Relationships between Maori values and streamflow: tools for incorporating cultural values into freshwater management decisions

Figures & data

Figure 1. A process for developing a Cultural Flow Preference Study and utilising this process to inform flow management decisions (adapted from Tipa and Nelson 2008; Tipa and Severne 2010). The focus of the present study is on Step 6.

Table 1. An example of cultural themes and their attributes, and the overall health scores used in the Cultural Flow Preference Study^a.

Category	Flow attribute
Cultural use	Flow will enable use of the site for kai gathering Flow will keep the riverbank vegetation watered Flow will protect kai species in and around this site Flow will enable cultural use of connected wetlands, springs and tributaries Flow will enable a range of recreational activities
Wai	Flow will provide a range of habitats instream and along the riverbank Flow will enable fish to move throughout the catchment Flow will help populations of kai species to re-establish and be abundant throughout the catchment Flow will keep sands and gravels moving through the system Flow will keep riparian wetlands, springs, or tributaries connected to mainstem Flow will create features that are important e.g. eddies, pools etc.
Cultural landscape	Flow will maintain a link between this site and other cultural sites downstream Flow will protect features of the river that are important in tribal stories, waiata etc Flow will return the voice of the river Flow will enable use of Maori lands, reserves and easements in the catchment
Health and well-being	Flow contributes to a good feeling about this site Flow enables whānau to be proud of this site
Overall flow satisfaction	How satisfied are you with the flow you are seeing today?
Overall health satisfaction	How satisfied are you with the health of the site you are seeing today?

^aPlease note these attributes were determined after completing thirty interviews across 3 catchments. They are modified or reconfirmed at the start of each CFPS.

Figure 2. An overview of the dataset and the types of analyses completed during a Cultural Flow Preference Study (Tipa 2013).

Figure 3. Locations of the five streams selected by whanau for the present study: Selwyn River (black square), Irwell River (grey circle) Buchannan’s Creek (black triangle), Merrys Stream (grey diamond), Waikouaiti River (black circle).

Table 2. Site and gauging station details.

River name	Site name	Gauging station number	Gauged period	7-day mean annual low flow (m^3s^−1)	Current minimum flow (m^3s^−1)
Selwyn River	Coes Ford	68,002	1985–2017	0.481	1.200*
Buchanan’s Creek	Fletchers	70,908	2000–2017	0.218	150 Oct – April 178 May – Sept
Merrys Stream	SH1 Bridge	70,705	2011–2014	0.003	5 Oct – April 45 May – Sept
Waikouaiti River	D/S Confluence	73,107	2010–2015	0.322	0.150^+
Irwell River	Lake Road	NA	2011–2012	0.300	0.890*

*Minimum flows read from Canterbury Land and Water Regional Plan.

⁺This was set through a resource consent process not a minimum flow limit setting process.

Figure 4. Recorded flows on the day of each visit for each site, compared to the 7-day mean annual low flow (MALF) and median flow.

Figure 5. Observed and fitted relationships between overall health score and river flow. Dots represent observed values. Light grey lines represent calculated values at the site level. Dark grey lines represent calculated values at the assessor level within site level.

Figure 6. Performance of mixed-effects models for the relationship between overall health and flow at different levels of resolution. Although scores ranged from 1 to 7, we show only observed vs. predicted relationships between 1 and 5 because this is the range of observations that were recorded. Thick dashed grey line represents linear regression. Thin dashed grey line represents the 90% confidence prediction interval. Data have been jittered to avoid overplotting of symbols.

Figure 7. Percent variation explained for models for the relationship between overall health and flow at three nested levels of the mixed-effects model for each site separately and all data pooled together.

Tipa G, Nelson K. 2008. Introducing cultural opportunities: a framework for incorporating cultural perspectives in contemporary resource management. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning. 10:313–337. doi: 10.1080/15239080802529472

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Tipa G, Severne C. 2010. Including Mātauranga Māori in environmental flow setting decisions National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Client Report: HAM2010-030, 26 p.

 Google Scholar