Battle of the waterways: town versus country

Fact: Urban streams are more degraded than rural streams. Yes, you read that correctly.



When talking with farmers recently, several have commented their waterways look healthier than those they see in town. And yes, it’s true. Rural streams often have better water quality, stream habitat and biodiversity.  

But before you say: “We told you so”, read on to get the full story.  

Every year, Auckland Council checks the health of streams around the region, with 23 in total. Council monitors five indicators of stream health, which are graded from A to F.

The results show rural streams are a lot healthier than urban streams.  

Auckland’s urban streams are severely degraded, with grades on average between D and E. The reasons for degradation include piping and channelisation, stormwater discharges, erosion, weeds, debris, and fish passage obstacles.

These problems are often difficult and very expensive to fix, and Auckland Council is devoting a lot of money to reversing them with projects for stream daylighting, re-naturalisation and enhancement.  

Better grades
Auckland’s rural streams, on the other hand, have notably better grades – on average between B and C.



Every indicator of stream health is better in rural streams than in urban streams. Auckland Council’s website notes rural waterway health has improved markedly in the last 10 years.  

So what’s the catch? There are two.

First, Auckland is the only region in New Zealand where urban streams cover such a large proportion of the total stream catchment area.

Although urban streams in New Zealand’s towns and cities will show the same degradation to varying degrees, the total area impacted is relatively small. In comparison, rural stream health is a concern almost everywhere and the total area impacted is very large.

Second, even though rural stream health is improving, it still falls within the ‘degraded’ part of the continuum.

In Auckland’s rural streams, the indicators that score worst are habitat and biodiversity, followed closely by water quality. Although regional councils report neutral or improving trends in water quality indicators, some indicators continue to get worse.

In the battle of the waterways, farmers have a distinct advantage. Unlike urban streams, improving rural stream health is not necessarily complicated or expensive.  

While councils need to spend thousands of dollars per metre to restore urban streams, rural waterway health has the potential for dramatic improvement with simple good management.

There are effective and inexpensive actions you can take to solve a range of problems that not only improve waterways on-farm, but downstream too. And there are a range of benefits of enhancing streams you might not have thought of.

Management plans
If you’re read my previous Coast & Country articles, you’ll know I’m an advocate for preparing and implementing farm waterway management plans.

Like all farm management, you improve the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of your actions when you have a written plan.

To maximise your bang for buck, it’s essential you get good advice on the best actions to take for your unique circumstances.

So instead of shaking your head at the shopping trolleys and tyres in the town creek, start thinking about what action you can take to improve stream health on the farm. When you have a plan, the battle is already half-won.

By Louise Clark,
associate principal and senior ecologist
with Boffa Miskell in Tauranga.


0 Comments

There are no comments on this article.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to make a comment. Login Now
Opinion Poll

We're not running a poll right now. Check back soon!