Editorial: Cubicle farming issues will not disappear despite withdrawal

OPINION: When Environment Minister Nick Smith "called in" the effluent discharge consent applications from the three companies planning to create dairy farms in the Mackenzie Basin, the writing seemed to be on the wall for the project, at least in the short term. And so it proved this week, when the companies withdrew their consent applications.

This development has naturally delighted the opponents, including numerous environmental groups, of the proposed farms. But the companies have the option of relodging applications in the future, by which time the public mood against cubicle or stable dairying might have changed.

The companies' decision this week was prompted by the cost of the call-in process; the Ministry for the Environment had estimated that to be at least $2.6 million, with the companies facing their own costs of a further $500,000.

These figures are another example of the expense of the resource consent process, which can be an impediment to development. In this case, the costs might have been inflated by the fact that the consents were lodged before last year's amendment to the Resource Management Act, and the companies could not take advantage of the more streamlined regime. Given the scale of the costs, the applicants had sought to defer the call-in process until they knew whether Environment Canterbury would grant them water resource consents, without which the farms could not proceed. When a deferment was not granted, as the Government believed water and effluent applications should be heard at the same time, the proposal was shelved, with the companies also claiming to have been victims of misinformation.

The farm proposal encapsulated several issues that will be confronted more regularly as New Zealand agriculture, notably dairying, becomes more intensive and increasingly more marginal land is subject to farming proposals.

As has occurred with the Mackenzie Basin, this trend inevitably pits those seeking to farm marginal land against those who want to preserve iconic, or sensitive, landscapes.

The perceived threat to scenic values was just one of the negative buttons pushed by the Mackenzie Basin proposal. Undoubtedly, some opponents regard the concept of cubicle dairying as alien to New Zealand and, therefore, not desirable.

There was also a negative perception of large-scale dairying in terms of its thirst for water, the effluent threat to waterways and aquifers, the health of which has become a major issue, and the methane produced by cows.

On a variety of fronts, therefore, the proposed Mackenzie Basin farms and large-scale dairying generally were regarded as being contrary to the clean, green image that New Zealand uses to market itself internationally.

Coincidentally, on the very day that the companies withdrew their consent applications, a report was published that showed the dairy industry had got worse, not better, at disposing of effluent.

Nationally, the percentage of dairy farms with significant non-compliance for disposal rose from 12 per cent in the 2007-08 dairy season to 15 per cent in 2008-09. Canterbury had one of the worst records in the country, with only 43 per cent of farms fully complying with the regulations.

One farmer attributed Canterbury's poor performance in the ratings to the fact the standards set by Environment Canterbury are higher than in other regions. But most Cantabrians will consider it laudable that the region has such high standards to protect lowland streams and aquifers.

The message for non-compliant farmers must be that if they cannot meet these standards, they should consider whether dairying is the right business for their land.

Ironically, critical reports on the dairy industry's compliance rates might work to the advantage of the backers of the Mackenzie Basin cow sheds, as traditional dairy farmers will come under greater pressure to meet both effluent standards and public expectations.

Over time, might innovative cubicle stables with state-of-the art effluent disposal systems lose their negative connotations and actually be perceived as a better way to achieve a clean, green dairy industry?

- © Fairfax NZ News