Water standards sure to bite

ncn_banner.png

Dan Hodgen. Photo: File
Dan Hodgen. Photo: File
The Government's proposed national environmental standards for freshwater are predicted to have a huge impact on North Canterbury, far beyond the farm gate.

The farming industry is voicing its concern about the financial impact on farmers, communities, and businesses that rely on the spend from the rural sector to survive.

Farmers and farming leaders are critical of the apparent haste to implement the standards.

There is also concerns that so much mis-information was now circulating about the freshwater document that it was almost dividing communities, where farmers were being labelled the bad guys by communities that had grown out of servicing the industry.

Hawarden farmer Dan Hodgen says, given the size of the document and its potential impacts, the eight-week consultation period provided by the Government was ''pretty cynical and very, very disappointing''.

Dan, who is also North Canterbury Federated Farmers senior vice-president and on the national meat and wool executive council, says only three farmer meetings were being held in the South Island by the Ministry for the Environment to discuss the proposals, but none would be north of Ashburton.

''It's really disappointing from a government that is trying to convince us that it doesn't hate farmers.''

Dan says there has been a huge amount of work done by farmers in the Hurunui district.

''There has been a lot of cool stuff done to protect waterways and wetlands voluntarily, but a lot of that is now going to come back to bite them. It is frustrating.''

The Government needs to work with farmers, not against them, he says. Many farmers had changed their practices in response to water quality issues.

''A lot of community-led work is being done in neighbourhoods and on farms. It is going to take a period of time to see the full benefits of it.

''Regulators seem to think that writing something down on paper is more important than taking action. It is like doing a farm plan and having it audited. Actions are going to make the change, not words,'' he says.

Rural Advocacy Network chairman Jamie McFadden says the proposals are a ''shocker''.

''It has so many impractical rules, and if implemented as is, would send many of our farmers broke - not to mention ratepayers too. It is particularly harsh on our most environmentally progressive farmers,'' he says.

Jamie, who has studied the document, says all wetlands have to be fenced off from cattle, deer and pigs. ''This is all farms - plains, hill and high country. Many hill and high country farmers have 20 to 50 wetlands, some up to 100. Very few are fenced.

''So, once again, those farmers that have left natural areas on their land are being penalised by government policy, whereas those farms that have previously cleared all bush and wetlands are free of regulation.

''The message this government is sending is, if farmers have left natural areas on their land, then they will be burdened with regulation. Expect the same from the national policy statement on biodiversity.

''There are a raft of rules proposed not only in wetlands, but also on farmed areas surrounding wetlands. These farmers need advice and support to help them protect wetlands, not a big stick.''

Jamie says all farmers are affected by the freshwater proposals.

''However, those farmers that have chosen to not intensively develop their properties and instead run low environmental impact farms are being punished by rules that severely constrain their future options and strip away the value of their carefully nurtured land asset.

''Intensive farms are also being hard hit, particularly in some areas where significant nitrogen reductions are being sought. These farmers, in good faith, went through proper consent processes and upon receiving those consents spent millions developing their properties, only to have the rug pulled from under their feet.

''Yes, farmers need to make changes where their farming activities have caused serious water quality problems, but there needs to be a fairer process.

''Does anyone in policy think about the consequences?'' he says.

Hurunui Mayor Winton Dalley, who has been a farmer all his life, says the measures will affect urban ratepayers as well, particularly through having to upgrade town water supplies.

''Some small towns could be looking at millions of dollars just to make a relatively minor improvement in water quality,'' he says.

''It could cost $10,000 a household in some towns.''

But the costs don't stop there. Aside from the huge cost to farmers, particularly with fencing and the difficulties that arise on hill and high country farms, hundreds, if not thousands of people will have to be employed to monitor compliance.

''There will also be no place for our voluntary groups who are working away doing great stuff.''