Top-quality water ES's aim

ROBYN EDIE/The Southland Times

INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS REQUIRED: Environment Southland ground water scientist Clinton Rissman, left, and Environment Southland councillor Rowly Currie check the water at Waituna Lagoon.

Relevant offers

OPINION: Declining water quality has been the defining issue for Environment Southland this year, writes Ali Timms this week.

In February we launched an urgent response to the poor condition of the Waituna Lagoon to prevent it flipping irreversibly into a slimy state. Most of our work is done out of the spotlight, but the Waituna response caught the public interest in a way we haven't seen in Southland before.

At the same time we were working on the Waituna response, we were also finishing a comprehensive report into the state of the region's fresh water. The State of the Environment report showed the overall quality of surface water and groundwater has been declining for a decade.

Our Water Plan aims to improve water quality standards by 10 per cent in 10 years but the State of the Environment report shows that we won't achieve that with current standards and rules.

Hot on the heels of the State of the Environment report, the Office of the Auditor-General stated that our council had not been doing enough to address water quality. This included a clear message that the current non-regulatory permissive approach to land use has not been enough to deal with the known effects of intensive land use on water quality.

That was also a recurring theme in this newspaper's campaign to make water quality an election issue.

It's impossible to bring about improvements in water quality without making changes to the activities that put sediments, nutrients, effluent and other contaminants into our waterways. Environment Southland can set higher standards, develop new policies and impose tougher rules but unless people are willing – or compelled – to change their behaviour, we will get nowhere.

This brings me to Environment Southland's first step to reducing the impact that increased dairy farming is having on water quality.

On Wednesday, our council will decide whether to make new dairy conversions and the home-farm winter grazing associated with those new conversions a discretionary activity in Southland. This would mean anyone wanting to convert to dairying would need to get a consent, and to get this they will have to prepare a comprehensive farm environment plan that includes provision for winter grazing.

We're being asked why this only applies to dairying – why not make all types of farming a discretionary activity?

The proposal we are considering has been put forward as an interim measure – a transitional policy that could come into effect as soon as next Saturday, with the intention to "hold the line" on water quality. We have already been talking to targeted groups about this, and propose to carry out extensive consultation to develop a permanent regime that will take account of the impacts of all farming on water quality.

We also have work under way to look at the effects of industrial activities and urban impacts including stormwater discharges.

This is not an attempt to stop any further dairy farming in Southland. Rather, it's a stopgap measure until more comprehensive plans are put in place.

The proposed rules will not affect any existing dairy farms or their winter grazing. Those in the middle of converting their property will be able to continue under the existing rules as long as their consent applications have been lodged and accepted by the date the new rules come into effect.

Our staff are already talking to farmers, industry groups and their advisers. We intend that the new rules will be simple, workable and practical.

There are already some very polarised positions being expressed about the conversion rule and I expect we'll have a large audience at next Wednesday's meeting. But many sheep, beef and dairy farmers I have spoken to say they are pretty comfortable with what's being proposed.

It's human nature to often be opposed to the "something" because it is new and people worry about the details and how they might impact on their business and livelihood.

People have been asking why the rush? Frankly, it's to prevent a flood of last-minute applications to convert less suitable land under the existing rules, which do not give as much environmental protection as the new policy. We don't want water quality degrading any further through more dairy farms being established in high-risk situations.

At its core the Resource Management Act gives the responsibility to your elected representatives to make values-based policy decisions on how our natural resources can be used. We represent the public, we reflect the values of our community and we're ultimately accountable to our community.

The steps we take to achieve better quality in Southland have to be careful, measured and lawful. If we rush, or don't follow proper processes, important decisions on how Southland's environment is managed could be taken out of the hands of your elected representatives and made by appointed commissioners.

That's why at times, some of these issues will be not be debated in public. Councillors need to be able to ask questions and speak freely without their comments being misconstrued as showing bias or predetermination.

There will be ample opportunities for people to have their say during consultation.

» Ail Timms is the chairman of Environment Southland.

- © Fairfax NZ News

Newest First

Oldest First