Interviews with experts

Conducted by
Jonah Franke-Bowell

Interviews: Headliner

Interview with Mark Van Heukelum of OAK, Utrech

Trained initially at Wageningen University in the field of biology

Contemporary environmental planning takes largely in private consultancies, whose purported goal is to shape and aid environmental policy planning and implementation across a range of fields. We spoke with Mark to see whether he thought this was the case.

Mark Van Heukelum of OAK, Utrecht, trained initially at Wageningen University in the field of biology. Graduating after the Financial Crash of 2007/08 Mark took it upon himself to extend his time studying completing a masters thesis in freshwater ecology, rather than enter a fragile and uncertain job market. No stranger to crisis, the Covid situation has forced Mark from his office in Utrecht to his apartment. We spoke of the struggle and joys of working from home, the structure and shape of migratory fish conservation in the Netherlands and how to engage people in the work that occurs out of sight and below the surface of waterways. (This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.)

Jonah:

Mark, could you briefly describe what you do and how you came to be doing it?

Mark:
Absolutely. My journey towards this place began with my undergraduate degree conducted at the Wageningen University studying biology. At the time the financial effects of the Global Financial Crisis were making themselves felt so I decided I wanted to postpone entering the job market. I decided to stay on in Wageningen and complete a masters degree in freshwater ecology. Funnily enough the internship attached to my program was at a consultancy much like OAK. The internship saw me work on a project implementing the European Union’s Water Framework Directive whose aim is to meet both ecological and chemical water standards by 2027. My role during this time was to match these directives with the needs of migratory fish.

Jonah:
I hear a coffee machine in the background, I take it you’ve been at home for the past several weeks. Has this changed much of what you do?

Mark:

Not really. Many of the contracts we have been working on are still able to be completed online. In fact I am surprised at the speed of which some of our clients (water boards) have made the move online. Some practical matters have changed. For instance, the ease of going next door to ask to have a document read or a get a signature has become more difficult. In turn however, I have seen an increased efficiency in meetings; we no longer have a long preamble nor do we have to meet for coffee!

Jonah:

Much of your work is in tandem with the 21 waterschap (water boards) of the Netherlands. Are these water boards effective partners in ensuring waterway and fish species conservation?

Mark:

Water boards here in the Netherlands were initially set up by farmers to settle disputes over water access, and in some provinces have been around for centuries in some form or another. This heritage is now superseded by a need for bureaucratic efficiency, EU targets and a uptick in water usage. Much of my work is in partnership with these waterboards and I believe they do by in large share the goals of conservationists. I believe that these organisations are a sum of their parts – the individuals who work for them. It is the impassioned individuals who really shape the direction of the organisations they work for.

I do recognise however that the model we have currently, while changing, is inefficient to an extent. Water boards need to navigate their own internal procedures but also given the Netherlands is a delta nation (the interface between sea and land) the upstream and flow on effects of their decisions. There is a lot for them to think about.

These water boards also operate much like a standard business. Albeit there business is to ensure that the water catchments they care for are navigable, free of flooding, healthy, robust and accessible. This often results in a situation in which figures and fixed targets are the sole measures of outcome. I would like to see an emphasis on a more holistic approach. For instance when we consult on the assembly of a fish ladder rather than have targets simply to have more fish let us also measure their quality of their spawn, their age, where they may have come from originally etc.

Jonah:

You say that it is the people who give an water boards their worth. Does this change now many of these people are at home?

Mark:

Hey interesting you say that. I think many of these people are passionate in any circumstance I don’t know if that changes all that much. Why do you think that is?

Jonah:

I think perhaps with many of these people, who let’s be frank are science communicators, may have difficulty express this without being face to face.

Mark:

Okay I see what you mean. Interesting. I think at the moment much of that communication has stopped in order too focus on their core tasks perhaps time will tell on this one. Maybe these people will have adapted to the realities of home working and new resources for both in person and online will come out of this.

I think this situation also gives impassioned citizen scientists an opportunity to have their resources seen and their voices heard. With more and more of at home with time to spare I think citizens are more likely and willing to take part in things like fish counts, fish passage barrier identification and so on.

Perhaps rather than things stopping they will shift. Does that make sense?

Absolutely.

Jonah:

Finally, when one thinks of a consultancy one thinks of the outcome of the project in the sense of fish ladders built or waterways made clean. We both know there is more to it than that. Does a consultancy like yours have a role in telling this more holistic story?

