2007 ...............124
Figure A4-3: Detail of Figure A4.3, i.e. hydrograph for Orari River at SH1 ........................................125
Figure A4-4: Hydrograph for Orari River at Parke Road (69514), September 2006- August 2007 ...125
Figure A4-5: Detail of Figure A4.4, i.e. hydrograph for Orari River at Parke Road (69514),
September 2006- August 2007 .....................................................................................126
Figure A4-6: Hydrograph for Coopers Creek at SH72 (69515), September 2006- August 2007 ......126
Figure A4-7: Hydrograph for Coopers Creek at Upstream of Orari Confluence (69513), September
2006- August 2007 ........................................................................................................127
Figure A4-8: Hydrograph for Ohapi Creek at Milford Clandeboye Road (69509), September 2006-
August 2007 ..................................................................................................................127
Figure A4-9: Hydrograph for the Waihi River at DOC reserve (69649), September 2006- August
2007 ...............................................................................................................................128
Figure A4-10: Hydrograph for the Waihi River at SH72 (69683), September 2006- August 2007 ......128
Figure A4-11: Detailed view of Figure A4.10, i.e.hydrograph for the Waihi River at SH72 (69683),
September 2006- August 2007 .....................................................................................129
Figure A4-12: Hydrograph for Dobies Stream at Woolscours Road (69684), September 2006-
August 2007 ..................................................................................................................129
Figure A9-1: Distribution of average sulphate concentrations measured in shallow groundwater

and surface waters (August 2006 – November 2007)...................................................167
Figure A9-2: Distribution of average chloride concentrations measured in shallow groundwater
and surface waters (August 2006 – November 2007)...................................................168
Figure A9-3: Distribution of average dissolved oxygen levels measured in shallow groundwater
(August 2006 – November 2007). .................................................................................169
Figure A9-4: Distribution of average nitrate concentrations measured in shallow groundwater and
surface waters (August 2006 – November 2007)..........................................................170
Figure A10-1: Variation of Ca/Mg ratio in groundwater analysed during field study ............................171
Figure A10-2: Variation of sulphate concentrations in groundwater analysed during field study ........171
Figure A10-3: Variation of sodium concentrations in groundwater analysed during field study ..........172
Figure A10-4: Variation of nitrate concentrations in groundwater analysed during field study ............172
viii Environment Canterbury Technical Report

List of Tables
Table 2-1: Aquifer parameters determined from aquifer tests performed on shallow wells <20 m
on the Waihi-Rangitata plain. ..........................................................................................18
Table 2-2: Aquifer parameters determined from aquifer tests performed on wells >20 m on the
Orari-Rangitata plain. ......................................................................................................19
Table 2-3: Total average daily abstraction of water within the Orari catchment, based on
consented volumes: 1980, 2007, and 2009 ....................................................................26
Table 3-1: Daily rainfall recording locations......................................................................................27
Table 3-2: Surface water flow recording stations .............................................................................29
Table 3-3: Surface water concurrent gauging locations. ..................................................................31
Table 3-4: Mean groundwater ages in the Orari hydrological catchment, based on isotope
chemistry. ........................................................................................................................37
Table 4-1: Flow statistics for the Orari River, based on combined Silverton (69505) and Gorge
(69506) recorder datasets. ..............................................................................................41
Table 4-2: Surface water flow records subject to flow naturalisation. ..............................................46
Table 4-3: Surface water concurrent measuring locations subject to flow naturalisation ................47
Table 4-4: Flow correlations for the Orari mainstem ........................................................................53
Table 4-5: Flow correlations in Coopers Creek ................................................................................53
Table 4-6: Flow correlations in Ohapi Creek ....................................................................................54
Table 4-7: Flow correlations in Waihi River ......................................................................................54
Table 4-8: Flow correlations in Dobies Stream.................................................................................55
Table 4-9: Flow correlations in Worners Creek and Raukapuka Creek ...........................................55
Table 4-10: Flow correlations in Station Stream.................................................................................55
Table 4-11: Flow correlations in the Lowland Springs ........................................................................56
Table 4-12: Key to colour coding of Stiff plots shown in Figure 4-18 and Figure 4-19.......................69
Table 4-13: δ18O values measured in surface waters. Colour coding same as Figure 4-25 ..............81
Table 4-14: Surface areas of new hydrological zones defined in this study and presented in
Figure 4-26 ......................................................................................................................84
Table 4-15: Summary of consented surface water and groundwater abstractions ............................85
Table 5-1: Inputs and outputs for a complete water balance of the surface water and shallow
groundwater system of the Orari hydrological catchment ...............................................92
Table 5-2: Results of simulated LSR, summed for individual hydrological zones/sub-basins. ......100
Appendices
Table A7-1: Consents tied to minimum flows on Orari River ............................................................156
Table A7-2: Consents tied to minimum flows on Coopers Creek .....................................................156
Table A7-3: Consents tied to minimum flows on Ohapi Creek at Brown Road ................................157
Table A7-4: Consents tied to minimum flows on Dobies Stream......................................................158
Table A7-5: Consents tied to minimum flows on the lowland springs...............................................160
Table A8-1: Surface water chemistry ................................................................................................161

Table A8-2: Groundwater chemistry (shallow wells) .........................................................................162
Table A8-3: Groundwater chemistry (deep wells) .............................................................................166
Table A12-1: Summary of land surface recharge estimates, based on depth equivalents. ...............180
Table A12-2: Summary statistics for land /sub- basins of systems model, as used in recharge
calculations ....................................................................................................................182
Environment Canterbury Technical Report ix

Table A13-1: Station Stream basin .....................................................................................................183

Table A13-2: Waihi basin ....................................................................................................................184
Table A13-3: Ohapi basin ...................................................................................................................185
Table A13-4: Orari (upper basin) ........................................................................................................186
Table A13-5: Orari (middle) basin .......................................................................................................187
Table A13-6: Orari (lower) basin .........................................................................................................188
x Environment Canterbury Technical Report

1 Introduction
1.1 Background
It has generally been recognised that the hydrology of the Orari River catchment is complex. Along its
path from the Orari Gorge to the ocean, across the coastal plain, the Orari River both loses and gains
flow from/to the sub-terrain. Equally, the numerous spring-fed streams distributed about the catchment
are further evidence of the strong hydraulic links between surface water and groundwater. There are
various anecdotal reports from the Orari community about how groundwater levels correlate with river
levels after flood events, and opinions on which surface waters are hydraulically interconnected via
groundwater. Similarly, with the expansion of irrigated farming, there has been varying concern
expressed over the relationships between groundwater abstractions and stream flows in the Orari and
its tributaries, such as Coopers Creek.
There has, however, been little quantitative evidence to support or deny the conceptualisations made
of the integrated Orari hydrological system, on which some water management decisions have been
based. As a natural progression to improved scientific understanding, in 2006, Environment
Canterbury commissioned an investigation of the Orari hydrological catchment. The motive of the
investigation was to gain knowledge of surface water - groundwater interactions in the Orari
catchment. The technical details of the investigation strategy, methods and findings are described in
this report.
1.2 Previous investigations

Previous investigations that have focussed on the Orari hydrological catchment are reported in:
• de Joux, R.T., 1980. The Water Resources of the Orari River. South Canterbury Catchment
Board Publication No. 24.
• McEwan, G., 2001. The Hydrogeology of the Orari River Shallow Aquifer, MSc thesis,
University of Canterbury.
• Scarf, F., 2003. Low Flow of the Mainstem and Tributaries of the Orari and Temuka Rivers
and Ohapi Stream, Environment Canterbury Technical Report U03/38.
• Davey, G., 2004. Stream Depletion in the Ohapi Creek Catchment, Environment Canterbury
Report U04/55.
• van der Raaij, R., 2007. Groundwater Age-Dating in South Canterbury and Orari Areas. GNS
Science Consultancy Report 2007/294.
De Joux (1980) summarised the store of knowledge on the quality, quantity and usage of water within
the Orari River. At the time of the report, little was known of local groundwater behaviour other than
groundwater depths were shallowest adjacent to the banks of the Orari River.
McEwan’s (2001) thesis was the first groundwater investigation of the area. He compiled geological
and geomorphological evidence, together with piezometric survey and aquifer test data to form a
conceptual model of the shallow aquifer system. The thesis concluded that surface water within the
catchment is inherently linked to shallow groundwater, although no work was undertaken to identify
the nature of these connections. McEwan (2001) proposed the catchment might be divided into
discrete groundwater management zones and recommended a catchment water balance be the next
stage of investigation.
Scarf’s (2003) low flow report focussed solely on flow statistics for the Orari catchment’s surface
waters based on river gauging data. The main recommendation from the report was the establishment
of a flow recording site on Ohapi Creek. This recommendation was implemented in 2006.
In 2004, Davey used historic flow gauging records, water level and borelog data, and field
observations of stream-bed sediments to assess potential for shallow groundwater - surface water
connectivity for the spring-fed Ohapi Creek catchment. He concluded that shallow impermeable
Environment Canterbury Technical Report 1

sediments in the catchment are discontinuous and that Ohapi Creek is not a perched fluvial system.
Potential hydraulic connectivity between surface and groundwater was inferred to be greatest in the
north and south branches of the creek. Davey’s (2004) conclusions were constrained by a lack of field
measurement data. As a consequence, he noted that any aquifer tests, concurrent stream gauging
coupled with piezometric surveys, or stream-bed conductance surveys would be helpful in advancing
the knowledge of surface water - groundwater relationships in the Ohapi Creek catchment.
Review documents that reference the Orari hydrological catchment include:
• Environmental Consultancy Services, 1997. Rangitata-Temuka Groundwater Review, Issues

and Recommended Future Investigations, Canterbury Regional Council Unpublished
Technical Report U97/34.
• Aitchison-Earl, P., 1999. Rangitata-Opihi and Levels Plains Aquifer Test Review, Environment
Canterbury Technical Report U99/29.
• Brown, L.J., 2001. Groundwaters of the Canterbury Region, Environment Canterbury Report
R00/10 (revised by Weeber, J.H., 2002).
• Aitchison-Earl, P., 2001. Rangitata-Orari Deep Groundwater Review, Environment Canterbury
Unpublished Technical Report U02/71.
There have been no previous investigations made to study the inter-relationship between surface and
groundwater systems of the Orari hydrological catchment.
1.3 Aims of the Orari Hydrological Catchment Investigation

The aim of the Orari Hydrological Catchment Investigation was to gather scientific data pertaining to
surface and shallow groundwater in the Orari River catchment, for the purpose of improving
understanding about the interactions between surface water and groundwater. The information gained
about the inter-relationship between surface waters and shallow groundwater of the Orari region was
to be applied to re-evaluate the Orari hydrological catchment boundaries, based on consideration of
the lateral extent to which Orari River water migrates underground.
Specific objectives of the investigation were to:

• monitor surface water flows; groundwater levels in the shallow, unconfined aquifer system;
water usage; and meteorological conditions over the period of one year (2006-2007);
• identify any correlations between surface waters in the study area;
• characterise the hydrochemistry of the study area, from which groundwater flow paths might
be inferred;
• use the data collected from the above to delineate the extent of the surface-water catchment
on the coastal plain, and develop a conceptual model of the Orari hydrological catchment;
• establish a water budget for the catchment.
It was beyond the scope of this investigation to develop any predictive mathematical models of the
Orari hydrological system. Similarly, it was not the aim of this study to refine water allocation limits
within the catchment, nor to make any recommendations on an integrated catchment management
plan. The findings of this investigation may however contribute to those purposes in the future.
1.4 Report structure

There are four main components to this report. In Sections 1 and 2, the aims and scope of the
investigation are outlined, and a description is provided of the study area, based on review of existing
data collated mainly from the reports listed in Section 1.2, but also routine environmental monitoring
undertaken by Environment Canterbury. The investigation strategy and methods are described in
Section 3. The resulting field data, complete with data analyses and interpretation, are presented in
Section 4. In Section 5 we report an attempt at evaluating a water budget for the hydrological
catchment, based on the application of a systems-based model that we have conceived for the
catchment using knowledge accrued from the field study. In Section 6, the conclusions drawn from the
2 Environment Canterbury Technical Report

investigation are presented; existing gaps in the data are described; and recommendations for further
work required to fill these gaps are made.
2 Environmental setting
A detailed description of the Orari River catchment is provided in the report of de Joux (1980).
McEwan (2001) provides a comprehensive presentation of the shallow geology and hydrogeology of
the Orari system. The physical geography of the Orari catchment remains unaltered from the time of
those publications, for this reason, only brief descriptions are given here, for the purpose of providing
a general overview of the investigation area.
As explained by de Joux (1980), the Orari River can be divided into two sub-catchments, based on
topography: the mountainous upland catchment, and the coastal plains, respectively (e.g. Figure 2-1).
The Orari Gorge effectively constitutes the divide between the two sub-catchments. It is the
hydrological system on the coastal plain that was the prime focus of our investigation. As such, any
subsequent references we make to the “Orari hydrological catchment” in this report relate to the
hydrological system (surface water and shallow groundwater) on the coastal plain. Although we did
not directly investigate the upland catchment, we include it in our description of the environmental
setting because the physiology of the upland catchment indirectly influences the hydrological system
on the coastal plain.
2.1 Location
The Orari River is located at the southern end of the Canterbury Plains, close to Geraldine and
Temuka townships (Figure 2-1). Its catchment is bordered to the north by the Rangitata River and to
the south by the Opuha, Waihi and Te Moana Rivers.
The upland catchment comprises an area of 520 km2 within the Canterbury Foothills, west of
Geraldine. The Four Peaks, Ben McLeod and Tara Haoa Ranges make up the watershed in this
region. The Phantom, Hewson and Mowbray Rivers that drain these hills constitute the main
tributaries of the Orari River. The Orari River emerges from the foothills, onto the coastal plain, at the
Orari Gorge. From the Gorge, the river proceeds to flow south-eastwards 40 km (via the settlements of
Orari and Clandeboye, and under SH72 and SH1 road bridges), before discharging into the Pacific
Ocean.
De Joux (1980) describes the Orari catchment on the coastal plain as being an area of 230 km2 that,
in addition to the Orari River itself, incorporates also Coopers Creek (to the north) and Ohapi Creeks
(to the south). One of the objectives of this investigation was to delineate the extent of the Orari
hydrological catchment, which involves a reassessment of the hydrological boundaries, hence
possible adjustment to the area of 230 km2. The Orton plain constitutes part of the land on the coastal
plain that divides the Orari River/Coopers Creek from the Rangitata River - it constituted the northern
boundary of the field investigation.

Figure 2-1: Location map of Orari hydrological catchment. Upland and coastal sub-
catchment areas are those described by de Joux (1980). Black outline marks
frame of GIS maps presented throughout this report

2.2 Topography
The topography of the complete Orari River catchment is described in detail in de Joux (1980) and
only briefly described here. The average ridge heights of the main watershed boundaries in the upland
catchment are between 1370 and 1850 m above sea level (asl). De Joux describes the terrain of the
upland catchment as dominated by steep, rugged slopes, especially in the northern and western
areas. A small portion (~10%) of the upland catchment comprises swampland.
At the Gorge, the Orari River is approximately 260 m asl. De Joux (1980) estimated the average
channel slope of the river to be 0.015 m/m, from its source to the Silverton recorder (1 km downstream
of the Gorge). Aside from minor (1 - 2 m high) river terrace features, the coastal plain is
topographically featureless and slopes to the coast with an average gradient of approximately 0.008
m/m.
2.3 Geology
The geology of the Orari region has most recently been mapped and described as part of the Institute
of Geological and Nuclear Science’s (GNS) QMap series (Cox and Barrell, 2007) (Figure 2-2).
Descriptions of the local geology are provided in both de Joux (1980) and McEwan (2001). We restrict
our description of the local geology here to a brief overview of the geographical distribution of shallow
units that are relevant to the investigation.
The hills of the upland catchment mainly comprise interbedded sandstone and siltstone basement
rocks (greywacke) of the Mesozoic, which have been uplifted by substantial tectonic folding and
faulting. Younger, Tertiary sediments that include sandstones of the Eyre Group and Motunau Group
are preserved and exposed in a few localities of the upland catchment, mainly at the foothills with the
plain. These sediments can be observed at the Orari Gorge. Recent river gravels and swamp deposits
line the valley floors of some of the tributaries in the upland catchment.
The surficial geology of the coastal plain differs substantially from the uplands geology, and is
consistent with the rest of the Canterbury Plains. That is: the Orari-Orton plain comprises coalesced
alluvial fan deposits, the bulk of which are attributed to outwash from the Rangitata River and into which
the Orari River has incised and deposited its own sediments. Barrell et al. (1996) describe in specific
detail the evolution and composition of the Rangitata fan surfaces which, during the penultimate
glaciation, spread as far south as the Opihi River (Brown, 2001). McEwan (2001) compiled a map of
Rangitata fan surfaces mapped by Barrell (1996) and remnant river channels mapped by Lynn et al
(1996), it is included here as Figure 2-3. For the most part, the Quaternary deposits comprise poorly
sorted, silty gravel, sand and silt. Generally, Orari fan deposits are younger, less weathered, and
therefore coarser than Rangitata fan deposits. Examples of the fan material are shown in Figure 2-4.
Beneath the Quaternary alluvium lies yet more alluvium of Tertiary age, known as the Kowai
Formation, or, more commonly in South Canterbury; the Cannington Gravels. The Tertiary alluvium
comprises brown-weathered greywacke conglomerate with interbedded sandstone, mudstone and
minor lignite. Its composition is not much different from the Quaternary gravels and there are generally
no reliable markers with which to identify from borelogs where Quaternary deposits transgress into
Tertiary. The exact thickness of the Quaternary gravel sequence beneath the Orari plain has not been
determined, but there is evidence that it progressively thins towards the south, away from the
Rangitata River. South of Temuka, Quaternary gravel strata are generally absent, except for in active
river beds. The most reliable proof for the thickness of the alluvial fan material comes from 3 deep
bores drilled in the region:
1. In an oil exploration well (K37/1225) drilled at Ealing, on the north bank of the Rangitata River,
alluvial gravels were recorded to 637 m below ground level (bgl), before mudstone was
encountered;
2. At Geraldine Flat (south of the Orari catchment) alluvial gravels were recorded to a depth of
149 m in bore J38/0507, where they overlay sandstone. A layer of volcanic rock that is the
Geraldine basalt was logged between 85 and 105 m bgl in J38/0507. The basalt was extruded
some time during the Pliocene (Cox and Barrell, 2007);

3. Gravels, silts and clays were encountered throughout the profile logged for bore K38/0998,
which was drilled to 316 m bgl near Winchester. Shells were noted in this bore at 290 m bgl,
and mark the early marine sequence of the Cannington Gravels.
From the perspective of this hydrological investigation, the alluvial outwash deposits beneath the Orari
coastal plain are significantly deep and extend far below the depth of any conventional abstraction well
in the catchment.
In the vicinity of Geraldine there is a localised occurrence of basalt, mainly exposed at Geraldine
Downs. The mapped extent of the basalt is outside of the Orari hydrological catchment; it is contained
between the Waihi and Te Moana River catchments.
McEwan (2001) notes from the work of Lynn et al. (1997) that shallow old swamp deposits are present
along the coastal margin, from Clandeboye to the Temuka River. A band of clay (“pug”) exposed at
Brown’s beach on the coast is evidence of fine-grained material that conceivably limits drainage and
probably contributes to the swampy conditions in this area (Figure 2-4).

Figure 2-2: Geology map of Orari region (GIS shape files supplied by GNS). Geological codes
can be found in Cox and Barrell, 2007. Inset shows map area in relation to area
plot in Figure 2-1. Labels A-D denote locations of photos shown in Figure 2-4

8
Environment Canterbury Technical Report
Figure 2-3: Map of Rangitata fan surfaces and remnant Orari river channels. Old channels generally comprise younger, coarser gravel material.
Marked cross-sections do not relate to this report (from McEwan, 2001)
Figure 2-4: Example of shallow geological features in the Orari-Rangitata coastal plain; see
Figure 2-2 for locations. A) Alluvial, silty gravels exposed at the former Timaru
District Council gravel pit, Pit Road, Coopers Creek; B) Exposure of Rangitata
RG2 (Barrell et al., 1996) fan material at Rangitata Huts. Note the lenticular gravel
channel sandwiched between loess. This composition; coarse material of finite
extent interbedded with a finer grained matrix constitutes the basic make up of
most of the Canterbury Plains geology. C) Exposure of shallow clay layer at
Brown’s Beach; old swamp deposits have been mapped from Orari River mouth
to Temuka River mouth; D) Drill cuttings from 17 m depth in bore K38/2331. The
formation at this depth comprised silty gravels that are generally not tapped for
groundwater
2.4 Soils and land-use

The soils of the upland mountainous Orari catchment have not been mapped, but are typical
steepland soils; bare rock, scree and talus in the higher altitudes, grading to fans and terrace soils on
the valley floors (de Joux, 1980). The soils of the Orari coastal plain have most recently been mapped
and described by Landcare Research, as part of the New Zealand S-map database.
Most of the Orari region is covered by silt loam from the Brown and Pallic soil groups. Some general
patterns are exhibited in the areal distribution of the soils on the coastal plain that relate to properties
such as thickness, stone content and peat content of the soils:
• Soil coverage in the upper end of the Orari plain, from Orari Gorge to Coopers Creek is
composed mainly of moderate to well drained Mayfield silt loam and deeper Hororata silt loam
soils;
• Well, to moderately well drained, Rakaia stony sandy and shallow sandy loam, and Templeton
loam are the dominant soil types in the catchment between Coopers Creek to Orari township;

• An extensive coverage of well drained Lismore soil, typical of river fans and high terraces,
makes up the central Rangitata-Orari plain that is the northern Orari catchment boundary;
• Deeper soils that exhibit poor drainage characteristics are found towards the bottom end of
the catchment. Wakanui deep silt loam dominates about Ohapi. Between Temuka, Milford and
Clandeboye are distributed gley and humic organic soils that include: Temuka deep silt loam;
Waimairi loamy peat and peaty loam; loams of the Kaiapoi family, and; Taitapu silt loam or
varying thickness. These soils are recognised as vulnerable to water-logging
(http://smap.landcareresearch.co.nz/).
Of significance to this hydrological investigation is the water holding capacity of the soils. Figure 2-5 is
a map of the soil profile available water (PAW) for the region – that being the amount of water that can
be extracted between field holding capacity (-10 kPa) and -1500 kPa, to 0.3 m depth. Most soil within
the catchment falls within the PAW classes of low to medium (25 – 75 mm).
The pockets of soil (at Clandeboye and between Milford and Temuka) that exhibit poor drainage
characteristics can be seen in Figure 2-5. The soils at these locations are graded as very high PAW
(>100mm).
Pastoral and dairy farming are the major land use types on the Orari plain, closely followed by arable
farming (Hickley, 2003). Together, these three activities utilise close to 93% of the land within the
catchment (see Figure 2-6).

Figure 2-5: Map of profile available water (PAW) for soils within the Orari region (GIS
shapefiles supplied by Landcare Research). White areas mark regions for which
no data are available, such as in the upland catchment

Figure 2-6: Land-use on the Orari coastal plain (Hickley, 2003)
2.5 Surface water hydrology

Figure 2-7 shows the location of the surface water courses and mapped springs in the Orari
catchment. The hydrology of the Orari River and its tributaries is very complex. At its simplest, the
river loses water to groundwater along its upper reach, from the gorge to State Highway One (SH1) -
where it is often dry during the summer months. Some river flow is resumed between SH1 and the sea
due to an influx of groundwater. Flow at the mouth of the Orari River is significantly less than at the
gorge.
Before 1849, the Orari (then named the Umukaha) flowed directly south from the present day gorge to
join the Waihi River around Winchester. Sketch maps produced in 1849 and 1856 (Figure 2-8) show
the change in the river course as a consequence of a flood event in 1849 (de Joux, 1980). Much of
the water lost from the Orari River above SH1 is believed to be channelled as groundwater down the
old river bed, resurfacing as Dobies Stream, Worners Creek, and Raukapuka Creek that are
tributaries of the Waihi River (refer to Figure 2-7 for locations).

Figure 2-7: Surface waters and springs of the Orari hydrological catchment

The Ohapi, Aker and Bains Creeks are also spring-fed systems, south of SH1. Aker Creek and Bains
Creek feed into the Orari River downstream of Badham Road. The three tributaries of the Ohapi Creek
network (North, Middle and South branches) merge and enter the Orari close to its mouth. A
description of the Ohapi Creek catchment can be found in Davey (2004). Te Ao Creek flows in
between the often dry sections of the Orari River and Coopers Creek, and joins the Orari downstream
of SH1.
To the north of the Orari, Coopers Creek emerges from its two tributaries, the Kowhai and Scotsburn
streams, as they flow over the plains near Peel Forest. Shortly downstream, flows are joined by a
spring-fed creek at Spring Farm before SH72. During much of the summer months, the sole source of
Coopers Creek flow is from this spring-fed creek. Coopers Creek flows are normally lost by the time
the Creek reaches the SH79 bridge. The source of the spring water is unknown. Coopers Creek flows
re-emerge some 18 km downstream just upstream of the confluence with the Orari.
Finally, there are the coastal spring-fed streams, many of which have been channelled into drains.
Petries Drain; Hendersons Drain; Clandeboye Drain; Old Rhodes Drain; Settlement Road Drain;
Rhodes (Canal or Donehue Drain); Millars Drain; Drain X; Ross Drain; Youngman Drain; Drain 9;
Newland Drain; and Kapunatiki Stream are located on the northern side (true-left) of the Orari River.
Taumatakahu Stream; Orakipaoa Creek; Burkes Creek; and Dairy Creek are located to the south,
near Temuka.
From its headwaters in the Ben McLeod Range, the Orari River is approximately 87 km long. There
has been a recorder at the Gorge (Orari at Gorge 69505) since 1982, thus providing 28 years of
continuous record. There was a recorder at Silverton (69506) 700 m upstream of the current recorder
site, and which ran from October 1964 to June 1983. Together, the two recorders provide over 45
years of data. The Orari River has a mean flow of 9.2 cumecs at the Gorge and a minimum and
maximum of 1.2 and 800 cumecs, respectively. The 2000-2001 drought resulted in the lowest
recorded 7-day annual low flow (ALF) of 1.7 cumecs, which has a return period of 1 in 43 years
(Ettema, 2007).

The Orari River course in a) 1849 and b) 1856, reproduced from de Joux (1980), after Gillespie (1958)
Figure 2-8:
2.6 Groundwater hydrology

The general hydrogeology of the Orari catchment is not different from that encountered across the rest
of the Canterbury Plains, i.e. groundwater is found within, and resourced exclusively from Quaternary
alluvial gravel deposits. On the coastal plain these gravels constitute fan deposits from the Rangitata
River, into which younger alluvial gravels from the Orari River system have incised. Groundwater on
the Orari plain is principally recharged by water permeating through the banks and bed of the Orari
river, together with direct land surface recharge from precipitation – determining the distribution of
these recharge sources is one of the objectives of this investigation. Under natural flow conditions,
groundwater discharges to the surface waters, hence the numerous spring-fed streams in the Orari
catchment (Figure 2-7), as well as directly to the ocean.
Groundwater is encountered at a relatively shallow depth throughout the coastal plain, which is a
consequence of the close proximity of the foothills to the coastal boundary. The maximum recorded
depth to groundwater in Environment Canterbury’s wells database, from all the wells between the
Waihi and Rangitata rivers is 52 m bgl (well K37/1623 near Arundel). Within the Orari catchment
mapped in Figure 2-1 it is 35 m bgl (well K37/1951 between Bridgend and Belfield). Both of these
wells screen deeper than 112 m bgl, hence tap groundwater within the old Rangitata fan deposits.
Piezometric water levels measured at discrete spatial and depth locations throughout the Orari
catchment and recorded in Environment Canterbury’s wells database indicate that there is a distinct
downward vertical hydraulic gradient throughout most of the catchment, i.e. potential for shallow
groundwater to move deeper, which decreases with increasing proximity to the coast. This is a
common characteristic of groundwater systems comprising highland and coastal boundary conditions,
and is witnessed across all of the Canterbury Plains. At the coastal margin, the vertical hydraulic
gradient is reversed. Evidence for this is provided in the free-flowing artesian conditions for wells
penetrating >50 m bgl, east of Clandeboye and Milford. Recent drilling explorations on Parke Road,
Clandeboye reported free-flowing artesian groundwater pressures from 20 m down. The spatial
distribution of the vertical gradients is suggestive that the discharge point for the deep groundwater in
the Orari catchment is probably offshore. Figure 2-9 shows the vertical profile of four well clusters in
the Orari catchment, from which the variations in piezometric water levels (and vertical hydraulic
gradient) are apparent.
It is generally recognised that there are at least three definable aquifers on the Rangitata-Orari plain,
based on the distribution of well screens and descriptive terms used in borelogs (Davey, 2006). These
correlate to the approximate depth ranges: i) 0 – 15 m bgl, ii) 45 – 90 m bgl, and iii) 90 m, to an
undetermined depth, possibly 125 m. Definition of the latter aquifer is somewhat ambiguous, given it is
based on the data from only one well. The aquifers described by Davey (2006) are not clearly defined
individual geological units and do not constitute laterally extensive systems, rather reflect zones where
lenses of water-bearing gravel are apparently more abundant. The sequences of fine grained strata
(generally silty gravel; often described by drillers as “claybound gravel”) that separate the aquifers,
restrict the movement of groundwater between the aquifer systems, as evidenced from responses in
aquifer test data collected from the deeper Orari aquifers (Table 2-1). Note: it is the shallow, upper-
most aquifer that is the focus of our study, and throughout this report we will use the depth of 20 m as
the threshold for categorising wells as “shallow”.

Figure 2-9: Vertical profile of piezometric water levels, as measured (concurrently) at clusters
of wells across the Orari hydrological catchment

18
Table 2-1: Aquifer parameters determined from aquifer tests performed on shallow wells <20 m on the Waihi-Rangitata plain. Data shaded grey
denote wells outside of the Orari hydrological catchment - on the Rangitata-Orton plain. All data sourced from Environment
Canterbury wells database. Locations shown in Figure 2-12
test
depth transmissivity interpretation Brook's
well easting northing 2 storativity duration
(m) (m /d) method reliability
(hours)
K37/2593 10.3 2370068 5687943 1928 0.06 n/r Neuman n/r
K38/0373 8.5 2371860 5675077 2200 0.04 n/r n/r n/r
K38/0386 9.1 2370855 5670430 2585 0.03 73 Theis 1
K38/0273 7.5 2372491 5668644 3600 n/r 20 Cooper-Jacob 3
K38/0025 12.0 2372450 5678070 4546 n/r n/r n/r 3
K38/0634 8.5 2373506 5671326 4750 0.08 48 Hantush 3
K38/0858 12.0 2371899 5679514 5500 0.07 8 Theis 2
K38/1062 12.8 2377186 5672652 6300 n/a n/r Eden-Hazel 3
K38/1057 10.0 2376609 5672779 6335 0.17 72 Theis 3
K38/0659 10.0 2375532 5675248 7000 n/a n/r Eden-Hazel 3
K38/0011 14.4 2373252 5673812 7250 0.05 4 Theis 2
K38/0658 10.0 2375515 5675498 10500 n/a n/r Eden-Hazel 3
K38/0970 11.3** 2381045 5660709 120 0.00004 46 Theis 3

K38/1333G 8.7 2385490 5676950 1700 n/a 72 n/r 2
K38/1093 10.5 2387200 5670230 2000 1* 23 Theis 1
K37/0286 12.8 2379340 5682120 2400 0.11 8 n/r 2
G
gallery
* assumed rather than estimated from test data n/a not analysed
** well K38/0970 since deepened to 69 m n/r not reported
Table 2-2: Aquifer parameters determined from aquifer tests performed on wells >20 m on the Orari-Rangitata plain. Data shaded grey denote
wells outside of the Orari hydrological catchment - on the Rangitata-Orton plain. All data sourced from Environment Canterbury wells
database. Locations shown in Figure 2-12
test
depth transmissivity K'B' interpretation Brook's
well easting northing 2 storativity duration
(m) (m /d) (1/day) method reliability
(hours)
K38/0014F 64.4 2380700 5665100 460 0.00044 n/a 27 Hantush 2
K38/0678F 65.8 2380670 5664900 450 n/a n/a 30 Cooper-Jacob 3
K38/0679F 65.0 2380600 5665150 800 n/a n/a 3 Eden-Hazel 2
F
K38/1700 64.5 2381953 5665773 838 0.00006 0.00003 48 Boulton 2
F
K38/1701 66.9 2382216 5665488 860 0.00011 0.00011 48 Boulton 2
K38/1698 77.6 2379667 5668341 1085 0.0004 0.00021 75 Hunt & Scott 1
K38/0072 60.5 2380682 5660112 2200 0.00004 n/a 2 Theis 2
K38/0388 60.0 2380460 5659740 2950 0.00006 n/a 7 Theis 2
K38/0664 114.0 2375769 5663974 120 n/a n/a 15 Cooper-Jacob 2
K38/1356 84.0 2376409 5675528 350 0.00007 0.00003 n/r Hantush-Jacob 1
K38/1675 83.3 2380190 5675860 390 0.0004 0.00047 40 Hunt & Scott 1
K37/1310 89.6 2377940 5684262 265 0.00022 0.00006 73 n/r 3
K37/1315 57.4 2380980 5682290 515 n/a n/a 4 Eden-Hazel 2
K38/1385 71.0 2388113 5672533 1100 0.0046 0.00804 - Hantush-Jacob 1
K37/1312 78.0 2379710 5681440 882 0.00056 0.00044 65 Hantush-Jacob 2
K37/1305 81.2 2377730 5683820 573 0.00017 0.00035 50 Hantush-Jacob 2
K37/2706 102.5 2377255 5683351 577 0.0014 0.00001 71 n/r 3
K38/1300 108.0 2383120 5671120 1600 0.0002 n/a - Theis 2
K38/1512 186.1 2382124 5679669 441 0.00106 0.00030 27 Hantush-Jacob 2
F
Fonterra milk factory, Clandeboye
n/a not analysed
n/r not reported
19
The shallow Orari aquifer is significantly more permeable than the deeper systems, and transmissivity
values between 1000 – 10,000 m2/d have typically been estimated from shallow aquifer tests, of which
11 have been conducted across the Orari catchment. Transmissivity estimates for the deeper aquifer
systems (>60 m bgl) are generally an order of magnitude lower; 120 – 2950 m2/d, based on the results
of 11 aquifer tests (Table 2-2). There is no reliable indication of any spatial trends in the hydraulic
property values of the deep aquifers, yet indications are that the deep aquifer near the coast at Milford
does function as a truly confined system, in accordance with the geological model of that region.
Elsewhere in the catchment there is evidence from aquifer test data that the deep aquifer can function
as a leaky-aquifer, i.e. groundwater potentially moves vertically through strata acting as aquitards.
McEwan (2001) delineated the Orari shallow aquifer into five hydrogeological zones based on the
extent of mapped Orari River avulsion channels and Rangitata fan surfaces, coupled to the distribution
of well yield data and limited aquifer testing:
Zone 1. Recent gravels associated with the Orari River and Coopers Creek that exhibit high
transmissivity and storativity;
Zone 2. The upper Ohapi and Clandeboye area that is influenced by a combination of fluvial fan
deposits and swamp deposits, which result in unconfined to semi-confined conditions;
Zone 2b. The lower Ohapi and Clandeboye area that is more heavily influenced by swamp deposits
than zone 2, a consequence of which are semi-confined to confined aquifer conditions;
Zone 3. Orari and Waihi River gravels that are outside of zone 1;
Zone 4. Upper Coopers Creek where clay-rich flood overbank splays occur and aquifer conditions
are unconfined to semi-confined.
In keeping with the methods applied by McEwan (2001), Figure 2-10, Figure 2-11 and Figure 2-12 plot
the distribution of well yield, specific capacity and transmissivity values based on the most recent data
held in Environment Canterbury’s wells database. The figures are equally marked with the
hydrogeological zones described by McEwan (2001). Well yield and specific capacity are measures of
the performance of the well that incorporate inefficiencies in yield attributed to the abstraction well
design - specific capacity is effectively a normalised form of the well yield. For this reason these
variables are less reliable indicators of the hydraulic properties of the aquifer formation than aquifer
transmissivity. Transmissivity is a direct measure of how readily water can flow through the aquifer,
however, as a function of the thickness of the aquifer, it is susceptible to variation based on the depth
and screen height of the well from which it was measured and may contain analytical error.
From the spatial distribution of values in Figure 2-10 through Figure 2-12 (most notably the specific
capacity data), it is evident that in the central plain region (away from the Rangitata and Orari Rivers),
the shallow aquifer system generally produces little water. This concurs with the shallow
hydrogeological system described by McEwan (2001) and is indicative of low permeability geological
material, probably combined with limited recharge (owing to the distance from the river recharge
systems). This region, although broad, effectively constitutes the northern boundary of the Orari
hydrological catchment.
The most permeable and high yielding groundwater regions of the catchment appear to be
concentrated close along the banks of the main stem of the Orari River and its former channel (Dobies
Stream) where hydraulic connection with surface water is strongest. However, a wide range of specific
capacity and transmissivity values have been measured within each of the individual hydrogeological
zones described by McEwan (2001) and are evidence of deficiencies in the broad assumptions made
in the hydrogeological model of the shallow aquifer described by McEwan (2001).

Figure 2-10: Yield values reported for shallow wells between the Rangitata and Waihi Rivers.
Data sourced from Environment Canterbury’s wells database

Figure 2-11: Specific capacities reported for shallow wells between the Rangitata and Waihi
Rivers. Data sources from Environment Canterbury’s wells database

Figure 2-12: Aquifer transmissivity values reported from aquifer tests performed between the
Rangitata and Waihi Rivers. Data sourced from Environment Canterbury’s aquifer
test database. Further details can be found in Table 2-1 and Table 2-2

The hydrological catchment of the Orari River constitutes part of the Orari-Opihi Groundwater
Allocation Zone (GWAZ) that was initially defined by Aitchison-Earl et al. (2004), provided for under
Schedule WQN12 of the Proposed Natural Resources Regional Plan (PNRRP). Groundwater
allocation limits for the Orari-Opihi GWAZ are currently set at 71.1 million m3/year and this limit was
reached in May 2010.
The allocation limits assess groundwater abstractions over a year, and do not take into account short-
term supply problems caused by localised lack of recharge. Although it is commonly recognised that
the shallow aquifer associated with the Orari recharges quickly, it equally drains quickly as a result of
the numerous spring-fed streams; hence the aquifer has little storage. As a consequence, the shallow
aquifer is susceptible to variable groundwater levels.
2.7 Water use

Water usage within the catchment largely reflects land usage (Figure 2-6). 12% of the total consented
water from the catchment is for water supply, which includes Timaru District Council’s operation of two
stock-water races on both the true right and true left of the Orari River. These are consented to divert
water up to the equivalent of 63 645 m3/d from the Orari River, approximately 4 km downstream of the
Gorge. There are two consents for public water supply in the catchment: one surface water take from
Coopers Creek at Peel Forest, and one groundwater take in the Ohapi sub-catchment. Many
households in the Orari catchment have private domestic wells for which no water consent is required
hence they are not included in the water-use statistics. Likewise, small abstractions of groundwater for
stock-water supply do not require resource consent, and there are many such abstractions distributed
throughout the catchment, of which little is known. Such stock-water supplies are not accounted for in
the water-use statistics.
The principal water demand in the catchment is for irrigation: 66% of the consented water volume is
registered as for mixed farming, cropping, or beef farming. Dairy farming and dairy use accounts for
31% of the issued consents (by volume). The Fonterra dairy factory, Clandeboye is the single largest
groundwater-user in the catchment, sourcing all of its water needs via a collection of wells that screen
>60 m bgl. The annual allocated 5 755 568 m3 volume of groundwater consented to Fonterra is
equivalent to 11% of all groundwater abstracted in the catchment.
In his review of the Orari water resources, de Joux (1980) calculated the consented average daily
water take in the Orari catchment (together with the Coopers Creek and Ohapi Creek sub-catchments)
to be 166 500 m3/d. Presently, the consented water takes for the same region is 525 167 m3/d – an
increase of 215% on 1980 rates. The majority of this increase in water usage has been resourced
from groundwater (Figure 2-13) – groundwater abstractions have increased by effectively 843% on
1980 rates. Increases in surface water abstractions over the past 29 years have been mainly in the
Ohapi Creek sub-catchment (128% increase in consented daily rate) (Table 2-3). The current
distribution of water takes is apportioned one third from surface waters; two-thirds from groundwater.
The full allocated consented volume of groundwater that can be abstracted presently equates to
51 093 247 m3/year.
As with much of the Canterbury region, the true consumptive water usage in the Orari catchment
remains uncertain. This is primarily because it has not been a mandatory requirement for many
consent holders to meter their water abstractions. Secondary to this is the fact that there is little
knowledge of the many small-scale domestic and stock-water takes. One of the objectives of this
investigation was to attempt to measure consented water abstractions, for the purpose of constraining
water usage estimates in the catchment.

