In case you thought the Tukituki has been getting cleaned up, here are some recent photos to set you straight (once on Flickr, click on the Slideshow option, or scroll through at your own pace).
All were taken 17 April 2009 by Claire Belford, at or within a kilometer or so of the Red Bridge over the Tuki (leading to Ocean Beach/Waimarama).
Too many “nutrients” in the water > slime (officially, algae).
Yes, the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council has some promising plans afoot to get on with the clean-up. It’s taken them over a year (remember the 12 March 08 Tukituki meeting in Havelock North Community Centre?) to come up with a plan of action.
But are they actually doing anything yet to clean up the river? NO! As these photos make clear.
Until we see some action underway, as opposed to research and planning, you can expect to see fresh photos like these regularly.
Tom Belford
P.S. Why don’t you print one or two and send them to your favourite Regional Councillor? Or just forward this BayBuzz post.
As a teenager in the 70s I paddled the Tuki in a 2 man canoe from Waipawa to the mouth with my best mate from school. Slime back then? NO. When my growing family came back to live as a family in HB in the early 90s, we went numerous times to the Tuki for the kids to paddle and mess about. Signs of slime then? YES but mostly ok. Now I will not take my grandchildren anywhere near it. What have we done! I say WE because we can berate councillors if we wish but it is each and every one of us who allows this to happen (and has the power to change it).
When I was a child in the 50s I swam in all our rivers and yes, there was some slimy weed then but nothing like what you've shown in the photos. I had my own name for this hated stuff: "skiggies". My brothers would throw it at each other (and me) but I wouldn't swim where there was lots of skiggies.
On the topic of river pollution, I rode the lovely bike path along the stopbank by the Tutaekuri River on Easter weekend and was appalled to see cattle standing in the river and one pooing into it.
We always used to joke about Tutaekuri meaning "dog poo" (though I've subsequently found out it means "dog offal") and I'm suggesting that an alternative name could be given to reflect modern useage of the river: "Tutaekau" or Cow Poo River.
Hello Tom.
I have read today’s comment on the Tukituki. Yesterday’s debate on the report – which you rightly called a comprehensive review – indeed in some areas took the RC to task but also approved of other actions. It also had rather compelling criticisms of the HBEWG which you have not mentioned.
On Sunday you sent a bank of 25 photos of Tukituki slime near the Waimarama bridge – one would have been enough. Yes, there is heaps of slime as there always is at the end of summer, particularly a long hot one. This, you claimed, was evidence of RC inaction over the last 12 months. I immediately challenged you to indicate what the RC hasn’t done but should have over the year that would have decreased the slime. To date you’ve been silent. Yes, challenge us by all means, but you are being selective.
It is my view in practical, useful terms the Regional Council provides nothing but distruction to our Hawkes Bay Environment.
All I see is alot of vehicles being driven around aimlessly spending tax payer resources; clearly taking vehicles home for private use.
Resources spent on flash buildings and equipment, unnecessary staff and their Mafia like tactics to extract money from helpless ratepayers.
I SEE THEM AS BEING THERE TO FEATHER THEIR OWN COMFORTABLE NESTS AND MAKE TOKEN PUBLIC APPEARANCES TO TRY AND JUSTIFY THEIR OVER BEARING ARROGANT RAPE OF THE RESOURCESOF THE REGION!
I do not see with the current personel (be they elected and more importantly the bureaucratic employees) to hold any solutions for the fast degrading Hawkes Bay Water and land qulaity.
T o me they are in a computer dreamworld and simply have no undersatnding of the real world they are expected to administer.
The only real solution is to get rid of this organisation as soon as practicalbly possible; this can only lead to positive outcomes.
Money spent by farmers on rates can be used directly on their ownproperties not filtered through a self serving bureaucracy thats wastes all this money and there is therefore nothing left for positive outcomes.
We are deluding ourselves to think that this organisation is there for anything other than themselves.