Interesting question. I think something that demonstrates this sentiment well is my art cum conservation on the walls of Utrecht sluices. I recognise that the average person doesn’t and can’t identify the benefit in some of the work that goes on beyond their view in the murk of canals and ponds. The project I mention involved machining seven stainless steel fish silhouettes to line the walls of sluices in Utrecht’s city centre. Although submerged when the sluice was full as boats transferred through the sluice the water level would drop and the silhouettes would become visible.

In gaining permission for the project I has met with the local sluice manager, the fish at the bottom of the food chain so to speak. He was overjoyed that somebody from bureaucracy cared as much as he did about fish. He spoke to me of how he, like me, believes people struggle to engage with what cannot be seen.

During the lockdown recently he and his staff took this message to heart. The reduction in ship traffic allowed the sluices gates to remain open and for fish to migrate freely through the city’s water ways.

I like to think that this interaction started with the consultancies initiative to create the fish silhouettes! Ultimately we do have an obligation to tell a story to – I believe we do this.

Interviews: Text

Second interview with Dr. Michael Pingram

In the second edition of our interview series I met with Dr. Michael Pingram of the Waikato Regional council in New Zealand. Michael’s title is perhaps too prosaic for the work he undertakes. A scientist in the water, science and strategy unit his work sees him facilitate national fresh water policy directives, provide analysis and retrieve samples and specimens from the field. Michael, a keen trout fisherman, sat down in between his schedule of meetings and family life to discuss the state of New Zealand’s waterways, the intricacies of multi-catchment hydrological regions, and the best places in the Waikato to bag a trout.

(This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.)

Jonah:
Hi Michael, nice to finally sit down and talk! First of all, could you briefly explain what you do and how you came to be doing it.

Michael:

Of course. I come from a family of keen outdoors enthusiasts; fishing, boating, swimming you name it we do it. Having been in and around water in my formative years I decided to pursue a tertiary degree that would allow access to the water. After having finished my bachelor’s I had a brief stint overseas and then return to enrol in the PhD programme at Waikato University in which I developed a thesis investigating the health of waterways and streams. This was accidental in some ways, the trend at the time was to conduct biological research into ‘fur and feathers’ (birds and mammals) – so I really found a nice niche, one I fill to this day.

My day-to-day work has changed in the time I have been at the council. Initially I was employed ensuring waterways and stream projects were in keeping with the RMA (Resource Management Act – a guiding planning document in New Zealand). After having done this for some time I transitioned into a role that really allowed the use of my skills and background. I was part of a team that developed indicators for the council against which tangible progress towards national water policy directives can be measured. Today much of my work sees me guide those wanting to alter waterways and streamways.

Jonah:

This interview is targeted toward an international audience. Could you describe the situation in New Zealand vis-à-vis migratory fish species, the challenges they face and what is being done about to solve them?

Michael:

The situation in New Zealand I imagine is similar in many broad aspects to that of overseas. The most obvious challenge that rivers, waterways and the critters that live within them face in us. The cumulative effects of human expansion in New Zealand’s cities and towns have seen the loss of habitats and key spawning areas for adult fish.

The term for this habitat deletion is ‘floodplain disconnection’. In short this is the in ability of fish to access without impedance all aspects of their habitat.

A fish might in fact spend the majority of its life in a single waterway however very few of the fish’s key biological functions might occur during this period. The problem is then when fish cannot access small areas in which limited time is spent but plenty of biological function takes place.

The back filling of urban streamways, gully degradation etc and good examples of this disconnection taking place. The two required environments might exist separately from one another although increasingly the vital connection between the two is lacking.

Another example of negative human interaction with the aquatic environment is particularly evident in the Hauraki Plains (a large marshy expanse south east of Auckland). Here vast drainage schemes have been implemented to turn what really is estuarine floodplains into arable farm land mainly for dairy herds. Here drainage passages and streamways become gradually silted by pasture run off. Some level of silting would have occurred naturally but not to this degree. Ultimately the silting leads to anoxic conditions in which little other than algae can thrive. This comes with the territory of climate change too. Nutrient dense run off paired with higher temperatures provide fecund breeding grounds for choking algae blooms.

Recreational fish take is also becoming a concern in New Zealand. The whitebait (Galaxiid fry) season, proclaimed to be an exclusively recreational event has swelled in numbers. Some recreational fishers also abuse the tradition, taking more than necessary and selling it on – effectively commercialising what was originally a recreational event.