Surface Water
1980 2009
63600 66100 73846

40457
7 (other) 63775
Groundwater
1980 2009
28250 222292
120297
5600 1660
1300
key: 4500
Water supply
Irrigation
Dairy etc.
Other
Figure 2-13: Consented daily water use in the Orari catchment: 1980 and 2009. 1980 data are
from de Joux (1980). All units are m3. Note: groundwater usage is a collective of
shallow and deep aquifer takes; water usage at Fonterra’s dairy factory is
incorporated in the “dairy” category which also covers pasture for dairying;
Timaru District Council’s stockwater consents are incorporated in the “water
supply” category

26
Table 2-3: Total average daily abstraction of water within the Orari catchment, based on consented volumes: 1980, 2007, and 2009. Revised from
de Joux (1980). All units are as m3/d. Note: groundwater usage is a collective of shallow and deep aquifer takes; water usage at
Fonterra’s Dairy Factory is incorporated in the “dairy” category; TDC’s stock-water consents are incorporated in the “water supply”
category
Water Supply Irrigation Dairy etc. Other Total

1980 2007 2009 1980 2007 2009 1980 2007 2009 1980 2007 2009 1980 2007 2009
Orari R. 63600 63646 63646 22700 8014 11466 7 12146 12146 - - - 86307 83806 87257
Surface Water
Ohapi
- - - 38100 62307 62381 - 26647 24667 - - - 38100 88954 87048
Crk.
Coopers
- 130 130 5300 - - - 3643 3643 - - - 5300 3773 3773
Crk.
Total 63600 63775 63775 66100 70321 73846 7 42437 40457 - - - 129707 176533 178078
Orari R. 2900 - - 13200 49448 47990 1600 35072 51103 500 - - 18200 84520 99093
Groundwater
Ohapi
2700 4500 4500 8050 74096 74264 50 20236 20236 800 - - 11600 98832 99000
Crk.
Coopers
- - - 7000 87217 100038 10 42738 48958 - 588 - 7010 130543 148996
Crk.
Total 5600 4500 4500 28250 210761 222292 1660 98045 120297 1300 588 - 36810 313895 347089
Grand Total* 69200 68275 68275 94350 281082 296138 1667 140482 160754 1300 588 - 166517 490428 525167
*
Grand Total = sum of surface water and groundwater
3 Investigation methodology
The core of this investigation was an intensive field study of the Orari catchment on the coastal plain,
conducted over the period September 2006 – August 2007. The field investigation was designed
around the aims of the project, namely: to gather technical data from which information about the
interactions between surface water and shallow groundwater could be inferred, including detail on the
spatial extent of the Orari hydrological catchment.
To this end, the field study combined five principal components:
1) Weather monitoring;
2) River flow measurements to capture spatial and temporal patterns of surface flows;
3) Groundwater level monitoring to study variations in shallow groundwater storage;
4) Hydrochemistry applied as a forensic tool to delineate water flow paths;
5) Water usage of both surface water and the shallow groundwater resources of the catchment.
It was anticipated that stream-bed conductance surveys might be conducted as part of the
investigation; however, these were not undertaken due to a lack of available resources.
3.1 Weather
3.1.1 Rainfall
Precipitation constitutes the primary external source of all water in any hydrological catchment, so
requires measurement for a catchment water balance. Rainfall was gauged using 13 rain gauges
distributed across the region (see Table 3-1 and Figure 3-1). Gauges beyond the confines of the
hydrological catchment were included for the purpose of improving the accuracy of any spatial
interpolations. Gauges were either privately run, operated by NIWA, or by Environment Canterbury.
For descriptive purposes, long-term records were evaluated from the NIWA operated stations. Based
on general rainfall distributions, rainfall gauge locations were categorised into three geographic
regions: coastal, central and upland (see Figure 3-1). It is helpful to note that the coastal and upland
geographic descriptive references for rainfall data (see Figure 3-1) are not the same as those we
apply to describe the Orari River system (see Figure 2-1).
Table 3-1: Daily rainfall recording locations

station altitude geographic
site name easting northing start date
id (m asl) region
H31926N Orari Gorge 2365288 5691031 01/1899 259 upland
H31927 N Peel Forest 2370156 5698670 09/1973 281 upland
H41011 N Woodbury 2362752 5687942 01/1967 305 upland
410211 P Struan Farm 2369190 5687100 07/2006 ~190 upland
319210 P Watties Bush 2368340 5696740 07/2006 ~300 upland
419211 E Mt Frances 2362787 5698845 03/1988 640 upland
319211 E Blandswood 2368028 5699026 12/1992 365 upland
H41101 N Kakahu Bush 2358010 5671510 07/1909 122 central
H41131 N Orari Estate 2374586 5674419 10/1897 81 central
410210 E Arundel-Belfield 2373555 5683646 10/2006 137 central
H41211 N Waitawa 2363690 5656850 01/1941 49 coastal
H41153 N Coldstream No.3 2393380 5671563 01/1967 12 coastal
n/aP Fonterra 2380594 5664998 n/a ~16 coastal
N P
NIWA operated Privately operated
E
Environment Canterbury operated n/a not applicable

upland
central
coastal
Figure 3-1: Rain gauges used in the Orari investigation. Geographic classifications, as
adopted in this report, are also shown

3.1.2 Evapotranspiration
Evapotranspiration is the sum of water lost through evaporation and plant transpiration. It can be
directly measured using lysimeters, although there were no such apparatus located near the Orari
catchment. Thus, an automated weather station was installed at Arundel-Belfield (410210) specifically
for the project. Rainfall, temperature, solar radiation, wind-speed and wind-direction were recorded at
the station, from which potential evapotranspiration (PET) was estimated using the Penman-Monteith
equation (FAO, 1998).
3.2 River flow measurements

Surface water flows throughout the study area were measured using a combination of flow recorders
and concurrent gaugings, the locations of which are shown in Figure 3-2.
3.2.1 Flow recorders

A total of nine flow recorders were used in the investigation. All were rated based on a stage-
discharge relationship with readings taken at 15-minute intervals. Two recorders (one on each of the
Orari and Waihi Rivers) comprised permanent recorders with long-term historic records. The
remaining recorders were temporary installations, purposely set up for the field study. Details are
listed in Table 3-2.
Table 3-2: Surface water flow recording stations

surface site
site description easting northing data record
water number
69506 Silverton 2364900 5695700 1/10/64 - 13/6/83
69505 Gorge 2365356 5695179 8/9/82 - current
Orari R
69510 SH1 (Victoria Bridge) 2374500 5673900 15/8/06 - 19/8/08
upstream of Ohapi Crk
69514 2381600 5662000 30/8/06 - current
confluence
69649 DOC Reserve 2362202 5687795 12/4/91* - current
Waihi R
69683 SH72 bridge 2369410 5678700 04/7/06 - 17/7/08
Milford Clandeboye
Ohapi Crk 69509 2378100 5662500 31/8/06 - current
Road
69515 SH72 2372060 5686510 08/6/06 - 5/10/07
Coopers Crk upstream of Orari R
69513 2379180 5665520 16/8/06 - 5/10/07
confluence
Dobies Crk 69684 Woolscours Road 2372180 5667790 08/6/06 - 5/10/07
* There is a significant gap in the Waihi River DOC reserve record, from July 1999 to April 2006.
3.2.2 Concurrent flow gaugings

Concurrent stream gaugings were conducted at 51 sites (in addition to gaugings at the 9 recorder
sites). The gauging sites are listed in Table 3-3. It was the aim to gauge flows in every surface
waterway within the investigation area, for the purpose of identifying possible flow relationships
between stream systems. In most cases, the location of a specific gauging site was determined by site
accessibility. Between 8 and 12 gaugings were performed per site, over the period between
September 2006 and September 2007. All gaugings were conducted in accordance with International
Standard ISO 748:2007.

Figure 3-2: River flow gauging locations of the Orari investigation (the two permanent
recorders are labelled in blue)

Table 3-3: Surface water concurrent gauging locations. Gaugings were also conducted at
the flow recorder sites listed in Table 3-2. Dates of gaugings can be found in
Appendix 6
site
surface water site description easting northing
number
Scotsburn 1695132 Gorge above Bruce's place 2367630 5697070
1695133 Scotsburn Road 2369990 5695660
1695134 Scotsburn Road 2370370 5695420
Coopers Crk 1649 North Boundary Road 2370830 5691010
1346 Down-stream Spring Farm 2370900 5687300
1812 SH79 Bridge 2372690 5683790
TDC stock-water take (TLB Orari) 169511 Thew/Inglis Road 2366730 5693090
TDC stock-water take (TRB Orari) 169512 Orari Gorge Station 2366870 5691150
Trib TDC stock-water 1695159 end of Inglis Road 2366260 5693500
Station Strm 1695155 historic homestead 2365000 5690900
McLeod Strm 1695156 Yates Road Br 2365400 5689300
Stream 1 1695157 Blakiston Road 2366500 5687900
Stream 2 1695158 Blakiston Road 2366200 5687600
1746 Burdons Crossing 2368600 5689200
Orari R 2245 Rolleston Bridge 2379400 5663700
1745 SH72 2371200 5683400
Te Ao Crk 2230 Victoria Bridge SH1 2374800 5674200
1589 Woodbury Road 2369200 5680900
Waihi R 169619 Coach Road 2370500 5674300
169651 SH72 Winchester 2372050 5668050
Raukapuka Crk 69658 Coach Road 2371100 5674200
Worners Crk 69678 Coach Road 2371300 5674200
Dobies Strm 169686 Coach Road 2372660 5674150
Ohapi Crk North Branch 1924 Muff Road 2375800 5668300
140 Milford Clandeboye Road 2377980 5662690
Ohapi Crk Middle Branch 138 Guild Road 2376300 5664500
Ohapi Crk South Branch 1923 Scott Road 2373600 5664700
137 Guild Road 2376300 5664300
Ohapi Crk East Branch 1695128 stopbank outlet 2382290 5661620
Ohapi Crk 1695130 stopbank outlet 2381470 5661980
Bains Crk 2085 Badham Road 2377500 5667800
Aker Crk 1921 Stumps Corner 2377200 5667600
Hendersons Drain 2336 Parke Road 2381890 5662400
Clandeboye Drain 2108 A Hendersons Site_6 2382160 5662700
Old Rhodes Drain 2339 Parke Road 2382440 5663020
Settlement Road Drain 2335 Parke Road 2382100 5662600
Rhodes(Donehue/Canal) Drain 1941 Parke Road 2382800 5663300
Millars Drain 2341 Parke Road 2383800 5663800
Drain X 1695153 Parke Road 2383050 5663500
Ross Drain 2340 Parke Road 2383300 5663600
Youngman Drain 2342 Parke Road 2384200 5664000
Drain 9 1695154 Parke Road 2384800 5664300
Newland Drain (S/W Q) 2344 Maori Reserve Road 2385500 5665400
Kapunatiki Strm 1638002 Parke Road 2385740 5665520
Taumatakahu Strm west branch 169663 John Street footbridge 2374150 5661250
Taumatakahu Strm east branch 1970 John Street footbridge 2374200 5661410
Taumatakahu Strm 169656 Downstream woolscour 2374300 5660200
Orakipaoa Crk 1917 Milford Lagoon Road 2377280 5659080
Burkes Crk 66 Milford Clandeboye Road 2377050 5659550
Dairy Crk 169609 Waipopo huts 2376500 5658500
Petries Drain 169535 upstream of stopbank 2380260 5663400

3.3 Groundwater level monitoring

Groundwater levels were monitored across the catchment, using a combination of automated
downhole pressure transducers and manual measurements. Five shallow wells were installed at
various locations, for the specific purpose of facilitating study of groundwater level - surface water
level dependencies. In all other cases, existing wells (often redundant irrigation and stock-water wells)
were used for monitoring purposes (Figure 3-3). All but one of the wells used in the survey (K38/0664;
114 m deep) screened the shallow aquifer (<20 m bgl).
Groundwater levels were continuously recorded at 15 minute time intervals in 11 wells within the
catchment, using automated pressure loggers. Groundwater levels were measured manually, once
per month, in a further 52 wells screening shallower than 20 m bgl; providing 62 points from which
monthly groundwater level observations were made.
Where applicable, the records of closed-system, automated downhole loggers were compensated for
barometric pressure effects. The atmospheric pressure recorded at well K38/0013 (located on the
Orton plain - see Figure 3-3) was used as the barometric reference dataset in all cases.

Figure 3-3: Locations of wells utilised for groundwater level monitoring

3.4 Hydrochemistry
The chemical composition of groundwater is dependent on a number of factors, including:
1) composition of the aquifer material through which it flows;

2) composition and type of recharge source, i.e. river recharge versus rainfall recharge that has
percolated through soil;
3) mean residence time of the water;
4) contamination, e.g. land-use activities;
5) chemical reaction processes occurring within the aquifer, e.g. ion exchange and oxidation-
reduction (redox) reactions;
6) groundwater flow path and mixing processes, such as infiltration of rainfall and/or irrigation
water.
Groundwater chemistry can therefore provide important clues about the processes and dynamics of a
hydrogeological system.
Vincent (2005) used variations in groundwater chemistry (especially dissolved ion composition and
oxygen-18 content) to determine aquifer recharge sources in the Upper Selwyn catchment. Methods
similar to those applied by Vincent (2005) were applied in this investigation. The chemical signatures
of surface waters within and bounding the Orari catchment were characterised, together with the local
groundwater chemistry. The spatial and temporal patterns of water chemistry were then analysed for
the purpose of delineating the Orari hydrological catchment. The sampling regime is described below.
3.4.1 General hydrochemistry

On 16 September 2006, water samples were collected from 21 spot locations of surface waters
associated with the Orari and Waihi river catchments. A total of 33 shallow wells were sampled in the
area about the same time, for water chemistry analysis. All water samples were analysed for 12
chemical determinands:
1. Alkalinity 7. Magnesium (dissolved)

2. Ammonia-Nitrogen 8. Nitrate-Nitrogen
3. Calcium (dissolved) 9. Potassium (dissolved)
4. Chloride 10. Reactive Silica
5. Conductivity 11. Sulphate
6. Iron (dissolved) 12. Sodium (dissolved)
Groundwater samples were also subject to field measurement of pH, dissolved oxygen, and
temperature. In addition, some groundwater samples were subject to lab analysis of dissolved arsenic,
total dissolved solids and dissolved manganese.
To evaluate any temporal variability in groundwater chemistry, 4 wells within the study area were
sampled on a monthly basis. A further 10 wells within the region were sampled on a seasonal
(quarterly) basis, as part of Environment Canterbury’s groundwater quality monitoring program. The
complete water chemistry dataset reviewed in this investigation incorporated all water chemistry
results collected between October 2006 and November 2007.
Since the 2006-2007 field investigation, the water quality of the Orari River was monitored by
Environment Canterbury at 6 locations throughout 2008, from which further water (ion) chemistry data
was acquired. The results of this subsequent monitoring have been collated with the data collected in
2006. To aid with delineating the hydrological catchment boundary on the Orton plain, it is helpful to
know of the chemical characteristics of water in the neighbouring Rangitata River catchment.
Unfortunately, no water samples were collected from the Rangitata River during the field study,
although some historic hydrochemical data were available from a Rangitata River study conducted in
2005 (Dommisse, 2006). Although not concurrent with the Orari investigation, we have incorporated
the 2005 Rangitata River chemistry data into our study. Sampling locations are mapped in Figure 3-4.

Figure 3-4: Map of water sampling locations for hydrochemical analysis

3.4.2 Isotope chemistry

3.4.2.1 Oxygen-18
Oxygen is an integral component of the water molecule (H2O) and exists as two naturally occurring
stable isotopes: oxygen-16 (16O) and oxygen-18 (18O). The difference in mass between the two
isotopes leads to fractionation during water evaporation and condensation processes (Taylor et al.,
1989). Oxygen-18 in a water sample is measured relative to the Vienna Standard Mean Ocean Water
(VSMOW), and expressed as δ18O, in units of parts per thousand (‰):
⎧ Rsample ⎫
δ 18 O (‰ ) = ⎨ − 1⎬ ×1000
⎩ RVSMOW ⎭
where R is the oxygen isotope ratio 18O/16O (Clark and Fritz, 1997).
Oxygen isotope fractionation is highly governed by temperature and elevation (Clark and Fritz, 1997).
Effectively, rainwater becomes more depleted in 18O with progressive increase in altitude and
concomitant decrease in temperature. For the most part, rainfall in Canterbury originates at the coast
and moves inland where it is accompanied by decreasing δ18O values (Stewart et al., 2002), as a
consequence of both temperature-elevation effects, plus a “rain-out” (of the heavier 18O isotope)
effect. These properties enable the distinction between:
• groundwater recharged by rivers sourced from high elevations and groundwater recharged by
lowland rainfall;
• groundwater affected by rainfall recharge distributed at the coast and groundwater affected by
rainfall recharge distributed around the foothills.
It was for these useful forensic properties that oxygen-18 analysis was utilised in the investigation. All
21 of the surface water samples collected in September 2006 (Figure 3-4) were analysed for 18O.
Twenty seven of the groundwater samples collected about the same period (between October and
November 2006) were similarly analysed for 18O. The resulting δ18O values from these samples were
mapped over the region to provide a snapshot of water signatures.
Because δ18O signatures are governed by climatic conditions, values vary seasonally. To evaluate this
seasonal variance, δ18O was monitored at 5 well locations and in 5 surface waters, namely the Orari
River, Waihi River (2), Coopers Creek and Ohapi Creek, at an approximately monthly sampling
frequency. Historic, monthly δ18O records were available for the Orari and Rangitata Rivers, and these
data were incorporated into the data analysis.
To extend the investigation dataset, a collective analysis of all δ18O data obtained between November
2005 and November 2008 was made and the resulting map compared with the 2006 dataset. Implicit
to this broader assessment were seasonal variations in δ18O values. The expanded dataset
incorporated δ18O values from 57 shallow (<20 m deep) wells and 19 deep wells. Where multiple δ18O
values had been evaluated for a single sampling location, the median δ18O value was used.
3.4.2.2 Groundwater age

In 2007, the Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences determined the age of groundwater sampled
from five wells within the investigation area, using CFC, SF6 and tritium isotope dating techniques (van
der Raaij, 2007). Only one of the samples comprised shallow groundwater, the remaining samples
were from wells screening deeper than 43 m bgl. The results of the age determination exercise are
reproduced in Table 3-4. Inferences that can be made from the age data pertinent to our field
investigation are discussed in subsequent sections of this report. The limitations of the dating methods
applied to derive the ages listed in Table 3-4 can be found in the Van der Raaij (2007) report.

Table 3-4: Mean groundwater ages in the Orari hydrological catchment, based on isotope
chemistry. Ages inferred assuming an exponential piston flow model with 60%
exponential mixed flow (from van der Raaij, 2007)
mean age (years)

3
well depth (m) CFC-11 CFC-12 SF6 H
K37/1301 46 63† 57.5† 65 106-118
K38/1544 62.3 84 72 30* >115
K37/1951 118.5 94† 97† 76.5 109-119
K38/1402 68 C <10 <3 <1
K38/2155 8.2 C <10 <3 <1
C – contaminated above that possible for water in equilibrium with modern CFC or SF6 concentrations in air.
*
denotes CFC and SF6 concentrations may be affected by contamination due to air contact.
†
denotes CFC concentrations may be affected by degradation due to anoxic conditions.
3.5 Water usage

To study the effects of abstraction on surface flows and groundwater levels and to evaluate a
catchment water balance, an attempt was made to collect abstraction data from all irrigators and other
major water users within predefined areas of the catchment, over the 2006-2007 irrigation season.
Figure 3-5 shows the location of the abstractions within the investigation area.
Not every consented water abstraction was monitored during the course of the investigation. Consents
for which no water use data were recorded are marked on Figure 3-5 as “not measured”. Reasons for
failure to monitor every consent included: expansion of the conceived hydrological catchment area
beyond the bounds set in 2006, and; in a few cases, lack of co-operation of consent holders.
Water use was monitored using a combination of automated and manual metering techniques. Pumps
at 46 abstraction points were already out-fitted with data logging technology. In these cases, Boraman
Consultants were contracted to download data from the loggers at the start and end of the irrigation
season. Elsewhere, abstractors were asked to maintain daily records of their water use.
Where water takes were not directly metered, a calibration was performed of the water pump.
Abstractors then kept a record of times the pump was operated, from which the volume of water
abstracted was estimated. Boraman Consultants undertook the pump calibrations, using a
Controlotron ultrasonic flow meter. Details of the metering procedures can be found in Environment
Canterbury File Note: IN6C/47-3, IN6C/365.

Figure 3-5: Consented surface water and groundwater abstractions in the investigation area
exercised over the 2006-2007 investigation period, and those that were not
measured

4 Investigation results
4.1 Weather
4.1.1 Rainfall
Weather patterns and rainfall distribution across the catchment were described by de Joux (1980) and
remain little changed from that period. Based on NIWA’s climate records available from the seven rain
gauges in the region, the 30-year averaged annual rainfall is 600 mm at the coast, increasing to
approximately 1100 mm at the foothills.
The weather pattern for the years 2006 and 2007, during which the field investigation was run was
somewhat abnormal - 2006 in particular. Balanced over the year 2006, rainfall in the region was
slightly above average: 105% (range 78% – 125%) of the 30 year norm. In 2007 it was below average,
at 81% (range 65% - 99%).
The rainfall pattern in 2006 was significantly unusual, as can be seen in the monthly records shown in
Figure 4-1. Prior to the field investigation, during the months May and June, the region received 136%
and 256%, respectively, of its normal rainfall. Beyond the most coastal confines, the region then
experienced a relatively dry winter period: receiving only 56% of its seasonal rainfall between July and
October. As little as 8% of the normal September rain was recorded at the most central gauging sites
(Orari Estate and Kakahu Bush (Figure 3-1)). In contrast, November and December 2006 proved
exceptionally wet months – on average 190% (range 102% – 241%) of the monthly normal rain was
recorded across the region. The following first 7 months of 2007 were generally dry compared to long-
term records.
Isohyets of monthly rainfall monitored during the investigation can be found in Appendix 1.
Figure 4-1: Monthly observed regional rainfall separated into coastal, central, and upland
areas (as defined in Section 3.1.1); 2006 (black bars); 2007 (white bars). Blue bars
indicate monthly norm, based on 30 year NIWA record (1971-2000)
4.1.2 Evapotranspiration
The potential evapotranspiration (PET) data values provided from the Arundel-Belfield weather station
and based on application of the Penman-Monteith equation were erroneously high (circa. 1300
mm/year). This error has since been recognised to be a fault of the weather station software and not
the weather sensors per se (pers. comm. Jeff Smith, 2009). To correct the anomalous PET data, the
dataset was standardised against the PET dataset measured at NIWA’s closest weather station
(Winchmore), together with their virtual climate data. According to the NIWA data, annual PET at
Belfield for September 2006 – October 2007 was estimated to be approximately 91% of that at

Winchmore (which is located 42 km northeast of Arundel-Belfield). Based on this, a correction factor of

0.59 was applied to the daily PET data recorded from Arundel-Belfield weather station.
The resulting annual PET at Arundel-Belfield (Sept ‘06 – Aug ’07) was thus estimated to be 737 mm.
Daily PET measurements are displayed in Figure 4-2, together with monthly totals. PET in the summer
months was four times that of the winter.
2006 2007
month PET [mm] month PET [mm]
Jan 76
Feb 73
Mar 79
Apr 47
May 43
Jun 27
July 22 July 27
Aug 37 Aug 42
Sept 37 Sept 57
Oct 61
Nov 89
Dec 82
Figure 4-2: Plot of daily potential evapotranspiration (PET), together with list of monthly
totals. Data recorded from Arundel-Belfield weather station and corrected as
described in text
In terms of monthly summarised climate data, the PET measured at Arundel-Belfield exceeded
monthly rainfall budgets measured at all rain gauge sites in the month of September 2006. Similar
deficits were recorded for the majority of rain gauge sites, for the months: January; February and;
March 2007. The PET record in Figure 4-2 was used as an input dataset in the catchment water
budget, whereby potential evapotranspiration was converted to actual evapotranspiration, details of
which are covered in Section 5.2.2.
4.2 Surface water flows

4.2.1 Putting the investigation period into context
The existing flow recorder at Orari Gorge has been in operation for 28 years. An earlier recorder
(69506) located at Silverton (700m upstream of the Gorge recorder site) was operated for 18 years
prior. Combined, the recorders provide over 45 years of continuous data for the Orari River, from
which useful information about general flow statistics can be extracted.
In the context of long-term flow statistics, flows in the Orari River during the investigation period were
lower than normal, but not extreme. The statistics are summarised in Table 4-1 and Figure 4-3. Flow
duration curves are included in Appendix 2.
When examined at a monthly time interval, however, we see that the flow patterns during 2006-2007
were not normal. This was attributed to the unusual rainfall pattern experienced in that year (see
Section 4.1.1). Over both December 2006 and January 2007, above average flows were recorded in
the Orari River. In fact, December flows were the highest on record. Aside from November, flows over
all remaining months were below their long-term monthly average values.

Similar flow patterns were recorded on the Waihi River, although no monthly maxima records were set
(Figure 4-5).
Table 4-1: Flow statistics for the Orari River, based on combined Silverton (69505) and
Gorge (69506) recorder datasets. All units L/s
entire record investigation
statistic
(10/64 - 5/08) (9/06- 9/07)
minimum 1560 2074
MALF (7d) 2805 2505
median 6604 5421
mean 9492 7803
maximum 860 451 149 655
MALF (7d) = 7-day, mean annual low flow
1000000
Max
100000
Flow (L/s)
Mean
10000
Median
MALF
Min
1000
Whole record (10/64 - 5/08) Investigation (9/06- 9/07)
Orari at Silverton/Gorge (69505/6)
Figure 4-3: Comparison of flow statistics (in ascending order: minimum, MALF (7d), median,
mean, and maximum flow) for the Orari River measured at the Gorge during the
investigation period (2006 - 2007) versus entire data record (1964 - 2008)

60000
M ax
M ean
50000 M in
06/07'
40000
Flow (L/s)
30000
20000
10000
0
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Month
Figure 4-4: Monthly Orari River flows, recorded at the Gorge: comparison of flow patterns
observed during 2006 - 2007 field investigation, versus monthly statistics based
on long-term records
4500
M ax
4000 M ean
M in
3500
06/07'
3000
Flow (L/s)
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Month
Figure 4-5: Monthly Waihi River flows, recorded at the DOC reserve: comparison of flow
patterns observed during 2006 - 2007 field investigation, versus monthly
statistics based on long-term records
4.2.2 Naturalising surface water flows

Water abstractions affect river flows, either directly (surface water takes) or indirectly (groundwater
takes). River flows are also affected by water diversions and any discharges of water back to the river.
It is common to naturalise river flows by means of compensating for these phenomenon, such that a
hypothetical “natural” flow is obtained. A distinguishing feature of this study is that consented water
abstractions were measured. This removed the requirement to make assumptions about water usage,
thus reducing errors in estimating natural flows.
It is difficult to naturalise river flows when rivers run dry, and downstream of dry reaches, since it is
difficult to determine how much of the abstracted water would otherwise have appeared as surface

water, and how much would have been groundwater. Such conditions are common in the Orari
catchment.
4.2.2.1 Surface water abstractions

All of the (37) measured abstractions affected stream flows at spot gauging locations. Two of four
abstractions that were not measured affected river flow gaugings – the other two were located
downstream of gauging sites, and near to the coast. From the pumping records we were able to apply
corrections to stream flow data only for takes that were active at the time of the gauging (red sites in
Table 4-3). Altogether, 15 out of the 60 sites were affected by surface water abstractions during the
investigation period. The pumping timings of the 2 unmeasured abstractions were estimated based on
nearby surface water takes with the same land-use. The rate for all the abstractions was obtained by
dividing the abstracted water volume by the duration of pumping.
4.2.2.2 Surface water diversions

There were no diversion consents active that are likely to have affected gaugings.
4.2.2.3 Surface water discharges

In total, there were seven discharge consents in the investigation area:
• consent CRC970478.1 is related to diversion consent CRC970477.1;

• consent CRC020725 is for hydro-power, and related to diversion: CRC020440;
• three discharge consents (CRC962515.1, CRC050712, and CRC991976) are associated with
abstractions - none of which were used during the investigation;
• two discharge consents held by Timaru District Council (CRC011983 and CRC011992) permit
the discharge of stock-water via 19 discharge points at various locations. 13 of the discharge
points are to the river system, the remainder discharge to land or the ocean.
A field visit with Judy Blakemore from Timaru District Council on 24/10/06 confirmed the locations of
the stock-water discharge points and 16 were gauged on 3 occasions (16/11/06; 27/3/07; 21/6/07) -
see Appendix 3. Seven discharges (E, F, H, I, J, K, and P) were recognised as affecting gaugings
(see Figure 4-6). Discharge Q has potential to affect flows in Kapunatiki Creek, but both the creek and
stock-race were dry on all dates gaugings were undertaken. In order to naturalise for the discharges,
the value added to the river flow is subtracted. Since the discharges were not measured on all gauging
occasions, an average value of the discharge was subtracted from the flow record.

Figure 4-6: Map of Timaru District Council’s stock-water race’s discharge points and gauging
sites in this investigation

4.2.2.4 Groundwater abstractions

Groundwater abstractions that are hydraulically linked to surface watercourses have an effect on
stream flow. This effect is known as stream depletion. Stream depletion effects are particularly
applicable to a catchment like the Orari, where generally surface water - groundwater inter-
dependency is particularly significant. As a consequence, there is a high potential for individual
groundwater takes within the Orari catchment to be “stream-depletors”.
In reality, potential for stream depletion is dependent upon: 1) the distance of the abstraction point
from the surface water; 2) the transmissivity of the aquifer; 3) the conductance of the stream-bed, and;
4) the prevalence of other sources of aquifer recharge water. Hydraulic properties of the aquifer and
stream-bed are inherently heterogeneous and poorly characterised for the Orari; in fact there are no
available data on stream-bed conductance values within the Orari catchment. Furthermore, in most
cases (the Orari included), aquifer recharge mechanisms are not characterised to a level sufficient
enough to justify incorporation into stream depletion assessments.
It is inevitable that naturalisation of surface water flows for groundwater takes is fraught with
uncertainty. In our analysis, groundwater abstractions deemed to affect the stream flows were
identified from the surface water allocation report of Environment Canterbury’s RMA consents
database, from which stream depletion rate values were extracted. The stream depletion rates
reported in the RMA consents database have been calculated using the Jenkins (1977) method, which
simulates stream losses based on evaluating the flow contribution to a pumped well occurring from a
stream that is considered to be a continuous line source in a uniform and homogeneous aquifer. Both
the well and stream are assumed to fully penetrate the aquifer and no consideration is given to
phenomenon such as low permeability sediments lining the streambed nor to aquifer recharge
processes. The period of simulated abstraction in the RMA consents database stream depletion
records differs for individual water take consents. We did not question the assumptions made in the
RMA consents database and employed stream depletion rate values as documented. It is important to
note that stream depletion considered in our context is a direct depletory effect. We did not employ
any means for compensating for indirect stream depletion effects that occur as a consequence of
cumulative, or passive, effects attributed to extensive groundwater abstraction.
According to the RMA consents database, 46 of the 129 wells for which abstractions were measured,
and one well that was not monitored were classified as stream-depletors. Water usage of the
unmeasured abstraction was assumed to be the average of two nearby groundwater takes connected
with the same land-use. Each of the abstractions was assigned to the spot river gaugings that it
affected (29 out of 60). As with the surface water takes, the times of pumping were scrutinised to
check whether they coincided with gauging dates. If they did, it was assumed that stream flow would
be decreased by the stream depletion component of the take. Altogether, 24 sites required
naturalising for groundwater abstractions.
In an effort to account for some of the uncertainty associated with naturalising for groundwater
abstraction, we analysed datasets for the separate cases of: 1) surface water takes alone, and: 2) the
combined impact of surface water and groundwater abstractions. In summary: 6 of the 9 recorder
datasets (see Table 4-2) and 18 of the 51 spot-gauging datasets required naturalisation (see Table
4-3).

Table 4-2: Surface water flow records subject to flow naturalisation. Further details of
recorder sites are included in Table 3-2
number of consents additional consents
site affecting record not used
river site description
number
SW GW SW GW
69505 Gorge *
2 TDC
6 (1 not
69510 SH1 (Victoria Bridge) takes and 3 3
Orari R measured)
discharges
10 plus 2
upstream of Ohapi Crk TDC takes 8 (1 not
69514 7
confluence and 4 measured)
discharges
69649 DOC Reserve
Waihi R
69683 SH72 Bridge 1 1
Ohapi
69509 Milford Clandeboye Road 17 1 2
Crk
69515 SH72 **
Coopers
Crk upstream of Orari R 4 and 1
69513 4 5
confluence discharge
Dobies 2 and 2
69684 Woolscours Road 15 5 5
Crk discharges
Unshaded cell – natural record, unaffected by abstractions
Shaded cell – affected by abstractions; naturalised
* There are two surface water takes in the upper reaches of the Orari on the Hewson River (CRC064030 – this was only granted
in September 2006 after the investigation began, for average rate of take of 60 L/s for irrigation and CRC041402 for an average
rate of 50 L/s for irrigation). Neither of these takes were measured, however since the investigation is focussing on the
catchment below the gorge, the record at the gorge can be taken as the starting point.
** On Coopers Creek there is a consent for TDC to take 1.5 L/s for public water supply (SYC880034) however, this water flows
back into the natural river system upstream of the gauging Coopers Creek 2 at Scotsburn Road, so the flow is considered to be
unaffected.

Table 4-3: Surface water concurrent measuring locations subject to flow naturalisation.
Further details of recorder sites are included in Table 3-3
site
surface water site description
number
Scotsburn 1695132 Gorge above Bruce's place
1695133 Scotsburn Road
1695134 Scotsburn Road
Coopers Crk 1649 North Boundary Road
1346 Down-stream Spring Farm
1812 SH79 Bridge
TDC stock-water take (TLB Orari) 169511 Thew/Inglis Road
TDC stock-water take (TRB Orari) 169512 Orari Gorge Station
Trib TDC stock-water 1695159 end of Inglis Road
Station Strm 1695155 historic homestead
McLeod Strm 1695156 Yates Road Br
Stream 1 1695157 Blakiston Road
Stream 2 1695158 Blakiston Road
1746 Burdons Crossing
Orari R 1745 SH72
2245 Rolleston Bridge
Te Ao Crk 2230 Victoria Bridge SH1
1589 Woodbury Road
Waihi R 169619 Coach Road
169651 SH72 Winchester
Raukapuka Crk 69658 Coach Road
Worners Crk 69678 Coach Road
Dobies Strm 169686 Coach Road
Ohapi Crk north branch 1924 Muff Road
140 Milford Clandeboye Road
Ohapi Crk middle branch 138 Guild Road
Ohapi Crk south branch 1923 Scott Road
137 Guild Road
Ohapi Crk east branch 1695128 stopbank outlet
Ohapi Crk 1695130 stopbank outlet
Bains Crk 2085 Badham Road
Aker Crk 1921 Stumps Corner
Hendersons Drain 2336 Parke Road
Clandeboye Drain 2108 A Hendersons Site_6
Old Rhodes Drain 2339 Parke Road
Settlement Road Drain 2335 Parke Road
Rhodes(Donehue/Canal) Drain 1941 Parke Road
Millars Drain 2341 Parke Road
Drain X 1695153 Parke Road
Ross Drain 2340 Parke Road
Youngman Drain 2342 Parke Road
Drain 9 1695154 Parke Road
Newland Drain (S/W Q) 2344 Maori Reserve Road
Kapunatiki Strm 1638002 Parke Road
Taumatakahu Strm west branch 169663 John Street footbridge
Taumatakahu Strm east branch 1970 John Street footbridge
Taumatakahu Strm 169656 Downstream woolscour
Orakipaoa Crk 1917 Milford Lagoon Road
Burkes Crk 66 Milford Clandeboye Road
Dairy Crk 169609 Waipopo huts
Petries Drain 169535 upstream of stopbank
Normal font – natural record, unaffected by abstractions. Italic – abstraction
Bold – affected by abstractions, naturalised: SW only, GW only, SW and GW
Red – abstractions did not occur at gauging time, therefore measured flow is natural.

4.2.3 Hydrographs
The hydrographs of each of the nine recorders are included in Appendix 4. The hydrographs have
been plotted showing both the recorded flow and the naturalised flow, and the timings of the spot
gaugings. To facilitate a visual comparison, the flow data (naturalised for surface water and
groundwater) from the 9 recorders have been plotted on the same (logarithmic) scale (Figure 4-7 and
Figure 4-8). Periods for which any dry river reaches were recorded are indicated.
It can be seen that some of the rainfall events affected all of the rivers in the catchment with resulting
peaks in flows. The Orari and Waihi Rivers, and the upper reach of Coopers Creek (recorded at SH72)
show the greatest responses to rainfall. The flow pattern recorded on the lower reach of Coopers
Creek, upstream of the Orari confluence, differs substantially from that recorded upstream, at SH72.
Significantly less variability is exhibited in streamflows of Coopers Creek in its lower reach, due to a
strong dependency on groundwater inflows, rather than stormflows. Similarly, relatively consistent
flows were recorded in the groundwater, spring-fed systems of Ohapi Creeks and Dobies Creek.
de Joux (1980) noted that the Orari River is usually dry from SH72 to SH1 over January and February
of most low rainfall years, yet under extreme low flow conditions it can dry out over a much longer
reach, extending from 3km above Burdon’s crossing, down to Ohapi Settlement Road. During the
course of our field investigation, the Orari River bed was dry between SH72 and SH1, starting March
2007 and extending through to mid-winter (July 2007). The exceptionally wet December (2006) was
most likely responsible for delaying the onset of dry-river conditions. The dry section on the Orari was
not observed to have extended as far as other observation sites, namely Burdon’s Crossing
(upstream) and Rolleston Bridge (downstream) (Figure 4-9). As can be seen in Figure 4-7 and Figure
4-8, despite the dry mid-section of Orari River, for the time of our investigation, flow patterns at the
Gorge and Parke Road recorder site were surprisingly similar. A consistent net loss in Orari River flow
was recorded between the ends of the river system on the coastal plain.
On the Waihi River, both of the recorder sites were located upstream of the mapped dry reach, which
was between Geraldine and Coach Road. Dobies Stream was also observed to dry up between its
source and Coach Road, if not further. Ohapi Creek was the only significant surface water system in
the Orari catchment for which permanent flows along its entire length were observed. The flow pattern
recorded on Ohapi Creek bears many similarities with that recorded on Dobies Stream (e.g. Figure
4-7).
Combining field observations and flow recorder data, a map of the extent of dry reaches within the
study area, has been produced (Figure 4-9) that covers the period September 2006 – September
2007. In Figure 4-9, solid lines indicate sections where permanent flow was observed; dotted lines
indicate sections observed to dry out, and; dashed lines indicate sections that could not be observed
along their entire length, between “dry” and “wet” observation points.

