MfE's freshwater proposals - update on ORC's submission
ORC is making a submission on MfE's proposed Action for Health Waterways reforms. Below are the key messages that will form the basis of our submission. As mentioned in the last issue of On-Stream, we will share our final submission with you later in the month. Please remember that submissions close on 31 October.
ORC supports the overall intention of the Action for Healthy Waterways
ORC’s submission will support the direction and overall intention of the package of freshwater reforms. Our position is that maintaining, and where appropriate improving, water quality is a fundamental aspect of its work, and one that should be done to ensure Otago’s waterways are healthy and sustainable and provide good water quality and quantity for future generations.
While ORC supports the direction and overall intention, there are concerns around some of the detail, and whether there are better or different ways to get benefits for water quality. There are instances where a prescriptive approach at a national level will not lead to better water quality outcomes and ORC’s position is that having a policy framework that provides for FMU characteristics to be managed appropriately should be retained.
The inclusion of tangata whenua values and interests is supported by ORC
Our submission will outline support for the inclusion of tangata whenua values and interests. We agree that the concept of Te Mana o te Wai is important and brings clarity to freshwater policy. Te Mana o te Wai is about looking after the health and well-being of water and its needs first, and that is a concept we believe applies to everyone who uses or interacts with fresh water.
The requirement to maintain current environmental quality, where appropriate, is supported
As outlined above, ORC supports the maintenance, and where appropriate, enhancement of the health of our freshwater bodies, and overall environmental quality. We understand the intention of focusing on known high-risk activities and limiting how they can be undertaken in the short term.
It is important to recognise work already done by farmers and catchment groups
Otago has seen a huge increase in the number of catchment groups and farmer-led groups who have a focus on biodiversity, land management and water quality. These groups are critical to the success of environmental improvements. They have the potential to play a critical role in the delivery of better environmental outcomes and are also a key channel for engaging the community in the responsibilities of regional councils.
The current proposals do not reflect the good work already undertaken by catchment groups and farmers, with no recognition of the role they play in assisting with environmental improvements. ORC would like the proposals to give greater recognition to the work that has already been done by individual landholders and community groups to address the adverse impacts of their activities. This needs to include appropriate policy mechanism that would allow innovative individuals and groups to continue to develop effective alternative solutions that enhance water quality outcomes.
The proposal lacks consideration of economic and social impacts and does not reflect the four well-beings as outlined in section 5 of the RMA
ORC’s submission will acknowledge the need to look after the environment, however this should not be done in a manner that poses a risk to the wellbeing and social structure of communities. ORC believes one of the key drivers to positively influence change is time. We understand the imperative to introduce provisions by 2025 but believe that communities should have sufficient time to adapt to those provisions, depending on the nature and extent of improvements needed. For example, ORC is supportive of stock exclusion in principal but would prefer an ability to stage the progressive stock exclusion, focusing first on the areas where the greatest benefit will be achieved. We are also mindful that at times, managing critical source areas has an equal or improved benefit for water quality than might be achieved through stock exclusion. An ability to adjust and adapt and allow time for these examinations to be undertaken is critical to the success of freshwater initiatives.
ORC feels there is an uncertainty of expectations and further clarity will be required
ORC has heard from the community, and identified for itself, that some of the provisions are uncertain in terms of expectations, outcomes or both. ORC believes that improved clarity would assist all parties and notes in particular:
- uncertainty around issues such as the legal status of farm management plans and their relationship with consents
- methods that can legally be applied for stock exclusion and general uncertainty around the method for calculating carrying capacity
- timing of further proposals that will address key components such as requirements for setting environmental flows or allocation limits.
There are likely significant capacity constraints for all parties to implement – land owners, iwi, councils
ORC is concerned that not all of the community is resourced sufficiently to respond as necessary to the freshwater package in a timely manner. One of the key outcomes ORC is seeking, is to establish meaningful partnerships to enable the work to be undertaken. This means that the burden of the improvements needed can be shared, it avoids duplication and repetition, improves social connections and facilitates understanding. But the current approach allows little time or ability to develop these relationships and focuses parties on being competitive rather than co-operative.
ORC believes it would be beneficial for government to provide support mechanisms, including sufficient transition times to allow for catchment groups to form and establish. We understand that part of the delivery of the freshwater reforms includes an implementation workstream, and the success of the package will be, in part, measured by the uptake of the implementation and practical assistance from MfE.
A prescriptive approach can stifle innovation and may undertake or stop existing innovation that is happening
ORC is concerned that the prescriptive approach promoted in the current proposals stifles innovation and requires a one-size-fits-all approach that restricts the ability to have more tailored and bespoke solutions, rather than allowing for collaboration and genuine on-the-ground improvements.
ORC’s main driver for improving water quality is to ensure that landholders can invest in the most appropriate mitigation, depending on the specifics of each catchment or water body. ORC has a concern that the proposals will remove this flexibility and responsiveness, and instead create one set of solutions irrespective of the problem. ORC would like the proposals to provide landholders with a greater degree of flexibility around how certain management tools can practically be applied on the ground or provide landholders with a range of alternative responses.
General concerns about DIN and DRP targets as these may not be reflective of ecological health
ORC has concerns that the target attribute states for Dissolved Inorganic Nitrogen (DIN) and Dissolved Reactive Phosphorus (DRP) are difficult to achieve, but more importantly, achieving them may not result in improvements in ecological health. ORC believes there are better ways to demonstrate ecological health improvements, including by using tangata whenua indicators of health, or Macroinvertebrate Community Indices.
|
