ORC staff and elected members are hosting 10 sessions in rural Otago over a week, beginning last Friday and finishing this Friday.
Mr Woodhead said feedback from the first round of public drop-in sessions in February about the possible plan change 1D showed many people were confused about the difference between a residual and a minimum flow, and did not think a plan change was needed. The February drop-in sessions had also not featured a public presentation.
ORC councillors and staff had subsequently realised they needed to deliver a public presentation and ''more clearly present the issues'', and it was hoped that would be achieved from this month's round of public sessions, Mr Woodhead said.
Sessions have so far been held in Tapanui, Roxburgh, Wanaka, Omakau, Ranfurly and Middlemarch, and are still to be held in Outram and Maheno, as well as Omakau and Middlemarch.
About 30 people attended the session in Omakau yesterday and several farmers and irrigators said there was still confusion about the definition of a residual flow, which they said was in effect a minimum flow, as it stipulated the amount of water to be left in a waterway immediately downstream of a water take.
Mr Woodhead said the area covered and processes applied for minimum and residual flows differed, but acknowledged the net result of a residual flow was similar to a minimum flow.
However, he said it was important to realise any plan change process would seek to improve things for permit holders, and that the ORC wanted to ''preserve the value in our waterways'' and ensure there was sufficient water for all users.
Those attending yesterday's presentation then discussed the issue in smaller groups and their feedback was collated and provided to the ORC.
Their feedback said economic and social values had to be taken into account when considering a plan change and definitions had to be more precise, measurement locations to be more flexible and natural low flows and drought conditions to be acknowledged. They also said any measurement had to be cost-effective.
Mr Woodhead said it had not yet been decided a plan change was definitely needed, and feedback would now be analysed. A preferred option would be identified by early next year and if a plan change was sought, it would be notified about the middle of next year.