Figure 4-7:
Flow (L/s) Flow (L/s) Flow (L/s)
Flow (L/s)
1/ 1/ 1/
09 1/ 09 09
Stream)
/2 09 /2 /2
00 00
10
100
1000
10000
100000
10
100
1000
10000
100000
1000000
00 /2
10
100
1000
10000
100000
6 00 6 6
10
100
1000
10000
15 6 15 15
/0 15 /0 /0
9 /2 /0 9/
20
9/
20
0 06
9/
20 06 06
Dry
29 06 29 29
Dry
/0 /0
Dry
Dry
/0 29
9 /2 /0 9/
20
9/
20
0 06
9/
20 06 06
13 06 13 13
/1 13 /1 /1
0 /2 /1 0/ 0/
0 0/ 20 20
06 20 06 06
27 06 27 27
/1 27 /1 /1
0 /1
Site 69505 Orari at Go rge
0/ 0/
/2 20 20
0 06
0/
20 06 06
Naturalised 69510 Orari at SH1
10 06 10 10
Naturalised flow at Ohapi Creek

/1 /1
Site 69515 Coo pers Creek at SH 72
/1 10
1 /2 /1 1/
20
1/
20
0 1/
Site 69683 Waihi River at SH 72 B ridge

06 20 06 06
Site 69649 Waihi River at DOC Reserve

24 06 24 24
Naturalised 69684 Do bies at Wo olsco urs

/1 24 /1 /1
1 /2 /1 1/
20
1/
20
0 1/
06 20 06 06
06 8/ 8/
8/ 12 12
12 8/
/2 12 /2 /2
00 /2 00 00
6 6 6
NaturalisedSite 69513 Coo pers Creek at u/s Orari Confluence
00
22 22 6 22
/1
22
/1
/1
2 /2
/1
2/
2/
20
2/
20
0 06 20 06 06
06 5/ 5/
5/ 01 01
01 5/
Naturalised (only when flow at SH1>0) 69514 Orari at Parke Rd (u/s Ohapi)
/2 01 /2 /2
00 /2 00 00
7 00 7 7
19 19 7 19 19
/0 /0 /0
1 /2
/0
1/
1/ 1/
0 20 20
07 20 07 07
07
2/ 2/ 2/
02 2/ 02 02
/2 02 /2 /2
00 /2 00 00
7 00 7 7
16 16 7 16 16
/0 /0 /0
2 /2
/0
2/
2/ 2/
0 20 20
07 20 07 07
07
2/ 2/ 2/ 2/
03 03 03 03
/2 /2 /2 /2
00 00 00
16 7 00
7 16 7 16 7
/0 16 /0 /0
3 /0 3/ 3/
/2 3/ 20 20
0 07 20 07 07
30 07 30 30
/0 30 /0 /0
3 /0 3/ 3/
/2 3/ 20 20
0 07 20 07 07
13 07 13 13
/0 13 /0 /0
4 /0 4/ 4/
/2 4/ 20 20
0 07 20 07 07
27 07 27 27
/0 27 /0 /0
4 /0 4/ 4/
/2 4/ 20 20
0 07 20 07 07
11 07 11 11
/0 11 /0 /0
5 /0 5/ 5/
/2 5/ 20 20
0 07 20 07 07
25 07 25 25
25 /0 /0
/0 /0
5 /2 5/ 5/ 5/
0 20 20 20
07 07 07 07
8/ 8/ 8/ 8/
06 06 06 06
/2 /2 /2 /2
00 00 00 00
22 7 7 22 7 22 7
22
/0 /0 /0 /0
6 /2 6/ 6/ 6/
0 07
20 20
07
20
07
07
6/ 6/ 6/ 6/
07 07 07 07
/2 /2 /2 /2
00 00 00 00
20 7 7 20 7 20 7
20
/0 /0 /0 /0
7 /2 7/ 7/ 7/
0 07
20 20
07
20
07
07
3/ 3/ 3/ 3/
08 08 08 08
/2 /2 /2 /2
00 00 00 00
17 7 7 17 7 17 7
17
/0 /0 /0 /0
8 /2 8/ 8/ 8/
0 20 20 20
07 07 07 07
31 31 31 31
/0 /0 /0 /0
8 /2 8/ 8/ 8/
0 07
20
07
20
07
20
07
14 14 14 14
/0 /0 /0 /0
9 /2 9/ 9/ 9/
0 07
20
07
20
07
20
07
28 28 28 28
/0 /0 /0 /0
9 /2 9/ 9/ 9/
0 07
20
07
20
07
20
07
reaches were noted anywhere along stream are shaded yellow (N.B. for Ohapi/ Dobies hydrograph, dry reaches apply only to Dobies
Hydrographs for the 9 recorder sites (naturalised for surface water takes only) September 2006 - August 2007. Times for which dry
Figure 4-8:
Flow (L/s) Flow (L/s) Flow (L/s)
Flow (L/s)
1/ 1/ 1/
09 1/ 09 09
/2 09 /2 /2
00 00
10
100
1000
10000
100000
10
100
1000
10000
100000
1000000
00 /2
10
100
1000
10000
100000
6 00 6 6
10
100
1000
10000
15 6 15 15
/0 15 /0 /0
9/ /0 9/ 9/
20 9/ 20 20
06 20 0 6 06
29 0 6
29 29
Dry
Dry
/0 /0 /0
Dry
29
Dry
9/ /0 9/
20
9/
20
20 9/
06 20 0 6 06
13 0 6 13 13
/1 13 /1 /1
0/ /1 0/
20
0/
20
20 0/
06 20 0 6 06
27 0 6 27 27
/1 27 /1 /1
Site 69505 Orari at Go rge
0/ /1 0/ 0/
20 0/ 20 20
06 20 0 6 06
Naturalised 69510 Orari at SH1
10 0 6 10 10
Naturalised flo w at Ohapi Creek

/1 10 /1 /1
Site 69515 Co opers Creek at SH 72
1/ /1 1/
20
1/
20
20 1/
06 20 0 6 06
0
Site 69649 Waihi River at DOC Reserve

24 6 24 24
Naturalised 69684 Dobies at Wo olsco urs

/1 24 /1 /1
1/ /1 1/ 1/
20 1/ 20 20
06 20 0 6 06
0 6
Naturalised Site 69683 Waihi River at SH 72 B ridge

8/ 8/ 8/
12 8/ 12 12
/2 12 /2 /2
00 /2 00 00
6 00 6 6
6
NaturalisedSite 69513 Co o pers Creek at u/s Orari Co nfluence
22 22 22
/1 22 /1 /1
2/ /1 2/ 2/
20 2/ 20 20
06 20 0 6 06
0 6 5/ 5/
5/
Naturalised (only when flo w at SH1>0) 69514 Orari at P arke Rd (u/s Ohapi)
01 5/ 01 01
/2 01 /2 /2
00 /2 00 00
7 00 7 7
19 19 7 19 19
/0 /0 /0
1/ /0 1/ 1/
20 1/ 20 20
07 20 0 7 07
0 7
2/ 2/ 2/
02 2/ 02 02
/2 02 /2 /2
00 /2 00 00
7 00 7 7
16 16 7 16 16
/0 /0 /0
2/ /0 2/ 2/
20 2/ 20 20
07 20 0 7 07
0 7
Figure 4-7 for notes on significance of yellow shading

2/ 2/ 2/ 2/
03 03 03 03
/2 /2 /2 /2
00 00 00
16 7 00
7 16 7 16 7
/0 16 /0 /0
3/ /0 3/ 3/
20 3/ 20 20
07 20
0 0 7 07
30 30 7 30 30
/0 /0 /0 /0
3/ 3/ 3/ 3/
20 20 20
07 20
0 0 7 07
13 13 7 13 13
/0 /0 /0 /0
4/ 4/ 4/ 4/
20 20 20
07 20
0 0 7 07
27 27 7 27 27
/0 /0 /0 /0
4/ 4/ 4/ 4/
20 20 20 20
07 0 0 7 07
11 11 7 11 11
/0 /0 /0 /0
5/ 5/ 5/ 5/
20 20 20 20
07 0 0 7 07
25 25 7 25 25
/0 /0 /0 /0
5/ 5/ 5/ 5/
20 20 20 20
07 0 0 7 07
8/ 7 8/ 8/
06 8/ 06 06
/2 06 /2 /2
00 /2 00 00
7 00 7 7
22 22 7 22 22
/0 /0 /0 /0
6/ 6/ 6/ 6/
20 20 20 20
07 0 0 7 07
7
6/ 6/ 6/ 6/
07 07 07 07
/2 /2 /2 /2
00 00 00 00
20 7 7 20 7 20 7
20
/0 /0 /0 /0
7/ 7/ 7/ 7/
20 20 20 20
07 0 0 7 07
7 3/ 3/
3/ 3/ 08 08
08 08
/2 /2 /2 /2
00 00 00 00
17 7 7 17 7 17 7
17
/0 /0 /0 /0
8/ 8/ 8/ 8/
20 20 20 20
07 0 0 7 07
31 31 7 31 31
/0 /0 /0 /0
8/ 8/ 8/ 8/
20 20 20 20
07 0 7 0 7 07
14 14 14 14
/0 /0 /0 /0
9/ 9/ 9/ 9/
20 20 20 20
07 0 7 0 7 07
28 28 28 28
/0 /0 /0 /0
9/ 9/ 9/ 9/
20 20 20 20
07 0 7 0 7 07
Hydrographs for the 9 recorder sites (naturalised for both surface water and groundwater takes) September 2006- August 2007. See
Figure 4-9: Map of dry stream reaches observed during the 2006 - 2007 field investigation.
Duration of dry-spells are marked on Figure 4-8

4.2.4 Flow correlations

Linear mathematical correlations between naturalised spot gauging data and recorder data have been
tested, for the purpose of identifying possible relationships between datasets from different sites. Any
such reliable correlations would allow for spatial extrapolation of data and generation of synthetic flow
records. Correlations were tested on datasets naturalised for both surface water takes alone and the
combined impact of surface water and groundwater abstractions. The correlations are presented in
Appendix 5.
The 7-day mean annual low flow (MALF (7d)), median and mean flow statistics (and corresponding
standard error) have been calculated for all of the measured flow datasets (see Table 4-4 to Table
4-11). The only primary site (a recorder site with at least 30 years of record and so fully representative
of long-term conditions) in the catchment is the Orari Gorge recorder. The Waihi DOC reserve
recorder site is the only true secondary site (a recorder site with less than 30 years of record) in the
investigation area. The statistics for the Waihi DOC reserve record have been normalised against
those from Rocky Gully at Rockburn. Both of these sites have their statistics highlighted in blue. All of
the other secondary recorder sites used in the study do not have a sufficiently long record from which
to determine reliable flow statistics, so have been treated as tertiary sites with their flow statistics
calculated from their relationship with either the Orari Gorge data or the Waihi DOC reserve data; their
statistics are marked in bold type. Many of the spot gaugings (tertiary sites) do not have a strong
enough relationship with either the Orari Gorge or the Waihi DOC reserve data, so their statistics have
been generated based on their relationship with secondary recorders. The statistics derived for the
tertiary sites should therefore be treated with caution since they implicitly contain the added error
inherited from performing two sets of correlations; affected data are shown in italics. Where there is a
difference in the statistics that have been calculated using variable relationships, it is highlighted in
yellow. The flow datasets exhibiting the strongest linear correlations (with a coefficient of
determination (r2) value greater than 0.8) are highlighted and discussed below.
4.2.4.1 Orari River

The only flow data from the Orari River mainstem that do not require naturalising are the Orari Gorge
dataset. The 3 spot gauging sites (Burdon’s Crossing, SH72, and Rolleston Bridge) and 2 secondary
sites (SH1 and Parke Road) were correlated with the Gorge and, where applicable, also with the two
secondary sites. It was found that for the best correlations, three related to data naturalised only for
surface water takes, and two corresponded to data naturalised for both surface water and
groundwater takes. Note that SH72, SH1, and Rolleston Bridge have fewer gauging data to analyse
due to the uncertainty surrounding the naturalisation of dry reaches.
Flows in the upper-half of the study area of the Orari River correlated very well with those recorded at
the Gorge; the best correlations found were:
Burdon’s Crossing: y = 0.98x – 454 r2 = 0.98 (naturalised for both surface water and groundwater),
and;
SH72: y = 0.96x – 3636, r2 = 0.96 (naturalised for surface water only).
Downstream of SH1, flow data correlated reasonably well with the Gorge recorder dataset, but better
with the recorder at Parke Road (upstream of Ohapi confluence); the best correlations were:
SH1 Parke Road: y=1.04x-2207, r2 = 0.98 (naturalised for surface water and
groundwater);
Gorge: y = 0.81x – 3605, r2 = 0.72 (naturalised for surface water only);
Rolleston Bridge Parke Road: y = 1.17x – 1156, r2 = 0.99 (naturalised for surface water only);
Parke Road Gorge: y=0.58x+247, r2 = 0.77 (naturalised for surface water and
groundwater).

Table 4-4: Flow correlations for the Orari mainstem

Number of Regression Std Error of
River and Site Name Primary Site Naturalised R2 Flow statistics (L/s)
gaugings Equation Equation
%Std %Std %Std

MALF (7d) Error Median Error Mean Error
Gorge 2805 6216 9185
Burdon's Crossing 11 Gorge SW and GW y = 0.980x – 454 0.98 317 2294 15 5635 6 8543 4
SH72 7 Gorge SW y = 0.963x – 3636 0.96 375 0 53 2351 17 5211 9
SH1 7 Gorge SW y = 0.813x - 3606 0.72 975 0 100 1450 72 3865 32
Rolleston Bridge 6 Gorge SW and GW y = 0.892x - 2319 0.75 1109 184 806 3227 37 5876 24
6 Parke Road SW y = 1.170x - 1156 0.99 262 1032 30 3341 8 5351 6
Parke Road 11 Gorge SW and GW y = 0.579x+247 0.77 713 1870 22 3843 27 5561 22
4.2.4.2 Coopers Creek

Only flow data from the most downstream site (Coopers Creek upstream of Orari confluence) required
naturalising. None of the sites exhibited good correlations with the Gorge data. However, if the two
high flow gauging data are ignored, a good correlation is apparent between the recorder at SH72 and
the Orari Gorge (y = 0.02x + 7, r2 = 0.83). Once the 3 tributaries of Coopers Creek have joined, good
correlations are found between the 3 sites nearest to the recorder at SH72:
Coopers Creek at North Boundary Road: y = 0.89x - 62, r2 = 0.97;

Coopers Creek at downstream Spring Farm: y = 0.98x + 64, r2 = 0.97;
Coopers Creek at SH79: y = 0.86x - 73, r2 = 0.96.
Some caution must be taken however due to the number of dry gaugings. The best correlation for
Coopers Creek at upstream Orari confluence was with the Orari at Parke Road (naturalised for
surface water only): y = 0.06x + 138, r2 = 0.83 (the relationship with Orari at SH1 does have a slightly
higher r2 but it is based on fewer points because of the dry reach).
Table 4-5: Flow correlations in Coopers Creek
%Std %Std %Std

Coopers Creek
Scotsburn 12 Coopers at SH72 natural y = 0.169x + 41 0.60 25 50 52 59 43 68 38
1 at Scotsburn Road 12 Coopers at SH72 natural y = 0.079x + 7 0.79 7 12 67 16 47 20 38
2 at Scotsburn Road 12 natural No correlation
North Boundary Road 12 Coopers at SH72 natural y = 0.891x - 62 0.97 30 0 212 35 89 78 39
d/s Springs Farm 12 Coopers at SH72 natural y = 0.981x + 64 0.97 29 116 27 171 18 218 14
SH72 10 Gorge natural y = 0.016x + 7 0.83 18 53 37 109 18 158 14
SH79 12 Coopers at SH72 natural y = 0.856x - 73 0.96 33 0 127 21 168 62 55
u/s Orari confl. 12 Gorge SW and GW y = 0.037x + 154 0.63 63 258 27 383 17 492 15
12 Parke Road SW y = 0.062x + 138 0.83 42 254 18 375 12 481 10
4.2.4.3 Ohapi Creek

For Ohapi Creek, one site (Ohapi Creek North branch at Muff Road) did not require naturalising and
the others only required naturalising for surface water since the groundwater take was not used on the
gauging days. Only one site gave a significant correlation: Ohapi Creek at Stopbank outlet against the
Ohapi Creek recorder at Milford Clandeboye Road (y = 1.01x - 99, r2 = 0.92). This correlation is not
surprising considering there is only 5 km between the two sites, no inflows, and no abstractions
occurring on the gauging days. The majority of the flow at the recorder sites flows through this outlet
whilst only a small amount flows through the Ohapi East branch.
Even though the correlations do not have a significant fit, there is a definite trend of the upstream sites
(Scott Road and up) correlating better with the Orari at Gorge or Waihi at DOC reserve and the
downstream sites (Guild Road and down) correlating better with the recorder on the Ohapi.

Table 4-6: Flow correlations in Ohapi Creek

%Std %Std %Std

Ohapi Creek
N at Muff Road 11 Gorge natural y = 0.046x + 389 0.55 94 519 20 676 15 813 14
S at Scott Road 11 Gorge SW y = 0.014x + 330 0.71 21 371 6 420 5 463 5
S at Guild Road 11 Waihi at DOC SW y = 0.636x + 377 0.70 50 503 11 692 8 984 10
M at Guild Road 11 Ohapi SW y = 0.153x + 162 0.51 44 381 13 464 10 593 12
N at Milford Clandeboye Rd 11 Gorge SW y = 0.050x + 411 0.67 79 550 16 720 12 868 11
Milford Clandeboye Road 11 Waihi at DOC SW y = 1.838x + 1065 0.57 194 1429 16 1977 11 2819 13
E at Stopbank Outlet * 10 SW no correlation
Stopbank Outlet 11 Ohapi SW y = 1.011x - 99 0.92 89 1345 7 1899 5 2750 5
* only 1 gauging is not an estimate
4.2.4.4 Waihi River

The natural sites within the Waihi catchment are the Waihi at DOC reserve and Worners Creek at
Coach Road. The sites Waihi at Woodbury Road, SH72 recorder and Coach Road were only affected
by groundwater abstractions. The 7 other sites in the catchment generally correlated better when only
naturalised for surface water: only Waihi at Coach Road correlated better being naturalised for both
surface water and groundwater abstractions, however the difference is minimal.
The Waihi at DOC reserve has a poor correlation with the Orari at Gorge. Only 3 sites have
correlations with a good fit reflected by an r2 value greater than 0.8.
Woodbury Road: strong correlation with the recorder at SH72: y = 0.61x - 91, r2 = 0.98;
SH72 (recorder): the best correlation was with the recorder at the DOC reserve (y = 1.35x - 114) which
has a fit with an r2 of 0.69;
Coach Road: the best correlation was the recorder at SH72. However a number of gaugings are dry
at Coach Road and so the correlation should be treated with caution.
SH72 (Winchester): The gaugings on the Waihi at SH72 in Winchester correlated well with the
gaugings at the recorder upstream (SH72) despite the river running dry in between (y = 1.95x + 703,
r2 = 0.83, naturalised for surface water only). There was only a weak correlation with the Orari at
Gorge (r2 = 0.45) unlike that found in the past (Scarf, 2003: r2 = 0.81). The change in correlations is
likely to be attributed to dynamic shifts in water-use within the catchment. Notably, the increase in
groundwater abstracted from the region will have affected the hydrological system from the conditions
experienced in the 1960’s through to the 1980’s that were analysed by Scarf (2003). The current
correlations incorporate more uncertainty about effects of groundwater take stream-depletors than
historic correlations. Similar trends in correlation data, attributed to increasing groundwater abstraction
have been reported in the Selwyn River (McKerchar and Schmidt, 2007).
Table 4-7: Flow correlations in Waihi River
4.2.4.5 Dobies Stream

Dobies Stream at Woolscours had the best correlation with the flows measured at Orari Gorge,
however, it still only had an r2 value of 0.63. This is a weaker correlation than has been found in the
past (Scarf, 2003: r2 = 0.87). Again, the same arguments described for the Waihi correlation data

apply here. Dobies Stream at Coach Road correlated best with the Woolscours Road recorder
(r2 = 0.95).
Table 4-8: Flow correlations in Dobies Stream
4.2.4.6 Worners Creek and Raukapuka Creek

Worners Creek and Raukapuka Creek had poor correlations with the Orari at Gorge, Waihi at DOC
reserve, and Waihi at SH72. The correlation was strongest with the Waihi at SH72 in both cases but
still only had r2 values of 0.41 and 0.67 for Worners and Raukapuka Creek respectively. They did
however, correlate well with the flows in the Waihi at SH72 Winchester with the combined flows
correlating with an r2 value of 0.83 (similar to Scarf, 2003: r2 = 0.92) since they contribute a large
proportion of the flow in the Waihi at Winchester (Scarf, 2003). They also correlate reasonably well
with each other (r2 = 0.75).
Table 4-9: Flow correlations in Worners Creek and Raukapuka Creek
4.2.4.7 Station Stream

All the gauging sites on Station Stream, McLeod Stream, Streams 1 and 2 at Blakiston Road were
unaffected by abstractions. Station Stream and the total of the streams together correlated well with
the Waihi at DOC reserve with r2 values of 0.86 and 0.82 respectively. Stream 1 appears to have a
good correlation with the gorge, however, only 5 of the gaugings are flowing and all of them are
estimates. Therefore there is low confidence in the correlation.
Table 4-10: Flow correlations in Station Stream
* only 5 readings are flowing; all are estimates

** 6 of the readings are estimates
4.2.4.8 Lowland springs

Few of the lowland springs correlate well with Orari River flows measured at the Gorge. The spring-fed
systems to the south of the Orari (e.g. Taumatakahu Stream) correlated better with the Waihi River or
Ohapi Creek. The spring-fed streams located in the middle portion of the coastal plain (e.g. Te Ao
Stream and Bains Creek) correlate well with nearby recorders (Dobies Stream, Orari at SH1, Ohapi
Creek), see Table 4-11. Flows in Petries, Ross and Rhodes drains correlate well with each other.

Table 4-11: Flow correlations in the Lowland Springs
* all gaugings were dry

** 11 gaugings are estimates
*** only 5 gaugings are flowing
4.2.5 Flow profile - losses and gains

Flow profiles have been drawn from the gauging data for: the Orari River, Coopers Creek, Ohapi
Creek, and the Waihi River. In order to clearly illustrate the gains and losses from and to groundwater,
the inflows have been subtracted from the naturalised spot gaugings down the mainstem of each of
the main rivers. These were plotted as a function of distance downstream from the top gauging site
on the main channel (Figure 4-10 to Figure 4-12) (a map of gauging sites can be found in Figure 3-2).
For ease of interpretation of flow losses and gains, the measured flows at the top sites have been
scaled to zero. The results shown have been naturalised for both surface water and groundwater. The
results for naturalising surface water only are very similar to those naturalised for both surface water
and groundwater. The full gauging dataset and accompanying calculations are documented in
Appendix 6. A map summarising the average measured flow losses and gains in the four fluvial
systems is presented as Figure 4-13.
4.2.5.1 Orari River

Concurrent gaugings along the Orari River are tabulated in Appendix 6.1. Figure 4-10 shows the
profile of flow losses and gains down the Orari mainstem. Individual reaches are discussed below.

Gorge Burdons SH72 SH1 Rolleston Parke Rd

Recorder Crossing Recorder Bridge Recorder
7/09/2006
0
18/10/2006
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 4525/10/2006
-1000 31/01/2007
Loss and Gain in Flow (L/s)
21/02/2007
-2000 22/03/2007
17/04/2007
-3000 30/04/2007
30/05/2007
-4000 9/08/2007
15/08/2007
22/08/2007
-5000
11/09/2007
19/09/2007
-6000
-7000 Distance dow nstream (km )
Figure 4-10: Flow losses and gains down the Orari River mainstem
Gorge to Burdon’s Crossing

There are small gains in flow from inflowing tributaries between the Gorge and Burdon Road. There
are also two major stock-water races situated 4.1 km below the Gorge. These races abstract
approximately 500 L/s between them. After accounting for these abstractions, it is apparent that
channel losses from the Gorge to Burdon’s Crossing (7.44 km in length) appear to be relatively
constant at an average loss of 75 L/s/km throughout the investigation.
Burdon’s Crossing to SH72 Bridge

The greatest flow losses we observed in the Orari occurred between Burdon’s Crossing and SH72
(6.67 km in length): from 270 to 571 L/s/km; with an average of 437 L/s/km, which equates to
3.5 cumecs lost over the reach. The data indicate that greater losses occur during higher flows,
however, proportionally, more of the total flow is lost (up to 90%) during low flows.
SH72 Bridge to SH1 Bridge

The pattern of loss and gain between SH72 and SH1 bridges (10 km separation distance) varied
during the investigation, ranging between a loss of 150 L/s/km to a gain of 3 L/s/km. The gain
occurred at the start of a dry period when the river was starting to dry out at SH72, while flow was still
being maintained at SH1. This observation suggests that the dry section on the Orari probably
propagates from approximately SH72, leading downstream. This pattern follows the concept of a
recharge-limited system. de Joux (1980) noticed that the largest flow losses on the Orari occur
between the SH72 bridge and Bennetts Road (4 km further downstream). This coincides with the
approximate location of the buried historic channel of the Umukaha River that branches off south
towards the Waihi at Winchester, see Figure 2-8.
SH1 Bridge to Rolleston Bridge

Reasonably constant gains in Orari river flow (average 39 L/s/km) occur between SH1 and Rolleston
Bridge, at Clandeboye. The steady increase appears to be independent of river flow rates, most likely
due to the fact that the groundwater table levels in the lower reaches of the river remain at a much
more constant level than those in the upper reaches. de Joux (1980) found that channel losses
continue in this reach for another 2.4 km below the SH1 bridge to Ohapi Settlement Road after which
the flow increases, attributed to influent groundwater.
Rolleston Bridge to Parke Road

Between Rolleston Bridge and the recorder upstream of the Ohapi confluence, the flow profile varies:
sometimes the river gains and sometimes it loses flow (ranging from a loss of 265 L/s/km to a gain of
77 L/s/km, average loss of 12 L/s/km). The pattern does not appear to be simply related to the general
flows recorded in the river. Ohapi Creek discharges to the Orari some 1.4 km above the river mouth,
hence its impacts on the Orari River system are relatively localised.


The three stream flows: Coopers 1 (Kowhai Stream); Coopers 2; and Scotsburn were summed to give
the starting point of flows in Coopers Creek. There is a consistent net gain in flow between this starting
point and the end-point, at the confluence with the Orari River. Results of concurrent gaugings along
Coopers Creek are tabulated in Appendix 6.2 and Figure 4-11 shows the flow profile.
North d/s Spring u/s Orari

Boundary Rd Farm SH72 SH79 Confl.
600 7/09/2006
18/10/2006
500 25/10/2006
23/01/2007
400
31/01/2007
300 21/02/2007
22/03/2007
200 17/04/2007
30/04/2007
100
30/05/2007
0 9/08/2007
19/09/2007
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
-100
-200
-300
Distance dow nstream (km )
Figure 4-11: Flow losses and gains down Coopers Creek

Total of streams to North Boundary Road
In most cases, the creeks lost water from their gauging points on Scotsburn Road to the combined
gauging at Boundary Road. It is not known where these losses occur. However, the creek was found
to be dry at Boundary Road on 5 occasions, which limited the losses.
Two occasions in late January (23rd and 31st) show a different flow variation to the other 10 runs,
namely the Creek gained in flow above North Boundary Road. This was undoubtedly related to the
heavy December rainfall, which was particularly concentrated about the foothills and upper Orton plain
(see isohyets in Appendix 1). It would appear that the December rainfall possibly recharged the
shallow aquifer system to a level sufficient to enable a reversal of the hydraulic gradient that normally
prevails between the creek and the groundwater table.
North Boundary Road to downstream of Spring Farm

There is a very consistent gain in flow, averaging 35 L/s/km between North Boundary Road and the
gauging point downstream of Spring Farm. This increase in flow can be attributed to the springs that
emerge at Spring Farm.
Downstream of Spring Farm to SH72

There is an average loss of 40 L/s/km to SH72.
SH72 to SH79
There is an average loss of 27 L/s/km to SH79. The creek was dry at SH79 on 8 of the 12 occasions,
thus limiting the amount of water lost.
SH79 to upstream of the Orari confluence

Again, in all cases except for January 2007, the creek gained flow at an average rate of 15 L/s/km. In
January, with the higher flows, the creek lost water on one occasion and gained only a small amount
on the other. This is due to the difference in water levels between the creek and the groundwater
table: when the creek is lower than the water table, the creek will gain water but when the creek is
higher, it will lose water to groundwater.

4.2.5.3 Ohapi Creek

The majority of the flow in Ohapi Creek comes from the North and South branches which both gain
water down their length. The Ohapi has fairly stable flows that varied by only 15% (± 250 L/s).
Concurrent gauging data from along Ohapi Creek are tabulated in Appendix 6.3.
4.2.5.4 Waihi River

Like the Orari, the Waihi River has a tendency to lose water to the subsurface as it crosses the plain.
During times of low flow, generally most of what has been lost from the river is regained before
Winchester. In times of higher flows during the investigation, a definite positive gain in net flow is
measurable between the DOC reserve and SH72 Winchester gauging points, some of which could be
attributable to non-measured surface flow. The general profile of losing and gaining reaches on the
Waihi is invariant. Concurrent gauging data for the Waihi River are tabulated in Appendix 6.4 and
Figure 4-12 shows the flow profile.
DOC Reserve Woodbury Coach SH72
Rd SH72 Road Winchester
800
7/09/2006
18/10/2006
600
25/10/2006
23/01/2007
400 31/01/2007
21/02/2007
22/03/2007
200 17/04/2007
30/04/2007
0 30/05/2007
9/08/2007
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
19/09/2007
-200
-400
-600
Distance dow nstream (km )
Figure 4-12: Flow losses and gains down the Waihi River mainstem. We theorise that the
Geraldine basalt geological intrusion is responsible for the gains in river flows
measured between Woodbury Road and SH72 (Geraldine) – see Section 4.4.1 for
further explanation
DOC reserve to Woodbury Road

There is an average loss of 19 L/s/km.
Woodbury Road to SH72

There is an average gain of 99 L/s/km. There is, however, an ungauged inflow in this reach so it is
unknown as to whether the gain is due to surface water or groundwater inflows. Any surface water
inflows in this vicinity will themselves be linked to hydrogeological phenomena, as we explain in
Section 4.4.1.
SH72 to Coach Road

There is an average loss of 23 L/s/km (if the ungauged inflow is accounted for). The river was dry at
Coach Road on 3 occasions potentially limiting the degree of loss.
Coach Road to SH72 at Winchester

There is an average gain of 43 L/s/km (if the ungauged inflow is accounted for).


Whilst Dobies Stream only had 2 gauging points on it, it always showed a gain (average 204 L/s)
between Coach Road (where it was dry on 3 occasions) and Woolscours Road - see Appendix 6.5.
Figure 4-13: Average river flow losses and gains in the Orari Catchment, measured from
gauging runs conducted between September 2006 and September 2007
(measured as L/s difference between consecutive gauging sites). Select gauging
sites labelled (see Figure 3-2 for names of other gauging sites)

4.2.6 Minimum flows and reliability of supply

The minimum flow is the flow at which abstractions and diversions must cease except for domestic,
stock and fire fighting uses. A minimum flow is part of an environmental flow and allocation regime,
which may include tools such as caps on the total amount of water allocated per block, gaps between
allocation blocks, flow sharing and flushing flows. Reliability of supply is a measure of how often
abstractors are put on restriction and so is a fundamental issue for irrigators. It affects their ability to
plan ahead, make investment decisions, and most importantly, their economic viability. It is affected by
the minimum flow level as well as the size of the allocation block. Full details of minimum flow sites
and associated consents are included in Appendix 7. Flow duration curves for the river systems (for
both 2006 – 2007 field observation dataset and extended long-term data) are included in Appendix 2.
The flow duration curves were derived for both recorded and naturalised flows. The recorded flow
duration curve is important for determining reliability of supply as consents are put on restriction based
on recorded, not naturalised, data. The MALF(7d) and, where applicable, the minimum flow are also
shown on the figures. Generally, the minimum flow is significantly lower than the MALF(7d) which
questions the degree of protection afforded to the river ecosystem1. The two longer term recorders
(Orari Gorge, Figure A2-1 and Waihi DOC reserve, Figure A2-7) show that in 2006-07 the very low
flows were higher than average, whilst the low to mean flows were lower than average.
4.2.6.1 Orari River

Gorge
There are 4 consents tied to a minimum flow at the Gorge. All 4 consents have different minimum flow
conditions, see Table A7-1. The lowest minimum flow (2106 L/s) is shown on Figure A2-1 and is
exceeded on average more than 88% of the time; i.e. restrictions would occur 12% of the time. The
higher minimum flow result in restrictions less than 3% of the time.
SH1
There are no consents tied to a minimum flow at SH1. The flow duration curve (Figure A2-2) shows
that the river is dry 34% of the time, the flows then increase so that by 50% of the time the flow is up to
195 L/s. The naturalised flow duration curves have a sharp drop off due to the fact that the dry flow
periods were not naturalised as it is not known how to estimate how much additional water would be in
the system as surface water.
Parke Road
There are 5 consents (Table A7-1) tied to a minimum flow of 200 L/s on the Orari River at Parke Road
(just upstream of the confluence with Ohapi Creek). The minimum flow was not even close to being
reached during 2006-07 (Figure A2-3). The naturalised flow duration curves have a sharp drop off due
to the fact that the periods when there was dry flow at SH1 were not naturalised as it is not known how
to estimate how much additional water would be in the system as surface water.

SH72
There are 3 groundwater consents (Table A7-2) tied to a minimum flow on Coopers Creek at SH72.
Figure A2-4 shows that these consent holders were on restriction for 24 days over the investigation
period. The flow duration curve (Figure A2-4) has an unusual shape due to the flashy nature of the
response to the high rainfall in December and January.
Upstream of Orari Confluence

In contrast, the 7 consents tied to Coopers Creek further downstream (Table A7-2) were not even
close to being put on restriction during the investigation period; the flow in Coopers Creek, upstream
of the Orari confluence was over double the set minimum flow level (of 100 L/s), 98% of the time
(Figure A2-5). The flatness of the curve indicates that creek flows are consistent, which is a general
feature of lowland groundwater-fed streams. The naturalised curves are not significantly different to
the recorded curve but they do smooth the curve from the ‘bumps’ caused by abstractions.
1
The Proposed National Environmental Standard on Ecological Flows and Water Levels suggests a minimum
flow of 90% of MALF(7d) for rivers with mean flows less than 5 m3/s.

4.2.6.3 Ohapi Creek

The minimum flow site on Ohapi Creek is currently at Brown Road where there is no fixed recorder.
The Brown Road site is 400 m upstream of the Ohapi Creek at Stopbank outlet recorder site. Whilst
the reach between the two sites is a losing reach, as an initial estimate, the flows at Brown Road could
be likened to the flows at the Stopbank outlet and hence the correlation with the recorder could be
used to ascertain a corresponding minimum flow at the recorder site. There are 36 consents tied to
minimum flows at Brown Road (Table A7-3). There are two minimum flows set for 34 consents:
570 L/s in October to January, and 730 L/s in February to September. The remaining 2 consents are
tied to a minimum flow of 570 L/s, all year round. These 2 consents are also subject to partial
restriction (50%) when the flow reaches 1000 L/s. 28 of the other consents are also subject to partial
restriction (50%) when the flow reaches 1000 L/s in October to January and 1100 L/s in February to
September. The highest minimum flow, 1100 L/s is equivalent to 1188 L/s at the recorder and was not
quite reached during the investigation. The full restriction level (730 L/s, equivalent to 821 L/s) was far
from being reached (Figure A2-6). Like the lower reach of Coopers Creek, Ohapi Creek also has
consistent flows shown by the flatness of the flow duration curve. There is no significant difference
between the naturalised curves and the recorded flow duration curve.
4.2.6.4 Waihi River

There is no minimum flow site set for the Waihi River. The flow duration curves (Figure A2-7 and
Figure A2-8) show consistent variable flows are encountered at both the DOC reserve and SH72
recorder sites.

There are a number of minimum flow sites on Dobies Stream, none of which were measured during
the investigation. The minimum flow on Dobies is when it is dry, but the consents are also linked to
flows on the Temuka River (which Dobies Stream feeds via the Waihi River) (Table A7-4). During the
investigation, some of the consents were on restriction but not during the irrigation season. The flow
duration curve at the Woolscours Road site (Figure A2-9) shows that the flow there is consistently
above 100 L/s. The curve derived from flows naturalised for both surface water and groundwater
abstractions is significantly different in the mean flow range, with higher flows resulting.
4.2.6.6 Lowland springs

Three of the lowland springs have consents tied to them: Canal (Rhodes/Donehue) Drain; Petries
Drain; and Burkes Creek (Table A7-5). It is not possible to tell whether they were affected by
restrictions since the only data available are spot gaugings. Flows in Canal Drain do not correlate with
any recorder data and so it is not possible to simulate a flow record. However, some of the spot
gaugings were conducted during low flow times and at these times the flow exceeded the minimum
flow, so it is doubtful that the consents were in restriction. Both Petries Drain and Burkes Creek
loosely correlate with Ohapi Creek and the flow record implies that the consents were not on
restriction.

4.3 Groundwater levels

4.3.1 Groundwater contours
A contour map of shallow groundwater levels across the investigation area is included as Figure 4-14.
The map is comparable to that generated by McEwan (2001), albeit McEwan utilised 117 shallow
wells in his piezometric survey, compared to our 62. In this respect McEwan’s map is of better
resolution, although he only conducted two surveys (October 2000 and May 2001) rather than our
twelve, monthly surveys.
Between the Gorge and Geraldine, the piezometric gradient averages 0.008 m/m; it ranges between
0.006 and 0.005 m/m across the central region of the plain and flattens out to approximately
0.003 m/m between Clandeboye and the coast. When referenced against the local topography, it is
apparent that the groundwater table is not as steep as the topographic gradient at the top end of the
catchment immediately below the Gorge, however becomes increasingly steeper relative to the land
surface towards the coastal boundary.
Despite a slight loading of groundwater in the upper half of the catchment during December and
January, no significant seasonal variations were observed in the general piezometric gradients within
the catchment. Similarly, no obvious change in the general direction of groundwater flow was
apparent. The streamlines (which mark the groundwater flow path) are shown in Figure 4-15, from
which it is evident shallow groundwater deviates from the current course of the Orari River channel to
flow along the route of the historic river course. This is consistent with McEwan’s (2001) observations.
Dobies Stream and Ohapi Creeks clearly act as significant drainage pathways for shallow
groundwater that, based on the streamlines, can be traced back to the Orari River. However, between
Winchester, Temuka and Milford there is no strong evidence in the plot of groundwater vectors to
suggest groundwater feeds Ohapi Creek, south of the confluence of the South and Main Branches.
Our piezometric data suggest that in this region (downstream of the confluence of the South and
Middle branches), groundwater flows southwards, towards the tributaries of the Ohapi River system,
i.e. Taumatakahu Stream, Burkes Creek and Orakipaoa Creek. McEwan (2001) noted similar
complexities in the piezometric contours about Ohapi Creeks. Furthermore, based on stream gaugings
and geological mapping, Davey (2004) postulated potentially significant hydraulic connectivity
between shallow groundwater and surface water within the North and South branches of Ohapi Creek,
but less connectivity for the Middle branch, to the confluence with the Orari River.
Groundwater streamlines north-east of Coopers Creek are poorly constrained by observation data.
Nonetheless, there are no indications in the piezometric data to suggest Coopers Creek imposes any
significant role in the movement of groundwater, such as is apparent for Dobies Stream and Ohapi
Creek. For the most part, the groundwater table rests below the stream bed of the main channel of
Coopers Creek, and the creek is dry. At these times it is physically impossible for the creek to act as a
drainage pathway for shallow groundwater. Equally, the streamline data are suggestive that there are
probably no major buried river channels on the northern side of the Orari River that might otherwise
act to divert groundwater flow from a simple north-west to south-east topographically driven path.

Figure 4-14: Piezometric contours determined from monthly well recordings. Contour interval
5 m; measured relative to sea level datum

Figure 4-15: Streamlines for shallow groundwater system

4.3.2 Changes in groundwater levels

The monthly changes in groundwater levels over the investigation area are presented in Figure 4-16.
Unsurprisingly, the pattern of events is consistent with the rainfall (see Figure 4-1) and irrigation
abstraction patterns. That is: general rises in groundwater levels were experienced in November
through to January, April, and July to August, as a direct response to rainfall events. December and
January were months in which exceptionally high rainfall promoted high stages in all rivers the effects
of which can be seen to have raised groundwater levels, notably along the periphery of Coopers
Creek.
October 2006 was the month during which the greatest volume of groundwater was abstracted for
irrigation and correlates with declining groundwater levels across most of the region. February and
March similarly were months in which irrigation was exercised and significant drops (> 1m) in water
levels occurred across the catchment, which are probably linked to abstraction rather than natural
recession on the back of wet months.
It is clearly evident from Figure 4-16 that the greatest variation in groundwater levels occurs at the
upper end of the catchment, north and east of Geraldine, and immediately south of Spring Farm,
Coopers Creek. Extreme groundwater level fluctuations were recorded east of Coopers Creek (e.g.
well K37/0130). The fluctuations are attributed to pumping effects, but the anomalous magnitude of
the effects signifies the aquifer in this region probably has a low storativity, plus perhaps a low
transmissivity, and recharge from surface waters is not active. It is unsurprising that the amplitude of
effects is high in the upper catchment where the Orari River - which is the principal groundwater
recharge mechanism – runs dry, reducing the storage potential of the local hydrological system.
The smallest changes in groundwater levels were recorded in the lower catchment – about the Ohapi
Creeks and Rhodes Stream. This low sensitivity in this area reflects the proximity of the coastal
boundary, about which the water table hinges and its nature as an area of groundwater discharge.
Figure 4-17 shows the groundwater levels monitored from the 11 wells that were outfitted with
dataloggers. The plots clearly show how the amplitude of the groundwater level fluctuation is greatest
towards the upper end of the catchment. Groundwater levels varied least in wells K38/2154, K38/2155,
K38/1758, K38/1426 and K38/0060, for the reason that these locations are either at the bottom of the
catchment and/or in close proximity of spring-fed streams, namely, Dobies Stream and Ohapi Creeks.
The hydrographs of K38/2154 and K38/1426 are closely related and tend to suggest groundwater in
these localities is hydraulically connected to Dobies Stream. Similarly, K38/1758 and K38/0060
demonstrate some commonality in water fluctuations, although the smoothed shape of the data
suggest the shallow aquifer at these locations (about Ohapi Creek) is not particularly responsive to
recharge events stemming from Orari River flows.
K38/0064 is a (114 m) deep well that screens a confined aquifer system, below K38/0060, near the
confluence of the South and Main branches of Ohapi Creek. The low storage coefficient associated
with this confined system accounts for the “sawtooth” nature of the data. It appears from the
piezometric record that after May 2007, the deep aquifer recovered to a higher relative water pressure
than the overlying shallow aquifer. Thus, the water pressure response in well K38/0064 cannot be
attributed solely to elastic storage effects and therefore must imply recharge probably through some
leakage mechanism.
Peaks in the water level data from wells J37/0009 and K37/0335 – that are both located in the upper
catchment - are more rounded than those of the other well records e.g. compared to K37/2896,
K37/2923. We predict that this attenuation in the water record signal is symbolic of cases where there
is lower direct hydraulic connectivity between the groundwater and surface water system, and
probably where the aquifer is strongly influenced by land-surface recharge.
The recessive limb following the peak levels of January 2007 exhibits a convex pattern in the
piezometric data from J37/0009, K37/03335, K37/2923, K38/2155 (compared to concave recessive
limbs in data from K37/2896, K38/2154, K38/2157 and K38/1426). This pattern emulates the river
stage data for Coopers Creek and appears to be symbolic of delayed recharge, probably from water
infiltrating from the land-surface.

