The Upper Taieri Water Resource Management Group recently released its vision document for community management of the river, and said after two years of working on the project there was little desire to return to the days of self-interest and fighting through the Environment Court.
The document states that the community saw an opportunity to convert a system "based on self-interest and competition, to a robust, future-proofed system capable of adapting sustainably to dynamic farming needs while adhering to important environmental bottom lines".
Project chairman Geoff Crutchley said irrigation was viewed negatively by many in the wider community, and that image was its greatest threat.
A Central Otago District Council economic impact report estimated irrigation annually added $93 million to the Central Otago economy.
Mr Crutchley said farmers needed to show leadership and prove they were capable stewards by being responsible users of the water and viewing it as an asset to be shared with the community.
"The future of irrigation relies on fair, sustainable allocation, involvement of the wider community and transparent monitoring and reporting.
"This project brings together wide community interests to determine how water should be allocated and managed within agreed environmental bottom lines.
We are sharing the approach as we believe deriving solutions as a community, for the community, makes sense."
This meant co-ordinating water use, utilising the right sources of water, defining efficient use, planning for group infrastructure, rationing during dry periods, monitoring, reporting and showing environment stewardship.
Mr Crutchley said irrigators were "cautious" about water trading or charging, saying water was scarce and needed to be allocated sustainably.
It was tried briefly with Maniototo Irrigation but Mr Crutchley described it as "the single worst example of water allocation in the catchment", which led to negative social, environmental and economic effects.
He said trading of water indicated desperation and recklessness and water was a commodity that the free market could not be relied on to allocate on a best-use basis.
"We cannot afford to allow water to be amalgamated to single intensive properties if we are to have thriving healthy communities and waterways.
We believe the community needs to carefully determine fair, forward-thinking regimes."
The report said most water takes for irrigation stemmed from mining rights which expire in 2021, after which they would be granted under Resource Management Act consents.
A group approach to managing the river reduced the bottleneck as those mining rights were transferred to new consents, while also allowing for the continuation of supply agreements established through different management or allocation regimes, such as access for stock drinking water.
Mr Crutchley said this new approach provided a stronger community voice in managing the water resource.
It allowed for the easy transfer of water between individuals, a collective approach to metering, reporting and development, and for investing and managing of any proposed water storage infrastructure.
The report said a regional authority may also look more favourably at giving the management group longer consent periods because of the community involvement.
A management structure for the catchment has been proposed, with the management group overseeing sub-catchment groupings.
Those sub-catchment groups would operate under group consents with supply agreements between individuals and they would manage and transfer water within the command area while adhering to environmental bottom lines, rules and consent conditions.