Oceania Data

This set of data sets provides an estimation of groundwater flux. There are three components: Groundwater recharge: development of nationwide mean (daily and seasonal) groundwater recharge data sets through the combination of three pre-existing groundwater recharge models; Groundwater–surface water exchange: development of a national indicative groundwater discharge data set using an existing national groundwater flow model, as well as comparison with a pre-existing gaining/losing stream prediction data set; Groundwater flow: development of a national groundwater flow data set using an existing national groundwater flow model. For more detail on the process and methods, see Westerhoff et al. (2019). New Zealand groundwater atlas: Groundwater Fluxes. Lower Hutt (NZ): GNS Science. 60 p. Consultancy Report 2019/126.

​

A national groundwater model was used to estimate near-surface groundwater flow amplitudes and separated into four classes to encompass the uncertainty of the dataset.

This set of data sets provides an estimation of groundwater flux. There are three components: Groundwater recharge: development of nationwide mean (daily and seasonal) groundwater recharge data sets through the combination of three pre-existing groundwater recharge models; Groundwater–surface water exchange: development of a national indicative groundwater discharge data set using an existing national groundwater flow model, as well as comparison with a pre-existing gaining/losing stream prediction data set; Groundwater flow: development of a national groundwater flow data set using an existing national groundwater flow model. For more detail on the process and methods, see Westerhoff et al. (2019). New Zealand groundwater atlas: Groundwater Fluxes. Lower Hutt (NZ): GNS Science. 60 p. Consultancy Report 2019/126.

​

A national groundwater model (NWT) was used to estimate the probability of groundwater discharging to the surface and separated into classes to encompass the uncertainty of the dataset.

This set of data sets provides an estimation of groundwater flux. There are three components: Groundwater recharge: development of nationwide mean (daily and seasonal) groundwater recharge data sets through the combination of three pre-existing groundwater recharge models; Groundwater–surface water exchange: development of a national indicative groundwater discharge data set using an existing national groundwater flow model, as well as comparison with a pre-existing gaining/losing stream prediction data set; Groundwater flow: development of a national groundwater flow data set using an existing national groundwater flow model. For more detail on the process and methods, see Westerhoff et al. (2019). New Zealand groundwater atlas: Groundwater Fluxes. Lower Hutt (NZ): GNS Science. 60 p. Consultancy Report 2019/126.

​

Three national models of groundwater recharge in New Zealand were used (NGRM, TopNet, IrriCalc) to create a mean model of groundwater recharge. This dataset summarises the gridded groundwater recharge from this model mean for the period 2000-2015 in mm/day.

​

_Attachment 1: _A complementary dataset describing the standard deviation of the NZGroundwaterRecharge_mean_20002015 dataset.

​

Attachment 2: This dataset summarises the gridded autumn groundwater recharge from this model mean for the period 2000-2015 in mm/day. Also complementary dataset of standard deviation.

​

Attachment 3: This dataset summarises the gridded spring groundwater recharge from this model mean for the period 2000-2015 in mm/day. Also complementary dataset of standard deviation.

​

Attachment 4: This dataset summarises the gridded summer groundwater recharge from this model mean for the period 2000-2015 in mm/day. Also complementary dataset of standard deviation.

​

Attachment 5: This dataset summarises the gridded winter groundwater recharge from this model mean for the period 2000-2015 in mm/day. Also complementary dataset of standard deviation.

​

This data set provides an update of New Zealand’s depth to hydrogeological basement map. Depth to hydrogeological basement can be loosely defined as the ‘base of aquifers’; or more strictly as ‘the depth to where primary porosity and permeability of geological material is low enough such that flued volumes and flow rates can be considered negligible’. For more detail on the process and methods, see Westerhoff et al. (2019). New Zealand groundwater atlas: depth to hydrogeological basement. Lower Hutt (NZ): GNS Science. 19 p. Consultancy Report 2019/140.

​

A national model was used to estimate depth to hydrogeological basement. Hydrogeological basement refers to geological material with primary porosity and permeability that is low enough such that fluid volumes and flow rates can be considered negligible.

This set of data sets provides a classification of geological units in terms of their importance for groundwater flow and storage. For more detail on the process and methods, see White et al. (2019). New Zealand groundwater atlas: hydrogeological-unit map of New Zealand. Lower Hutt (NZ): GNS Science. 88 p. Consultancy Report 2019/144.