Figure 4-16: Monthly change in shallow groundwater levels. Region mapped matches contoured area in Figure 4-14. Red points denote monitoring
well locations from which contours have been drawn based on observed groundwater levels
67
68
Figure 4-17: Hydrographs for selected monitoring wells fitted with dataloggers (15 min measurement frequency). River stages for the main surface
waters included for comparison: Orari (stage at Gorge); Waihi (stage at SH72); Coopers Creek (stage at SH72). Top row includes wells
in upper region of the catchment (above SH72); middle row includes wells in central region (between SH72 and SH1); bottom row
includes wells in lower regions (below SH1). See Figure 3-3 for map of well locations
4.4 Hydrochemistry
4.4.1 General hydrochemistry
The chemistry results for surface and groundwater samples analysed as part of this investigation are
included as Appendix 8. Water in the Orari catchment is predominantly a calcium-bicarbonate (Ca-
HCO3) type water composing variable sodium and magnesium cation content (each up to
approximately 10%). The water chemistry is characteristic of that found throughout the Canterbury
Plains and reflects the inert nature of the parent greywacke geology of the region.
Figure 4-18 and Figure 4-19 show Stiff plots of the major ion chemistry for surface waters and shallow
groundwater across the region. The size of the symbol scales proportionately with the total dissolved
ion content (meq/L). Stiff symbols are colour coded based on the following criteria associated with
variations in the ratio of minor ion components of the Ca-HCO3 base water (see Table 4-12):
Table 4-12: Key to colour coding of Stiff plots shown in Figure 4-18 and Figure 4-19. Symbol
width scales proportionally with total dissolved ion content (meq/L); see Figure
4-18 for key to ions
colour ion composition
Na > Mg; SO4 > Cl
Na > Mg; Cl > SO4
Mg > Na; Cl > SO4
Mg > Na; SO4 > Cl
At the upper end of the catchment, the headwaters of the Orari River, Coopers Creek and Waihi River
contain low quantities of dissolved ions – seen from the “skinny” nature of the Stiff symbols. This is
because the water in these systems is un-evolved (rain) water that has had little chemical interaction
with the land, drained directly from the foothills and upland catchment. The Rangitata River chemistry
exhibits a similar signature, characteristic of fresh alpine water (Figure 4-18).
For the Orari River itself, the path of this juvenile water can be traced in the Stiff plots down the Orari
River channel, across into Dobies Stream and Ohapi Creek. The shallow groundwater linking these
fluvial systems exhibits the same signature. This is evidence that Orari River water feeds these spring-
fed systems and essentially continues to flow along its historic course (Figure 2-8), albeit
underground. This is consistent with flow paths interpreted from the streamlines (Figure 4-15). Orari
River water downstream of SH1 contains progressively more dissolved ions, indicating an increasing
input of water that has interacted with the land, i.e. groundwater. This is consistent with the river flow
gauging data.
The composition of Waihi River water is slightly different from the main surface waters analysed
elsewhere in the study area. In particular, Waihi River water contains a slightly higher
chloride/sulphate ratio than Orari River water (Figure 4-18). This subtle difference in hydrochemistry is
quite possibly related to variations in the local geology, such as the prevalence of Tertiary, Kowai
Gravel (Cannington Gravels) geological strata in the Waihi catchment above Geraldine and which are
absent in the Orari catchment (Figure 2-2). Burbery and Vincent (2009) have previously noticed that

groundwater in the Cannington Gravels aquifer of South Canterbury generally contains more chloride
than groundwater in the shallow Quaternary gravel aquifers.
Figure 4-18: Stiff plots of surface water chemistry, which show major ion composition of water
in meq/L units

Figure 4-19: Stiff plots of shallow (<20 m) groundwater chemistry, which show major ion
composition of water in meq/L units

There is a detectable increase in the dissolved ion composition of Waihi River water that occurs
somewhere north of SH79 (Figure 4-18). We conceive this is due to an influx of groundwater into the
Waihi River system immediately north of Geraldine that is probably driven by the imposition of the
Geraldine basalt, which acts as a hydraulic barrier to groundwater flow north-south down the
catchment. Flow losses and gains measured in the Waihi River are consistent with this theory (e.g.
Figure 4-13).
The high relative sulphate levels measured in shallow groundwater (at well K38/0404) and the
adjacent Coopers Creeks, near its confluence with the Orari River at Clandeboye, are impacts
attributed to land-use rather than natural phenomena. Groundwater sampled from well K38/0684,
located approximately 5 km up-gradient, exhibited equally high ion concentrations, as did water in
Rhodes Stream, albeit the chloride/sulphate ratios were slightly different. Elevated nitrate
concentrations (between 7.5 and 10.2 mg N-NO3/L) were measured in surface and groundwater at
these locations, further evidence of impacts from land-use. That these anthropogenic impacts were
detected in both groundwater and surface water indicates that shallow groundwater about Clandeboye
supports flow in Coopers Creeks and Rhodes Stream.
Groundwater sampled from K38/0386 near Geraldine Flat exhibited a strikingly similar composition to
groundwater from well K38/0404 at Clandeboye. This observation, which is on the border of the
investigation area, serves to illustrate shallow groundwater in the Geraldine Flat district is affected by
agricultural land-use. It does not contribute much to understanding the hydraulic nature of the Orari
River.
The anomalous groundwater chemistry measured in shallow groundwater from well K38/1073 located
in the Ohapi sub-catchment is possibly attributed to contamination. The low levels of dissolved oxygen
coupled with elevated alkalinity values are conditions indicative of denitrification and may explain why
nitrate levels are low in the sampled water, should the contamination be from land-use activities.
Alternatively (and most probably) the contamination may be natural and be associated with the local
pug deposits, which were reported at the time of drilling. It is feasible that the groundwater at
K38/1073 is aged, owing to restricted transport through the pug, and the long residence time within the
aquifer facilitates geochemical reaction. The same impacts were not detected in water sampled from
the main branch of Ohapi Creek, which suggests they are localised, and the groundwater sampled
from K38/1073 may be hydraulically disconnected from the creek. This in part supports Davey’s
(2004) suggestion that the Middle branch of Ohapi Creek is likely to have limited hydraulic connectivity
with shallow groundwater.
Figure 4-20 shows the Stiff plots for deep groundwater within the Orari catchment that was analysed
during the investigation. It is evident from Figure 4-20 that generally the chemistry of the deeper
groundwater system (>20 m bgl) is of slightly higher bicarbonate (HCO3) composition than its shallow
equivalent (Figure 4-19). This characteristic reflects long residency within the aquifer that is composed
of weathered greywacke sediments, and limited exposure with the chemically-reactive soil zone.
There is also evidence however that (at least in places) shallow groundwater can rapidly transfer down
to the underlying deeper aquifer system. Proof of this can be seem in the water chemistry of well
K38/1402 (68 m deep), located at Waybrooke. Here, deep groundwater exhibits a similar composition
to shallow groundwater signifying significant vertical leakage. This concurs with groundwater age data
(see Section 3.4.2.2). Based on one observation, it is not possible to determine whether this
phenomenon is localised or extensive, nor the degree to which it is affected by groundwater
abstractions.
The high bicarbonate composition of shallow groundwater close to Orari lagoon (e.g. K38/0105)
suggests some contribution from the deeper groundwater system at the coastal margin and is
consistent with the flowpaths assumed from the (vertical) potentiometric gradients (see Figure 2-9).
Shallow groundwater close to the coast, about the Milford and Clandeboye districts in many cases is
depleted in oxygen, and often exhibits elevated levels of dissolved iron or manganese. It is unlikely
that in all cases these phenomena can be attributed to effluent disposal (such as at the Fonterra dairy
factory), rather they probably relate to biogeochemical activity stimulated by organic swamp deposits
(e.g. peat), as mapped by Lynn et al. (1997), possibly contributed to by the effect of upwelling deep
(anoxic) groundwater.

Calcium/magnesium ratios in groundwater have proven useful tools for zonation of river water
recharge in the Rakaia River catchment in central Canterbury (pers. comm. Howard Williams,
Groundwater Scientist, Environment Canterbury, 2009). Orari River water is over four-times more
concentrated in calcium than magnesium (Ca/Mg ~ 4.8). Ca/Mg ratios similar to those exhibited in
Orari River upstream of SH79 water were detected in Coopers Creek at Spring Farm, Dobies Stream,
Te Ao Stream and the primary branches of Ohapi Creek. Ca/Mg ~ 4.0 detected in the lower reaches of
Coopers Creek and in Burkes Creek indicates water likely to have originated from the Orari River, but
diluted with other water. In both cases the diluent (source of dilution) is likely to be water originating
from land-surface recharge, although it is not possible to rule out that Burkes Creek may comprise
some water originating from the Waihi River system.
Figure 4-21 maps the Ca/Mg ratio across the investigation area, from which the distinct trace of Orari
River water along the course of its historic channel can be seen. This corroborates with the Stiff plots
(Figure 4-19) and is equally evident in maps of sulphate and chloride concentrations across the
investigation area (see Appendix 9).
Monthly variation in groundwater chemistry was studied at three locations, all of which were located
between the Orari River and Waihi River: K38/0671, at SH79 bridge crossing; K38/0819, close to
Raukapuka Creek, and; K38/0950, north of Winchester. Overall, the chemistry varied very little over
the year (see Appendix 10). Of the chemical variables analysed, in relative terms, nitrate levels varied
greatest and increased in all wells in response to the wet weather of December and January, which
acted to flush nutrients from the soil zone. The nitrate impulse response lagged by at least one month
in shallow groundwater screened by K38/0819 and effects were more sustained in this locality.
At the start of the investigation, groundwater at K38/0819 exhibited a groundwater composition similar
to Raukapuka Creek water, which itself mimicked that of Waihi River water, rather than Orari River
water. The shallow groundwater at this location is noticeably more ionic than Orari River water, albeit
for the most part a chloride/sulphate composition similar to Orari River water was detected. It is
therefore not possible, based on ion composition, to determine the likely source of groundwater at
K38/0819, near Raukapuka Creek. Nonetheless, a similar trend to nitrate was observed in chloride
data for all the wells, and suggests groundwater at K38/0819 is strongly influenced by land surface
recharge, i.e. unlikely to comprise fresh Orari River water, as might be inferred for the other two
locations.
A second noticeable influx of nutrients to groundwater was detected in September 2007. This impulse
was likely triggered by August rainfall, which although not significant (compared to the preceding
December and January events) was evidently enough to flush nutrients from the soil zone, which
would have been susceptible to leaching given it was the winter season and therefore a dormant
period for nutrient uptake by plant growth.

Figure 4-20: Stiff plots of deep (>20 m) groundwater chemistry, which show major ion
composition of water in meq/L units

Figure 4-21: Ca/Mg ratio (mg Ca/L / mg Mg/L) in shallow groundwater and surface waters.
Labels denote well identification numbers. Similar maps for chloride, sulphate,
nitrate and dissolved oxygen determinands are included in Appendix 9

4.4.2 Oxygen-18
4.4.2.1 Temporal patterns
The temporal patterns in δ18O values evaluated for surface waters and groundwater are included in
Figure 4-22 and Figure 4-23, respectively.
-8
-8.5
-9
-9.5
-10
δ18O [o/oo]
-10.5
-11
-11.5 Orari R. - Burdon Rd.

Coopers Crk - Springs Farm
Waihi R. - DOC reserve
-12
Waihi R. - SH79
Ohapi Crk - Main Branch
-12.5
Jan-07
May-07
Jun-07
Feb-07
Mar-07
Oct-06
Apr-07
Jul-07
Oct-07
Sep-06
Nov-06
Dec-06
Aug-07
Sep-07
Figure 4-22: δ18O values for surface waters sampled multiple times during the field study.
Corresponding site references are: Burdon Road (SQ26862); Springs Farm
(SQ26866); DOC reserve (SQ26868); SH79 (SQ26869); Ohapi Creek (SQ26875)
Of the four surface waters monitored, water within Coopers Creek at Spring Farm exhibited the
greatest variance. The spring water at Spring Farm is heavily depleted in 18O, which suggests it can
be related to Orari River water. This concurs with the conclusions drawn from the ion water chemistry.
However, from November 2006 through to February 2007, δ18O values in Coopers Creek water
steadily rose - a trend that was not evident in other waterways – suggestive of an increasing dilution of
Orari River-derived baseflow. This steady enrichment in 16O can be explained by the rainfall
distribution patterns during the summer, which showed rainfall to be concentrated on the lower
catchment, rather than in the foothills. It indicates that although the base component of spring flow in
Coopers Creek is supported by water from the Orari River, the Creek is also sensitive to land-surface
recharge.
Three curious spikes and troughs in the δ18O data record of the Orari River, Waihi River and Coopers
Creek can be related to meteorological events. In February 2007, δ18O values peaked. This can be
related to sampling soon after a rainfall event that occurred while temperatures were reasonably warm
(11-17 oC). The trough in the March 2007 data reflects measurement during a local rainfall event
concentrated in the foothills and coincident with a cold front (air temperatures dropping from 16 oC to
4 oC). The signal is most evident in the Orari River. In July 2007, δ18O values plummeted to -11.7o/oo in
Coopers Creek, although no similar drop was observed in the other surface waters. We attribute this
to a spring thaw event on Mount Peel, which explains why the signal was not witnessed in the Orari
River. δ18O values in Ohapi Creek displayed no seasonal variance, thus imply a consistent source of
water that appears to be strongly related to Orari River water.

-8
-8.5
-9
-9.5
δ18O [o/oo]
-10
-10.5
-11
K37/0671
-11.5 K37/1301
K38/0819
-12 K38/0950
K38/1073
-12.5
Jan-07
May-07
Jun-07
Feb-07
Mar-07
Oct-06
Apr-07
Jul-07
Oct-07
Sep-06
Nov-06
Dec-06
Aug-07
Sep-07
Figure 4-23: δ18O values for shallow groundwater in wells sampled multiple times during the
field study. K37/0671, located adjacent to the Station Stream - Orari River
confluence, near SH72 bridge; K37/1301 (46 m deep) located north-east of
Geraldine, between the Orari and Waihi rivers; K38/0819, located adjacent to
Raukapuka Creek; K38/0950, located between Dobies Creek and the south branch
of Ohapi Creek; K38/1073 well with an anomalous ion chemistry, located between
the middle and north branches of Ohapi Creek
Of the wells in which 18O was monitored over the course of the investigation, it is evident that
groundwater at K38/0950 and K37/0671 is related to Orari River water. Groundwater at K37/0671
appears to suffer some chemical effects associated with land surface recharge, despite its close
proximity to the Orari River (450 m south of the main channel). It is possible that the stock-water race
that runs 290 m up gradient of the site may have played a role in the isotope signature measured for
shallow groundwater at K37/0671, although how is not entirely clear given the race effectively carries
Orari River water and this was not the consistent signature. Based on coincidences of peaks and
trough in the 18O data, it appears that transport time of groundwater flow, from the Orari River to
Winchester is as little as one month.
The un-dramatic 18O signature in groundwater from K38/0819 mirrors the ion chemistry for this well
and supports the idea of the source of the groundwater being rainfall derived. Despite insufficient data
to rule out coincidence, the pattern in a 4-month long 18O dataset collected from a 46 m deep well
(K37/1301) located between the Orari and Waihi rivers, north-east of Geraldine, exactly mirrors the
18
O pattern observed for the two rivers. The magnitude of the δ18O values is suggestive that the deep
groundwater is recharged from land-surface recharge, not rivers; the timing of events suggests rapid
transport of recharge water into the deep aquifer.
4.4.2.2 Spatial patterns

The Rangitata River water was not analysed during this field investigation, however δ18O values
monitored in both the Rangitata and Orari Rivers during 2003 and 2004 show the two rivers can
possess significantly different 18O isotope signatures (Figure 4-24). The indications are that Orari River
water is generally more depleted in 18O than Rangitata River water (average δ18O = -10.1o/oo vs. -
9.8 o/oo). This is unusual given the Rangitata River is a truly alpine river sourced by snowmelt from high

peaks, and so (based on isotope patterns elsewhere on the Canterbury Plains) would be expected to
have more negative δ18O values than a non-alpine river, such as the Orari.
-8
-8.5
-9
-9.5
δ18O [o/oo]
-10
-10.5
-11
-11.5 Orari R.
Rangitata R.
-12
Orari R. (2006 - 2007)
-12.5
Jun-03
Jan-04
May-04
Jun-04
Feb-04
Mar-04
Jul-03
Oct-03
Apr-04
Jul-04
Oct-04
Aug-03
Sep-03
Nov-03
Dec-03
Aug-04
Sep-04
Nov-04
Dec-04
Figure 4-24: Historic δ18O data pertaining to Rangitata River and Orari River. Data source
unknown, hence exact sampling locations are also unknown. Corresponding
monthly δ18O values from 2006 – 2007 field study are overlain for comparison
The discrepancy in δ18O values can be explained by longitudinal (rather than any latitudinal)
differences in the catchment headwaters. For both river catchments, precipitation is commonly
associated with weather fronts originating from the west coast. In this situation, the heavier 18O isotope
is “rained-out” as the weather systems cross overland, causing an enrichment of 16O in any remaining
precipitation. It is viable that the rain falling in the Orari catchment over the Four Peaks, Ben McLeod
and Tara Haoa Ranges (described in Section 2.1) is affected by this enrichment process more so than
the Rangitata recharge water that rains in on the Alps. Similarly low δ18O values (between -9.56o/oo
and -12.48o/oo) reported for groundwater within the Mackenzie and Fairlie basins lend support to this
hypothesis (e.g. Cooksey, 2008).
How consistent the variance between δ18O values of the two hydrological systems (Orari vs.
Rangitata) is remains to be assessed. Certainly, from the limited δ18O dataset available, it is evident
that δ18O values within the Orari catchment itself vary significantly between years, presumably due to
climatological differences – we would conclude from Figure 4-24 that water sampled in 2006 was more
depleted in 18O than water sampled in 2004. Thus, although we might assume that the Orari and
Rangitata Rivers exhibit different isotopic signatures based on the 2003 – 2004 dataset, further
investigation is required to reliably assess this conclusion.
The resulting δ18O values for all water samples collected over September – November 2006 are
mapped in Figure 4-25 (also tabulated in Appendix 8). It is evident that the Orari River is (isotopically)
chemically distinct from the Waihi River, also. Like the Rangitata River, it appears that the headwaters
of the Waihi River are less enriched in 16O than their Orari equivalent, which can be explained by the
low topographic nature of the Waihi catchment. The distinction between the δ18O signals between the
Waihi, Orari and Rangitata systems provides a useful means for delineating the groundwater
hydrological catchment.

δ18O values for groundwater sampled from the Orari – Rangitata (Orton) plain are relatively high
compared to any δ18O values measured for the Orari River. This suggests that the Orari River is
unlikely to be the recharge source of groundwater on the Orton plain. 18O was not analysed in soil
water, so it is not possible to reliably determine whether groundwater on the Orton plain is actually
land-surface recharge water or, alternatively (and quite feasibly) Rangitata River water that has
migrated southwards. For brevity, we shall use the term “plains” water to describe any water not
sourced from the upland catchment (i.e. Orari River water discharged via the Gorge); east of the Orari
River, “plains water” may comprise a component of Rangitata River water.
Based on δ18O data, it is possible to map the approximate lateral extent of Orari River water to the
north/east to not much beyond the banks of Coopers Creek. This affirms the inferences made from the
groundwater streamline data (Section 4.3.1). Consequently, water in Rhodes (spring-fed) Stream
carries a signature of “plains” water and thus appears not to be sourced from Orari River water.
Similar “plains” water is to be found in Coopers Creek in its lower reach about Clandeboye region.
This is in contrast to the upper sections of Coopers Creek (above SH1), where, as mentioned, 18O
signatures clearly express Orari River water that emerges at Spring Farm. These results concur with
the conclusions that were drawn from the ion chemistry (section 4.4.1). It is worth noting however, that
the accuracy of these conclusions is limited to the short data set available for analysis. More reliability
in the assessment could be achieved if a long-term δ18O time series dataset were available, since this
would enable variations in climatological conditions (which affect the δ18O signatures) and therefore
groundwater age factors to be incorporated into the analytical interpretations. The conclusions made
of source water for the lowland stream systems about Clandeboye contain the most uncertainty, given
the potential for the shallow groundwater system to be chemically influenced by deep, upwelling (and
older) groundwater, for which less is known of its chemical (in particular δ18O) history.
δ18O values measured in Raukapuka Creek tend to correlate with values in the Waihi River and
therefore signify little relationship with the Orari River, which is similar to the inferences made from the
ion composition chemistry. Similarly, δ18O values for Burkes Creek and Taumatakahu Stream in the
lower catchment area, about Temuka district, do not indicate any obvious mass contribution from the
Orari River. Notwithstanding, 18O analyses conducted at selected wells in November 2008,
subsequent to the field investigation (data not shown), have indicated δ18O values in shallow
groundwater about Milford district similar in magnitude to the values we associated with Orari River
water. This observation indicates that there remains some uncertainty as to whether groundwater
sourced from Orari River water does not contribute some component of flow to Burkes Creek and
Taumatakahu Stream. It is viable that irrigation with surface water from Ohapi Creek has acted to
confound the 18O signal in the lower catchment. Further investigation and monitoring would be
required to test this and reliably ascertain the water source of the lowland streams about Temuka.
It is more certain that Dobies Stream and all the branches of Ohapi Creek carry isotope signatures
representative of water sourced from the Orari River. 18O data in groundwater about the Creeks are
limited, however, between the north and middle branches of Ohapi Creek there is evidence
groundwater is composed of Orari-sourced water at the top of the sub-catchment (e.g. K38/0644).
Distinctly higher δ18O values were recorded in groundwater at well K38/1073, which is midway
between the north and middle branches of Ohapi Creek further downstream. This indicates
groundwater at K38/1073 is not the same as that in Ohapi Creek, i.e. not of Orari River origin. Rather,
the source of shallow groundwater at K38/1073 is most likely to be rainfall recharge. Given its position
in the lower catchment, at 15 m depth and reportedly screening below pug layers, it is viable that
groundwater sampled from K38/1073 is in fact artesian water related to a deeper aquifer system that
underlies Ohapi creeks and is hydraulically separated locally from the shallow aquifer system by pug
strata. The δ18O results for surface water samples are summarised, with interpretative comments, in
Table 4-13.

Figure 4-25: δ18O values measured in surface water and groundwater. With the exception of
Rangitata River datapoint, all data relate to samples collected between September
and November 2006. Intervals defined by annual range of δ18O values measured in
main river systems: Orari (<-10.10/00); Waihi (-8.40/00 to -9.70/00)

Table 4-13: δ18O values measured in surface waters. Colour coding same as Figure 4-25
δ O ( /oo)
18 o
sampling inferred source based on

river max min median average
δ O signature
18
location
4 Rangitata River water / alpine
Arundel Bridge -9.7 -9.7 -9.7 -9.7
run off
4
Rangitata SH1 bridge -9.6 -9.6 -9.6 -9.6 "
River 4
river mouth -9.6 -9.6 -9.6 -9.6 "
5
unknown -9.4 -10.1 -9.8 -9.8 "
5 Orari River water / upland
unknown -9.5 -10.5 -10.2 -10.1
catchment run-off
2
Burdon Road -10.2 -11.4 -10.7 -10.7 "
1
Orari River Burnham Road -10.2 -10.2 -10.2 -10.2 "
U/S Milford Orari water diluted slightly with

1 -9.9 -9.9 -9.9 -9.9
Clandeboye Road "plains" water
Te Ao 1
D/S Vance Road -10.7 -10.7 -10.7 -10.7 Orari River water
Stream
2
Spring Farm -10.3 -11.7 -10.6 -10.7 Orari River water
Coopers
Creek 1 Orari River water diluted with
Canal Road -9.2 -9.2 -9.2 -9.2
"plains" water
U/S Bennett Road
Dobies 1 -10.9 -10.9 -10.9 -10.9 Orari River water
Stream 1
U/S Beeby Road -10.5 -10.5 -10.5 -10.5 "
2 Waihi River water / lowland
DOC Reserve -8.7 -9.4 -9.3 -9.3
rainfall
U/S SH79 Bridge
3 -8.6 -9.0 -8.8 -8.8 "
Waihi River Geraldine
1
U/S Hawke Road -8.8 -8.8 -8.8 -8.8 "
1 Waihi River water diluted with
U/S Te Awa Road -9.3 -9.3 -9.3 -9.3
Orari River water
Tributary Near
Geraldine -8.9 -8.9 -8.9 -8.9 Waihi river water
Raukapuka Sewerage Works
1
Creek
U/S Orari Station Waihi river water, possibly
1 -9.4 -9.4 -9.4 -9.4
Road mixed with Orari River water
North Branch Muff
1 -10.9 -10.9 -10.9 -10.9 Orari River water
Road
Middle Branch
1 -10.5 -10.5 -10.5 -10.5 "
Ohapi Barkers Road
Creek South Branch
1
-10.3 -10.3 -10.3 -10.3 "
Main Branch U/S
Milford -10.1 -10.5 -10.4 -10.4 "
2
Clandeboye Road
Rhodes U/S Rolleston "plains water" / land surface
1 -8.8 -8.8 -8.8 -8.8
Stream Road recharge
Burkes U/S Boiling Down Waihi River water diluted with
1 -9.6 -9.6 -9.6 -9.6
Creek Road Orari River water
Taumataka East Branch U/S Waihi River water diluted with
1 -9.4 -9.4 -9.4 -9.4
hu Creek Springfield Road Orari River water
1
single sampling event: September 2006
2
sampled monthly: September 2006 – September 2007
3
sampled September 2006, plus monthly: June 2007 – September 2007
4
single sampling event: December 2005
5
sampled approximately monthly July 2003 – December 2004, no reference of data source.

4.5 Hydrological catchment boundaries

One of the aims of the investigation was to delineate the extent of the Orari hydrological catchment on
the coastal plain, based on the surface water – shallow groundwater inter-relationships. At the outset,
the field investigation and collective monitoring was loosely designed around the hydrogeological
zones prescribed by McEwan (2001) (Figure 2-10). These zones were defined based on
geomorphological evidence - differences in their actual physical hydrogeological characteristics
remain to be reliably assessed. Our hydrological and hydrochemical data suggest that the zone
boundaries described by McEwan (2001) may not accurately map the true Orari hydrological
catchment. In particular, our findings are suggestive that the northern/eastern extent of the Orari River
influence may not be as extensive as that mapped by McEwan (2001). In contrast, the southern extent
may be greater than previously assumed.
We have re-zoned the Orari hydrological catchment, to incorporate more accurately the inter-
relationships between surface water and groundwater that we identified from our field data. The new
zones bear some resemblance to McEwan’s (2001) zones, and effectively trace the boundaries of
sub-basins within the Orari hydrological catchment. Our zones are presented in Figure 4-26. One
significant difference is that we have deliberately incorporated the full Waihi River catchment in our
zonation. The reason for this is that it appears that surface water and groundwater flowpaths diverge
at the top end of the coastal plain. Notably, Station Stream drains directly to the Orari River, yet
groundwater in this sub-basin more likely flows into the Waihi catchment. Equally, Dobies Stream,
which is sourced by Orari River water flows directly into the Waihi River.
The Orari basin has been divided into three components: upper, middle and lower sub-basins. The
Orari lower basin together with the Ohapi basin, incorporate the lowland spring-fed streams. The Orari
lower sub-basin includes the perennial reach of the Orari River towards the coast. Unlike previous
definitions of the Orari catchment, we have not included the spring-fed systems about Clandeboye
(unless they are direct tributaries of the Orari River). This is because the available hydrochemical
evidence suggests these surface water systems are likely to be sourced by deep-upwelling
groundwater, probably sourced from the direction of the Orton plain, rather than the Orari River.
The Orari middle sub-basin stretches between SH1 and SH72 road bridges. It incorporates the Dobies
Creek system, along with the mid reaches of the Orari River and Coopers Creek that characteristically
run dry during summer months.
The Orari upper sub-basin covers the area from the Orari Gorge to SH72. It includes the spring-fed
section of Cooper Creek, at Spring Farm, which is sourced from Orari River water.
We conceive the Station Stream basin to be a water-divide between the Waihi and Orari catchments.
We have designated it a separate zone, in an effort to capture the diverging surface water and
groundwater flowpaths in this area in any water balance assessment. Similarly, the Waihi basin has
been mapped to the full extent of its true catchment for the purpose of constraining any water budget
calculations. The Waihi basin stretches far beyond (west of) the extent of the field investigation.
The zones we present in Figure 4-26 map our estimate of the Orari hydrological catchment. The areas
of the zones are listed in Table 4-14. From the perspective of assessing a hydrological catchment
water balance, we are of the opinion that there is gain to be made from coupling the Waihi basin with
the Orari basin, since this fully encompasses the complex surface water – groundwater inter-relations
that hydraulically connect the 2 river networks, and uncertainty associated with this. In this
circumstance, the domain of the hydrological system covers 350.6 km2.
Without the Waihi basin, we estimate the Orari hydrological catchment to cover approximately
206 km2. This is not far removed from the 230 km2 previously reported for the catchment (e.g. de Joux
(1980), see Section 2.1), albeit the geographic coverage of the areas is different.

Figure 4-26: Hydrological zones of the Orari hydrological catchment, as defined for this study.
Outline of hydrogeological zones previously described by McEwan (2001) are
overlain for comparison

Table 4-14: Surface areas of new hydrological zones defined in this study and presented in
Figure 4-26
sub-basin upper middle lower Station

Ohapi Waihi Total
/ zone Orari Orari Orari Stream
area [ha] 2750.7 4498.8 2386.4 7344.3 3578.9 14508.2 35067.3
4.6 Water usage

4.6.1 Abstractions
A few groundwater consents were overlooked by the investigation. Moreover, a significant number of
consents were not used over the 2006-2007 irrigation period. Overall, within the study area there
were:
• 77 surface water takes: 37 of which were measured, 32 not used, and 8 which weren’t measured.
• 252 groundwater abstraction wells grouped into 168 consents (i.e. some consents were for more
than one well): 124 wells were measured; 80 were not used; and 48 were not measured.
77% of the water takes exercised during the investigation period were measured - equivalent to 82%
of all abstractions in terms of potential water volume. Of this volume, across the various regions of the
catchment, only 5 – 15% of groundwater consented for abstraction and generally 2 – 6% of consented
surface water was actually taken. Timaru District Council operate 2 stock-water races that
continuously divert Orari River water from just below the Gorge and these skew the water use
statistics, such that 60% of consented surface water takes were utilised in the top-end of the
catchment.
Most of the irrigation occurs within the larger zones of Ohapi and Waihi. The statistics for each of the
zones are shown in Table 4-15.

Table 4-15: Summary of consented surface water and groundwater abstractions
surface water
sub- number total total
(SW) / number
basin/ status of abstraction irrigated
groundwater of wells
zone consents rate (L/s) area (ha)
(GW) take
measured 6 9 378 840
GW not measured 2 2 73 348
upper not used 1 3 3 1
Orari measured 2 2 736 0
SW not measured 0 0 0 0
not used 0 0 0 0
measured 22 36 961 1504
mid not used 19 28 388 720
not used 3 3 26 48
measured 6 6 230 474
lower not used 3 11 229 669
not used 3 3 67 209
measured 38 45 1624 3172
not used 14 27 538 1421
Ohapi
measured 24 25 831 2102
not used 19 19 397 925
measured 21 28 683 1516
not used 8 11 192 139
Waihi
measured 2 2 27 119
not used 7 7 265 618
Station
Strm
Groundwater allocation for the area studied totals 542,052 m3/day and surface water allocation totals
229,510 m3/day. These figures are considerably more than those described in Section 2.7 – the
numbers for which were a tally for the Orari, Coopers Creek and Ohapi Creek catchments, to allow fair
comparison with de Joux’s (1980) data. The 1980 dataset did not include takes in the small subsidiary
catchments in the south, i.e. Dobies Stream, Raukapuka and Worners Creeks, nor about
Taumatakahu Stream and Burkes Creek.
Figure 4-27 shows the plots of monitored surface water and groundwater usage within each zone,
broken down into average daily take (m3/day) for each month. Note that the scale for the surface water
takes is different to the groundwater takes due to much more groundwater being consented than
surface water. Similarly, the vertical scales adopted in the display of Ohapi data differs from the scales
applied to the other zones, due to larger allocation volumes. The actual amount of water used is

shown in a bold colour (teal for surface water and orange for groundwater). The light yellow colour
shows water that was allocated to a monitored water take, but was not abstracted in the 2006 – 2007
study year. Light blue shows the additional consented volume within the zone that was either not
used, or failed to be monitored.
In the upper Orari zone, more surface water is consented and used than groundwater. The sole user
of the surface water in the upper catchment is TDC with two takes for stock-water which, combined,
used an average of 62% of their consented allocation over the 2006-2007 period (Figure 4-27). TDC
is by far the largest surface water user in the entire hydrological catchment. Only 13% of the
consented groundwater allocation volume subject to monitoring was taken over the period September
2006 to May 2007.
In the other zones, most surface and groundwater is abstracted for irrigation and therefore usage was
focussed between September 2006 and May 2007. As it construed, generally little water was used
during what are normally the peak irrigation months of December and January.
There are few (4) surface water take consents in the middle Orari zone. Only 1 of the 4 consents was
exercised in the 2006-2007 irrigation season. Furthermore, that specific consent took only 2% of its
actual allocated water. In comparison, 12% of the used component of the groundwater allocation was
taken (Figure 4-27).
In the lower Orari zone, an average of 5% of the used component of the surface water allocation was
taken. Equally, 5% of the used component of the groundwater allocation was taken (Figure 4-27).
The Ohapi zone has by far the most water allocated (both surface and groundwater). The zone was
subject to the most groundwater usage; a maximum rate equal to 27,325 m3/day was abstracted over
February 2007. Overall, actual usage during the field investigation year was low; equivalent to 6% of
the used component of the surface water allocation and 8% of the used component of the
groundwater allocation (Figure 4-27).
A significant number of consents were not monitored in the Waihi zone. This is because the Waihi
sub-basin was not an explicit part of the field investigation; rather it was incorporated in to the Orari
hydrological catchment study later, in the data analysis stage of the project. Of the few measured
water takes, usage was low, at 6% of the used component of the surface water allocation and 15% of
the used component of the groundwater allocation (Figure 4-27).
The plots in Figure 4-27 show that the peak of the irrigation occurred in October 2006, early on in the
growing season. Although meteorological conditions in October 2006 were not abnormal, we note that
September 2006 received an unseasonally low dose of rainfall and the antecedent conditions leading
into October may have influenced the irrigation pattern. Overall, an unusually low amount of water was
used for irrigation over the course of the 2006 – 2007 investigation, because of the generally wet
summer experienced.

Figure 4-27: Average daily water usage within individual hydrological zones for the 12 months
of the investigation period

The daily water usage as a percentage of the consented volume is shown in Figure 4-28 to Figure
4-32 for each of the zones. Although not evident in the data plotted by zone, and despite the generally
lower than average water usage, some individual consent holders exceeded their consented
volumetric quotas.
Groundw ater
90%
Surface w ater
Daily usage as a percentage of
80%
consented volume (%)
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Month
Figure 4-28: Upper Orari averaged daily water use as a percentage of consented daily volume
Groundw ater
90%
Surface w ater
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Month
Figure 4-29: Mid Orari averaged daily water use as a percentage of consented daily volume

Groundw ater
90% Surface w ater
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Month
Figure 4-30: Lower Orari averaged daily water use as a percentage of consented daily volume
Groundw ater
90% Surface w ater
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Month
Figure 4-31: Ohapi averaged daily water use as a percentage of consented daily volume
Groundw ater
90%
Surface w ater
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Month
Figure 4-32: Waihi averaged daily water use as a percentage of consented daily volume

4.6.2 Irrigated areas

From the consents database, land-parcels associated with individual consents were identified for both
used and unmeasured water take consents of the field investigation. Land-parcel maps stored in
Environment Canterbury’s GIS database were accordingly assigned affiliated consent identification
markers, from which a map was generated of the irrigated areas within the hydrological catchment
(Figure 4-33). Water take consents that are not for irrigation do not have land-parcels associated with
them and do not appear in Figure 4-33. These spatial data were used in the subsequent catchment
water budget calculations (see Section 5.1.1).

Figure 4-33: Map of irrigated land within the hydrological zones (associated with used and
unmeasured irrigation water take consents)

5 Catchment water budget

The final objective of the study was to establish a water budget for the hydrological catchment.
Evaluating such a budget was one of the recommendations made by McEwan (2001). The water
budget considers all the water inputs and outputs across the catchment and is based on the mass
balance equation:
INPUTS – OUTPUTS = CHANGE IN STORAGE
The purpose of performing a water budget was to evaluate the water fluxes within the catchment and
therefore provide insight into the scale and dynamics of the water resource. Groundwater Allocation
Zone (GWAZ) limits are assessed on the basis that over the course of a year there is no net change in
aquifer storage within a zone. Although it was not an objective of this study to refine the GWAZ limits
for the Orari catchment (which are currently lumped with the Opihi catchment), there is scope that the
water budget model developed here, and applied to the 2006 – 2007 dataset might provide some use
towards such a task in the future.
Table 5-1 lists the inputs and outputs of surface waters and shallow groundwater of the Orari
hydrological catchment, on the coastal plain. It is not feasible to measure all the inputs/outputs listed in
Table 5-1. Certainly, offshore groundwater flux remains a significant unknown in most mass balance
problems. In the case of this investigation, vertical leakage downwards to the deep groundwater
system also remained an unknown component.
Integration of both surface water and groundwater reservoirs into the catchment water budget is
complicated by the fact that the storage dynamics of the two hydrological systems (surface water vs.
groundwater) differ substantially. Moreover, the hydrochemical data from our field study has confirmed
that multiple surface waters (Coopers Creek; Waihi River; Ohapi creeks) are supported (at least in
part) by water sourced from the Orari River and that the groundwater catchment boundaries remain
poorly constrained. This further complicates the catchment water balance, since it precludes the
approach of modelling the Orari catchment as a single basin. Rather, the full hydrological catchment
must be discretised into its sub-basin components to capture the variability in the surface water and
groundwater pathways and make the problem tractable. Summation of water budgets for all the
contributing sub-basins provides a net water balance for the full hydrological catchment.
Table 5-1: Inputs and outputs for a complete water balance of the surface water and shallow
groundwater system of the Orari hydrological catchment
inputs outputs
1) Orari River flow at the Gorge 1) Abstractions
2) Rainfall 2) Evapotranspiration
3) Irrigation water 3) Infiltration to deep groundwater
4) Lateral groundwater flux from 4) Lateral groundwater flux to
neighbouring catchments, e.g. neighbouring catchments, e.g.
Orton plain Orton plain
5) Groundwater discharge to the
sea
6) River discharges to the sea
5.1 Conceptual hydrological systems model

Figure 5-1 shows our simplified conceptual systems model of the Orari catchment, for which a water
budget can be computed. The sub-basins match the new zones we defined in Figure 4-26. Their areas
are listed in Table 4-14.
Because the Waihi River is hydraulically-connected to the Orari hydrological catchment we have
incorporated it into the catchment model (as discussed in Section 4.5). Regrettably, the field

investigation did not focus on the Waihi catchment, since little was known of its relationship with the
Orari River prior to the study. As a consequence, technical details of this catchment remain poorly
characterised, particularly groundwater dynamics.
Station Stream catchment is an explicit component in our model because we conceive that surface
flows and groundwater flows from this basin follow different paths: surface water discharges to the
Orari River; groundwater flows south, into the Waihi sub-catchment.
All of the groundwater fluxes in our systems model remain undetermined, and require significant
simplifying assumptions in order to facilitate a solution to the mass balance problem. Most of these
assumptions are constrained by the field observation data; primarily that collected from surface water
gauging locations. They are:
1) all surface water lost from the main stem of the Orari between SH72 and SH1 flows via the historic
river channel (G3) and is supplemented with an unknown quantity of groundwater diverted from the
Orari basin;
2) groundwater flowing via the historic river channel towards the Waihi catchment is explicitly
accounted for in surface water flows of Dobies Creek (S4) together with an implicit groundwater
component that makes up Waihi River flows at Winchester (S6);
3) on account of assumptions 1) and 2), water lost from the Orari River that does not discharge to the
Waihi basin, flows as groundwater into the Ohapi catchment (G5 = G3 - G4 - S4);
4) any groundwater discharges from the Waihi sub-basin are directed to the Ohapi catchment, hence
are implicit to the groundwater fluxes G4 and G5;
5) surface water contributions from Coopers Creek (S3) are realised in the upper Orari basin, and are
ephemeral;
6) a lateral flux of groundwater contributes to the lower Orari basin, from the Orton plains catchment
(G6). This can be fully accounted for in surface flows measured at Coopers Creek and Petries
Drain, about Clandeboye;
7) surface water flows in Taumatakahu Stream and Burkes Creek, which both contribute to the
Orakipaoa Creek, are incorporated in the lumped offshore groundwater flow (G7).
As previously stated, it was beyond the scope of this investigation to develop any predictive
mathematical models of the Orari hydrological system. For this reason, together with the fact that only
one year of field observation data were available and not all of it was continuous, no attempt was
made to derive transfer functions for the systems model. Instead, the systems model was applied to
estimate water balances for each basin on a monthly timescale, which was common to the frequency
of manual groundwater observation recordings.