Jonah:

And the solutions?

Michael:

I’d point to NIWA’s (National Institute of Water and Atmosphere) initiative the REC as one example a useful data agglomeration that can help guide how we think about future solutions. The REC for instance provides a GIS layer to be placed over hydrological maps to indicate how and when rivers change. This can be then used in conjunction with NIWA’s freshwater fish calendars. These show when 41 (34 native species and 7 sport fish) species are set to migrate and/or spawn. The calendar also indicates how susceptible to changes in turbidity, sedimentation etc as brough about by human interaction. The idea then begin that agriculture, industry and the urban environment can establish when to undertake projects such that they have the least impact on freshwater quality and fish.

Jonah:

In 2017, the New Zealand government recognised the importance of fresh water ways by granting the Whanganui river personhood. Although from a legal perspective this was more about protecting treaty obligations, does this frame work provide conservationists with some inspiration?

Michael:

Personally, I believe this framework is well worth looking at. The Waikato River which flows through the region is under the guardianship of the Waikato River Authority. The Authority acts as the custodian of the river in effect has the ability to go beyond national policy statements and ensure efficient and direct change. The Authority supervises the clean up and restoration of the river along its length.

The paradigm is starting to shift from one which emphasises the taking of aquatic resource to one which sees the value of protection.

River health in this country (New Zealand) is often referred to in terms of how ‘swimable’ a river is or isn’t. In a 2017 Q&A with John Quinn NIWA chief scientist freshwater and estuaries he stresses the importance of the Macroinvertebrate Community Index (MCI) to be used in tandem with more traditional measures. What do these indices tell us that chemical and sediment values can’t?

Michael:

Absolutely they do! They allow scientists a holistic picture of what is going on below the surface. This index is one rarely used outside of New Zealand and I’m not sure why.

The index relies on the sensitivity of invertebrate to gauge fauna stress in a waterway. The index measures the quantity of X invertebrate in a waterway subject to what might be extended at that point in the river i.e. down stream one may expect fewer invertebrates anyhow.

It should be used with more precise indicators however to indicate which chemical imbalances have lead to that specific quantity in the waterway. Using this solely this index struggles to create a collective diagnosis. It shows something is wrong, although not what exactly is the matter.

Jonah:

In 2019 an extensive and multiauthor study was published by the ecology journal Nature. The report damns the way in which the Anthropocene has seen humans maltreat rivers. By their accounts only a third of rivers longer than 1000km flow freely from source to confluence/sea. New Zealand does not have any rivers of this length – but what are the challenges that face the free flow of New Zealand’s rivers and what can be done about them?

Michael:

As the article makes plain large hydroelectric installations are particularly troublesome for the free flow of fish up and down stream. The Waikato river is of course dammed along its length with many of the structures occurring where at some point a set of falls or cascades existed – the idea begin the effect on fish is lessened.

The Waipa and Waihou rivers, 115km and 150km respectively are almost unimpeded along their length, however begin in the midst of pastural low country some fairly big issues around turbidity and sediment input exist.

Because of the fairly recent settlement of New Zealand few rivers have been realigned or shortened as has been the case in Europe and North America. As you my know in the 90s Dutch hydrologists developed a strategy in which one allows the river slightly more space, allowing natural flood event only to envelop grass and marsh lands rather than submerge dense residential area prone to poor drainage. This as far as I am aware has been successful in the Netherlands. I would encourage those planning hydrological consents in New Zealand to use this approach too. There is simply no need to construct dwellings cheek-to-jowl with water courses.

Jonah:

The world has moved online. Has this shift had an impact on your work?

Michael:

Yes and no rally. I would estimate that I could have been doing 70% of my work at home prior to covid anyway – aside from the field work, obviously. The organisation had actually just finished introducing a fully portable office so the timing worked well. We were able to take our monitors and any ancillary equipment home.

Unfortunately we couldn’t finish this year’s stream survey, we had perhaps another three days of work towards it, that’s certainly a bit gutting. In addition the third iteration of the non-wadable river project had to be put on hold. There will definitely be some holes in the data tis year, not the best start to the decade! The autumn flushes which see mature eels head down stream to sea would have been recorded too had we had the chance.

My wife and I both work and with two young children it meant some long nights and early mornings. But that said it has been lovely to be there with them all while still continuing with some work.

Interviews: Text