​

New Zealand Hydrogeological unit map (HUM) separated into aquifers, aquitards, aquicludes and basement developed in a nationally-consistent manner. This dataset includes only outcropping hydrogeological units. This dataset was also joined to the hydrogeological system dataset (Moreau et al. 2019), to provide a single polygon for each unique combination of HUM and hydrogeological system. Summary statistics of surficially mapped products are provided for each polygon (groundwater use, flow, recharge, discharge to the surface; depth to hydrogeological basement; and number of drinking water wells serving >100 people).

​

Attachment: New Zealand Hydrogeological unit map (HUM) separated into aquifers, aquitards, aquicludes and basement developed in a nationally-consistent manner. This dataset includes overlapping stacked polygons that represent different aged hydrogeological units.

This dataset shows land that would be covered by the option 1 of section 8.4 Immediate action to reduce nitrogen loss.

This web map has been developed by the Ministry for the Environment to support policy proposals in the Action for Healthy Waterways discussion document. The proposals are currently being consulted on.

It provides extra detail on Option 1 in section 8.4 of the discussion document (Immediate action to reduce nitrogen loss). The map indicates the pastoral catchments and sub-catchments specified as high-nitrate in Option 1, where regional rules are not already in place or proposed, and shows the land considered to be low-slope.

Low-slope is defined in this option as land parcels with an average slope of less than 5, 7 or 10 degrees. We are seeking feedback on the appropriate slope threshold to use.

The catchments are those with the highest 10% of nitrate levels in the MfE Environmental Reporting River Water Quality dataset found here. Catchments where the predominant sources of nitrate are non-pastoral in origin are excluded.

Under Option 1, a per-hectare cap, or threshold, for nitrogen losses will be set for each sub-catchment with similar soil type and rainfall. This threshold will be based on a ranking of nitrogen losses from farms within each sub-catchment, and could be set at the 90th percentile, or the 70th, or a point between. Feedback is sought on where this threshold should be set.

This is only one of the options being consulted on, The areas indicated are provisional and may not equate to areas included in regulation.

This dataset shows land that would be covered by the option 3 of section 8.4 Immediate action to reduce nitrogen loss.

This dataset has been developed by the Ministry for the Environment to support policy proposals in the Action for Healthy Waterways discussion document.  These proposals are currently being consulted on.

The map provides extra detail on Option 3 in section 8.4: Immediate action to reduce nitrogen loss, of the discussion document.  The map indicates the high-nitrate catchments and sub-catchments that could be included under Option 3. These catchments have the highest 10% of nitrate levels in the MfE Environmental Reporting River Water Quality dataset which can be found here.  The catchments are further restricted to regions that do not have rules already in place or proposed. Catchments where the predominant sources of nitrate are not pastoral or horticultural in origin have been excluded.

Under this option, farmers in these catchments would have to show, in the freshwater module in their farm plan, how they will rapidly reduce nutrient leaching. Progress against the plan would be monitored by independent auditors and the regional council could take enforcement action if required.

This is only one of the options being consulted on. The areas indicated are provisional and may not equate to areas included in a regulation.

This dataset reports erosion modelling results regarding annual mean sediment load reductions required to meet proposed suspended sediment attribute bottom lines. For more detail on the modelling process and methods, see Neverman et al. (2019). Impact testing of a proposed suspended sediment attribute: identifying erosion and sediment control mitigations to meet proposed sediment attribute bottom lines and the costs and benefits of those mitigations. Maanaki Whenua Landcare Research Client Report. Prepared for the Ministry for the Environment.

Results of modelled mitigations are reported at catchment scale and at the REC2 river reach scale. The modelled on-farm mitigations (per economic optimisation as reported in Neverman et al. (2019) are also mapped.

This dataset shows land parcels within grassland and annual cropping areas which have an average slope of less than 10 degrees. Polygons are attributed into 3 slope classes: less than 5 degrees mean slope; 5 - 7 degrees mean slope; 7 - 10 degrees mean slope.

This dataset reports modelled mean annual suspended sediment load reduction required to meet proposed suspended sediment attribute bottom lines. Results are reported for the REC 2 river reach scale as well as at the “catchment pourpoint average” scale. The dataset includes masks for the DoC estate as well as glacial mountain source of flow. For further information, see Hicks et al. (2019) Sediment load reductions to meet suspended and deposited sediment thresholds. NIWA Client Report No. 2019100CH. Prepared for the Ministry for the Environment.

Note that the river segment and pour point catchment results provided here (in the attached folders with the same names) form the basis for the erosion and economic modelling assessment of proposed sediment attributes as reported in Neverman et al. (2019). Impact testing of a proposed suspended sediment attribute: identifying erosion and sediment control mitigations to meet proposed sediment attribute bottom lines and the costs and benefits of those mitigations. Maanaki Whenua Landcare Research Client Report. Prepared for the Ministry for the Environment.