Figure 5-1: Systems model of the Orari hydrological catchment, based on discretisation of
the catchment into six sub-basins (upper/mid/lower Orari; Waihi; Station Stream;
Ohapi). Note: all basins are also subject to abstraction, precipitation,
evapotranspiration and irrigation inputs/outputs, which are not shown in the
figure. Offshore groundwater discharge occurs from Ohapi and lower Orari sub-
basins

Surface waters in the system are assumed to exhibit no storage potential at a monthly time scale.
Soils have storage potential and limit recharge to the system. Soil water is not an explicit component
in our conceptual water systems model, but it is integral to the land surface recharge (LSR)
calculations. LSR effectively determines what fraction of combined rainfall and irrigation water input is
active within the water balance, routing it to the groundwater storage zone, after correcting for
evapotranspirative losses. Storage is assumed to occur within the shallow aquifer that has a storativity
value of 0.06. This value is equivalent to the average storativity estimated from shallow aquifer tests
conducted within the Orari hydrological catchment (Table 2-1). A schematic of the basic fluxes
(inputs/outputs) accounted for in each basin of our water balance model of the shallow groundwater –
surface water system is included as Figure 5-2.
We assume that rainfall runoff to streams is only active in steep topographic sections of the
catchment. These being: the mountainous upland catchment and the foothills that form parts of the
Station Stream and Waihi sub-basins. The coastal plain exhibits a very shallow topographic gradient
(see Section 2.2) and we assume rain that falls upon it within the Orari and Ohapi sub-basins is first
routed via the soil zone to the shallow groundwater system, before it might contribute to stream flows.
Figure 5-2: Conceptual water balance model showing fluxes equated in each basin.
Groundwater is the main active store of water; ΔS denotes the change in storage,
which can be determined from observed changes in groundwater levels (ΔH). The
net groundwater flux constituted the unknown in the water balance assessment
5.1.1 Irrigation use and land surface recharge estimates

Land surface recharge (LSR) is the quantum of water applied to the land that manages to infiltrate
down to the groundwater table and recharge the aquifer. There are two sources of LSR: rainfall
infiltration; and infiltration of irrigation water. Soil properties and evapotranspiration are the main
environmental variables that govern the potential for infiltration.
Scott (2004) calculated LSR for the Orari-Opihi GWAZ during an exercise that reviewed GWAZ limits
for the Canterbury Plains. In his assessment, Scott (2004) estimated that 33% of the annual rainfall
contributes to groundwater recharge. Scott’s approach to LSR calculations involved reliance on

NIWA’s virtual climate dataset and hypothetical water use data. The information gathered during the
field study facilitated LSR estimations to be made using real water use data, the results of which are
required to complete the catchment water budget. The soil moisture budget model used by Scott
(2004) was also used in this study. In brief, LSR is assumed to occur when the soil moisture content
exceeds the soil profile available water (PAW) (mapped in Figure 2-5).
It was presumed that LSR calculations could be performed at the resolution of the irrigated land
parcel, however this proved unfavourable. The reason being, information was not available on the
actual area of land specifically irrigated at any particular time. The implication of this is that any LSR
calculation conducted using the irrigated areas determined from the water take consent (as per the
data presented in Section 4.6.2) would under-estimate LSR because it would assume the daily volume
of water used for irrigation would be spread over an area significantly larger than that truly irrigated.
The problem was further confounded by details in the consents database that in many cases reports
individual land parcels to be irrigated using numerous water take consents.
To overcome this problem and constrain LSR estimates, LSR was modelled assuming a theoretical
irrigation demand, rather than utilise knowledge of actual water use. This was the method used by
Scott (2004). In brief, within the period from 1st October to 30th April, irrigation is assumed to occur
whenever soil moisture deficit drops to 50% of water holding capacity. An application efficiency of 80%
is adopted for irrigation to reflect the efficiency goals contained in the NRRP (see Scott, 2004). We
were able to confine the area of irrigated land to parcels associated with consents that we knew to
have been exercised during the field investigation period (i.e. those mapped in Figure 4-33).
The soil moisture budget model was run for every land parcel within the catchment to obtain LSR
estimates. Results were integrated over the area of individual sub-basins. The theoretical irrigation
demand that was simulated was subsequently compared with the measured water use data that was
collected from the study.
5.2 Mathematical model inputs and assumptions

Many of the assumptions of the water balance model are listed in Section 5.1. Specific assumptions
and data sources applied in the working mathematical model are described below.
5.2.1 Surface water fluxes

Data from river gauging sites listed in Table 4-2 were used for the surface water fluxes. River water
flowing from the Orari Gorge was assumed to represent all the water inputs from the upland Orari
catchment.
Stream flows in Station Stream were not continuously gauged. However, a daily flow record was
simulated using the flow recorder dataset from the Waihi DOC reserve site and the regression
equation presented in Table 4-10.
We assumed that the Waihi River outflow component (S6 in Figure 5-1) could be represented by the
sum of Waihi River flows estimated at the SH72 (Winchester) gauging site location and Dobies
Stream, recorded at Woolscours. A continuous SH72 (Winchester) dataset was calculated based on
correlations with the SH72 recorder site dataset (see Table 4-7).
An underlying assumption of the systems model is that water lost from the main stem of the Orari
River between the SH72 and SH1 is assumed to flow underground and out of the basin, via the
historic Umukaha River channel. It directly supports stream-flows in Dobies and Ohapi Creeks, and
when necessary contributes to Waihi River base-flows.
Losses from the Orari mainstem upstream of SH72 are assumed to be retained within the Orari basin,
as a recharge component to groundwater that supports the spring flows observed in Coopers Creek
(at Spring Farm), Te Ao and Vance streams. In reality it is viable that some of the water lost from the
Orari mainstem above SH72 actually seeps west across to the Waihi basin, not only downstream to
the lower Orari basin. For this reason, the groundwater flux between the Upper and Middle Orari
basins (G1a) may contain significant error. Notwithstanding, inaccuracies in these assumptions have

no bearing on the net outcome of the overall catchment water balance, since mass is conserved within
the total hydrological catchment.
Orari River flows at SH72 were not continuously recorded, but a dataset was compiled from the Orari
Gorge recorder data, using the regression relationship presented in Table 4-4.
Surface water outputs from Ohapi sub-catchment were estimated from the Ohapi Creek flow recorder
data, using the correlations made with the stop bank outlet (see Table 4-6).
As a storm drain for rainfall runoff from Mt Peel, Coopers Creek was assumed to contribute some
surface water flows to the Upper Orari basin. The flow recorder data for Coopers Creek at SH72
however constituted the sum of both inflows from outside the basin and spring-flows at Spring Farm
(which in effect are a re-working of Orari River water within the basin). The base-flow of the
hydrograph was assumed to relate to Orari river water (emerging at Spring Farm), which was already
accounted for in the Upper Orari basin water budget, thus could be neglected. The storm-flow
component was assumed to contribute an external input to the system. Base-flow was separated from
storm-flow using Dobies Creek hydrograph as a reference for the base-flow pattern. Resultantly,
Coopers Creek recharged the Upper Orari basin in the months of December and January, with
1.1 Mm3 and 1.8 Mm3 of water, respectively. These surges of storm water were not noticeable in the
Coopers Creek lowland recorder dataset, at Clandeboye.
A further assumption in the systems model is that groundwater sourced from the Orton plain, not the
Orari River contributes water to the Orari sub-catchment, in its lower reaches about Clandeboye. In
order to model this, it is assumed that flows measured in Coopers Creek at the recorder site located at
the confluence with the Orari River constituted such “plains water”. As previously discussed, there is
no evidence in the hydrograph to suggest flows were influenced by storm surges of surface water.
Similarly, Petries Drain is assumed to contribute a spring-flow input to the (lower) Orari sub-
catchment, sourced from groundwater beneath the Orton plain. Flows on Petries Drain were not
recorded and gauging data do not correlate well with any recorded flow sites. For this reason, a
constant flux was assumed for Petries Drain, equivalent to the median gauged flow of 213 L/s (Table
4-11) and this was lumped in with Coopers Creek input to provide a flux for G6.
Surface water fluxes were integrated over monthly timescales for use in the water budget model.
5.2.2 Groundwater inputs/Land Surface Recharge (LSR)

Individual parcels of land for which LSR calculations were applied constituted the union (in GIS) of
irrigated land parcels (section 4.6.2) and soil zones (Figure 2-5). Soil aggregate properties had to be
assumed for the upland components of both Station Stream and Waihi sub-catchments, because no
S-Map data were available for these areas. The land in these un-mapped locations is effectively steep
hill country comprising geological exposures of Tertiary sediments and greywacke basement rock (see
Section 2.3). For this reason the areas were assigned a zero-PAW value, which in effect assumes the
land has no water holding capacity. Landcare Research map similar, zero-PAW values to the gravel
river bed systems on their S-Map.
Daily rainfall data from the thirteen rain gauges listed in Table 3-1 were used for precipitation inputs.
An inverse distance correction was applied to spatially weight the observation data. In accordance
with the method applied by Scott (2004), a 10% correction was applied to rainfall data to compensate
for the rainfall gauges being situated above ground level.
PAW data presented in Section 2.4 were utilised in the LSR component of the model. No correction to
the PAW values was made, contrary to the method applied by Scott (2004), who referenced a PAW
dataset that reflected water holding capacity to 900 mm depth (as opposed to 300 mm depth, in the
more recent S-Map dataset).
Evapotranspiration data used in the LSR calculations was the corrected potential evapotranspiration
(PET) dataset collected from Arundel-Belfield weather station (Section 4.1.2). A single, uniform daily
PET value was applied across the entire study catchment. Errors in this assumption were considered
to be insignificant, given NIWA’s virtual climate dataset reports only an 18 mm difference in total
annual PET between the coastal and foothill margins of the Orari catchment - equivalent to an

approximately 2% difference in PET across the catchment. PET was converted to actual
evapotranspiration (AET) using the relationship explained by Scott (2004) - the algorithm for this can
be found in the BUDGET subroutine of the LSR model computer code (included as Appendix 11).
Rainfall was assumed to provide a direct input to the basin in areas where soils had no water holding
capacity, i.e. over areas where soils had a zero-PAW value. This assumption was applicable to only
the Station Stream and Waihi basins.
In our systems model, we assume that the water lost from the Orari sub-basins, such as via the
historic river channel (G3), routes groundwater to Dobies Creek (S4) and the Ohapi basin (G5). A
certain amount of groundwater sourced from the Orari (G4) is also assumed to support flows in the
Waihi River (S6). This in effect covers any subsurface flow not gauged by the Dobies recorder, in
addition to the possibility that Raukapuka and Worners may be sourced by Orari River water, not LSR,
as inferred from the hydrochemical evidence. G4 is an unknown that is estimated from balance of
components in the Waihi basin. From this, G5 can be estimated from: G5 = G3 – G4 – S4. Note
however that there are too many degrees of freedom in the problem to solve either G5 or G1b
explicitly, since the offshore groundwater flux (G7) also constitutes an unknown. Thus, G5 and G1b
were estimated on the basis that G7 must be a positive discharge to sea and that the lower Orari and
Ohapi sub-basins contribute to it at a ratio of 9:1. This ratio is equal to the relative difference in the
length of coastline of these sub-basins.
In our systems model, we assume that the Waihi basin discharges groundwater to the Ohapi basin.
However, because the Waihi and Ohapi basins share a common source of groundwater recharge from
the Orari (G3) there is no need to explicitly account for a Waihi to Ohapi groundwater flux, as it is
implicit to the solutions of fluxes G4 and G5.
5.3 Model results

5.3.1 Groundwater inputs/Land Surface Recharge (LSR)
The results of our LSR simulations are summarised for each basin in Table 5-2. Table 5-2 reports LSR
in volumetric terms, since these units are amenable for comparison with water usage records and the
overall catchment water budget. However, LSR is itself computed in terms of water depth (as per PAW
and rainfall measurements), which is integrated over the land area. The depth-equivalent LSR data
are included in Appendix 12, for reference.
The simulations predict irrigation in the Ohapi basin over 2006-2007 probably had a residual effect
that promoted groundwater recharge beyond the end of the irrigation season (and into the month of
July). This phenomenon of apparent artificial recharge outside of the irrigation period is not unusual
and can occur when there is a significant difference in soil moisture conditions between irrigated and
non-irrigated soils at the end of the irrigation season, preceding an autumn rainfall event.
We estimate that under dry-land conditions (i.e. non-irrigated land), between 18% and 43% of rainfall
infiltrates through the soils of the various basins, to recharge shallow groundwater. LSR is most
effective in the upper Orari basin, because of the low water-holding capacity of the soils in this region.
LSR is least effective in the Ohapi basin, where deep gley and humic soils are prevalent. Overall,
using the soil moisture model, we estimate that for non-irrigated land, 23% of the rainfall that fell
across the catchment during the study period infiltrated shallow groundwater. This value is similar to
the estimation of 33% for the Orari-Opihi GWAZ, made by Scott (2004) using the same soil moisture
budget model but a dated PAW dataset and a longer meteorological dataset.
Under the assumptions about water use, we estimate that in the Station Stream basin (where only one
irrigation consent was exercised in 2006-2007), irrigation water contributed to less than 1% of the total
LSR. LSR was estimated to be boosted by between 10% and 17% by irrigation water returning to
ground in the Waihi, upper Orari and Ohapi basins. In contrast, we estimate that irrigation contributed
a significant proportion to LSR within the lower and middle Orari basins, where groundwater recharge
was effectively 51% and 75% higher than what we would predict it to have been if the respective
basins were farmed under dry-land conditions.

It is worth noting that we explored the sensitivity of the LSR result to the assumption about antecedent
soil moisture conditions for September 2006, particularly given the month was abnormally dry (as
described in Section 4.1.1). As a result, we found <1% difference in total LSR estimations for the year,
whether assuming soils were at full saturation or 10% saturation at the commencement of the 2006-
2007 irrigation season. We consider these differences to be insignificant in terms of introducing errors
into the catchment water balance.

100
Table 5-2: Results of simulated LSR, summed for individual hydrological zones/sub-basins. Blue shaded cells indicate months for which we
predict irrigation effects contributed to groundwater recharge, surplus to that which would otherwise have occurred under dry-land
conditions. All units reported as 103 m3
STATION STREAM OHAPI WAIHI
LSR LSR LSR

simulated LSR simulated LSR simulated LSR
assuming assuming assuming
rain PET water under rain PET water under rain PET water under
no no no
usage irrigation usage irrigation usage irrigation
irrigation irrigation irrigation
Sep 584 2180 0 0 0 532 4459 0 1 1 2141 8836 0 0 0

Oct 3462 3207 17 305 315 4244 6560 1036 23 415 11982 12999 1834 658 1439
Nov 5260 3171 0 791 794 6579 6487 93 38 147 18516 12854 595 1471 1953
Dec 10792 2945 0 4969 4969 9583 6025 0 2442 2612 36304 11940 24 14192 14433
Jan 2461 2727 0 210 210 2116 5579 387 3 64 7996 11055 495 205 281
Feb 3012 2623 7 62 66 2229 5366 448 6 81 9721 10635 831 186 384
Mar 2693 2842 11 418 426 3335 5813 504 24 235 8810 11520 732 535 938
Apr 2622 1686 3 89 91 4278 3448 227 22 213 9548 6833 633 309 592
May 2619 1546 0 1360 1363 4188 3163 0 1983 2220 9741 6268 0 3897 4304
Jun 1657 977 0 1 1 2333 1999 0 12 12 5329 3961 0 0 0
Jul 2917 981 0 956 956 6022 2006 0 2236 2248 12582 3975 0 3418 3418
Aug 1263 1500 0 365 365 2221 3068 0 1578 1578 4142 6079 0 1367 1367
Total 39341 26384 38 9527 9558 47661 53972 2694 8369 9826 136810 106954 5144 26238 29107
Table 5-2: (continued)
ORARI (UPPER BASIN) ORARI (MIDDLE BASIN) ORARI (LOWER BASIN)
LSR LSR LSR

simulated LSR simulated LSR simulated LSR
assuming assuming assuming
rain PET water under rain PET water under rain PET water under
no no no
usage irrigation usage irrigation usage irrigation
irrigation irrigation irrigation
Sep 384 1675 0 0 0 393 2740 0 0 0 167 1453 0 0 0

Oct 2472 2465 632 645 986 2545 4031 1373 354 851 1341 2138 1407 89 662
Nov 3676 2437 128 1071 1285 3466 3986 563 311 610 2037 2114 186 150 295
Dec 8253 2264 57 6085 6143 7585 3702 111 3517 3806 3024 1964 59 905 1107
Jan 1633 2096 83 118 148 1658 3428 488 9 113 688 1818 480 0 95
Feb 1576 2016 317 66 199 1221 3298 703 0 118 703 1749 634 2 124
Mar 1765 2184 354 454 713 1991 3572 650 214 527 1066 1895 700 116 407
Apr 1474 1296 205 96 225 2060 2119 367 73 242 1376 1124 199 86 271
May 1876 1188 0 1467 1558 2580 1943 0 1400 1634 1337 1031 0 812 1037
Jun 1058 751 0 42 42 1119 1228 0 6 6 721 651 0 39 39
Jul 2235 754 0 1295 1295 3532 1233 0 1415 1415 1946 654 0 893 893
Aug 872 1153 0 417 417 1162 1885 0 727 727 716 1000 0 507 507
Total 27274 20278 1776 11757 13010 29314 33165 4256 8026 10047 15121 17592 3665 3598 5436
101
5.3.2 Modelled water use vs. actual water use

The most significant assumption in our LSR calculations was of water usage. Figure 5-3 plots our
simulated monthly water usage (for irrigation) with the actual usage, recorded by consent holders. It is
clear from the water take records that our assumption that the irrigation season starts in October was
incorrect. In all the basins, water was being abstracted in September 2006, and in some cases, as
early as August (data not shown). It is not known whether this pattern of irrigation is typical or a
consequence of the un-seasonally dry spring of 2006.
Only in the Ohapi basin did we under-estimate water usage for the investigation year: by 41% overall.
It appears from the water use records, that a reasonably consistent rate of water was abstracted
between the months of November and February in the Ohapi catchment, the pattern of which bears no
resemblance to the weather pattern or simulated water demand. This is in contrast to water use
patterns in the other sub-catchments, where actual water usage dropped off during wet periods,
notably December and January, as also calculated by the hypothetical demand.
In the upper and middle sub-basins of the Orari, our simulated water use was approximately 50%
more than that actually abstracted, over the full year. In the lower sub-basin of the Orari, significant
discrepancies occur between our modelled water use dataset and the real-world dataset. In reality,
relatively little water was abstracted in this zone over the investigation period. Such that we simulated
almost 800% more irrigation water than was recorded. The greatest single discrepancy was for
October 2006.
We modelled 110% more irrigation water than we recorded in the Waihi basin, although some over-
estimation is to be expected in this zone, given the field study did not cover the entire Waihi
catchment.
In total, our model simulated 55% more water for irrigation purposes than was actually recorded. It is
not unreasonable that estimates should be higher than actual usage, since the discrepancy
incorporates errors in missing data records (i.e. active but no measured water take consents), plus the
errors in actual irrigated land-use areas. In absence of any additional knowledge, our model assumed
that all land associated with a water take consent was irrigated. In reality, only a portion of such land
parcel can physically be irrigated at a time, due to practical limitations. Reliable assessment of true
irrigated land areas provides a future challenge, but one that is simplified where centre-pivot irrigators
(which are fixed) are involved.
In terms of LSR calculations (which were evaluated on depth of water equivalent), the over-estimate of
water usage combined with an over-estimate of irrigated land coverage should not significantly affect
the predictions of relative effectiveness of LSR (i.e. percentage of irrigation water that infiltrates to
groundwater). However, assessments involving volumes – such as the catchment water balance - are
more prone to uncertainty, associated with this error.

Figure 5-3: Modelled monthly irrigation water use versus actual, recorded water use for
individual basins of the catchment model. Station Stream data are not shown,
because no water metering was undertaken in that basin. Similarly, water use in
the Waihi basin was not comprehensively monitored, thus records are likely to
under-estimate actual water use
5.3.3 Estimated fluxes and overall water balance

The results of the monthly water fluxes in our water budget are tabulated in Appendix 13. Footnotes
are included in Appendix 13 that provide an explanation of how the water balance model solves
unknown components of the monthly water budget within each zone/sub-basin. The annual budgets
are shown in Figure 5-4 through to Figure 5-6.
We calculate that for the period of study (2006 – 2007), 43% of all water entering the hydrological
catchment was via the Orari River inflows at the Gorge. Rain falling directly into the catchment

accounted for 53% of the water inputs, although as already discussed, only about 23% of this was
actually effective in recharging the hydrological system. Hence, when considered in the context of
active recharge inputs to the system; the Orari River inflows at the Gorge account for 74% of the water
entering the catchment. 34% of all the water entering the catchment drained out via the mouth of the
Orari River (equivalent to 57% of recharge water).
Surface water inflows from Station Stream and Coopers Creek make relatively minor contributions to
the total water balance and account for 1% of all water entering the catchment. In comparison to these
surface water influxes draining off the foothills, based on the water budget calculations, we estimate
that emergent groundwater in spring-fed streams near the coast (e.g. Coopers Creek and Petries
Drain) and sourced from groundwater transmitted from the Orton plain contributes three-times more
water to the catchment water balance. If the origin of spring water from the Orton plain is in some way
related to the Rangitata River, as we suspect it might be based on geochemical evidence, then the
rates of emergent groundwater inputs in the lower catchment will be sensitive to groundwater
pressures in the deeper aquifer system, not just groundwater levels in the shallow aquifer system that
is directly linked to the Orari River.
The water balance model highlights the strong dependence of the Ohapi basin on water leaked from
the Orari River basins. For the study period, we estimate it to have been approximately 120 Mm3,
which is equivalent to 48% of the annual volume of Orari River water discharged on to the coastal
plain at the Gorge. For 2006 – 2007, approximately 47% of the groundwater in-flowing to the Ohapi
basin is predicted to have drained back to the Orari River by the Ohapi Creeks.
On the basis of the catchment water balance, we estimate the net annual groundwater discharge from
the catchment was 96 Mm3. Although in our modelling we conceived this to be discharge to the sea,
this is not likely to be exactly the case, as discussed below. Although hypothetical, we estimate that
irrigation in 2006 – 2007 accounted for only about 3% of the total water flux within the hydrological
catchment; less than either 10% of the Orari River inputs at the Gorge or outflows at the mouth.
Despite the low water usage during the 2006 -2007 irrigation season, based on the groundwater levels
monitored during the study, there was a net decline in water levels between the start and end of the
study period. This equated to a net reduction of groundwater in storage within the catchment, of 1.8
Mm3 (less than 1% of the net annual water inputs to the catchment).
5.3.4 Errors and uncertainty in model results

When substituted into the groundwater flow (Darcy’s) equation:
Q=Txwxi
where Q is the groundwater discharge [L3/T] (96 Mm3/yr), T is aquifer transmissivity [L2/T], w is the
aquifer width [L] (5 km along the Ohapi and Lower Orari basin coastlines) and i is the hydraulic
gradient on the coastal margin (0.003 (see section 4.3.1), this equates to a transmissivity of
17,560 m2/day for the shallow aquifer. This is four-times the average transmissivity value reported
from shallow aquifer tests (Table 2-1), hence suggests the figure 96 Mm3 is likely to be an over-
estimate of the true flux through the shallow aquifer system, to the sea.
Our omission to consider deep groundwater in our water balance will account for some of the error.
Assuming this to be the sole error in our analysis would imply that the shallow aquifer accounts for
only ¼ of all groundwater movement in the catchment. There are other obvious sources of uncertainty
however that contribute to this error and which cannot be overlooked.
It is likely that the water budget is greatly affected by errors in our conceptual model, and errors in the
groundwater level data. In particular, the water balance for the Waihi basin is poorly constrained by
available field data, owing to the fact that this basin was an oversight in the field study.
Significant errors appear to be evident in the monthly mass balance for the Waihi basin, especially as
a result of the un-seasonally wet months: December and January. For example, in order for the water
budget in the Waihi basin to balance in January 2007, our water balance model was forced to simulate
a large influx of groundwater to the basin, when, for the most part of the year, a net efflux of
groundwater was predicted by the systems model. Note this apparent groundwater efflux is captured

by the dashed line in our systems model depicted in Figure 5-1, albeit it is written in as a negative flux
for flow component G4.
We believe much of the error in the water balances estimated for the Waihi system might be attributed
to our reliance on correlated datasets for the continuous flow record at Winchester SH72 that were
established for base-flows, not storm-flows. Similar errors afflict the Orari SH72 dataset, which was
reliant on correlations made for spot gauging with the Orari Gorge recorder, and are likely to also
affect the Station Stream surface water outflow predictions. In the case of Orari SH72 predictions, the
simulated flow data predict substantial losses in the Orari River in January, between the Gorge and
SH72. This is inconsistent with the flows recorded between the Orari Gorge and SH1 recorder sites
that suggest main-stem losses were probably less during this period. For the Orari sub-basins (and
Station Stream basin) such errors are relatively insignificant, because mass is conserved in surface
and groundwater, when integrated over adjacent basins. However, in the Waihi basin, such errors
manifest themselves in the groundwater flux to/from the Ohapi basin; hence affect the prediction of
groundwater discharge to the sea.
Furthermore, it is also feasible that the active area of the Waihi basin has in fact been under-estimated
in our water balance model and, as a consequence, fails to capture the full magnitude of the
groundwater flux from the Orari basin. Evidence for this is data from a flow recorder site on the
Temuka River at Manse Bridge, located approximately 7 km downstream of Winchester (where we
assumed the value for Waihi outflow, S6). River flows in the Temuka at Manse Bridge are, on
average, twice the magnitude of those estimated for the Waihi plus Dobies at Winchester (S6 in Figure
5-1). The Temuka River flows at Manse Bridge however constitute the sum of water discharging from
both the Te Moana and Waihi River catchments. Given we have no reliable information that might
permit separation of the flow components from either catchment; we are restrained to using the
information qualitatively. In this context, it is viable that groundwater from the Waihi, and quite possibly
the Ohapi basins contributes something to the gains in river flows downstream of Winchester, which
would in effect increase our estimate of G4, hence lower the predicted offshore discharge estimate
(G7). This concept bears relation to the uncertainty highlighted in the hydrochemistry data for source
water of the Taumatakahu and Burkes Creek surface water systems, and supports the suggestion that
the hydrological influence of the Orari River system does in fact extend as far as Temuka.
The over-estimate in the offshore groundwater flux can be reduced if it is assumed that the lowland
spring-fed systems about Temuka discharge water directly to the ocean, rather than lump such flows
with the groundwater flux, as we originally assumed. The flows in these systems were not
continuously gauged, but simulating such a discharge from the Ohapi basin, using either mean or
median flows gauged in Orakipaoa Creek during the study, resultantly reduces the predicted annual
net offshore groundwater flux by between 14 million and 21 million m3 – equivalent to a drop of 15 -
22%.
We have explored the effect of groundwater levels on our model predictions and concluded that the
uncertainty in the modelled groundwater levels (that determine groundwater storage) can in itself
explain all the error in the net groundwater discharge to the sea. Average groundwater levels were
used in the water mass balance calculations. A more reliable prediction of changes in groundwater
levels representative of each basin might be achieved if groundwater levels were spatially weighted,
although this has yet to be tested.

246 (upper) Irr = -2

STATION Orari LSR = +13
STREAM
ΔS = +1
Irr = <1
LSR = +23 3
ΔS = +2 5
ORARI
134
17 130
(mid) Irr = -4
Orari
LSR = +10
15 132
WAIHI ΔS = -2
Irr = -5 32
LSR = +64 -2
118 108
(lower) Irr = -4
ΔS = <0.1 Orari
LSR = +5
17 ΔS = -3
56
89
191
OHAPI
Irr = -3
LSR = +10
ΔS = +0.2
96
Figure 5-4: Results of annual catchment water balance, based on 2006 – 2007 dataset. Blue =
surface water fluxes; red = groundwater fluxes, based on components described
in Figure 5-1. Irr = irrigation water (outputs); LSR = land surface recharge (inputs),
and; ΔS = change in groundwater storage. Units are expressed in 106m3/year.
Note: the negative flux (of -2x106m3/year) shown entering the Waihi is effectively
the sum of groundwater entering the sub-basin from the Orari sub-basin and
groundwater exiting to the Ohapi sub-basin (dashed line). The offshore
groundwater discharge flux of 96x106m3/year is the lumped sum of effluxes from
the lower Orari and Ohapi sub-basins (weighted 9:1; Ohapi: Orari)

1 (upper) Irr = -0.008

STATION Orari LSR = +0.053
STREAM
ΔS = +0.004
Irr = <0.004
LSR = +0.093 0.01
ΔS = +0.008 0.02
ORARI
0.54
0.07 0.54
(mid) Irr = -0.016
Orari
LSR = +0.041
0.06 0.54
WAIHI ΔS = -0.008
Irr = -0.020 0.13

LSR = +0.260 -0.01
0.48 0.44
(lower) Irr = -0.016
ΔS = 0 Orari
LSR = +0.020
0.07 ΔS = -0.012
0.23
0.36
0.78
OHAPI
Irr = -0.012
LSR = +0.041
ΔS = +0.001
0.39
Figure 5-5: Annual catchment water balance, based on 2006 – 2007 dataset. Water volumes
expressed as a fraction of Orari River input at the Gorge. See Figure 5-4 for key to
flux and storage components. Note: the negative flux shown entering the Waihi is
effectively the sum of groundwater entering the sub-basin from the Orari sub-
basin and groundwater exiting to the Ohapi sub-basin (dashed line). The offshore
groundwater discharge flux is the lumped sum of effluxes from the lower Orari
and Ohapi sub-basins (weighted 9:1; Ohapi:Orari)

43% (upper) Irr = -0.3%

STATION Orari LSR = +2.3%
STREAM
ΔS = +0.2%
Irr = 6x10-5%
LSR = +4.1% 0.5%
ΔS = +0.3% 0.8%
ORARI
23.6%
3% 22.8%
(mid) Irr = -0.7%
Orari
LSR = +1.8%
23.2%
WAIHI
2.7% ΔS = -0.3%
Irr = -0.9% 5.6%

LSR = +11.3% -0.4%
20.8% 19% (lower) Irr = -0.6%
ΔS = 1x10-4% Orari
LSR = +1.0%
3% ΔS = -0.6%
9.8%
15.7%
33.6%
OHAPI
Irr = -0.5%
LSR = +1.7%
ΔS = +4x10-4%
16.9%
Figure 5-6: Annual catchment water balance, based on 2006 – 2007 dataset. Water volumes
expressed as a percentage of total basic inputs, i.e. in relation to sum of: Orari
River flow at the Gorge (S1) + Coopers Creek (S3) input + Orton plains
groundwater input (G6) + rainfall = 562 Mm3. See Figure 5-4 for key to flux and
storage components

6 Conclusions and recommendations

The 2006 – 2007 field investigation has enhanced the scientific understanding of the surface water –
groundwater inter-relationships within the Orari hydrological catchment. The findings have confirmed
that the Orari catchment is indeed a complex hydrological system, and support the justification that the
catchment water resources should be managed using an integrated (groundwater and surface water)
approach.
The conclusions that have been drawn from analysis of the technical data collected during the field
investigation are described below. Where applicable, recommendations are provided for further
investigation to contribute towards improved management of the water quantity resource.
6.1 Surface waters

6.1.1 Correlations
Naturalised flows in the rivers and streams of the catchment were compared with each other, for the
purpose of identifying correlations. Some significant correlations were found between flow data
collected at spot-gauging sites and recorder sites, from which it is possible to extrapolate flow
statistics between sites. However, the Orari Gorge and Waihi DOC reserve recorder are the only
respective primary and secondary recorder sites within the study area with long data records from
which to generate reliable flow statistics, hence, many of the statistical correlations are prone to
uncertainty.
Estimations of flow beyond the ranges encountered during spot-gaugings are susceptible to error and
we postulate such errors may have affected the reliability of our water balance computed for the Waihi
sub-basin. High river flows throughout November and December precluded gauging from being
conducted in these months. Overall, river flows were relatively high throughout the investigation period
and so there was little opportunity for gaugings to be carried out during low flow periods - only 1 of the
13 gaugings at Orari Gorge was undertaken at a flow of less than MALF (7d), 2808 L/s. The
implication for this is that many of the correlations do not carry high confidence for low flows.
We recommend that more low flow gaugings are carried out (i.e. when the flow at the Gorge is less
than MALF (7d)) in order to gain more confidence in the correlations at the low flow end of the flow
spectrum.
Whilst having abstraction data greatly increased the confidence of naturalised stream flows for water
takes, not all of the groundwater abstractions were assessed for stream depletion effects. We
therefore suspect that we may have underestimated naturalised flows in some cases. Furthermore,
stream depletion assessments relied on assumed parameter values, simply because there is a paucity
of available field data. Similarly, uncertainty arises from assumptions required to be made about
naturalization of dry reaches. In an attempt to reduce uncertainty, we naturalised stream flows
independently for surface water takes, and also for the combined effects of surface water and
groundwater abstractions. We identify from this problem the need for practical field measurements of
stream depletion potential, by way of streambed conductance surveys and pumping tests.
Generally, it was found that the Orari River can be divided into two sections over which reasonable,
but separate flows correlations hold: 1) upstream of SH72, and 2) downstream of SH1.
Despite apparently sourcing their water from the Orari, flows in the spring-fed streams, such as the
Ohapi Creeks, Coopers Creek and Dobies Stream, do not correlate well with the river. Unsurprisingly,
none of the lowland spring systems correlated well with upstream recorder sites on the main rivers.
Contrary to historic data, only weak correlations were identified between the flows in either Dobies
Stream or the Waihi River, at Winchester, and the Orari River. We attribute this to the increase in
ground water-usage within the catchment that we predict has effectively introduced non-linearity to the
hydrological system. Compensation for stream depletion effects attributed to groundwater abstraction
failed to improve our correlations. The discrepancy between historic and modern stream-flow

correlations might need considering if planning objectives for management of stream-flows are set in
the future.
6.1.2 Losses, gains and dry reaches

Flow losses and gains were determined along various reaches of the Orari River, Waihi River,
Coopers Creek and Ohapi Creeks, and to an extent greater than ever before. Equally, dry river
reaches were also mapped over the 2006 – 2007 investigation period, although the exact locations of
start and end points remain somewhat uncertain.
The bulk of the water lost from the Orari River occurs between Burdon’s Crossing and SH72. Flow
losses positively correlate with river flow. Proportionally, losses are greatest at times of low flow – up
to 90% reduction in flows was recorded during the field study. Downstream of SH1 the Orari River
experiences relatively constant gains estimated at approximately 39 L/s/km, although variable losses
and gains have been recorded closer to the river mouth.
Coopers Creek is effectively an ephemeral storm channel for high rainfalls drained from the foothills of
Mt Peel. The springs at Spring Farm appear to be sourced from the Orari River and sustain flows in
the creek along a finite reach that is understood to be perched above the main shallow aquifer. The
spring flows are insufficient to maintain a continuous flow for any significant distance downstream of
SH72. Much like the Orari River, Coopers Creek is reliant on storm-flows for providing direct hydraulic
linkage with the system downstream of SH1 and flows above SH1 and below SH1 correlate poorly.
Management of flow conditions in Coopers Creek has historically focused on reference to stream-
flows measured at SH72 – the point of discharge for the Creek. In the advent of our improved
knowledge about the source of spring water supplying Coopers Creek, it might prove more effective to
manage the Creek flows based on preservation of recharge water, i.e. conserve groundwater levels
and/or Orari River flows upstream of Spring Farm. Further mathematical analyses would be required
to explore how such a resource management approach could be reliably implemented.
General gains in stream flows were recorded between the upstream and downstream ends of the
north and south branches of Ohapi Creek, which indicates a positive influx of groundwater to these
creeks. Below the confluence of the two tributaries, the creek appears to lose flow, which is analogous
to the trend observed for the Orari River. There has historically been much debate regarding the
hydraulic connectivity of Ohapi Creeks and shallow groundwater. The stream flow data tend to
suggest surface water – groundwater interaction. We reiterate the conclusions of Davey (2006) in
suggesting that further flow gaugings, conducted along shorter reach sections, coupled with high
resolution piezometric observations and aquifer pumping test analyses are the practical means by
which more detail might be obtained surface water – groundwater connectivity, at a local scale.
Dry reaches were experienced on sections of the Orari River, Coopers Creek, Waihi River and Dobies
Creek. Raukapuka and Worners Creeks, like Dobies Stream, are located east of Geraldine, between
the Waihi and Orari River channels. However, unlike Dobies Stream, these spring-fed systems
consistently flowed during the year. The basalt geological intrusion at Geraldine has a strong bearing
on the local groundwater flow pattern, hence the flow conditions of the Waihi River about Geraldine.
We suspect that flow conditions of Raukapuka and Worners Creeks are indirectly attributed to the
presence of the Geraldine basalt and are more closely associated with the hydraulics of the Waihi
sub-basin, rather than the Orari basin.
The natural flow regime in the Orari River is dominated by recharge, more so than discharge,
dynamics. During the 2006 – 2007 field investigation, the river was dry between SH72 and SH1, over
5 consecutive months: March to July. Dry reaches were reported earlier for Coopers Creek, although
were sustained for a shorter period. In contrast, the spring-fed Te Ao and Vance Streams, that are
short stems of the Orari system, immediately above SH1 were never reported to run dry, hence in
effect formed small oases in the centre of the catchment. The use of these small creeks as indicators
of the condition of water resource might be an option worth exploring.

6.1.3 Minimum flows and reliability of supply

Despite the field study coinciding with an unusually wet summer, such that most of the catchment was
not affected by water restrictions, consents tied to a minimum flow at Coopers Creek at SH72 did
encounter restrictions. Evidently, there is not an equitable reliability of supply throughout the
catchment.
In assessing mean annual low flow statistics for rivers in the catchment, we have noticed that many of
the minimum flows are far lower than the MALF (7d) limit. This prompts us to question whether the
minimum flow thresholds are serving their purpose of protecting the in-stream values and we
recommend they be reviewed.
6.2 Water usage

The weather pattern during the investigation was abnormal, albeit over the course of the full year,
rainfall amounted to an average level. In September 2006, leading into the field investigation, only 8%
of the normal monthly rain fell. In contrast, December 2006 and January 2007 proved to be wet
months during which time a (27-year) record monthly flow was recorded in the Orari River.
77% of the water takes exercised during the investigation period were measured - equivalent to 82%
of all abstractions in terms of potential water volume. The unseasonal weather however contributed to
a generally low water usage over the investigation period.
Of the consents that were monitored, across the various regions of the catchment, only 5 – 15% of
groundwater consented for abstraction and generally 2 – 6% of consented surface water were actually
utilised. Overall, an average of 8% of the total consented volume of water was used within the
catchment.
Timaru District Council operate 2 stock-water races that divert Orari River water from just below the
Gorge and these skewed the water use statistics, such that 60% of consented surface water takes
were utilised in the top-end of the catchment.
The low water usage actually meant that the catchment was studied under a more natural state than
might have been expected, albeit perhaps statistically abnormal. On the other-hand, the conditions
meant that the study did not necessarily record the full potential impacts of water abstraction.
Measurement errors are inherent to the water usage data collected in the study and include: faulty
data-loggers; inappropriate setup of data-logger parameters to record pump usage, and; complications
with data-loggers located in close proximity to electric fence pulse generators. Errors are more
susceptible in manually-recorded water records, due to: variable pump rates; variations in irrigation
setup, and; inaccurate record keeping. Regardless, the significance of error in water use
measurement was reduced by the fact that data were only finally used for comparative purposes.
More substantial is that we have identified that to make reliable and meaningful use of water usage
data in the context of modelling the natural water resource, beyond the actual measurements of water
usage, information is also needed pertaining to the area of irrigated land at any specific time. Although
the use of centre-pivot irrigators helps mitigate this problem, it is an issue that requires consideration
in the collection of water metering data and future water resource management across the region.
6.3 Surface water – Groundwater inter-relationships

6.3.1 Hydrochemistry
Water chemistry proved a useful forensic tool for determining surface water – groundwater inter-
relationships and in particular for delineating the extent of the Orari hydrological catchment.
The hydrochemistry of the Orari catchment is similar to that found across the Canterbury Plains and
basically comprises calcium bicarbonate type water, containing relatively low ionic mass. Subtle
differences in chloride : sulphate ratios have been distinguished for waters related to the Orari River
system, as fed from the Gorge, and waters in the Waihi catchment that appear to be subject to

stronger soil –water interactions. Similarly, recharge water sourced from the upland Orari catchment
exhibits a distinctly higher ratio of calcium: magnesium ions, compared to water apparently recharging
the system on the coastal plain. Thus basic ion chemistry provides a useful and relatively inexpensive
means for inferring the local extent of Orari River water, albeit its practicality is confounded by noise
induced by chemical changes attributed to land-use impacts.
In the regime of sampling conducted during the field study, shallow groundwater about Clandeboye
and under Geraldine Flat was identified as exhibiting chemical signs of agricultural land-use impacts.
These impacts were equally noticeable in the surface water chemistry of Coopers Creek and Rhodes
Stream that drain the lower end of the catchment. We came across evidence of somewhat anomalous
groundwater chemistry within the Ohapi Creek catchment that we suspect is related to localised
pockets of swamp deposits that have previously been mapped across the Milford and Clandeboye
districts, along the coastal margin.
Oxygen-18 stable-isotope analyses proved the most useful forensic tool for distinguishing the sources
of the various spring-fed streams in the catchment. From our findings, Orari River water appears to be
heavily depleted in 18O compared to water in the neighbouring Waihi and Rangitata river catchments,
as well as shallow groundwater in wells located on the adjacent Orton plain. We attribute this to
natural heavy isotope rain-out effects associated with the unique geography of the upland catchment
and prevailing westerly weather system. In practice this means that Orari River water out-flowing on to
the coastal plain has a distinct δ18O signature that makes it distinguishable from water from other
sources and therefore traceable.
Although the δ18O data were insufficient for determining dilution factors for the waters sampled, the
discrepancy in δ18O values has helped us towards delineating the hydrological catchment. Most δ18O
data were analysed from a single sampling event (in September 2006) and our inferences have been
heavily weighted by the results of that event. Given that δ18O values fluctuate naturally, due to
meteorological and climatological variations, we recommend that further δ18O data are collected to
improve the reliability of our conclusions. Accurate knowledge of water mixing within the catchment
can only be gained if δ18O data collection incorporated sampling all potential end-members, i.e.
surface waters, rain water and/or soil water, and groundwater. Thus, as well as broadening the
geographic range of water sampling and analysis for δ18O, concurrent sampling should be repeated at
varying times of the year to correct for temporal variations.
From the δ18O data we have identified that water sourced from the Orari River supports flows in:
Coopers Creek at Spring Farm; Dobies Stream; Ohapi creeks, Te Ao and Vance streams. On the
other hand, no such chemical relationship with the Orari River water was identified in Raukapuka
Creek or Worners Creek. It therefore appears that these two spring-fed streams (which are located
near Geraldine) are sourced from rainfall on the plain (land surface recharge), or possibly even Waihi
River water.
Similarly, about the Clandeboye district, the base-flow of Coopers Creek along its lower reach and
spring water in various drains, together with groundwater, exhibit chemical signatures indicative of
water that is more likely to have originated from the Orton plain (and quite possibly from the Rangitata
River), rather than bear any chemical association with the Orari River. Further investigation of the
hydrochemical signatures of groundwater on the Orton plain and Rangitata River water is
recommended to reliably evaluate the source of these spring waters. Such investigation should be
completed before the planned South Rangitata South Irrigation Scheme is developed, because the
irrigation scheme that is proposed will artificially promote the mixing of surface water and groundwater,
hence disrupt the natural hydrological system. At this stage, we hypothesise the springs are likely to
bear relation to deep groundwater movement in the old Rangitata fluvial fan deposits.
We are confident that the flows in Ohapi Creeks are related to groundwater sourced from the Orari
River. Thus, surface water and groundwater in these systems are inherently linked. Groundwater
study in the Ohapi basin was made using a very limited number of wells, from which it is only possible
to make generalised conclusions about surface water - groundwater relationships in this area. We
have reviewed some 18O isotope data related to groundwater sampling conducted after the main 2006
- 2007 field investigation, from which we believe groundwater as far south as Milford, near Temuka
may be affected by Orari River water. Irrigation obfuscates the problem of using hydrochemistry to

determine the natural hydrological conditions in the Ohapi catchment, by way of artificially transferring
surface water (known to be Orari River water derived) into shallow groundwater, which may not
necessarily be of similar origin. As we have already stated, aquifer testing and stream-bed
conductance surveys would be useful practical methods to apply in the Ohapi catchment for the
purpose of gaining more understanding of the surface water – groundwater connections in that basin.
6.3.2 Piezometric levels

Monthly groundwater levels were monitored in 62 wells throughout the catchment. Higher frequency,
continuous water level datasets were recorded in 11 wells. Groundwater contours across the
catchment reveal that there is a bulk tendency for shallow groundwater to flow in a south-westerly
direction, towards Ohapi basin. This is consistent with the concept that the buried, historic Umukaha
river channel plays a significant role in routing water within the catchment.
Seasonal variations in groundwater levels are greatest at the top-end of the coastal catchment, as is
to be expected given the water table hinges about sea water level. Moreover, significant fluctuations
occur in the vicinity of Coopers Creek / SH72 road crossing, which relates to the occurrence of dry
river reaches, and resulting loss of water storage, in this locality.
At this stage, only the most basic analysis of water level data has been undertaken. We can conclude
that generally, groundwater levels are quick to respond to recharge events, notably river flows. The
response time of shallow groundwater to storm-flows events in surface waters appears to be in the
order of hours to days, thus only water levels recorded on data loggers provide meaningful data.
The hydrodynamics of the shallow groundwater system is contained in the groundwater level records.
Detailed analysis of these records combined with consideration of recharge data (river stages, rainfall
events and water abstraction events) can provide technical insight into the recharge dynamics of the
shallow aquifer. An understanding can be made of how these vary in space, as well as time across the
catchment. If reliable mathematical relationships can be identified between river stages and
groundwater levels then there is a possibility that such information could be applied in a predictive
mode, hence be useful in integrated surface water – groundwater management. We suggest
mathematical analysis be completed of the water level, rainfall and irrigation records collected during
the study, for the purpose of: investigating the dynamic response of the shall groundwater system to
recharge events; estimating aquifer storage properties; determining the physical and/or mathematical
relationship of the shallow groundwater resource with surface water systems, and; characterising the
spatial variability of such relationships. Although extensive collection of water usage ceased at the end
of the field investigation, groundwater levels, river flows, and rainfall have remained to be monitored
within the catchment and should be incorporated in any analyses to improve the reliability of any
conclusions.
6.3.3 Hydrological catchment area

On the basis of hydrochemical and piezometric evidence, together with considerations about the
geology, we have mapped the lateral extent of the Orari hydrological catchment to just beyond the
northern banks of Coopers Creek and as far south as Temuka. In terms of area, this equates to
206 km2, which is close to the 230 km2 quoted for the currently recognised surface water catchment.
From the perspective of equating water balances for the Orari hydrological system, we believe it is
advantageous to incorporate the Waihi catchment, since the Orari inadvertently discharges to the
Waihi through groundwater. Omission of the Waihi basin increases the uncertainty of any water
balance.
6.4 Catchment water budget

Based on assumptions about surface water and groundwater flowpaths, identified from the field
investigations, a basic systems model for the surface water and shallow aquifer resources of the Orari
hydrological catchment has been developed. The model treats the catchment as six inter-connected
sub-basins that incorporate the Waihi catchment. The model has been developed into a working
mathematical model, albeit no attempt has been made to develop mass transfer functions that might
reliably simulate groundwater storage dynamics.

