(Southland Times 26 Nov)
LOUISE BERWICK
Environment Southland councillors look set to go into battle over water quality, but not with farmers.
The council is divided on how to deal with the degrading of Southland rivers outlined in a damning report by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Dr Jan Wright.
While some are calling for the council to follow Dr Wright's suggestions of wintering cows inside, cutting the number of cows per hectare and cutting the number of farms in the area, councillor Marion Miller said the council was not in a position to tell farmers how to use their land.
"We can not tell people what to do on their land."
Her comments were backed up by councillors Ross Cockburn and Neville Cook.
"I think it is a fair statement, we are not in the farming business," Cr Cockburn said.
He said the council had to be open minded about dairy farming and water quality issues and had already gone to great lengths to come up with initiatives to help with the issue of water quality.
"It doesn't happen overnight," Cr Cockburn said.
Dr Wright's report shows that as the rate of intensive dairy farming has increased, so has the level of nitrates and phosphates in the water.
Environment Southland chairwoman Ali Timms said the council used a mixture of education and regulation and encouraged best practice.
The rural community had been responsive to the education and any more regulation would have be worked through with the council and the community, she said.
Cr Nicol Horrell said from London yesterday that regulation was "always a last resort".
"In a lot of cases we have a range of options to achieve our goals, including education."
However, councillors Robert Guyton and Jan Riddell both agreed more needed to be done to reduce the damage to Southland's waterways and eco-systems.
"Our brief is to govern and regulate," Cr Guyton said.
"We have clearly got to be strong, we have got an obligation to be strong."
He said some councillors were reluctant to regulate the industry because they did not want to "upset" stakeholders.
"I think the farming community and the farming industry have always had a significant influence over Environment Southland through industry-friendly councillors. I think that influence has grown significantly."
Some councillors were holding the economy in "higher regard" than the environment, he said.
"The balance is swinging towards economic development and the not the environment."
Ms Timms would not comment on his statements.
Cr Riddell said the report was another reminder the council needed to do more than just regulate.
"This is a wake-up call."
The council needed to be more proactive in its attitude, she said.
Even dairy giant Fonterra was more rigorous in its standards around water quality and farming practices than Environment Southland.
The council needed more bottom-line regulation, she said.
"How much dairy can the region handle safely?"
Cr Lloyd McCallum said he was unwilling to have a discussion about the issue in the media and instead would air his views at the next council meeting.
Councillors Grant Hubber and Peter Jones did not return phone calls.
Tuesday, November 26, 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Unfortunately Robert,
Neville and Marilyn have been given the mandate to be a councilor for another three years, and there is virtually nothing to force them out of power.
There mindset of these two Invercargill councilors is such that it would be a waste of time even to remind them of their electorate mandate to regulate where needed.These two are on a self interested planet of their own ...and like it or not they can carry on as per norm for three more years ..even after that the Tory voters will still vote them back into power !!!
For the rest ..welllllll only McCallum won the seat ..the others they due to voting apathy have walked into power and can be as biased as they like who's going to challenge them !!
And its possible the same non interest by the voters will happen next local election !
Unfortunately Cr Miller has become a little confused. Whether ES is in the business of farming or not, and whether ES can or cannot tell farmers to do on their land is not relevant.
ES is responsible for water quality, and the water that runs off farmland contains all kinds of nasty crap. ES can and should tell farmers what the runoff from their land may or may not contain. As they are so keen on self regulation, it is then up to farmers to achieve that on their land. If they can't or won't, then regulate.
The idea that farmers are being told what they can and can't do is based on a false premise, so I suggest you point this out at the next opportunity
I will indeed, AC.
Pauline, Neville and Marilyn sound like a pair of gangsters, don't they :-)
I hope
we get the usual 'in case of fire' talk at the start of tomorrow's meeting.
Otago RC's plan 6A on water quality sets specified limits on discharges for nitrogen, phosphorous, e coli and sediment. It does not tell land owners what they can or can't do on their land, they can manage their activities as they wish as long as they do not breach the limits. Has ES considered this approach to water quality?
Post a Comment