Site Meter

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Farmer's response to River Patrols

FARMERS LIKELY TO FEEL THE HEAT FROM RIVER PATROLS OVER THE FENCE - JON MORGAN 

OPINION: Farmers beware. Coming to a river near you: a nosy self-appointed busybody with a camera. No doubt this is how many farmers will view a new river patrol group. It was formed at the weekend to urge people to adopt a river and patrol it for evidence of environmental vandalism. Farmers will shudder at the thought of such scrutiny, most likely from townies liable to misinterpret normal farming practice. But I see it as an unmissable opportunity to welcome such people, to explain farming to them and show them how you care for your animals and the environment. That's if you're doing nothing wrong. Of course, what is wrong and what is not is determined by the law. And the legal system does not always keep up with the times. For instance, in many parts of the country it is not illegal to graze cows beside a river, but I think the overwhelming majority would agree it is wrong. But still some farmers do it, because they can. The riverside grass is lush and nutrient-rich. And there's fresh water close at hand. However, it is illegal to cause pollution. The cows erode the banks, excrete in the river and scare away fish life. As far as I can discover no-one has been prosecuted for this. So you can sense the frustration behind the formation of the river patrols. One man who is already in action is Millan Ruka, the kaitiaki of the rivers in his part of Northland. He has amassed an impressive array of evidence of transgressions in his canoe patrols. He is meticulous, filming what he finds with a camera that has GPS fitted so the right farm is identified. He sends the film to his regional council and to Fonterra, spelling out what regulations he feels have been breached and asking for an abatement notice and an order to fence the river. His progress hasn't been dramatic but he has won some promises – from his local council to fence land it has leased to farmers and from Fonterra to investigate his film evidence. He has to rely on these promises because Northland has no rules requiring the fencing of streams and the Clean Streams Accord is voluntary. Further south in coastal Wairarapa, Grant Muir has been having the same battles. He leapt to fame recently in his son James' documentary, River Dog, showing him and his dogs chasing cattle out of the Pahaoa River. He first tried gathering photographic evidence but made no progress in getting the regional council to act. All he did was antagonise the locals. However he supports the new group's resolve to try non-confrontational methods. This makes sense. It is better to try to work with local farmers rather than against them. Show them the evidence and leave it to them to put pressure on their errant neighbour. Of course, if they are slow to act, if the farmer ignores all warnings, if prosecutions are not laid, then stronger action, such as naming and shaming, may be needed. I attended the meeting to form the patrol group and it was clear the non-confrontational way was preferred. There was also a strong feeling that most farmers acted responsibly and it is intended to show evidence of that on the website they will set up. And there was an acceptance that not all pollution was created in the country, that miscreants in the towns should also be reported. I don't think good dairy farmers have anything to fear from this. Fonterra will require all accord streams to be fenced next year anyway. Sheep and beef farmers could be in for a shock, though. The patrol group wants to include them. MAYBE it's time the hill country farmers faced up to it. Their streams and rivers are home to native fish that are struggling against the sediment and nutrients coming off the hills and flowing on downstream. If they don't act to stop this they may find they face strict controls from central and local government armed with the evidence of their carelessness. And this evidence could easily be based on false assumptions. I'll give you a dairying example. I was amazed recently to see a neighbour grazing his cows beside the stream across from my house. When I asked him, nicely, about it he told me it was because a cow had got through a fence and become stuck in the stream. All his efforts to push and pull it out were in vain and he resorted to putting the cows on the bank beside it to entice it out. It worked and the cows were quickly removed. However, in that time, I witnessed several cars stopping and taking photos. - © FAIRFAX NZ NEWS

6 comments:

Ralph said...

Jon Morgan would appear to be misinformed when he states that as far as he is informed no body has ever been prosecuted for grazing stock beside steams and rivers which have not been fenced off.
Check with Environment Southland for one.
Many of us who have farmed for 60 years plus, are environmists to the best of our ability.
Farmers are been prosecuted because effluent MIGHT make its way into waterways,while it is apparent that many Councils throughout NZ have pemission to discharge untreated wastewater and also at times,sewerage.

So much for one size fits all!

Naturally the River patrols will be investgating and filming this aspect as well.

robertguyton said...

I suppose, Ralph, that those prosecutions you know of were for issues other than 'grazing beside streams and rivers that were not fenced off' - most likely under another 'heading'. Your point over sewerage is one I share and make as much noise about that as for dairy effluent. There is further to go with that issue though, as humans do not readily discuss their own.
One size, as you say, doesn't fit all and there are variations between Councils, which can be a good and bad thing. I like locailsed decision making, but also good national guidelines.

Ralph said...

Some of the prosecutions were, some were not.Some were for what MIGHT occur.

robertguyton said...

Might eh! They say that Might is Right. For all that, I'm guessing a judgement has to be made about the likelihood of something occuring. Someone might say, yes, there's a massive spill of effluent there beside that creek, but it's not in the water yet. Our team of very polite compliance people might suggest that the effluent might well be in there shortly. It's not an easy area to make distant judgments for, Ralph, so I'll not try to defend too hard. I don't doubt that the potential for conflict is very high here.

Armchair Critic said...

Maybe a cup of "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" would soothe some nerves down on the farm.

robertguyton said...

That's it, Armchair Critic, the Conservative prescription, served up fresh. You're the Doctor!