Land surface recharge calculations were undertaken as part of our water budget analysis. We
estimate that 18 - 43% (average 23%) of rainfall infiltrates to groundwater in the various basins. LSR is
lowest in the Ohapi and lower Orari basins, owing to the presence of heavier soils.
Simulated water use was compared with actual water use, from which we noted that in practice
irrigation commenced earlier than what we assumed. The reason for this discrepancy has not been
analysed, but could signify that the general assumption that the irrigation season is from October –
April is in error and may need reviewing. Generally, water use within the Orari catchment was below
that what was predicted, except for in the Ohapi basin, where water use was more than predicted.
The systems model was applied to calculate a catchment water balance for the period of field study,
based on evaluation of monthly water budgets. Notwithstanding errors inherent to the model, it can be
concluded that water resources within the Orari hydrological catchment are heavily dependent upon
the flow pattern of the Orari River that is directly determined by outflows from the upland catchment.
Based on our simulation of the 2006 – 2007 irrigation year we estimate that the Orari River contributed
towards 74% of active water inputs to the system. Although rainfall accounted for 53% of all basic
water inputs to the catchment, after considering evapotranspiration losses, rainfall only contributed
approximately 20% of the net water inputs to the catchment. External contributions from Coopers
Creek and lateral inflows of groundwater from the Orton plain accounted for only 6% of total water
inputs. In total, we estimate a net volume of 337 Mm3 of water entered the hydrological system
(305 Mm3 neglecting rainfall inputs to the Waihi basin).
Over the course of a year, as much as 54% of the Orari River flows from the Gorge were “lost” from
the Orari basin and we believed served to provide recharge to the Ohapi and Waihi sub-basins. The
Ohapi catchment is almost entirely dependent upon sub-surface flows emanating from the Orari River
and it is estimated that the Ohapi Creeks drain close to 50% of such water entering the catchment - in
effect returning it to the Orari River, close to its mouth.
Several errors in our systems model appear to stem from various assumptions made about the Waihi
basin that were constrained by the fact that the Waihi was not an explicit component of the catchment
investigation at the time of the field study. These errors reflect outstanding holes in our knowledge of
the extent of the inter-relationship between Orari River and Waihi River systems. We construe from
our analyses that groundwater derived from the Orari River might influence Waihi River flows further
downstream than was anticipated prior to the field study, i.e. downstream of Winchester – this is
consistent with the uncertainty we also have about the relationship between the spring-fed streams
about Temuka and the Orari River water. Our water balance estimates have been made using
simulated datasets of Waihi River flows at Winchester that we suspect contain significant errors.
These errors could be reduced if components of flow from the Te Moana catchment and Waihi
catchment could be separated from an existing Temuka River flow recorder dataset, collected at
Manse Bridge, Temuka (recorder site: 69602).
We believe that the systems model provides a useful basic tool that can be refined to provide an
understanding of the water balance for the Orari hydrological catchment. This includes an estimate of
offshore groundwater flux, lumped with discharges to deeper groundwater. We recommended that a
sensitivity analysis of the systems model be conducted, which should include an assessment of
groundwater observation levels based on spatial and temporal weights, together with an assessment
of the errors connected with the assumptions of Waihi River flows. Development of transfer functions
for simulating the time delay in groundwater responses to recharge and discharge could greatly
improve the reliability of the model, albeit longer datasets would be required to achieve this with any
certainty. The process of identifying transfer functions overlaps with the advanced analysis
recommended of water level records.
We conceive that if pursuit of a technically-advanced estimator of water reliability is sought for the
catchment then focus should be on statistical analysis of flows for the Orari River, since it is clear that
hydrological system is highly dynamic, moreover, recharge of the shallow groundwater system is
heavily dependent upon inputs from the Orari River. On the basis of the findings of our field
investigations, we would have to assume that it is more likely than not that abstraction of shallow
groundwater anywhere in the Orari hydrological catchment will have some effect on surface water

systems. There is potential that further information regarding hydrodynamics of surface water –
groundwater relationships could be gained from advanced mathematical analysis of the hydrological
data collected from the 2006 -2007 field study.
Finally, we recommend that more knowledge be gathered of the deep groundwater resource in the
Orari catchment and its inter-relationship with the shallow groundwater/surface water systems. We
postulate that the residual in our catchment water balance is in part probably attributed to some flux of
water from the surficial hydrological system to the deep aquifer; pumping tests conducted in the deep
aquifer, are suggestive of leakage effects, thus hydraulic connectivity between the shallow and deep
aquifer systems; piezometric water levels in deep wells at the coast show an upward vertical flux of
groundwater and our water chemistry evidence suggests such deep, upwelling might be supplying the
shallow groundwater. We hypothesise that because the deep aquifer constitutes historic Rangitata
River fan deposits, it is likely that the hydrological catchment of the deep groundwater system is
different from the shallow Orari system. A piezometric survey should be made from levels measured
from deep wells spanning the Rangitata - Orton – Orari basins.
7 References
Aitchison-Earl, P., 1999, Rangitata-Opihi and Levels Plains Aquifer Test Review, Environment
Canterbury Report U99/29.
Aitchison-Earl, P., 2001, Rangitata-Orari Deep Groundwater Review, Environment Canterbury

Unpublished Report U02/71.
Aitchison-Earl, P., Scott, D., and Sanders, R., 2004, Groundwater allocation limits – Guidelines for the
Canterbury Region, Environment Canterbury Report U04/02.
Barrell, D.J.A., Forsyth, P.J. and McSaveny, M.J., 1996. Quaternary geology of the Rangitata Fan,
Canterbury Plains, New Zealand. Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences report 96/23.
Brown, L.J., 2001. Groundwaters of the Canterbury Region, Environment Canterbury Report R00/10
(revised by Weeber, J.H., 2002).
Burbery, L.F. and Vincent, C., 2009. Hydrochemistry of South Canterbury Aquifers. Environment
Canterbury Report R09/34.
Clark, I.D. and Fritz, P., 1997. Environmental Isotopes in Hydrogeology. Lewis Publishers, New York.
Cooksey, K., 2008. Hydrogeology of the Mackenzie Basin. MSc thesis, University of Canterbury,
Department of Geological Sciences
Cox, S.C. and Barrell, D.J.A, 2007. Geology of the Aoraki Area. Institute of Geological and Nuclear
Sciences 1: 250000 Geological Map 15.
Davey, G., 2004. Stream Depletion in the Ohapi Creek Catchment, Environment Canterbury Report
U04/55.
Davey, G., 2006. Definition of Canterbury Plains Aquifers. Environment Canterbury Report U06/10.
de Joux, R.T., 1980. The Water Resources of the Orari River. South Canterbury Catchment Board
Publication No. 24.
Dommisse, J., 2006. Hydrogeology of the Hinds Rangitata Plain, and the Impacts of the Mayfield-
Hinds Irrigation Scheme. MSc thesis, University of Canterbury, Department of Geological Sciences.
Environmental Consultancy Services, 1997. Rangitata-Temuka Groundwater Review, Issues and

Recommended Future Investigations, Canterbury Regional Council Unpublished Report U97/34.

Ettema, M., 2007. Hydrological Droughts in the Canterbury Region between 1998 and 2006.
Environment Canterbury Report U07/7.
Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO), 1998. Crop evapotranspiration,
Guidelines for computing crop water requirements, FAO Irrigation and drainage paper 56.
Gillespie, 1958. South Canterbury – A Record of Settlement: Timaru, Timaru Herald Company.
Hickley, M, 2003. Open presentation to the Geraldine Community, October 2003. Unpublished.
Jenkins, C.T., 1977. Computation of Rate and Volume of Stream Depletion by Wells; in Techniques of
Water of Water Resources Investigations of United States Geological Survey, Book 4, 3rd edition.
Lynn, I.H., Harrison, J.M., Basher L.R., Webb, T.H., 1997. A Geomorphic Interpretation of the Orari-
Waihi-Temuka and Opihi Rivers. Technical Report U097/34, Canterbury Regional Council.
McEwan, G., 2001. The Hydrogeology of the Orari River Shallow Aquifer, MSc thesis, University of
Canterbury, Department of Engineering.
McKerchar, A.I. and Schmidt, J., 2007. Decreases in Low Flows of the Lower Selwyn River? Journal
of Hydrology (NZ) 46 (2): 63-72 2007.
Scarf, F., 2003. Low flow of the mainstem and tributaries of the Orari and Temuka Rivers and Ohapi
Stream, Environment Canterbury Technical Report U03/38.
Scott, 2004. Groundwater Allocation Limits: land-based recharge estimates. Environment Canterbury
Technical Report U04/97.
Stewart, M., Trompetter, V. and van der Raaij, R., 2002. Age and Source of Canterbury Plains
Groundwater. Environment Canterbury Report U02/30.
Taylor C.B, Wilson, D.D., Brown, L.J., Stewart, M.K, Burden, R.J. and Brailsford, G.W., 1989. Sources
and Flow of North Canterbury Plains Groundwater, New Zealand. Journal of Hydrology, 106: 311-340.
van der Raaij, R., 2007. Groundwater age-dating in South Canterbury and Orari Areas. Institute of
Geological and Nuclear Sciences Consultancy Report 2007/294.
Vincent, C., 2007 File note IN6C/47-3 Collection of Orari Abstraction data. Unpublished.
Vincent, C. (2005) Hydrogeology of the Upper Selwyn Catchment. MSc thesis, University of
Canterbury, Department of Engineering.
8 Acknowledgements
We acknowledge the efforts of Graeme Horrell and Craig Vincent, who in their former respective roles
as surface water hydrologist and hydrogeologist at Environment Canterbury, were responsible for
planning and undertaking much of the field investigation. Also, Lawrence Smith (Environment
Canterbury) was significantly involved in the collection of field data and we acknowledge his
contribution to the project. We are grateful to the community of the Orari catchment, in particular
consent holders who cooperated in the monitoring of water usage data, as well as individuals who
have provided insightful information to the project. We extend our thanks to Boroman Consultants
whose responsibility was to calibrate pumps and download water metering data, and David Scott for
helping with the land surface recharge modelling. Finally, we thank Darren Leftley (Environment
Canterbury) and MS Srinivasan (NIWA) for internal and external review respectively.

Appendix 1
Rainfall results
Figure A1-1: Isohyets of monthly rainfall (mm) for 2006-2007 investigation period, contoured
based on kriging of data from 13 rain gauges listed in Table 3-1, starting October
2006. September 2006 data not plotted because there was such little rainfall
(between 8 and 30 mm at any recording station)

Appendix 2
Flow duration curves
100000
Who le reco rd
06-07 o nly
M A LF
M in flo w
10000
Flow (L/s)
1000
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percentage of tim e flow is exceeded (%)
Figure A2-1: Flow duration curve for the Orari River, recorded at the Gorge
100000
Naturalised fo r SW and GW abs
Naturalised fo r SW abs
10000 Orari at SH1
M A LF
Flow (L/s)
1000
100
10
1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Figure A2-2: Flow duration curve for the Orari River, recorded at SH1

100000
10000
Flow (L/s)
1000
100 Only naturalised fo r SW and GW abs when flo w at SH1>0

Only naturalised fo r SW abs when flo w at SH1>0
Orari at u/s Ohapi
M A LF
M in flo w
10
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Figure A2-3: Flow duration curve for the Orari River, recorded upstream of confluence with
Ohapi Creek
10000
06-07 o nly
M A LF
M in flo w
1000
Flow (L/s)
100
10
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Figure A2-4: Flow duration curve for Coopers Creek, recorded at SH72

10000
Naturalised flo w fo r SW and GW abs
Naturalised flo w fo r SW abs
Site 69513 Co o pers Creek at u/s Orari Co nfluence
M A LF
M in flo w
1000
Flow (L/s)
100
10
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
8
Figure A2-5: Flow duration curve for Coopers Creek, recorded upstream of confluence with
Orari River
100000
Site 69509 Ohapi Creek at M ilfo rd Clandebo ye Rd
M A LF
M in flo w
10000
Flow (L/s)
1000
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Figure A2-6: Flow duration curve for Ohapi Creek, recorded at Milford-Clandeboye Road

100000 Who le reco rd

06-07 o nly
M A LF
10000
Flow (L/s)
1000
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Figure A2-7: Flow duration curve for the Waihi River, recorded at DOC reserve
100000
06-07 only
MALF
10000
Flow (L/s)
1000
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Percentage of time flow is exceeded (%)
Figure A2-8: Flow duration curve for the Waihi River, recorded at SH72

10000
Naturalised flow for SW and GW abs
Naturalised flow for SW abs
Site 69684 Dobies Stream at Woolscours Road
MALF
1000
Flow (L/s)
100
10
0 20 40 60 80 100
Percentage of time flow is exceeded (%)
Figure A2-9: Flow duration curve for Dobies Stream, recorded at Woolscours Road, near
Winchester

Appendix 3
Timaru District Council discharges
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3

average
16-Nov-06 27-Mar-07 21-Jun-07
site number site name location source map reference TDC estimate
(L/s) (L/s) (L/s) (L/s)
169511 S/W C Thew/Inglis Rd Orari J37:6613-9286 100 - 300 l/s n/m n/m n/m n/m
169512 S/W D Orari Gorge Stn Orari J37:6685-9115 5 - 100 l/s n/m n/m n/m n/m
1695142 S/W E Burdon Rd Orari J37:6860-8855 max rate 10 l/s 2.5 8.0 16.0 8.8
1695141 S/W F Flatman Rd Orari J37:6953-8445 max rate 24 l/s 15.0 19.0 9.0 14.3
S/W G Orari J37:7027-8255 max rate 10 l/s Site Not Used n/a
1695140 S/W H SH 72 Orari J37:7024-8243 max rate 10 l/s 28.0 14.0 24.0 22.0
1695152 S/W I Orari Hall Orari K37:7081-5682 max rate 10 l/s 14.0 9.0 11.5
1695138 S/W J Stover Farm Orari K37:7118-8132 max rate 10 l/s 2.0 0.8 2.0 1.6
1695139 S/W K Bennett Rd Orari J37:6980-8043 n/m 5.0 4.0 3.0 4.0
1695144 S/W L Chalmers Rd Orari K38:8187-7796 max rate 20 l/s 1.0 Dry 24.0 12.5
1695143 S/W M Mahan Rd Orari K38:8209-7594 max rate 20 l/s Dry Dry Dry Dry
1695151 S/W NN Rolleston Rd Orari K38:8236-6664 Dry Dry Dry Dry
1695149 S/W N Rolleston Rd Orari K38:8250-6676 max rate 20 l/s 8.0 Dry 10.0 9.0
1695137 S/W O Parke Rd Orari K38:8620-6623 max rate 20 l/s Dry Dry Dry Dry
1695145 S/W P Old Main Sth Rd Orari K38:7526-7455 max rate 20 l/s Dry Dry 6.0 6.0
1695148 S/W Q Parke Rd Culvert Orari K38:8600-6529 max rate 20 l/s Dry Dry Dry Dry
1695146 S/W V Beach Outlet Orari K38:8667-6480 max rate 20 l/s 11.0 Dry 2.0 6.5
1695136 S/W R Beach Outlet Orari K38:8740-6537 max rate 20 l/s 0.7 Dry Dry 0.7
1695150 S/W S Parke Rd Orari K38:8900-6648 max rate 20 l/s Dry Dry Dry Dry
n/m = not measured
n/a = not applicable
123
Appendix 4
River hydrographs
100000
90000
80000
70000
Flow (L/s)
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
1/09/2006 1/11/2006 1/01/2007 3/03/2007 3/05/2007 3/07/2007 2/09/2007
Date
Figure A4-1: Hydrograph for Orari River at Gorge (69505), September 2006- August 2007
120000
Naturalised fo r SW and GW abs
100000
Orari at SH1
80000
Flow (L/s)
60000
40000
20000
0
1/09/2006 1/11/2006 1/01/2007 3/03/2007 3/05/2007 3/07/2007 2/09/2007
Date
Figure A4-2: Hydrograph for Orari River at SH1 (69510), September 2006- August 2007

3000 Naturalised fo r SW and GW abs

2500 Orari at SH1
Spo t gaugings
2000
Flow (L/s)
1500
1000
500
0
1/09/2006 1/11/2006 1/01/2007 3/03/2007 3/05/2007 3/07/2007 2/09/2007
Date
Figure A4-3: Detail of Figure A4-3, i.e. hydrograph for Orari River at SH1
100000
80000 Only naturalised fo r SW abs when flo w at SH1>0
Orari at P arke Ro ad
70000
Flow (L/s)
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
1/09/2006 1/11/2006 1/01/2007 3/03/2007 3/05/2007 3/07/2007 2/09/2007
Date
Figure A4-4: Hydrograph for Orari River at Parke Road (69514), September 2006- August 2007

10000
8000 Only naturalised fo r SW abs when flo w at SH1>0
Orari at P arke Ro ad
7000 Spo t gaugings
Flow (L/s)
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
1/09/2006 1/11/2006 1/01/2007 3/03/2007 3/05/2007 3/07/2007 2/09/2007
Date
Figure A4-5: Detail of Figure A4-4, i.e. hydrograph for Orari River at Parke Road (69514),
September 2006- August 2007
5000
4500
4000
3500
Flow (L/s)
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
1/09/2006 1/11/2006 1/01/2007 3/03/2007 3/05/2007 3/07/2007 2/09/2007
Date
Figure A4-6: Hydrograph for Coopers Creek at SH72 (69515), September 2006- August 2007

800
700
600
500
Flow (L/s)
400
300
200
100 Co o pers Creek at U/S Orari Co nfluence
Spo t gaugings
0
1/09/2006 1/11/2006 1/01/2007 3/03/2007 3/05/2007 3/07/2007 2/09/2007
Date
Figure A4-7: Hydrograph for Coopers Creek at Upstream of Orari Confluence (69513),
September 2006- August 2007
5000
4500
4000
3500
Flow (L/s)
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000 Naturalised flo w fo r SW and GW abs
500 Site 69509 Ohapi Creek at M ilfo rd Clandebo ye Rd
Spo t gaugings
0
1/09/2006 1/11/2006 1/01/2007 3/03/2007 3/05/2007 3/07/2007 2/09/2007
Date
Figure A4-8: Hydrograph for Ohapi Creek at Milford Clandeboye Road (69509), September
2006- August 2007

25000
20000
Flow (L/s)
15000
10000
5000
0
1/09/2006 1/11/2006 1/01/2007 3/03/2007 3/05/2007 3/07/2007 2/09/2007
Date
Figure A4-9: Hydrograph for the Waihi River at DOC reserve (69649), September 2006- August
2007
30000
Naturalised flo w fo r GW abs
25000
Spo t gaugings
20000
Flow (L/s)
15000
10000
5000
0
1/09/2006 1/11/2006 1/01/2007 3/03/2007 3/05/2007 3/07/2007 2/09/2007
Date
Figure A4-10: Hydrograph for the Waihi River at SH72 (69683), September 2006- August 2007

400
350
300
250
Flow (L/s)
200
150
100
Naturalised flo w fo r GW abs
50
0
1/09/2006 1/11/2006 1/01/2007 3/03/2007 3/05/2007 3/07/2007 2/09/2007
Date
Figure A4-11: Detailed view of Figure A4-10, i.e.hydrograph for the Waihi River at SH72
(69683), September 2006- August 2007
2500
Naturalised flo wn fo r SW and GW abs
Naturalised flo wn fo r SW abs
Site 69684 Do bies Stream at Wo o lsco urs Ro ad
2000 Spo t gaugings
1500
Flow (L/s)
1000
500
0
1/09/2006 1/11/2006 1/01/2007 3/03/2007 3/05/2007 3/07/2007 2/09/2007
Date
Figure A4-12: Hydrograph for Dobies Stream at Woolscours Road (69684), September 2006-
August 2007

Appendix 5
130
Flow correlations (yellow highlight indicates most significant of strong correlations, where applicable)
A5.1Orari River (naturalised for surface water only)

Correlate with: Gorge SH1 Parke Road (upstream of Ohapi confluence)
10000
Orari at Burdons Crossing (naturalised
9000 y = 0.9785x - 457.59

R2 = 0.9792
8000
7000
for SW only)
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
Orari at Gorge
Burdon’s Crossing
6000 6000 6000
Orari at SH72 (naturalised for SW only)

y = 0.9632x - 3635.8 y = 0.9977x + 611.74 y = 0.9794x - 1206.9
5000 R2 = 0.9601 5000 R2 = 0.8848 5000 R2 = 0.7974
4000 4000 4000
3000 3000 3000

2000 2000 2000
1000 1000 1000
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
Orari at Gorge Orari at SH1 (naturalised for SW only) Orari at Parke Road (naturalised for SW only)
SH72
6000
y = 0.8134x - 3605.9
5000 R2 = 0.7178
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
Orari at Gorge
SH1
8000 8000 8000
Orari at Rolleston Bridge (naturalised

y = 0.8917x - 2351.7 y = 1.1091x + 1341.8 y = 1.1702x - 1156.2
7000 7000 7000 R2 = 0.9861
R2 = 0.7326 R2 = 0.971
6000 6000 6000
for SW only)
for SW only)
for SW only)
5000 5000 5000
4000 4000 4000
3000 3000 3000
2000 2000 2000
1000 1000 1000
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
Orari at Gorge Orari at SH1 (naturalised for SW only) Orari at Parke Road (naturalised for SW only)
Rolleston Bridge
8000 8000
Orari at Parke Road (naturalised for SW

y = 0.5729x + 255.36 y = 0.9431x + 2142.7
7000 7000
R2 = 0.7553 R2 = 0.9749
6000 6000
5000 5000
only) (L/s)
only)
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Orari at Gorge Orari at SH1 (naturalised for SW only) (L/s)
Parke Road (recorder) upstream of Ohapi confluence
8000 8000
y = 0.5729x + 255.36 y = 0.9431x + 2142.7

7000 7000
R2 = 0.7553 R2 = 0.9749
6000 6000
5000 5000
only) (L/s)
only)
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Orari at Gorge Orari at SH1 (naturalised for SW only) (L/s)

131
132
A5.2 Orari River (naturalised for surface water and groundwater)
10000
Orari at Burdons Crossing (naturalised
y = 0.9795x - 453.73
9000
R2 = 0.9798
8000
for SW and GW) (L/s)
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
Orari at Gorge (L/s)
Burdon’s Crossing
6000 6000 6000
Orari at SH72 (naturalised for SW and

y = 0.9593x - 3597.2
Orari at SH72 (naturalised for SW and

y = 0.9993x + 608.66 y = 0.9869x - 1250.5
R2 = 0.96 R2 = 0.8837 R2 = 0.8042
5000 5000 5000
4000 4000 4000

Orari at SH72
GW)
GW)
3000 3000 3000
2000 2000 2000
1000 1000 1000
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
Orari at Gorge Orari at SH1 (naturalised for SW and GW) Orari at Parke Road (naturalised for SW and GW)
SH72
6000
Orari at SH1 (natuarlised for SW and GW)
y = 0.8086x - 3561.3
5000 R2 = 0.7157
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
Orari at Gorge
SH1
8000 8000 8000

y = 0.8922x - 2319 y = 1.1076x + 1361.6
7000 R2 = 0.7463 7000 R2 = 0.9738 7000 y = 1.1706x - 1163.5
R2 = 0.9856
Orari at Rolleston Bridge

6000 6000 6000
for SW and GW)
for SW and GW)

5000 5000 5000
4000 4000 4000
3000 3000 3000
2000 2000 2000
1000 1000 1000
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
Orari at Gorge Orari at SH1 (naturalised for SW and GW) Orari at Parke Road
Rolleston Bridge
8000 8000
Orari at Parke Road (naturalised for both

y = 0.5786x + 246.56 y = 0.9404x + 2167.4
7000 7000
Orari at Parke Road (Recorder)
R2 = 0.7705 R2 = 0.976
(naturalised for SW and GW)
6000 6000
SW and GW) (L/s)

5000 5000
4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Orari at Gorge Orari at SH1 (naturalised for SW and GW) (L/s)

133
A5.3 Coopers Creek (natural flow only)

Correlate with: Orari at Gorge Coopers at SH72
160 160
Scotsburn in Gorge above Bruce's place
Scotsburn in Gorge above Bruce's place

y = 0.0068x + 32.338 y = 0.169x + 40.988
140 140
R2 = 0.1508 R2 = 0.5998
120 120
100 100
80 80
60 60
40 40
20 20
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Orari at Gorge Coopers Creek at SH72
Scotsburn in Gorge above Bruce’s Place

60 60
Coopers Creek 1 at Scotsburn Road

y = 0.0792x + 7.2996
y = 0.0016x + 11.672
50 50 R2 = 0.7929
R2 = 0.0483
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Coopers Creek 1 (Kowhai Stream) at Scotsburn

Road 35
y = 0.0291x + 13.222
35 30 R2 = 0.455
30 y = -7E-05x + 18.195
25
R2 = 0.0004
25 20
20 15
15 10
10 5
5 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
0
Coopers Creek at SH72
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
Orari at Gorge
Coopers Creek 2 at Scotsburn Road 600

Coopers Creek at North Boundary Road
600 y = 0.8913x - 62.119

500 R2 = 0.9662
y = 0.0229x - 41.31
500
R2 = 0.1009 400
400
300
300 200
200 100
100 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
Orari at Gorge

800 800
Coopers Creek at downstream Springs
Coopers Creek at downstream Springs
y = 0.0249x + 88.441 y = 0.981x + 63.678

700 700 R2 = 0.9733
R2 = 0.0988
600 600
500 500
Farm
Farm
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Coopers Creek at downstream Springs Farm


700
y = 0.0362x - 31.333
Coopers Creek at SH72 recorder
600
R2 = 0.2061
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
Orari at Gorge
Coopers Creek at SH72 recorder

600 600
y = 0.0224x - 54.694 y = 0.8559x - 72.772

500 500 R2 = 0.9556
R2 = 0.1031

400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
A5.4 Coopers Creek (naturalised for surface water only)

700 700
y = 0.0339x + 162.02 y = 0.1306x + 318.85
Coopers Creek at U/S Orari Confluence
R2 = 0.5815 R2 = 0.055
600 600
(naturalised for SW only) (L/s)
500 500
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Orari at Gorge (L/s) Cooper Creek at SH72 (L/s)
Coopers Creek at u/s Orari Confluence
Correlate with: Orari at SH1 Orari at Parke Road

700 700
y = 0.0645x + 251.1 y = 0.0617x + 138.29
R2 = 0.8413 R2 = 0.8256
600 600
500 500
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
Orari at SH1 (naturalised for SW only) (L/s) Orari at Parke Road (naturalised for SW only) (L/s)

A5.5 Coopers Creek (naturalised for surface water and groundwater)

700 700

(naturalised for SW and GW) (L/s)

y = 0.0368x + 154.35 y = 0.1178x + 328.46
600 600
R2 = 0.6338 R2 = 0.0413
500 500
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Orari at Gorge (L/s) Cooper Creek at SH72 (L/s)
Correlate with: Orari at SH1 Orari at Parke Road

700 700


(natuarlised for SW and GW) (L/s)
y = 0.0646x + 262.13 y = 0.0637x + 138.07

600 600
R2 = 0.7973 R2 = 0.8122
500 500
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
Orari at SH1 (naturalised for SW and GW) (L/s) Orari at Parke Road (naturalised for SW and GW) (L/s)
A5.6 Ohapi Creek (natural flow only)

Correlate with: Orari at Gorge Ohapi at Milford Clandeboye Rd
900 900
Ohapi Creek North Branch at Muff Road
y = 0.0461x + 389.4 y = 0.2671x + 157.09

800 800
R2 = 0.5506 R2 = 0.3157
700 700
600 600
500 500
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Orari at Gorge Ohapi Creek at Milford Clandeboye Recorder

A5.7 Ohapi Creek (naturalised for surface water only)

Correlate with: Orari at Gorge Waihi at DOC Reserve
2500 2500
y = 0.0636x + 1421.5 y = 1.8382x + 1065.4
Road (Recorder)(naturalised for SW
Road (Recorder)(naturalised for SW

Ohapi Creek at Milford Clandeboye
Ohapi Creek at Milford Clandeboye

R2 = 0.2365 R2 = 0.5696
2000 2000
1500 1500
only)
only)
1000 1000
500 500
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Orari at Gorge Waihi at DOC Reserve
Ohapi Creek at Milford Clandeboye Road
Correlate with: Orari at Gorge Ohapi at Milford Clandeboye Rd

500 500
Ohapi Creek South Branch at Scott Road

y = 0.0144x + 330.45 y = 0.0881x + 249.68

450 450
R2 = 0.7108 R2 = 0.4551
400 400
(naturalised for SW only)

350 350
300 300
250 250
200 200
150 150
100 100
50 50
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Orari at Gorge Ohapi Creek at Milford Clandeboye Recorder (naturalised for SW only)

Ohapi Creek South Branch at Guild Road
900 900
y = 0.0142x + 539.5 y = 0.2599x + 158.32
800 800
R2 = 0.1215 R2 = 0.6966
700 700
600 600
500 500
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

600 600
Ohapi Creek Middle Branch at Guild
Ohapi Creek Middle Branch at Guild
y = 0.0127x + 364.36 y = 0.1526x + 162.48

Road (naturalised for SW only)
Road (naturalised for SW only)
500 R2 = 0.2077 500 R2 = 0.5147
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Ohapi Creek Middle Branch at Guild Road

1000 1000
Clandeboye Road (naturalised for SW
Clandeboye Road (naturalised for SW

y = 0.0497x + 411.08
Ohapi Creek North Branch at Milford

Ohapi Creek North Branch at Milford
900 900 y = 0.3568x + 40.388

R2 = 0.6671 R2 = 0.5882
800 800
700 700
600 600
only)
only)
500 500
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Ohapi Creek North Branch at Milford Clandeboye Road
Correlate with: Ohapi at Milford Clandeboye Rd Ohapi at Milford Clandeboye Rd

70
Ohapi Creek East Branch at Stopbank
y = 0.0233x - 29.789
Outlet (naturalised for SW only)
60 R2 = 0.1174
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Ohapi Creek at Milford Clandeboye Recorder (naturalised for SW only)
Ohapi Creek East Branch at Stopbank Outlet

2500
y = 1.0107x - 99.213
Ohapi Creek at Stopbank Outlet
R2 = 0.9211
2000
1500
1000
500
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Ohapi Creek at Milford Clandeboye Recorder (naturalised for SW only)
Ohapi Creek at Stopbank Outlet

A5.8 Waihi River (naturalised for surface water only)
Correlate with: Orari at Gorge Waihi at DOC Reserve Waihi at SH72
500 500 500
y = 0.0231x + 39.792 y = 0.814x - 154.58 y = 0.6128x - 91.032
450 450 450
Waihi River at Woodbury Road

R2 = 0.1462 R2 = 0.6493 R2 = 0.9758
400 400 400
350 350 350
300 300 300
250 250 250
200 200 200
150 150 150
100 100 100
50 50 50
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Orari at Gorge Waihi River at DOC Reserve Recorder Waihi River at SH72 Recorder
Woodbury Road
1000 1000
y = 0.0419x + 191.92 y = 1.3537x - 113.53
900 900
R2 = 0.1842 R2 = 0.691
Waihi River at SH72 Recorder

800 800
700 700
600 600
500 500
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Orari at Gorge Waihi River at DOC Reserve Recorder
SH72 Recorder
450 450 450
y = 0.0229x - 43.981 y = 0.8943x - 270.76 y = 0.6041x - 172.45
400 400 400
Waihi River at Coach Road (L/s)

R2 = 0.1371 R2 = 0.7506 R2 = 0.908
Waihi River at Coach Road
Waihi River at Coach Road
350 350 350
300 300 300
250 250 250
200 200 200
150 150 150
100 100 100
50 50 50
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Orari at Gorge Waihi River at DOC Reserve Recorder Waihi River at SH72 Recorder (L/s)
Coach Road
139
140
3000 3000 3000
y = 0.1401x + 770.06 y = 2.5205x + 526.69 y = 1.9483x + 702.52
Waihi River at SH72 (Winchester)

2500 R2 = 0.4516 2500 R2 = 0.5255 2500 R2 = 0.8326

2000 2000 2000
1500 1500 1500
1000 1000 1000
500 500 500
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
SH72 Winchester
A5.9 Waihi River (naturalised for surface water and groundwater)

500 500 500
y = 0.809x - 151.16 y = 0.612x - 90.129
450 y = 0.0235x + 39.612 450 450

R2 = 0.1514 R2 = 0.6463 R2 = 0.9748
400 400 400
(naturalised for GW)

350 350 350
300 300 300
250 250 250
200 200 200
150 150 150

100 100 100
50 50 50
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Orari at Gorge Waihi River at DOC Reserve Recorder Waihi River at SH72 Recorder (naturalised for GW)
Woodbury Road
1000 1000
y = 0.0422x + 191.74 y = 1.3487x - 110.1
900 900
R2 = 0.1882 R2 = 0.6901
800 800
700 700
600 600
500 500
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
SH72 Recorder
450 450 450
Waihi River at Coach Road (naturalised

y = 0.0228x - 42.781 y = 0.8936x - 269.99 y = 0.6055x - 173.46
400 400 400
R2 = 0.1359 R2 = 0.7515 R2 = 0.9094
350 350 350
300 300 300
for GW) (L/s)

for GW)
for GW)
250 250 250
200 200 200
150 150 150
100 100 100
50 50 50
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Orari at Gorge Waihi River at DOC Reserve Recorder Waihi River at SH72 Recorder (naturalised for GW) (L/s)
Coach Road
3000 3000 3000
y = 2.4206x + 614.49 y = 1.9501x + 747.9
y = 0.144x + 798.31

R2 = 0.4785 R2 = 0.8186
R2 = 0.4715

2500 2500 2500
2000 2000 2000
1500 1500 1500
1000 1000 1000
500 500 500
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
SH72 Winchester
141
142
A5.10 Dobies Stream (naturalised for surface water only)
Correlate with: Orari at Gorge Waihi at DOC Reserve Dobies at Woolscours
800 800 800
y = 0.0927x - 239.07 y = 0.7493x - 69.291 y = 0.908x - 152.49
700 700 700
Dobies Stream at Coach Road

R2 = 0.6565 R2 = 0.1652 R2 = 0.9542

600 600 600
500 500 500
400 400 400
300 300 300
200 200 200
100 100 100
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Orari at Gorge Waihi River at DOC Reserve Recorder Dobies at Woolscours Road
Coach Road
800 800
Dobies Stream at Woolscourers Road
y = 0.079x - 11.483
Recorder (naturalised for SW only)
Recorder (naturalised for SW only)

700 700y = 0.0021x + 385.19
Dobies Stream at Woolscourers

R2 = 0.6334 R2 = 1E-06
600 600
500 500
400 400
300 300
200 200
100 100
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Woolscours Road Recorder

A5.11 Dobies Stream (naturalised for surface water and groundwater)
Correlate with: Orari at Gorge Waihi at DOC Reserve Dobies at Woolscours
1000 1000 1000
y = 0.1211x - 252.82 y = 0.8872x + 5.023
900 900 900
R2 = 0.546 R2 = 0.1129

y = 0.8884x - 170.12

800 800 800
R2 = 0.9059
700 700 700
600 600 600
500 500 500
400 400 400
300 300 300
200 200 200
100 100 100
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Coach Road
1200 1000
Recorder (naturalised for SW and GW)
Recorder (naturalised for SW and GW)

y = 0.0998x + 55.072

900y = -0.1658x + 617.96
R2 = 0.4151 R2 = 0.0033
1000
800
700
800
600
600 500
400
400
300
200
200
100
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Woolscours Road Recorder

143
144
A5.12 Worners Creek (natural flow only)
700 700 700
y = 0.0277x + 312.19 y = 0.3421x + 324.74 y = 0.3181x + 326.01
600 600 600
Worners Creek at Coach Road

R2 = 0.3276 R2 = 0.1795 R2 = 0.4092
500 500 500
400 400 400
300 300 300
200 200 200
100 100 100
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Coach Road
A5.13 Raukapuka Creek (naturalised for surface water only)

700 700 700
y = 0.025x + 340.73 y = 0.4806x + 285.58 y = 0.4204x + 298.97
Raukapuka Creek at Coach Road

600 R2 = 0.2487 Rakapuka Creek at Coach Road 600 600
R2 = 0.3293 R2 = 0.6684

500 500 500
400 400 400
300 300 300
200 200 200
100 100 100
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Coach Road
A5.14 Raukapuka Creek (naturalised for surface water and groundwater)
700 700 700
y = 0.0266x + 339.85 y = 0.4561x + 302.49 y = 0.4078x + 310.94

600 600 600 R2 = 0.627

R2 = 0.282 R2 = 0.2975
500 500 500
400 400 400
300 300 300
200 200 200
100 100 100
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Coach Road
A5.15 Station Stream (natural flow only)

140 Station Stream at Historic Homestead 140 140
Station Stream at Historic Homestead

y = 0.0053x + 45.322 y = 0.1698x + 4.7497 y = 0.099x + 31.161
120 120 120
R2 = 0.1325 R2 = 0.8592 R2 = 0.458
100 100 100
80 80 80
(L/s)
(l/s)
(l/s)
60 60 60
40 40 40
20 20 20
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Orari at Gorge (l/s) Waihi at DOC Reserve (L/s) Waihi at SH72 (l/s)

145
146
80 80 80
y = 0.0017x + 42.949 y = 0.0799x + 20.109
McLeod Stream at Yates Road (l/s)

70 R2 = 0.0372 70 R2 = 0.543 70 y = 0.0346x + 37.127
R2 = 0.1601
60 60 60
50 50 50
40 40 40
30 30 30
20 20 20
10 10 10
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Orari at Gorge (l/s) Waihi at DOC Reserve (l/s) Waihi at SH72 (l/s)
McLeod Stream at Yates Road

2.5 2.5 2.5
y = 0.005x - 1.0077
y = 0.0006x - 1.6717 y = 0.0053x - 1.1372
R2 = 0.4783
Stream 1 at Blakiston Road (l/s)

R2 = 0.9782 R2 = 0.835
2 2 2
1.5 1.5 1.5
1 1 1
0.5 0.5 0.5
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Stream 1 at Blakiston Road

9 9 9
y = 0.0124x - 0.2811 y = 0.0108x + 0.3062
y = 0.0009x + 0.2311 8
8 8

R2 = 0.5966
R2 = 0.4536 R2 = 0.5085
7 7 7
6 6 6
5 5 5
4 4 4
3 3 3
2 2 2
1 1 1
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Stream 2 at Blakiston Road

250 250 250
y = 0.0085x + 86.83 y = 0.2671x + 23.57 y = 0.1497x + 67.457
R2 = 0.131 R2 = 0.8246 R2 = 0.406
200 200 200
150 150 150

Total (l/s)
Total (l/s)
Total (l/s)
100 100 100
50 50 50
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Orari (l/s) Waihi at DOC Reserve (l/s) Waihi at SH72 (l/s)
Total (all Station Stream tributaries)
A5.16 Lowland springs

Correlate with Dobies at Woolscours Orari at SH1 Ohapi at Milford Clandeboye Road
70 250
700 y = 0.0044x + 33.389
R2 = 0.7337 y = 0.0819x - 1.4822
y = 0.7946x - 13.763 60
Te Ao Creek at Victoria Bridge (L/s)
600 R2 = 0.5718
R2 = 0.7579 200
500 50
Bains Creek (L/s)
Aker Creek (L/s)

40 150
400
300 30
100
200 20
50
100 10
0 0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Dobies at Woolscours Road (L/s) Orari at SH1 (L/s) Ohapi Creek at Milford Clandeboye Road (L/s)
Te Ao Creek (naturalised for SW) Bains Creek (naturalised for SW and GW) Aker Creek (naturalised for SW)
147
148
Correlate with Ohapi at Milford Clandeboye Road Orari at SH1
350 20
18
y = 0.1452x - 74.308 y = 0.0023x + 3.2712
300
R2 = 0.509 16 R2 = 0.8781
Henderson Drain (L/s)

250 14
Petries Drain (L/s)
12
200
10
150 8
100 6
4
50
2
0 0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Ohapi Creek at Milford Clandeboye Road (L/s) Orari at SH1 (L/s)
Petries Drain (naturalised for SW) Henderson Drain (naturalised for SW and GW)
Correlate with Orari at Gorge

120 450 160
y = -0.0053x + 92.913
400 y = 0.0238x + 178.34 y = 0.0194x - 27.571
R2 = 0.1695 140
100 R2 = 0.2048 R2 = 0.7639
350
Clandeboye Drain (L/s)
120
Rhodes Drain (L/s)
Millars Drain (L/s)

80 300
100
250
60 80
200
60
40 150
100 40
20
50 20
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
Orari at Gorge (L/s) Orari at Gorge (L/s) Orari at Gorge (L/s)
Clandeboye Drain (natural) Rhodes Drain (natural) Millars Drain (natural)

40 140 30
y = 0.001x + 19.384 y = 0.008x + 53.576 y = 0.0043x - 13.222
R2 = 0.0396 120 R2 = 0.3179 R2 = 0.6112
25
30
Youngman drain (L/s)

100
Ross Drain (L/s)
20
Drain X (L/s)
80
20 15
60
10
40
10
20 5
0 0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
Orari at Gorge (L/s) Orari at Gorge (L/s) Orari at Gorge (L/s)
Drain X (natural) Ross Drain (natural) Youngman Drain (natural)

Correlate with Ohapi at Milford Clandeboye Road
600 700
y = 0.2556x - 113.5
R2 = 0.6454 y = 0.2593x - 59.709
500 600 R2 = 0.5496
Orakipaoa Stream (L/s)

500
Burkes Creek (L/s)
400
400
300
300
200
200
100 100
0 0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Ohapi Creek at Milford Clandeboye Road (L/s) Ohapi Creek at Milford Clandeboye Road (L/s)
Burkes Creek (naturalised for SW) Orakipaoa Stream (naturalised for SW)
Correlate with Waihi at DOC Reserve

120
y = 0.0098x + 69.031
100 R2 = 0.002
Dairy Creek (L/s)
80
60
40
20
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Waihi at DOC Reserve (L/s)
Dairy Creek (natural)

250 200 450
Tautamakahau Stream downstream of

y = 0.1949x + 80.696
180 y = 0.1595x + 69.591 y = 0.3701x + 120.28
Tautamakahau West Branch (L/s)
400
Tautamakahau East Branch (L/s)
R2 = 0.6116 R2 = 0.446 R2 = 0.5395

200 160 350
140
Woolscour (L/s)
300
150 120
250
100
200
100 80
150
60
50 40 100
20 50
0 0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Waihi at DOC Reserve (L/s) Waihi at DOC Reserve (L/s) Waihi at DOC Reserve (L/s)
Taumatakahu West Branch (natural) Taumatakahu East Branch (naturalised for SW) Taumatakahu Stream (naturalised for SW
149
Appendix 6
150
River Losses and Gains
The losses and gains tables of calculations are shown naturalised for both surface water and groundwater. The key to the following 4 tables of losses and
gains is:
estimated (av) as not measured

measured
add back take
subtract off TDC take
subtract inflow
calculated
abstraction not at gauging time
A6.1: Orari River
Site Location Site Number Grid Reference Distance (km 7/09/2006 18/10/2006 25/10/2006 31/01/2007 21/02/2007 22/03/2007 17/04/2007 30/04/2007
Orari River Gorge 69505 J37:65356-95179 0 9240 7355 6938 5343 4123 3242 3048 2673
TDC Stockwater Take (TLB) (Orari) Thew/Inglis Road 169511 J37:6673-9309 325 358 358 379 426 411 440 466
TDC Stockwater Take (TRB) (Orari) Orari Gorge Station 169512 J37:6687-9115 114 57 49 50 112 84 105 89
Trib TDC Stock Water End of Inglis Road 1695159 J37:6626-9350 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -9 -8
McDonald J37/0207 CRC052319 SD 49.4 0 0 49.4 0 49.4 0 0 0
Orari River Burdons Crossing 1746 J37: 686-892 7.44 8231 6480 5303 4652 3365 2280 1891 1659
Station Stream Historic Homestead 1695155 J37:650-909 -69 -69 -69 -69 -69 -89 -61 -68
McLeod Stream Yates Road Br 1695156 J37:654-893 -50 -50 -50 -50 -50 -70 -52 -53
Stream 1 Blakiston Road 1695157 J37:665-879 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 0 0
Stream 2 Blakiston Road 1695158 J37:662-876 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 4
TDC discharge E 1695142 J37:6860-8855 -8.8 -8.8 -8.8 -8.8 -8.8 -8.8 -8.8 -8.8
TDC discharge F 1695141 J37:6953-8445 -14.3 -14.3 -14.3 -14.3 -14.3 -14.3 -14.3 -14.3
Peterson K37/1547 CRC030334 SD 16.2L/s 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Orari River SH72 1745 K37:712-834 14.11 5030 2810 2364 1171 51 0 0 0
plus 1 GW take not used
McMillan CRC052461 2.8 Orari 0 0 0 0 2.8 0 0 0
Orari River SH1 (Rec) 69510 K38:745-739 24.96 4643 1995 661 453 84 23 0 0
Bowan Fitzgerald Drain CRC970122.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Morrison K38/0832 CRC010078 SD 30L/s 0 0 30 0 0 0 0 0
Te Ao C reek Victoria Bridge SH1 2230 K38: 748-742 -625 -472 -376 -623 -457 -235 -52 -17
Bains Creek Badham Road 2085 K38:775-678 -59 -35 -37 -38 -39 -34 -41 -39
Aker Creek The Stumps Corner 1921 K38:772-676 -166 -110 -110 -90 -77 -143 -156 -139
Coopers Creek U/S conflence of Orari 69513 K38:7918-6552 47.26 -600 -355 -338 -303 -326 -351 -286 -286
Orari River Rolleston Bridge 2245 K38: 794637 37.52 6616 3333 1707 2438 1611 1408 997 877
Petries Drain U/S Stopbank 169535 K38:8026-6340 -176 -176 -176 -130 -88 -139 -183 -185
Sherriff Orari CRC962356.1 0 0 18.8 0 24 0 0 0
Brown Orari CRC962358.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Brown Orari CRC962376 0 0 0 0 18.5 0 0 0
Orari River Park Road Recorder 69514 K38:815-621 40.6 5975 3747 1974 2520 1619 1555 1178 1197
Naturalised 7/09/2006 18/10/2006 25/10/2006 31/01/2007 21/02/2007 22/03/2007 17/04/2007 30/04/2007

Orari River Burdons Crossing 1746 J37: 686-892 7.44 8661 6886 5750.4 5072 3943.4 2766 2427 2206
Orari River SH72 1745 K37:712-834 14.11 5320.8 3076.8 2672.2 1451.8 490.2 307.9 401.9 406.9
Orari River SH1 (Rec) 69510 K38:745-739 24.96 4934 2262 969 734 526 331 402 407
Orari River Park Road Recorder 69514 K38:815-621 40.6 4639 2865 1294 1617 1116 961 862 938
Normalised
Orari River Burdons Crossing 1746 J37: 686-892 7.44 -579 -469 -1188 -271 -180 -476 -621 -467
Orari River SH72 1745 K37:712-834 14.11 -3919 -4278 -4266 -3891 -3633 -2934 -2646.1 -2266
Orari River SH1 (Rec) 69510 K38:745-739 24.96 -4306 -5093 -5969 -4609 -3597 -2911 -2646.1 -2266
Orari River Rolleston Bridge 2245 K38: 794637 37.52 -3783 -4727 -5754 -3678 -2969 -2289 -2184.1 -1870
Orari River Park Road Recorder 69514 K38:815-621 40.6 -4601 -4490 -5644 -3726 -3007 -2281 -2186.1 -1735
%
Orari River Burdons Crossing 1746 J37: 686-892 7.44 -6% -6% -17% -5% -4% -15% -20% -17%
Orari River SH72 1745 K37:712-834 14.11 -42% -58% -61% -73% -88% -91% -87% -85%
Orari River SH1 (Rec) 69510 K38:745-739 24.96 -47% -69% -86% -86% -87% -90% -87% -85%
Orari River Rolleston Bridge 2245 K38: 794637 37.52 -41% -64% -83% -69% -72% -71% -72% -70%
Orari River Park Road Recorder 69514 K38:815-621 40.6 -50% -61% -81% -70% -73% -70% -72% -65%
Intra-reach
Orari River Burdons Crossing 1746 J37: 686-892 7.44 -579 -469 -1188 -271 -180 -476 -621 -467
Orari River SH72 1745 K37:712-834 14.11 -3340 -3809 -3078 -3620 -3453 -2458 -2025 -1799
Orari River SH1 (Rec) 69510 K38:745-739 24.96 -387 -815 -1703 -718 36 23 0 0
Orari River Park Road Recorder 69514 K38:815-621 40.6 -817 238 109 -48 -38 8 -2 135
151
152
A6.2: Coopers Creek
Site Location Site Num ber Grid Reference Distance (km) 7/09/2006 18/10/2006 25/10/2006 23/01/2007 31/01/2007 21/02/2007 22/03/2007 17/04/2007
Scotsburn In Gorge above Bruce's place 1695132 J37:6763-9707 0 82 41 40 152 90 71 76 47
Coopers Creek 1 Scotsburn Road 1695133 J37:6999-9566 0 11 11 10 57 38 14 22 8
Coopers Creek 2 Scotsburn Road 1695134 K37:7037-9542 0 15 8 9 31 27 16 21 15
Total 5 108 60 59 240 155 101 119 70
Coopers Creek North Boundary Road 1649 K37:7083-9101 6.15 52 0 0 490 301 53 4 0
Coopers Creek Down-stream Spring Farm 1346 K377120-8696 10.1 179 156 119 668 464 174 163 117
Coopers Creek SH 72 Recorder 69515 K37:7206-8651 11.61 165 131 107 605 399 88 83 37
Coopers Creek SH79 Bridge 1812 K37: 7269-8379 15.18 26 8 0 488 231 0 0 0
Coopers Creek U/S conflence of Orari River 69513 K38:7918-6552 37.48 598 425.4 408.4 360 340 324 349 290.5
Farm Road Fitzgerald Drain CRC970883.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Gould Fitzgerald Drain CRC962539 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Gould Fitzgerald Drain CRC962512 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Poplars Farm Coopers CRC962477 0 30.2 30.2 0 0 0 0 0
Grant Farms K38/1274 CRC021116.1 SD 6.5L/s 0 6.5 6.5 0 0 0 0 6.5
Orari Estate K38/0786 CRC020687 SD 5L/s 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Poplars Farm K38/1669 CRC041317.1 SD 35L/s 0 35 35 0 0 0 0 0
Kelland K38/1362 CRC040590 SD 0.7L/s 0 0.7 0.7 0 0 0 0 0
TDC discharge P -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 -2 -2
Coopers Creek U/S conflence of Orari River 69513 K38:7918-6552 37.48 600 355 338 362 342 326 351 286
5 additional GW takes were not used this season
Normalised 7/09/2006 18/10/2006 25/10/2006 23/01/2007 31/01/2007 21/02/2007 22/03/2007 17/04/2007
Total 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Coopers Creek North Boundary Road 1649 K37:7083-9101 6.15 -56 -60 -59 250 146 -48 -115 -70
Coopers Creek SH 72 Recorder 69515 K37:7206-8651 11.61 57 71 48 365 244 -13 -36 -33
Coopers Creek SH79 Bridge 1812 K37: 7269-8379 15.18 -82 -52 -59 248 76 -101 -119 -70
Coopers Creek U/S conflence of Orari River 69513 K38:7918-6552 37.48 490 365.4 349.4 120 185 223 230 220.5
%
Total 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Coopers Creek North Boundary Road 1649 K37:7083-9101 6.15 -52% -100% -100% 104% 94% -48% -97% -100%
Coopers Creek Down-stream Spring Farm 1346 K377120-8696 10.1 66% 160% 102% 178% 199% 72% 37% 67%
Coopers Creek SH 72 Recorder 69515 K37:7206-8651 11.61 53% 118% 81% 152% 157% -13% -30% -47%
Coopers Creek SH79 Bridge 1812 K37: 7269-8379 15.18 -76% -87% -100% 103% 49% -100% -100% -100%
Coopers Creek U/S conflence of Orari River 69513 K38:7918-6552 37.48 454% 609% 592% 50% 119% 221% 193% 315%
Intra-reach
Total 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Coopers Creek North Boundary Road 1649 K37:7083-9101 6.15 -56 -60 -59 250 146 -48 -115 -70
Coopers Creek SH 72 Recorder 69515 K37:7206-8651 11.61 -14 -25 -12 -63 -65 -86 -80 -80
Coopers Creek SH79 Bridge 1812 K37: 7269-8379 15.18 -139 -123 -107 -117 -168 -88 -83 -37
Coopers Creek U/S conflence of Orari River 69513 K38:7918-6552 37.48 572 417.4 408.4 -128 109 324 349 290.5
A6.3: Ohapi Creek
Site Location Site Number Grid Reference Distance (km) 7/09/2006 18/10/2006 25/10/2006 31/01/2007 21/02/2007 22/03/2007 17/04/2007
Selbie Ohapi North CRC970504.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Selbie Ohapi North CRC962388 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ohapi Creek North Branch Muff Road 1924 K38: 759-683 0 768 718 670 779 597 656 551
Pye Ohapi CRC970884.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lealyn Ohapi North CRC970190 0 0 73.2 0 0 0 0
Sherriff Ohapi CRC970528 0 0 18.6 0 0 0 0
Sherriff Ohapi CRC962357.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ohapi Creek North Branch Milford Clandeoye Road 140 K38: 780-627 9.55 832 798 661 587 532 681 624
Winchester Farms Ohapi South CRC962540 0 0 30.4 0 0 0 0
Ohapi Creek South Branch Scott Road 1923 K38:736-667 1.4 462 424 382 453 363 380 382
Caird Ohapi South CRC970120.2 0 0 0 19.7 0 0 0
Turley Ohapi South CRC970189 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Caird Ohapi South CRC962500.1 0 0 0 24.595 4.5 0 0
Friend/McNabb Ohapi South CRC960310.2 0 19 0 0 0 0 0
Ohapi Creek South Branch Guild Road 137 K38: 763-643 682 573 504 559 535 576 617
Reid Ohapi CRC971275.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reid Ohapi CRC970364 0 25.3 0 25.3 0 0 0
Caithness Ohapi CRC970161 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Turley Ohapi CRC970187 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Smith Ohapi CRC970177 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Blue Stone Farm Ltd Ohapi CRC970351.1 0 0 12.6 0 0 0 0
Ohapi Creek Middle Branch Guild Road 138 K38: 763-645 5.39 521 367 363 493 383 458 407
Rhys Farm Ohapi CRC962398.1 0 0 35.4 0 0 0 0
Rhys Farm Ohapi CRC962396.3 0 0 39.5 0 0 0 0

Ohapi Creek Milford Clandeoye Road (Rec) 69509 K38: 781-625 9.79 1985 1723 1401 1692 1353 1891 1608
Sherriff CRC970529 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Brown CRC962359.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Brown CRC962375 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ohapi Creek Stop Bank Outlet 1695130 K38:8147-6198 NM 1671 1281 1686 1186 1641 1511
Houston CRC962386 0 32.8 0 0 0 0 0
Ohapi East Branch Stopbank Outlet 1695128 K38:8229-6162 60 1.5 1 3 2 1 2
Naturalised 7/09/2006 18/10/2006 25/10/2006 31/01/2007 21/02/2007 22/03/2007 17/04/2007

Ohapi Creek North Branch Milford Clandeoye Road 140 K38: 780-627 9.55 832 798 752.8 587 532 681 624
Ohapi Creek South Branch Scott Road 1923 K38:736-667 1.4 462 424 412.4 453 363 380 382
Ohapi Creek South Branch Guild Road 137 K38: 763-643 5.39 682 592 534.4 603.295 539.5 576 617
Ohapi Creek Middle Branch Guild Road 138 K38: 763-645 5.39 521 392.3 375.6 518.3 383 458 407
south and Middle 6.115 1203 984.3 910 1121.595 922.5 1034 1024
S,M, N 9.725 2035 1782.3 1698.2 1708.595 1454.5 1715 1648
Ohapi Creek Milford Clandeoye Road (Rec) 69509 K38: 781-625 9.79 1985 1767.3 1610.7 1761.595 1357.5 1891 1608
Ohapi Creek Stop Bank Outlet 1695130 K38:8147-6198 1715.3 1490.7 1755.595 1190.5 1641 1511
Ohapi East Branch Stopbank Outlet 1695128 K38:8229-6162 60 34.3 1 3 2 1 2
Total outlets 60 1749.6 1491.7 1758.595 1192.5 1642 1513
Normalised
S,M, N 9.725 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ohapi Creek Milford Clandeoye Road (Rec) 69509 K38: 781-625 9.79 -50 -15 -87.5 53 -97 176 -40
Total outlets 14.73 -32.7 -206.5 50 -262 -73 -135
%
S,M, N 9.725 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ohapi Creek Milford Clandeoye Road (Rec) 69509 K38: 781-625 9.79 -2% -1% -5% 3% -7% 10% -2%
Total outlets 14.73 -2% -12% 3% -18% -4% -8%
intra-reach
Ohapi Creek North Branch Milford Clandeoye Road 140 K38: 780-627 9.55 64 80 82.8 -192 -65 25 73
Ohapi Creek South Branch Scott Road 1923 K38:736-667 1.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ohapi Creek South Branch Guild Road 137 K38: 763-643 5.39 220 168 122 150.295 176.5 196 235
S,M, N 9.725 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
153
Ohapi Creek Milford Clandeoye Road (Rec) 69509 K38: 781-625 9.79 -50.00 -15.00 -87.50 53.00 -97.00 176.00 -40.00
Total outlets 14.73 -17.70 -119.00 -3.00 -165.00 -249.00 -95.00
154
A6.4: Waihi River
Site Location Site Number Grid Reference Distance (km 7/09/2006 18/10/2006 25/10/2006 23/01/2007 31/01/2007 21/02/2007 22/03/2007 17/04/2007 30/04/2007
Waihi River DOC R eserve 69649 J37:62202-87795 0 426 313 334 599 396 367 396 304 334
Mackenzie AD CR C991204_1 SD = 6 Waihi; 29.2 R aukapuka 0 6 6 0 0 6 0 0 0
Waihi River Woodbury Ro 1589 J37: 692-809 11.57 126 110 79 463 307 171 145 44 37
Waihi River SH72 (Record 69683 J38:6941-7870 14.09 419 297 260 866 657 428 344 205 219
Pemberton CRC972569AB SD = 32.6 Waihi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pemberton C RC000449 SD = 8.68 Waihi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Waihi River Coach Road 169619 K38: 705-743 19.04 42 0 0 396 170 29 0 0 0
Raukapuka Creek Coach Road 69658 K38: 711-742 -595 -432 -418 -661 -607 -604 -490 -405 -291
Worners Creek Coach Road 69678 K38: 713-742 -560 -429 -392 -620 -464 -444 -540 -323 -252
Worner EJ CRC991678A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sheed/Kempthorne K38/0258 CRC992412.1 SD = 9.06 0 0 9.06 0 0 9.06 9.06 0 0
Cowles Waihi C RC061722 SD8.1 0 0 0 8.1 8.1 8.1 8.1 0 8.1
Kakano Waihi C RC992593 SD 8.3 0 0 0 0 8.3 8.3 0 0 0
Kelman Waihi CRC 991867b SD 10.5 0 10.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
McDrury Waihi C RC981339 SD 24.7 0 0 0 0 0 24.7 0 0 0
Myers Waihi K38/0352 SD = 23.18 0 23.18 23.18 0 23.18 23.18 0 0 0
Myers Waihi K38/0396 SD = 6.59 0 6.59 6.59 0 6.59 6.59 0 0 6.59
K38/0374 CR C991964 SD = 21.38 0 21.38 21.38 0 21.38 21.38 0 0 0
Waihi River SH72 169651 K38: 7205-6805 26.415 1920 1423 1297 2431 1977 1466 1408 989 909
Naturalised 7/09/2006 18/10/2006 25/10/2006 23/01/2007 31/01/2007 21/02/2007 22/03/2007 17/04/2007 30/04/2007
Waihi River Woodbury Ro 1589 J37: 692-809 11.57 126 116 85 463 307 177 145 44 37
Waihi River Coach Road 169619 K38: 705-743 19.04 42 6 6 396 170 35 0 0 0
Waihi River SH72 169651 K38: 7205-6805 26.415 765 658.85 582.41 1158.1 973.55 554.51 395.16 261 380.69
Normalised
Waihi River Woodbury Ro 1589 J37: 692-809 11.57 -300 -197 -249 -136 -89 -190 -251 -260 -297
Waihi River SH72 (Record 69683 J38:6941-7870 14.09 -7 -10 -68 267 261 67 -52 -99 -115
Waihi River Coach Road 169619 K38: 705-743 19.04 -384 -307 -328 -203 -226 -332 -396 -304 -334
Waihi River SH72 169651 K38: 7205-6805 26.415 339 345.85 248.41 559.1 577.55 187.51 -0.84 -43 46.69
%
Waihi River Woodbury Ro 1589 J37: 692-809 11.57 -70% -63% -75% -23% -22% -52% -63% -86% -89%
Waihi River SH72 (Record 69683 J38:6941-7870 14.09 -2% -3% -20% 45% 66% 18% -13% -33% -34%
Waihi River Coach Road 169619 K38: 705-743 19.04 -90% -98% -98% -34% -57% -90% -100% -100% -100%
Waihi River SH72 169651 K38: 7205-6805 26.415 80% 110% 74% 93% 146% 51% 0% -14% 14%
Intra-reach
Waihi River Woodbury Ro 1589 J37: 692-809 11.57 -300 -197 -249 -136 -89 -190 -251 -260 -297
Waihi River Coach Road 169619 K38: 705-743 19.04 -377 -297 -260 -470 -487 -399 -344 -205 -219
Waihi River SH72 169651 K38: 7205-6805 26.415 723 652.85 576.41 762.1 803.55 519.51 395.16 261 380.69
A6.5: Dobies Stream
Site Location Site Number Grid Referen D istance (km 7-Sep-06 18-Oct-06 25-Oct-06 23/01/2007 31-Jan-07 21-Feb-07 22-Mar-07 17-Apr-07 30-Apr-07 30-May-07 9-Aug-07 19-Sep-07
Dobies Stream Coach Road 169686 K38:7266-7415 572 NM 363 727 NM 347 95 0 0 0 55 170
Geraldine Golf Club CRC011686A 5 Dobies 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Campbell crc971232B.1D =48.22 Dobies 0 0 48.22 0 0 48.22 0 0 0 0 0 0
Campbell K38/0373 CR C951971.2D =19.9 Dobies 0 19.9 19.9 19.9 19.9 19.9 19.9 19.9 0 0 0 0
Campbell K38/0489_071 Crc951971.2 D =17.77 Dobies 0 0 17.77 0 17.77 17.77 0 0 0 0 0 0
McMillan CRC052461 2.3 Dobies 0 0 0 0 0 2.3 0 0 0 0 0 0
Raukapuka Farm K38/0482 D = 23.3 Dobies 0 0 23.3 0 0 23.3 0 0 0 0 0 0
Shefford CRC032274 3.1 Dobies 0 3.1 3.1 0 0 3.1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Timaru DC K38/0857 69.4 Dobies 69.4 69.4 69.4 69.4 69.4 69.4 69.4 69.4 0 0
TDC discharge I -7.7 -7.7 -7.7 -7.7 -7.7 -7.7 -7.7 -7.7 -7.7 -7.7 -7.7 -7.7
TDC discharge J -1.6 -1.6 -1.6 -1.6 -1.6 -1.6 -1.6 -1.6 -1.6 -1.6 -1.6 -1.6
Dobies Stream Coach Road 169686 K38:7266-7415 765.8 NM 674.09 940.7 NM 655.39 308.7 213.7 0 0 45.7 160.7
7-Sep-06 18-Oct-06 25-Oct-06 23/01/2007 31-Jan-07 21-Feb-07 22-Mar-07 17-Apr-07 30-Apr-07 30-May-07 9-Aug-07 19-Sep-07
Dobies Stream Woolscourers 69684 K38:7218-6779 727 649 581 Digger in Str 563 342 207 166 112 199 390
White CRC 000338A L/s 5.3 5.1 4.2 3.1 3.1
Butler Dobies CRC 021142.1 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cofffey CRC 041689 SD 4.7 0 4.7 4.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reid CRC 940267_ 27 Dobies 0 27 27 0 27 0 27 0 0 0 0
Selbie CRC 991858 12.21 Dobies 0 0 12.21 12.21 12.21 0 0 0 0 0 0
Timaru DC SCY750122.18.46 Dobies 8.46 8.46 8.46 8.46 8.46 8.46 8.46 0 0
Dobbs CRC 990699 7.6 Dobies 0 0 0 7.6 7.6 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dobies Stream Woolscourers 69684 K38:7218-6779 929.3 911.2 949.5 263.9 929.7 564.2 459.2 156.7 102.7 189.7 380.7
Loss/Gain 163.5 275.4 274.3 255.5 245.5 156.7 102.7 144.0 220.0
155
Appendix 7
Minimum flows
Note: there are no minimum flows sites on the Waihi River
Table A7-1: Consents tied to minimum flows on Orari River
Minimum
Restricted
Set flow
over ‘06-‘07 GW
minimum recorded Consent Other ties
investigation /SW
flow (L/s) ‘06-‘07
period?
(L/s)
Orari at Gorge
2950 2278 Yes CRC041402 SW and when Hewson River <830
2203 2278 No CRC064030 SW N/A
2166 2278 No CRC052319 GW and when dry at Thatchers Rd
2106 2278 No CRC030334.2 GW and when dry at Flatman Rd
Orari at upstream of Ohapi confluence
CRC101178 GW
CRC962566.1 SW
200 999 No CRC962356.1 SW N/A
CRC962358.1 SW
CRC962376 SW
Table A7-2: Consents tied to minimum flows on Coopers Creek

Minimum
Restricted
Set flow
over ‘06-‘07 GW
minimum recorded Consent Other ties
investigation /SW
flow (L/s) ‘06-‘07
period?
(L/s)
50 19 Yes CRC962360 GW
50 19 Yes CRC962478 GW N/A
50 19 Yes CRC971884.3 GW
Coopers Creek at upstream of Orari confluence
CRC020838 GW
CRC041317.1 GW
CRC962477 SW
CRC962512 SW
CRC962539.1 SW
100 194 No CRC970121.1 GW N/A
CRC970883.1 SW
CRC962391.1 GW
CRC970546 GW
CRC970525 GW
CRC970459.1 GW

Table A7-3: Consents tied to minimum flows on Ohapi Creek at Brown Road
Minimum Restricted
Set
Level of Restriction flow over ‘06-‘07 GW Other
minimum Consent
restriction period recorded investigation /SW ties
flow (L/s)
‘06-‘07 (L/s) period?
CRC012702 GW
CRC040536 GW
570 Oct-Jan 1224 No CRC962286.2 SW
100% N/A
CRC962357.1 SW
730 Feb-Sep 1224 No CRC970529.1 SW
CRC970884.1 SW
100% 570 All year 1224 No CRC960310.2 SW
N/A
50% 1000 All year 1224 No CRC970190 SW
CRC022140.2 SW
CRC962359.1 SW
CRC962375 SW
CRC962386 SW
CRC962388.1 SW
100% 570 Oct-Jan 1224 No CRC960396.3 SW
CRC962398.1 SW
CRC962500.2 SW
CRC962521.1 SW
CRC962540 SW
CRC962567 SW
100% 730 Feb-Sep 1224 No CRC970111 SW
CRC970120.2 SW
CRC970161 SW
N/A
CRC970177 SW
CRC970187 SW
50% 1000 Oct-Jan 1224 No CRC970189 SW
CRC970351.1 SW
CRC970363 SW
CRC970364 SW
CRC970395 SW
CRC970463.1 SW
50% 1100 Feb-Sep 1224 No CRC970479.1 SW
CRC970504.2 SW
CRC970524 SW
CRC970528 SW
CRC970545 SW
CRC971275.1 SW

158
Table A7-4: Consents tied to minimum flows on Dobies Stream
Set Restricted
Minimum flow
Level of minimim Restriction over ‘06-‘07 GW
recorded ‘06- Consent Other ties
restriction flow period investigation /SW
‘07 (L/s)
(L/s) period?
Dobies at Bates St
100% 0
100% Apr-Sep Temuka <1000
1393 Temuka No
Partial Apr-Sep CRC990688 GW 1300<Temuka <1000
100% Oct-Mar Temuka <700
1847 Temuka No
Partial Oct-Mar 1000< Temuka <700
Dobies at Four Arches Orari Station Road
100% 0
Partial Apr-Sep Temuka <1000
1393 Temuka No
Partial Apr-Sep CRC064043 GW 1300< Temuka <1000
Partial Oct-Mar Temuka <700
1847 Temuka No
100% 0
100% Apr-Sep CRC962077A.8 GW Temuka <1000
1393 Temuka No
Partial Apr-Sep 1300< Temuka <1000
100% Oct-Mar CRC971232A.1 GW Temuka <700
1847 Temuka No
100% 0 CRC962077B.8 GW
100% Apr-Sep 1393 Temuka Yes Temuka <1900
100% Oct-Mar 1847 Temuka No CRC971232B.1 GW Temuka <1600
Table A7-4 (continued)
Dobies at Conjunction with Temuka
100% 0
100% Apr-Sep 1393 Temuka Yes CRC021323 GW Temuka <1900
100% Oct-Mar 1847 Temuka No Temuka <1600
100% 0
100% Apr-Sep Temuka <1000
1393 Temuka No
Partial Apr-Sep CRC991858 GW 1300< Temuka <1000
100% Oct-Mar Temuka <700
1847 Temuka No
Dobies at downstream Orari Back Road
100% 0
100% Apr-Sep 1393 Temuka Yes CRC020920 GW Temuka <1900
100% Oct-Mar 1847 Temuka No Temuka <1600
159
A7.5: Lowland springs

Table A7-5: Consents tied to minimum flows on the lowland springs
Minimum
Restricted
flow
Level of Minimium over ‘06-‘07 GW
gauged Consent Other ties
restriction flow (L/s) investigation /SW
‘06-‘07
period?
(L/s)
Canal (Rhodes) Drain at Parke Road
CRC962538 GW
CRC970159.2 GW
CRC970160.2 GW
CRC970382 SW
100% 60 159 N/A
CRC970517.1 SW
CRC970533 GW
CRC981456.1 GW
CRC991228 GW
Petries Drain at upstream of Stopbank Culvert
CRC962378.2 GW
CRC970201 GW
CRC970381 SW
CRC970459.1 GW
100% 70 88 N/A
CRC970537 GW
CRC970538 SW
CRC970541 SW
CRC971307.1 SW
Burkes Creek at Milford Clandeboye Road
CRC000400.2 BOTH
CRC020747.2 GW
100% 160 CRC991374.1 SW
CRC992275 SW
220 N/A
CRC992496 SW
50% 200 CRC992568 SW
CRC992588.2 GW
CRC992599.1 SW

Appendix 8
Water chemistry
Table A8-1: Surface water chemistry
watercourse Orari River Te Ao Stream Coopers Creek Raukapuka Creek Dobies Stream
U/S Milford Tributary Near
Burdon Burnham U/S Orari U/S Bennett U/S Beeby
sample location Clandeboye D/S Vance Road Spring Farm Canal Road Geraldine
Road Road Station Road Road Road
Road Sewerage Works
site ID SQ26862 SQ26863 SQ26864 SQ26879 SQ26866 SQ26867 SQ26865 SQ26877 SQ26876 SQ26878
pH 1 n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m
conductivity (μS/cm) 5 10 13 7 8 21 12 7 5 8
alkalinity (mg HCO3/L) 31 40 40 34 33 43 33 29 29 34
ammonia (mg N-NH4/L) 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
calcium dissolved (mg/L) 6.3 12 13 7.7 8.8 22 11 6.6 5.8 8.2
chloride (mg/L) 0.9 4.3 6.9 2.2 2.7 14 9.5 3.0 1.5 3.0
iron dissolved (mg/L) <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 <0.03
magnesium dissolved (mg/L) 1.30 2.7 3.3 1.7 1.8 5.5 3.6 1.7 1.3 1.8
manganese dissolved (mg/L) n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m
nitrate (mg N-NO3/L) <0.1 1.9 2.8 0.3 0.9 7.5 3.2 0.4 <0.1 0.6
potassium dissolved (mg/L) 0.2 0.5 0.7 0.4 0.5 0.9 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.5
reactive silica (mg SiO2/L) 8.7 11.0 10.0 8.4 9.9 11.0 12.0 8.0 7.7 <0.1
sodium dissolved (mg/L) 2.9 4.5 5.4 3.4 3.6 8.1 7.2 3.9 2.9 3.8
sulphate (mg/L) 1.6 6.7 9.9 3.4 5.1 20.0 8 4.3 1.9 3.6
total hardness (mg CaCO3/L) 21.2 41.3 46.3 26.3 29.5 77.9 42.5 23.6 19.9 28.0
δ O (o/ )
18 oo
-10.7 (0.3) -10.2 -9.9 -10.7 -10.7 (0.4) -9.2 -8.9 -9.4 -10.9 -10.5
watercourse Waihi River Ohapi Creek Rhodes Stream Burkes Creek Taumatakahu Creek
U/S SH79 North Main Branch U/S
DOC U/S Hawke U/S Te Awa Middle Branch South U/S Rolleston U/S Boiling Down East Branch U/S
sample location Bridge Branch Muff Milford Clandeboye
Reserve Road Road Barkers Road Branch Road Road Springfield Road
Geraldine Road Road
site ID SQ26868 SQ26869 SQ26870 SQ26871 SQ26872 SQ26873 SQ26874 SQ26875 SQ26880 SQ26882 SQ26881
1
pH n/m n/m n/m 7.4 n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m 6.9
conductivity (μS/cm) 7 13 12 11 6 8 9 10 24 14 13
alkalinity (mg HCO3/L) 36 37 34 36 29 37 39 40 44 45 42
ammonia (mg N-NH4/L) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02
calcium dissolved (mg/L) 7.1 10.0 11.0 11.0 6.1 8.3 9.2 10 22 14 12.0
chloride (mg/L) 2.4 10.0 7.4 6.7 1.7 3.2 3.7 4.2 14.0 8.1 7.6
iron dissolved (mg/L) <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03
magnesium dissolved (mg/L) 1.9 3.5 3.2 n/m 1.4 2.0 2.1 2.6 5.6 3.4 3.5
manganese dissolved (mg/L) n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
nitrate (mg N-NO3/L) 0.1 2.7 2.7 2.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 8.8 3.4 2.9
potassium dissolved (mg/L) 0.4 0.8 0.6 0.9 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.6 1 0.6 0.7
reactive silica (mg SiO2/L) 9.6 10.0 12.0 11.0 9.7 11.0 10.0 9.8 9.1 14 12.0
sodium dissolved (mg/L) 3.5 7.7 5.9 5.8 3.0 4.0 4.2 5.0 13.0 6.8 6.5
sulphate (mg/L) 1.9 6.6 8.6 7.7 2.1 4.2 4.7 6.2 21 7.7 7.4
total hardness (mg CaCO3/L) 25.7 39.6 40.8 n/m 21.1 29.1 31.8 35.8 78.3 49.2 44.6
δ18O (o/oo) -9.3 (0.2) -8.8 (0.2) -8.8 -9.3 -10.9 -10.5 -10.3 -10.4 (0.1) -8.8 -9.6 -9.4
1
determinand measured in field Water-type based on relative ion composition:
2
total hardness calculated as sum of: Ca/0.4 + Mg/0.24 Ca-Na-HCO3 Ca-Na-Mg-HCO3-Cl Ca-Mg-Na-HCO3
n/m = not measured Ca-Na-Mg-HCO3 Ca-Na-Mg-HCO3-SO4-Cl Ca-Mg-Na-HCO3-SO4-Cl

Table A8-2: Groundwater chemistry (shallow wells)
Average result reported; one standard deviation shown in brackets, where applicable
well number K38/0819 K38/0950 K37/0671 J37/0012 K38/0760 K38/0148 K38/0408 K37/0465 K38/0404
well depth (m) 5.9 4.8 7.6 6.7 10.5 9.14 9 5.8 7.3
number of samples 13 13 12 8 8 7 7 6 6
pH1 6.3 (0.2) 6.5 (0.2) 6.6 (0.4) 6.0 (0.4) 6.8 6.4 (0.2) 6.5 (0.2) 6.3 (0.2) 6.4 (0.2)
1 o
water temperature ( C) 11.8 (1.1) 10.9 (2.2) 11.6 (0.8) 11.3 (1.5) 11.7 12.3 (0.3) 11.1 (1.5) 11.2 (1.0) 11.8 (1.3)
1
conductivity (μS/cm) 11 (1) 7 (2) 8 (3) 17 (6) 26 15 (2) 8 (0) 11 (0) 24 (1)
1
dissolved oxygen (mg/L) 7.8 (0.9) 8.8 (0.6) 7.6 (1.5) 6.0 (2.8) 0.1 8.2 (1.3) 7.2 (1.7) 9.3 (0.5) 9.0 (1.6)
dissolved oxygen saturation (%) 71.7 (7.1) 79.7 (4.2) 69.7 (13.8) 56.7 (30.0) 0.5 78.7 (10.2) 68.6 (16.2) 86.9 (6.1) 84.9 (12.9)
alkalinity (mg HCO3/L) 38 (3) 40 (2) 38 (6) 59 (28) 102 45 (3) 39 (4) 41 (4) 53 (4)
ammonia (mg N-NH4/L) <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.011 (0.003) 0.010 (0.006) 0.017 (0.005) 0.013 (0.001) 0.012 (0.006) 0.015
arsenic dissolved (mg/L) n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m
calcium dissolved (mg/L) 11.2 (1.4) 9.0 (1.5) 9.3 (2.2) 17.7 (6.7) 25.0 16.9 (2.7) 8.8 (1.2) 9.8 (1.2) 21.3 (1.5)
chloride (mg/L) 4.9 (0.8) 2.2 (1.0) 2.5 (1.4) 9.4 (3.1) 17.0 6.3 (1.8) 2.1 (0.6) 4.6 (0.2) 13.7 (1.9)
iron dissolved (mg/L) 0.06 <0.03 <0.03 0.04 <0.03 <0.03 0.04 <0.03 <0.03
magnesium dissolved (mg/L) 2.8 (0.2) 1.9 (0.2) 1.9 (0.5) 4.6 (1.8) 8.2 2.6 (0.4) 1.9 (0.1) 2.8 (0.2) 7.2 (0.6)
manganese dissolved (mg/L) n/m n/m n/m 0.5 (0.7) 0.02 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
nitrate (mg N-NO3/L) 2.3 (0.5) 0.8 (0.6) 1.1 (1.0) 3.9 (1.3) 3.8 (1.3) 3.5 (1.0) 0.6 (0.2) 2.4 (0.3) 9.7 (1.1)
dissolved reactive phosphorus (mg/L) n/m n/m n/m 0.005 n/m 0.006 (0.001) 0.004 0.012 0.005
potassium dissolved (mg/L) 0.8 (0.1) 0.7 (0.1) 0.5 (0.1) 1.2 (0.2) 1.3 1.1 (0.1) 0.6 (0.1) 1.0 (0.1) 1.8 (0.4)
reactive silica (mg SiO2/L) 13.5 (0.5) 11.5 (0.5) 11.4 (0.8) 15.0 (2.0) 17.0 11.3 (0.5) 10.6 (0.5) 15.8 (0.4) 16.5 (0.5)
sodium dissolved (mg/L) 5.6 (0.3) 3.8 (0.2) 4.0 (0.5) 8.0 (1.5) 14.0 5.3 (0.6) 3.8 (0.3) 6.5 (0.5) 12.0 (0.6)
sulphate (mg/L) 7.2 (0.8) 3.3 (1.6) 3.9 (1.6) 9.6 (3.0) 10.0 11.4 (2.9) 3.1 (0.4) 4.9 (0.9) 18.3 (1.8)
total hardness (mg/CaCO3/L) 39.8 (4.3) 30.4 (4.3) 30.9 (7.4) 63.5 (24.2) 96.7 53.0 (8.5) 29.8 (3.6) 35.9 (3.9) 83.3 (6.1)
δ18O (o/oo) -9.5 (0.1) -10.7 (0.5) -10.3 (0.5) -10.0 -8.6 -9.7 -10.7 -7.7 -8.3
1
determinand measured in the field Water-type based on relative ion composition:
2
total hardness calculated as sum of: Ca/0.4 + Mg/0.24 Ca-HCO3 Ca-Mg-HCO3
n/m = not measured Ca-Na-HCO3 Ca-Na-Mg-HCO3
Ca-Na-Mg-HCO3-Cl Ca-Na-Mg-HCO3-SO4
Transgresses NZ drinking water guideline value (Ministry of Health, 2008) Ca-Mg-Na-HCO3
Exceeds NZ drinking water maximum acceptable value (Ministry of Health, 2008)
162
163
well number K38/0747 K38/1017 K38/0105 K38/0144 K38/0240 K38/1073 K38/1821 K37/0130
well depth (m) 6.7 12 8 7.62 7.7 15 19.4 15.85
number of samples 6 6 5 5 5 5 4 3
pH1 6.1 6.2 (0.2) 6.9 (0.1) 6.5 (0.1) 6.4 (0.0) 6.9 (0.1) 6.7 6.3 (0.3)
water temperature1 (oC) 12.7 12.1 (0.6) 12.1 (2.1) 12.0 (0.9) 11.7 (1.0) 11.9 (0.4) 12.5 12.1 (0.2)
conductivity1 (μS/cm) 24 21 (3) 19 (0) 19 (1) 15 (3) 32 (10) 18 13 (3)
dissolved oxygen1 (mg/L) 4.2 7.6 (0.8) 0.8 (1.4) 9.6 (0.8) 7.7 (1.1) 1.3 (0.4) 5.7 8.9 (0.1)
dissolved oxygen saturation (%) 39.7 73.5 (6.2) 7.6 (13.9) 91.8 (5.5) 73.0 (8.1) 11.7 (3.6) 53.4 91.7 (11.6)
alkalinity (mg HCO3/L) 41 45 (5) 89 (5) 39 (1) 47 (2) 116 (34) 66 38 (2)
ammonia (mg N-NH4/L) 0.014 (0.008) 0.010 (0.002) 0.007 0.010 (0.003) 0.012 (0.003) <0.005 0.021 0.016 (0.016)
arsenic dissolved (mg/L) n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m <0.002 n/m
calcium dissolved (mg/L) 18.0 20.5 (4.0) 17.2 (0.4) 16.8 (0.8) 13.8 (0.8) 30.8 (10.6) 20.0 13.5 (0.7)
chloride (mg/L) 20.7 (7.2) 12.3 (2.0) 11.0 (0.7) 12.2 (0.8) 5.6 (0.9) 16.8 (9.2) 8.2 8.2 (0.3)
iron dissolved (mg/L) <0.03 <0.03 0.2 (0.1) <0.03 0.26 0.22 <0.03 <0.03
magnesium dissolved (mg/L) 4.7 4.5 (1.4) 6.0 (0.2) 4.8 (0.3) 3.4 (0.3) 11.6 (4.9) 4.5 3.9
manganese dissolved (mg/L) <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
nitrate (mg N-NO3/L) 11.9 (2.9) 8.5 (2.1) 0.1 (0.1) 8.4 (1.0) 3.3 (1.0) 0.4 (0.2) 2.9 5.4 (0.6)
dissolved reactive phosphorus (mg/L) 0.005 0.005 0.010 0.005 0.007 n/m 0.079 0.009
potassium dissolved (mg/L) 1.7 1.5 (0.2) 1.1 (0.1) 1.1 (0.1) 0.9 6.0 (1.6) 1.1 0.9 (0.1)
reactive silica (mg SiO2/L) 15.0 13.3 (0.5) 17.8 (0.4) 14.4 (0.5) 14.0 15.8 (1.1) 17.0 16.0
sodium dissolved (mg/L) 16.0 9.5 (0.9) 11.0 9.9 (0.6) 6.6 (0.5) 17.4 (4.7) 9.8 8.8 (1.3)
sulphate (mg/L) 17.0 16.3 (1.5) 11.0 (1.0) 8.3 (1.3) 9.6 (1.9) 33.0 (20.0) 7.8 7.8
total hardness (mg/CaCO3/L) 64.6 70.0 (15.6) 68.0 (2.1) 62.0 (3.3) 48.6 (3.5) 125.3 (46.9) 68.8 50.0 (1.8)
δ18O (o/oo) -8.8 -9.0 -8.6 -8.4 -9.6 -9.4 (0.3) -9.3 -8.0
1
2
total hardness calculated as sum of: Ca/0.4 + Mg/0.24 Ca-HCO3
n/m = not measured Ca-Na-HCO3
Ca-Na-Mg-HCO3-Cl
well number K38/0406 K38/0407 K38/2154 K38/2155 J37/0225 J37/0041 K37/0871 K37/2896 K38/0158
well depth (m) 10 8.5 8 8.2 15.6 9.0 9 9.2 8.7
number of samples 3 3 3 3 2 1 1 1 1
pH1 6.5 6.3 (0.1) 6.1 6.5 6.5 (0.3) 6.2 6.5 6.8 6.9
water temperature1 (oC) 12.7 (2.9) 11.3 (0.3) 11.0 11.7 (2.0) 11.8 (0.5) 12.2 10.1 7.9 10.3
conductivity1 (μS/cm) 16 (1) 10 (3) 12 5 (1) 17 (1) 16 13 6 6
dissolved oxygen1 (mg/L) 4.5 (5.2) 6.0 (0.3) 4.7 5.8 (0.9) 3.8 (0.5) 6.4 6.9 4.6 7.4
dissolved oxygen saturation (%) 45.3 (52.5) 58.0 (0.3) 43.0 53.1 (11.2) 34.5 (4.1) 61.0 61.0 39.0 66.0
alkalinity (mg HCO3/L) 62 (2) 39 (2) 41 33 58 (10) 34 42 36 36
ammonia (mg N-NH4/L) 0.010 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.025 (0.017) <0.005 0.006 <0.005 0.0
arsenic dissolved (mg/L) n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m
calcium dissolved (mg/L) 14.5 (0.7) 11.0 (1.5) 11.0 6.3 14.5 (2.1) 14.0 12.0 6.5 7.2
chloride (mg/L) 8.7 (0.4) 4.4 (0.5) 5.3 1.8 8.1 (1.2) 8.3 7.3 1.3 1.5
iron dissolved (mg/L) 0.04 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.04 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 <0.03
magnesium dissolved (mg/L) 4.7 (0.2) 2.4 (0.1) 2.8 1.4 5.9 (0.3) 4.1 3.3 1.4 1.5
manganese dissolved (mg/L) <0.01 <0.01 n/m n/m 0.1 n/m n/m n/m n/m
nitrate (mg N-NO3/L) 1.5 (0.2) 2 2.1 0.2 4.1 (0.1) 7.1 3.8 <0.1 0.2
dissolved reactive phosphorus (mg/L) 0.004 0.009 n/m n/m 0.003 n/m n/m n/m n/m
potassium dissolved (mg/L) 0.8 (0.1) 0.8 (0.1) 0.8 0.5 1.1 (0.2) 1.0 1.0 0.3 0.4
reactive silica (mg SiO2/L) 16.5 (0.7) 11 12.0 9.6 16.5 (0.7) 16.0 12.0 9.3 10.0
sodium dissolved (mg/L) 8.0 (0.4) 4 4.7 2.9 8.7 (0.8) 8.4 7.2 3.0 3.2
sulphate (mg/L) 11.5 (0.7) 4.8 (1.1) 6.1 2.0 5.1 (2.5) 8.7 6.2 1.7 2.3
total hardness (mg/CaCO3/L) 55.6 (2.7) 37.4 (4.3) 39.2 21.6 60.8 (6.5) 52.1 43.8 22.1 24.3
δ18O (o/oo) -9.7 -10.3 -9.9 -10.6 n/m -8.5 -9.0 -10.9 -10.9
1
2
164
165
well number K38/0386 K38/0644 K38/0659 K38/0684 K38/1001
well depth (m) 9.1 10 10 16 8.5
number of samples 1 1 1 1 1
pH1 6.2 12.1 6.6 6.5 6.3
water temperature1 (oC) 12.0 11.6 12.9 11.2 10.5
conductivity1 (μS/cm) 24 15 12 21 7
dissolved oxygen1 (mg/L) 7.6 8.2 7.8 10.2 7.6
dissolved oxygen saturation (%) 71.0 74.3 70.7 92.0 69.0
alkalinity (mg HCO3/L) 55 45 44 39 31
ammonia (mg N-NH4/L) <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
arsenic dissolved (mg/L) n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m
calcium dissolved (mg/L) 22.0 15.0 12.0 19.0 6.3
chloride (mg/L) 14.0 6.7 4.5 11.0 3.7
iron dissolved (mg/L) <0.03 0.04 0.03 0.05 <0.03
magnesium dissolved (mg/L) 6.8 3.8 2.8 5.3 1.7
manganese dissolved (mg/L) <0.01 n/m n/m n/m n/m
nitrate (mg N-NO3/L) 10.2 4.2 2.4 8.5 0.5
dissolved reactive phosphorus (mg/L) n/m n/m n/m n/m n/m
potassium dissolved (mg/L) 1.2 1.0 0.8 1.1 0.5
reactive silica (mg SiO2/L) 15.0 13.0 12.0 15.0 11.0

sodium dissolved (mg/L) 12.0 6.7 5.0 9.9 3.8
sulphate (mg/L) 13.0 10.3 6.5 16.0 3.7
total hardness (mg/CaCO3/L) 83.3 53.2 41.7 69.6 22.8
δ18O (o/oo) -8.2 -9.7 -10.0 -8.7 -9.4
1
2
Table A8-3: Groundwater chemistry (deep wells)
Average result reported; one standard deviation shown in brackets, where applicable
well number K37/1301 K38/0459 K38/0690 K37/1951 K38/1544 K38/1402 K38/1540 K38/1705 K38/1706 K38/1707
well depth (m) 46 66.2 43.7 118.5 62.3 68 29.7 100 72.5 34
number of samples 10 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1
pH1 7.3 (0.4) 7.2 (0.2) 7.5 (0.3) 7.4 (0.1) 7.7 (0.3) 6.3 (0.1) 7.6 8 8.5 10.0
water temperature1 (oC) 12.1 (0.2) 12.7 (0.6) 13.2 (1.4) 13.1 (0.1) 13.3 (0.2) 12.6 (0.8) 12.3 13 13.2 12.7
conductivity1 (μS/cm) 11 (2) 12 (4) 12 (2) 11 (3) 10 (3) 11 (2) 12 12 13 16
dissolved oxygen1 (mg/L) 0.9 (0.2) 7.6 (2.3) 6.1 (2.7) 3.4 (1.0) 3.0 (0.1) 7.6 (0.6) 5.1 9 7.9 6.8
dissolved oxygen saturation (%) 8.4 (1.7) 74.8 (24.9) 60.1 (28.6) 32.2 (9.6) 28.1 (1.5) 71.7 (6.6) 47.4 86 75.2 64.1
alkalinity (mg HCO3/L) 83 (6) 59 (8) 64 39 (54) 73 54 58 64 68 89
ammonia (mg N-NH4/L) <0.005 0.012 (0.002) 0.008 (0.004) <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.009 0.013 0.019 0.015
arsenic dissolved (mg/L) n/m n/m n/m n/m <0.002 n/m <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002
calcium dissolved (mg/L) 11.5 (0.8) 13.0 12.0 (1.4) 13.0 12.0 13.0 11.0 13.0 14.0 24.0
chloride (mg/L) 4.0 (0.2) 7.7 (0.1) 6.3 (0.6) 3.8 (0.0) 3.1 4.3 6.5 4.1 4.2 3.9
iron dissolved (mg/L) 0.04 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03
magnesium dissolved (mg/L) 5.2 (0.2) 3.8 3.7 (0.1) 3.3 3.0 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 2.8
manganese dissolved (mg/L) n/m <0.01 <0.01 n/m <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
nitrate (mg N-NO3/L) 0.4 (0.1) 2.6 (0.9) 1.1 0.8 0.5 2.4 0.5 0.1 0.2 0.3
dissolved reactive phosphorus
n/m 0.009 0.015 n/m n/m n/m n/m 0.017 0.0 0.032
(mg/L)
potassium dissolved (mg/L) 0.6 (0.1) 0.9 (0.1) 0.9 (0.2) 0.7 0.7 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.9
reactive silica (mg SiO2/L) 19.0 (0.0) 14.0 (2.8) 18.0 (0.0) 17.0 18.0 14.0 17.0 20.0 20.0 18.0
sodium dissolved (mg/L) 10.5 (0.5) 7.7 (0.1) 8.2 (0.4) 8.9 8.6 5.4 7.8 8.1 8.0 8.3
sulphate (mg/L) 1.9 (0.3) 2.5 (0.1) 1.9 (0.6) 2.0 2.0 5.7 2.5 2.4 2.6 3.0
total hardness (mg/CaCO3/L) 50.6 (2.9) 48.3 45.2 (3.8) 46.3 42.5 46.7 41.7 46.7 49.2 71.7
δ18O (o/oo) -8.8 (0.2) -8.7 -8.7 -9.0 (0.2) -9.4 (0.1) -9.9 -8.8 -9.2 -9.2 -9.2
1
2
166

Appendix 9
Maps of water chemistry
Figure A9-1: Distribution of average sulphate concentrations measured in shallow

groundwater and surface waters (August 2006 – November 2007). Well identities
labelled

Figure A9-2: Distribution of average chloride concentrations measured in shallow groundwater

and surface waters (August 2006 – November 2007). Well identities labelled

Figure A9-3: Distribution of average dissolved oxygen levels measured in shallow

groundwater (August 2006 – November 2007). Well identities labelled

Figure A9-4: Distribution of average nitrate concentrations measured in shallow groundwater

and surface waters (August 2006 – November 2007). Well identities labelled

Appendix 10
Temporal variations of selected ion determinands in groundwater
Note: K37/1301 is a 46 m deep well. All other samples relate to shallow groundwater system. Daily
rainfall is also plot (grey line). K38/1017, J37/0012 and K38/0148 are actually located on Orton-
Rangitata plain and are sampled routinely as part of Environment Canterbury’s water quality
monitoring programme. They are included for completeness.
Figure A10-1: Variation of Ca/Mg ratio in groundwater analysed during field study
Figure A10-2: Variation of sulphate concentrations in groundwater analysed during field study

Figure A10-3: Variation of sodium concentrations in groundwater analysed during field study
Figure A10-4: Variation of nitrate concentrations in groundwater analysed during field study

Appendix 11
Land Surface Recharge Model – coded in Fortan
Program Orari_LSR
c=========================================================================
c
c This program applies the soil budget model "Drain.for" as applied by David Scott in report
c U04/97 (Appendix 3 therein) to estimate land surface recharge (LSR) LSR based on
c meteorological records and assumptions made about irrigation demand/use that are
c determined by antecedent soil conditions.
c
c original author (Drain.for): Dave Scott, 1997, Environment Canterbury, Christchurch
c
c modified for Orari hydrological catchment study by: Lee Burbery, 2009, Environment
c Canterbury
c
c modifications include:
c 1) Rainfall estimate no longer dependent on NIWA virtual climate data, rather is read
c from (13) rain gauge observations and applies an inverse weighted distance algorithm
c to observations.
c 2) Assumption that PAW = 0.67PAW has been removed. This assumption was based on
c fact that historic PAW values were for 900 mm soil depth, and assumption that crops root
c only to 600 mm in Canterbury soils. New Landcare (S-Map) PAW profiles are now based on
c 300 mm soil depth profile.
c 3) A flag is read from land parcel input files to recognise whether to apply generic irrigation
c for year (2006-2007).
c 4) Monthly totals of Rain, PET, LSR (in terms of depth and volume) are determined and
c output. These output data constitute input data to the Orari hydrological catchment water
c budget model.
c 5) Code is scripted for analysis of 395 days of data: 1/9/2006-31/8/2007.
c Variables: maxim; day0; days - reference this timescale and must be corrected if model is
c run for different time period.
c===========================================================================
PARAMETER (maxim=12, numrainobs=13)

integer cellid, irrigflag, maxim, days, day, dayno
integer monthcnt, kount, numrainobs, seasonflag
real East(numrainobs), Nrth(numrainobs), x0, y0, area
real paw, paw0, w_irrig, w_rain, drain_rain, drain_irrig
real totalarea, totalrockarea, totalirrarea
real wght(numrainobs), rain(numrainobs)
real monthPET(maxim), monthRAIN(maxim)
real monthDRAIN1(maxim), monthDRAIN2(maxim)
real monthVOLRAIN(maxim), monthVOLPET(maxim)
real monthVOLDRAIN1(maxim), monthVOLDRAIN2(maxim)
real monthVOLIRR(maxim)
character*80 line
character*10 dummy
character*10 date1, date2
logical*1 irrig
c........open file to which will print annual outputs (by land parcel)
open (14,'drainage_est.txt')
write (14,*) 'cellid, x0, y0, paw, rtot, etot, drain_rain,
&drain_irrig'
c........open file to which will print monthly outputs (by sub-catchment)

open (15,'monthly_output.txt',err=94)
do i = 1,maxim
monthRAIN(i) = 0.
monthPET(i) = 0.
monthDRAIN1(i) = 0.
monthDRAIN2(i) = 0.
monthVOLRAIN(i) = 0.
monthVOLPET(i) = 0.
monthVOLDRAIN1(i) = 0.
monthVOLDRAIN2(i) = 0.
monthVOLIRR(i) = 0.
end do
monthcnt =0 ! initialise month counter
c.........open file of rainfall input data and read in co-ordinates of rain gauges
open (11,'rain_input.txt',err=92)
read (11,*) dummy, (East(i),i = 1,numrainobs)
read (11,*) dummy, (Nrth(i),i = 1,numrainobs)
read (11,*) line
close(11) ! close rainfall input data file
c........open file of land parcel attributes
open (10,'land_input.txt',err=91)
read (10,*) line
days = 365 ! 1/9/2006 - 31/8/2007

day0 = 244 ! Julian day for 1/9/2006
totalarea = 0.
totalrockarea = 0.
totalirrarea = 0.
kount =0
c........start process of evaluating climate data and LSR at individual land parcels
1 read(10,*,end=98) cellid, irrigflag, paw0, x0, y0, area
paw = paw0
totalarea = totalarea + area
if (paw .eq. 0.0) then

totalrockarea = totalrockarea + area
endif
if (irrigflag .eq. 1) then

totalirrarea = totalirrarea + area
endif
kount = kount + 1
write(*,*) kount
c........calculate distance to rain gauges & inverse distance spatial weighting function
call WEIGHTS(x0, y0, East, Nrth, wght)
c........re-open file containing daily rainfall records (skip first 3 lines of text/geospatial data)

open (11,'rain_input.txt',err=92)
read (11,*) line
read (11,*) line
read (11,*) line
c........open file of daily Potential Evapotranspiration data (skip 1st title line)
open (12,'evap_input.txt',err=93)
read (12,*) line
c........initialise water/soil moisture variables as zero
w_rain = paw
drain_rain = 0.0
w_irrig = paw
drain_irrig = 0.0
rtot = 0.0
etot = 0.0
dayno =0
31 read (11,*,end=40) date1, (rain(i),i = 1,13) ! read rain gauge data
c.........estimate daily rainfall at land parcel from rain gauge dataset
call TOTALRAIN(wght, rain, rest)
rest = 1.1*rest ! apply ground-level gauge correction
c.........read in daily PET data (assumed uniform across catchment)
read (12,*,end=41) date2, pet
if (date1 .ne. date2) then

goto 95
endif
read (date1,103) day ! read day (DD) component of date string (DD/MM/YYYY)
103 format(i2)
if (day .eq. 1) then ! if 1st of month advance month counter

monthcnt = monthcnt + 1
if(monthcnt .gt. maxim) go to 98
endif
if (pet .lt. 0.0) then

pet = 0.0 ! correct any negative PET data values
endif
rtot = rtot + rest

etot = etot + pet
c........assess whether land parcel comprises has no soil water holding capacity (e.g. river beds
or bedrock).
c........If so, skip LSR calculations, yet proceed to summarise rainfall and PET components
if (paw .eq. 0.0) then

drain_rain = 0.0
drain_irrig = 0.0

drainage1 = 0.
drainage2 = 0.
appl2 = 0.
go to 2
endif
c........LSR calculations on land with soil cover

c........Assume: irrigation season Oct-April (incl.)
julianday = mod(day0 + dayno, 365.25)
if (julianday.le.120.0.or.julianday.ge.274.0) then
seasonflag = 1
else
seasonflag = 0
end if
c..... only irrigate if consent exercised 2006-2007
if (seasonflag.eq.1.and.irrigflag.eq. 1) then
irrig = .true.
else
irrig = .false.
endif
c........compute dryland LSR recharge, i.e. case if no irrigation
appl1 = 0.0 ! zero application depth for dryland option
call BUDGET(paw,rest,pet,w_rain,appl1,drainage1)
drain_rain = drain_rain + drainage1
c........compute irrigation demand together with LSR for irrigated land, if applicable.
c........Assumptions: 1) irrigation occurs when soil moisture = 50% of PAW
c 2) land is irrigated to 80% of water holding capacity
appl2 = 0.0
if(irrig) then
if(w_irrig .lt. 0.5*paw) then
appl2 = (paw - w_irrig)/0.8 ! appl to restore to field capacity with 80% efficiency
endif
endif
call BUDGET(paw,rest,pet,w_irrig,appl2,drainage2)
drain_irrig = drain_irrig + drainage2
c.......calculate monthly statistics
2 continue
monthRAIN(monthcnt) = monthRAIN(monthcnt) + rest
monthPET(monthcnt) = monthPET(monthcnt) + pet
monthDRAIN1(monthcnt) = monthDRAIN1(monthcnt) + drainage1
monthDRAIN2(monthcnt) = monthDRAIN2(monthcnt) + drainage2
monthVOLRAIN(monthcnt) = monthVOLRAIN(monthcnt) + (area *
& rest/1000)
monthVOLPET(monthcnt) = monthVOLPET(monthcnt) + (area *

& pet/1000)
monthVOLDRAIN1(monthcnt) = monthVOLDRAIN1(monthcnt) + (area *
& drainage1/1000)
monthVOLDRAIN2(monthcnt) = monthVOLDRAIN2(monthcnt) + (area *
& drainage2/1000000)
monthVOLIRR(monthcnt) = monthVOLIRR(monthcnt) + (area *
& appl2/1000)
c.......end of daily time-step, so proceed to next day in climate dataset
dayno = dayno + 1
go to 31
40 close(11)
41 close(12)
c.........calculate annual statistics
factor = 365.25/real(days)
rtot = factor*rtot
etot = factor*etot
drain_rain = factor*drain_rain
drain_irrig = factor*drain_irrig
write (14,*) cellid, x0, y0, paw, rtot, etot,
& drain_rain, drain_irrig
monthcnt = 0 ! reset month counter

go to 1 ! proceed to assess next land parcel
c.........collection of error statements
91 write(*,*) 'error opening land input data'

92 write(*,*) 'error opening rain input data'
93 write(*,*) 'error opening pet input data'
94 write(*,*) 'error opening monthly output file'
95 write(*,*) 'dates in rain and PET input do not match'
go to 99
98 write(*,*) 'finished reading land parcel inputs'
c.........write summary of data outputs
write(15,*) 'Month Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb

& Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug'
write(15,*) 'Rain[mm]', (monthrain(i), i = 1,maxim)

write(15,*) 'PET[mm]', (monthPET(i), i = 1,maxim)
write(15,*) 'dryland_drainage[mm]',(monthDRAIN1(i), i = 1,maxim)
write(15,*) 'irrig_drainage[mm]', (monthDRAIN2(i), i = 1,maxim)
write(15,*) 'volumes'
write(15,*) 'vol_rain[m3]', (monthVOLRAIN(i), i = 1,maxim)
write(15,*) 'vol_PET[m3]', (monthVOLPET(i), i = 1,maxim)
write(15,*) 'dryland_drainage[m3]',(monthVOLDRAIN1(i),i=1,maxim)
write(15,*) 'irrig_drainage[m3]', (monthVOLDRAIN2(i),i=1,maxim)
write(15,*) 'hypothetical_irrig_demand[m3]',
& (monthVOLIRR(i),i=1,maxim)
write(15,*) 'land_parcel_averaged'
write(15,*) 'Ave_Rain[mm]', (monthrain(i)/kount, i = 1,maxim)
write(15,*) 'Ave_PET[mm]', (monthPET(i)/kount, i = 1,maxim)

write(15,*) 'spatially_averaged'
write(15,*) 'SpatialAvged_rain[mm]',(monthVOLRAIN(i)/totalarea*
& 1000,i = 1,maxim)
write(15,*) 'SpatialAvged_PET[mm]', (monthVOLPET(i)/totalarea*
& 1000,i = 1,maxim)
write(15,*) 'SpatialAvgedDryland_Drainage[mm_m2]',
& (monthVOLDRAIN1(i)/(totalarea-totalrockarea)*
& 1000,i=1,maxim)
write(15,*) 'SpatialAvgedIrrig_Drainage[mm_m2]',
& (monthVOLDRAIN2(i)/totalirrarea*1000,i=1,maxim)
write(15,*)
write(15,*) 'Other_useful_summary_statistics...'
write(15,*) 'number_of_land_parcels: ', kount
write(15,*) 'total_area_of_land_parcels[ha]: ', totalarea/10000
write(15,*) 'total_area_of_rock[ha]: ', totalrockarea/10000
write(15,*) 'total_area_of_active_irrigated_land[ha]: ',
& totalirrarea/10000
close(15)
99 stop
end
c=================================================================
subroutine BUDGET(paw,rain,pet,w,appl,drainage)
! soil moisture budget model, see report U04/97 for description of function
a = 6.0 ! constant in aet/pet vs w/paw relationship

smfac = (1.0 - exp(-a*w/paw))/
* (1.0 - 2.0*exp(-a) + exp(-a*w/paw))
aet = smfac*pet ! convert Potential ET to Actual ET
w = w + rain + appl - aet ! soil moisture
drainage = 0.0
if(w .gt. paw) then ! drainage occurs if soil moisture exceeds PAW
drainage = w - paw
w = paw
elseif(w .lt. 0.0) then
w = 0.0
endif
return
end
c================================================================
subroutine WEIGHTS(x,y,E,N,w)
! This routine calculates spatial weights between land parcel and 13 rainfall observation data
! sites in Orari catchment.
! Applies a modified inverse distance weighting algorithm that incorporates distance to
! farthest rain gauge.
! Input variables are: x0 and y0 i.e. co-ords for land parcel at which need to estimates rainfall;
! East and Nrth i.e. grid co-ords for 13 rain gauge observation sites.
! 13 weights to be applied in weighting function are output in array "w(13)".
PARAMETER (numrainobs=13)
real x, y, E(numrainobs), N(numrainobs), hmax, h(numrainobs)
real w(numrainobs), denom

hmax = 0. ! distance to farthest rain guage

denom = 0. ! denominator of weight variable = sum of numerator values
c......calculate distance b/w land parcel centroid & all rain gauges, store max distance
do i = 1,numrainobs
h(i) = sqrt((E(i) - x)**2 + (N(i)-y)**2)

if (h(i).gt.hmax) then
hmax = h(i)
endif
enddo
c......sum up distances for denominator or weighting function
do 20 j = 1,numrainobs
denom = denom + ((hmax - h(j)) / (hmax * h(j)))**2
20 continue
c.......calculate 13 weights
do 30 k = 1,numrainobs
w(k) = (((hmax - h(k)) / (hmax * h(k)))**2) / denom
30 continue
return
end
c=====================================================================
subroutine TOTALRAIN(wght,rain,rest)
! This routine applies (inverse-distance) weights to daily rainfall observations

! Provides a rainfall estimate at a point location, output as "rest".
PARAMETER (numrainobs=13)
real wght(numrainobs), rain(numrainobs), rest
rest = 0.
do 10 i = 1,numrainobs
rest = rest + wght(i)*rain(i)
10 continue
return
end
c===================================================================

Appendix 12
Land surface recharge model outputs
Table A12-1: Summary of land surface recharge estimates, based on depth equivalents. Note 1): extra drainage under irrigated land considers only
land parcels attached to consents that consent holders reported actively irrigated 2006 – 2007, i.e. volume irrigated drainage [m3] /
area of irrigated land parcel [m2]. Note 2): model applied hypothetical irrigation demand/water use – see main body text for
explanation and assumptions
STATION STREAM OHAPI WAIHI

extra extra extra
drainage drainage drainage
dryland dryland dryland
rain PET under rain PET under rain PET under
[mm] [mm] irrigated [mm] [mm] irrigated [mm] [mm] irrigated
[mm] [mm] [mm]
land land land
[mm] [mm] [mm]
Sep 16 61 0 0 7 61 0 0 15 61 0 0
Oct 97 90 13 48 58 90 0 39 83 90 7 12
Nov 147 89 35 15 90 89 1 11 128 89 15 7
Dec 302 82 217 0 131 82 33 17 250 82 149 4
Jan 69 76 9 0 29 76 0 6 55 76 2 1
Feb 84 73 3 17 30 73 0 7 67 73 2 3
Mar 75 79 18 39 46 79 0 21 61 79 6 6
Apr 73 47 4 12 58 47 0 19 66 47 3 4
May 73 43 60 13 57 43 27 23 67 43 41 6
Jun 46 27 0 0 32 27 0 0 37 27 0 0
Jul 82 27 42 0 82 27 31 1 87 27 36 0
Aug 35 42 16 0 30 42 22 0 29 42 14 0
Total 1099 737 417 145 651 737 114 144 943 737 275 42
180
181
ORARI (UPPER BASIN) ORARI (MIDDLE BASIN) ORARI (LOWER BASIN)
extra extra extra
dryland dryland dryland
rain PET under rain PET under rain PET under
[mm] [mm] irrigated [mm] [mm] irrigated [mm] [mm] irrigated
[mm] [mm] [mm]
land land land
[mm] [mm] [mm]
Sep 14 61 0 0 9 61 0 0 7 61 0 0
Oct 90 90 23 42 57 90 8 38 56 90 4 48
Nov 134 89 39 27 77 89 7 23 85 89 6 12
Dec 300 82 221 7 169 82 78 22 127 82 38 17
Jan 59 76 4 4 37 76 0 8 29 76 0 8
Feb 57 73 2 17 27 73 0 9 29 73 0 10
Mar 64 79 17 32 44 79 5 24 45 79 5 24
Apr 54 47 4 16 46 47 2 13 58 47 4 16
May 68 43 53 11 57 43 31 18 56 43 34 19
Jun 38 27 2 0 25 27 0 0 30 27 2 0
Jul 81 27 47 0 79 27 31 0 82 27 37 0
Aug 32 42 15 0 26 42 16 0 30 42 21 0
Total 992 737 427 156 652 737 178 155 634 737 151 154
Table A12-2: Summary statistics for land /sub- basins of systems model, as used in recharge calculations
Total Total
hydrological hydrological
Station Upper Middle Lower
Ohapi Waihi catchment catchment
Stream Orari Orari Orari
(inc. Waihi (excl. Waihi
basin) basin)
basin area [ha] 3579 7321 14508 2751 4499 2386 35044 20536
proportion of total catchment [%] 10 21 41 8 13 7 100 n/a
area of zero-PAW [ha] 1293 0 4964 0 0 0 6257 1293
area of irrigated land [ha] 21 1014 6768 806 1301 1190 11100 4332
proportion of basin with no soil 36 0 34 0 0 0 18 6
cover, so active run-off [%]
proportion of basin under
1 14 47 29 29 50 32 21
irrigation [%]
n/a not assessed

182
Appendix 13
183
Catchment water budget results
Table A13-1: Station Stream basin

aquifer storativity 0.06
sub-basin area [ha] 3579
active aquifer area [ha] 2286
INPUTS OUTPUTS STORAGE
Observed Estimated Observed Estimated Observed Estimated
Rain LSR PET Rivers Irrigation Groundwater ΔH ΔS
run off infiltrated S2 G2 [m]
Sept 584 194 0 2180 223 0 461 -0.36 -490
Oct 3462 1223 315 3207 239 17 1454 -0.13 -172
Nov 5260 1838 794 3171 454 0 1834 0.25 344
Dec 10792 3919 4969 2945 1420 0 5685 1.30 1783
Jan 2461 859 210 2727 485 0 -390 0.71 974
Feb 3012 963 66 2623 256 7 2343 -1.15 -1577
Mar 2693 943 426 2842 256 11 828 0.20 274

Apr 2622 846 91 1686 160 3 1049 -0.20 -274
May 2619 925 1363 1546 407 0 1167 0.52 713
Jun 1657 573 1 977 111 0 1397 -0.68 -933
Jul 2917 1030 956 981 345 0 1134 0.37 507
Aug 1263 457 365 1500 286 0 -192 0.53 727
Total 39341 13769 9558 26384 4643 38 16770 1876
3 3
units expressed in 10 m unless stated otherwise.
red = estimated from correlation with Waihi groundwater levels.
blue = unknown for which solved considering water balance for basin.
grey = data not evaluated in water balance, but was used in LSR calculations. Included for reference purposes.
Table A13-2: Waihi basin
Rain Rivers LSR Groundwater PET Rivers Irrigation ΔH ΔS
S4 infiltrated run off G2 G4 S6 [m]
Sept 2141 1465 0 456 461 1299 8836 5298 0 -0.27 -1617
Oct 11982 1548 1439 3012 1454 -1474 12999 4963 1834 -0.14 -818
Nov 18516 1617 1953 4557 1834 -2402 12854 6485 595 0.08 479
Dec 36304 2395 14433 8750 5685 -3672 11940 23611 24 0.67 3957
Jan 7996 2924 281 1964 -390 9467 11055 11428 495 0.39 2323
Feb 9721 1565 384 1887 2343 -5219 10635 5594 831 -0.92 -5465
Mar 8810 938 938 2453 828 -94 11520 4735 732 -0.07 -405
Apr 9548 554 592 2529 1049 -1381 6833 3616 633 -0.15 -907
May 9741 444 4304 2911 1167 -1181 6268 6955 0 0.12 690
Jun 5329 394 0 1396 1397 -826 3961 3331 0 -0.16 -972
Jul 12582 438 3418 4040 1134 -2949 3975 6303 0 -0.04 -223
Aug 4142 1051 1367 1355 -192 6264 6079 6804 0 0.51 3041
Total 136810 15334 29107 35309 16770 -2168 106954 89122 5144 85
3 3
units expressed in 10 m unless stated otherwise
blue = unknown for which solved considering water balance for basin
green = references value solved in water balance for adjacent Station Stream basin.
184
185
Table A13-3: Ohapi basin
Rain LSR Groundwater Rivers PET Irrigation Groundwater ΔH ΔS
G5 S5 G7 (part of) [m]
Sept 532 1 9713 4472 4459 0 5529 -0.07 -286
Oct 4244 415 13943 4043 6560 1036 9685 -0.09 -405
Nov 6579 147 16093 4334 6487 93 11810 0.00 3
Dec 9583 2612 21145 6068 6025 0 17439 0.06 248
Jan 2116 64 -10855 5662 5579 387 -17207 0.08 367
Feb 2229 81 14185 3464 5366 448 10907 -0.13 -553
Mar 3335 235 9074 4606 5813 504 4079 0.03 120
Apr 4278 213 8803 3982 3448 227 4771 0.01 36

May 4188 2220 11024 4738 3163 0 8227 0.06 279
Jun 2333 12 7894 3572 1999 0 4567 -0.05 -232
Jul 6022 2248 14831 5052 2006 0 11974 0.01 53
Aug 2221 1578 2525 5729 3068 0 -2220 0.13 594
Total 47661 9826 118374 55722 53972 2694 69561 224
units expressed in 103 m3 unless stated otherwise.
green = references values solved in water balance for Waihi and Lower Orari basins. Constrained by assumption about how much
groundwater sourced from Orari mid basin contrinutes to each of Ohapi (G5) and Lower Orari basins (G1b).
Table A13-4: Orari (upper basin)
Rain Rivers LSR PET Rivers Irrigation Groundwater ΔH ΔS
S1 S2 S3 S1a G1a [m]
Sept 384 18926 223 0 0 1675 8806 0 10732 -0.24 -388
Oct 2472 21053 239 0 986 2465 10540 632 11190 -0.05 -84
Nov 3676 27091 454 0 1285 2437 16670 128 12243 -0.13 -211
Dec 8253 66553 1420 1126 6143 2264 54366 57 20106 0.43 712
Jan 1633 36127 485 1817 148 2096 25059 83 11140 1.39 2295
Feb 1576 11628 256 0 199 2016 2404 317 10346 -0.60 -984
Mar 1765 9518 256 0 713 2184 388 354 10508 -0.46 -763
Apr 1474 7645 160 0 225 1296 0 205 8603 -0.47 -778
May 1876 10688 407 0 1558 1188 1785 0 9658 0.73 1210
Jun 1058 7909 111 0 42 751 336 0 8312 -0.36 -587
Jul 2235 11570 345 0 1295 754 2232 0 10893 0.05 85
Aug 872 17426 286 0 417 1153 7046 0 10186 0.54 897
Total 27274 246132 4643 2943 13010 20278 129632 1776 133916 1404
units expressed in 103 m3 unless stated otherwise.
green = references value solved in water balance for adjacent Station Stream basin.
186
187
Table A13-5: Orari (middle) basin
Rain Rivers LSR Groundwater PET Rivers Irrigation Groundwater ΔH ΔS
S1a G1a S1b G1b G3 [m]
Sept 393 8806 0 10732 2740 5240 0 3043 12477 -0.45 -1223
Oct 2545 10540 851 11190 4031 4494 1373 3418 14018 -0.27 -722
Nov 3466 16670 610 12243 3986 10070 563 3733 15308 -0.06 -149
Dec 7585 54366 3806 20106 3702 52542 111 4845 19868 0.34 913
Jan 1658 25059 113 11140 3428 33007 488 375 1536 0.34 906
Feb 1221 2404 118 10346 3298 358 703 2568 10531 -0.48 -1294
Mar 1991 388 527 10508 3572 96 650 2418 9918 -0.62 -1660
Apr 2060 0 242 8603 2119 0 367 1945 7976 -0.53 -1443
May 2580 1785 1634 9658 1943 0 0 2509 10288 0.10 280
Jun 1119 336 6 8312 1228 0 0 1819 7462 -0.23 -627
Jul 3532 2232 1415 10893 1233 0 0 3004 12319 -0.29 -784
Aug 1162 7046 727 10186 1885 1887 0 2399 9839 1.42 3834
Total 29314 129632 10047 133916 33165 107694 4256 32075 131540 -1969
3 3
units expressed in 10 m unless stated otherwise.
green = references values from water balance for adjacent Upper Orari basin.
Table A13-6: Orari (lower) basin
Rain Rivers LSR Groundwater PET Irrigation Rivers Groundwater ΔH ΔS
S1b S5 G1b G6 S7 G7 (part of) [m]
Sept 167 5240 4472 0 3043 1898 1453 0 13257 2411 -0.38 -1016
Oct 1341 4494 4043 662 3418 1694 2138 1407 13106 463 -0.25 -665
Nov 2037 10070 4334 295 3733 1424 2114 186 16666 3917 -0.34 -914
Dec 3024 52542 6068 1107 4845 1379 1964 59 53509 12461 -0.03 -88
Jan 688 33007 5662 95 375 1492 1818 480 35734 3140 0.47 1275
Feb 703 358 3464 124 2568 1356 1749 634 7670 -244 -0.07 -189
Mar 1066 96 4606 407 2418 1382 1895 700 8741 -189 -0.13 -342
Apr 1376 0 3982 271 1945 1324 1124 199 7255 1174 -0.41 -1107
May 1337 0 4738 1037 2509 1415 1031 0 8418 1476 -0.07 -196
Jun 721 0 3572 39 1819 1106 651 0 6254 741 -0.17 -459
Jul 1946 0 5052 893 3004 1294 654 0 8597 1781 -0.05 -135
Aug 716 1887 5729 507 2399 1320 1000 0 11768 -546 0.23 621
Total 15121 107694 55722 5436 32075 17083 17592 3665 190975 26584 -3214
units expressed in 103 m3 unless stated otherwise
red = estimated from correlation with mean groundwater levels across all basins
blue = unknown for which solved considering water balance for basin
green = references values solved in water balance for Waihi and Lower Orari basins. Constrained by assumption about how much groundwater
sourced from Orari mid basin contributes to each of Ohapi (G5) and Lower Orari basins (G1b).
188

ECtrR10 36

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ECtrR10 36

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Integrated study of

surface water and

Report No. R10/36

Environment Canterbury Technical Report i

ii Environment Canterbury Technical Report

Executive summary .................................................................................................... i

2 Environmental setting .................................................................................... 3

3 Investigation methodology .......................................................................... 27

4 Investigation results ..................................................................................... 39

Environment Canterbury Technical Report iii

4.2.4.1 Orari River ......................................................................................52

5 Catchment water budget .............................................................................. 92

6 Conclusions and recommendations ......................................................... 109

iv Environment Canterbury Technical Report

6.3.2 Piezometric levels ..........................................................................................113

8 Acknowledgements .................................................................................... 116

Appendix 1 Rainfall results................................................................................ 117

Appendix 2 Flow duration curves ..................................................................... 118

Appendix 3 Timaru District Council discharges .............................................. 123

Appendix 4 River hydrographs ......................................................................... 124

Appendix 5 Flow correlations (yellow highlight indicates most significant

Appendix 6 River Losses and Gains ................................................................. 150

Appendix 7 Minimum flows ............................................................................... 156

Appendix 8 Water chemistry ............................................................................. 161

Appendix 9 Maps of water chemistry................................................................ 167

Appendix 10 Temporal variations of selected ion determinands in

Appendix 11 Land Surface Recharge Model – coded in Fortan ....................... 173

Appendix 12 Land surface recharge model outputs ......................................... 180

Appendix 13 Catchment water budget results ................................................... 183

Environment Canterbury Technical Report v

vi Environment Canterbury Technical Report

Figure 4-16: Monthly change in shallow groundwater levels.. .............................................................67

Environment Canterbury Technical Report vii

Figure A9-1: Distribution of average sulphate concentrations measured in shallow groundwater

viii Environment Canterbury Technical Report

Table A8-1: Surface water chemistry ................................................................................................161

Environment Canterbury Technical Report ix

Table A13-1: Station Stream basin .....................................................................................................183

x Environment Canterbury Technical Report

1.2 Previous investigations

Environment Canterbury Technical Report 1

Review documents that reference the Orari hydrological catchment include:

• Environmental Consultancy Services, 1997. Rangitata-Temuka Groundwater Review, Issues

1.3 Aims of the Orari Hydrological Catchment Investigation

Specific objectives of the investigation were to:

1.4 Report structure

2 Environment Canterbury Technical Report

Environment Canterbury Technical Report 3

4 Environment Canterbury Technical Report

Environment Canterbury Technical Report 5

6 Environment Canterbury Technical Report

Environment Canterbury Technical Report 7

2.4 Soils and land-use

Environment Canterbury Technical Report 9

10 Environment Canterbury Technical Report

Environment Canterbury Technical Report 11

Figure 2-6: Land-use on the Orari coastal plain (Hickley, 2003)

2.5 Surface water hydrology

12 Environment Canterbury Technical Report

Environment Canterbury Technical Report 13

14 Environment Canterbury Technical Report

2.6 Groundwater hydrology

16 Environment Canterbury Technical Report