Disgusted environmentalists quit water talks over claims of farming bias

Friday, 8 June 2018

The Hurunui in North Canterbury attracts thousands of people, many of whom, like Pete Dormer, left, and Guy Higginson, enjoy fishing from its stony banks.

Two major environmental groups have walked away from an Environment Canterbury water management organisation over accusations of bias towards farmers, saying it refuses to listen to their concerns and backs a 'self-interested' rural community.

The Hurunui-Waiau water zone committee is supposed to promote 'collective interests' rather than represent any particular group.

But the North Canterbury body is dominated by farmers, and after years of frustration Fish and Game has refused to attend any further meetings, claiming the organisation gives little more than 'token consideration' to its views.

In a letter to committee chairman John Faulkner, Fish and Game environmental adviser Scott Pearson said: 'The whole collaborative process in its current form is broken.'

* Legal challenge over Environment Canterbury plan to help irrigation firm delay river flow rates

Environmental groups Forest and Bird and Fish and Game claim their concerns are being ignored by a water management organisation that oversees the Hurunui River.

* Green campaigners hope to sink irrigation plan that could delay protection of Canterbury's Hurunui River

* Irrigation schemes to continue despite withdrawal of taxpayer funding**

Charity Forest and Bird has made a similar move, saying its opinions are 'routinely dismissed' by a committee that does not reflect the community.

Environment Canterbury (ECan) chairman Steve Lowndes said environmental views were 'well-represented' and urged them to keep contributing.

'Anybody is able to apply to go onto a zone committee, there is no restriction at all.'

The two groups are fighting plans to delay increases in minimum water flows – levels which if flows fall below, irrigators cannot take water – on the Hurunui River, introduced five years ago to ensure its health as a long-term requirement under the Hurunui and Waiau River regional plan.

Environmentalists are furious over plans to delay bringing in new minimum water flow requirements on the Hurunui River.

Amuri Irrigation Company (AIC) wants to put off the higher flows while it investigates building a dam for irrigation, saying to bring them in now would impose significant financial costs on both the company and farmers.

Under one option being considered, in which AIC would fund an 'enhancement package' of environmental measures, new minimum flows might not happen until 2025.

The 12-person zone committee discussing the idea includes seven farmers, including Hurunui District Mayor Winton Dalley, councillor Vincent Daly and an AIC director, James McCone.

Aside from a water management professor and ECan councillor Cynthia Roberts, an ecologist, no environmental groups are represented.

A Forest and Bird member applied to be on the committee shortly after it was set up but was rejected because of his charity association; a Fish and Game field officer was a member in the committee's early days but stepped aside after realising its requirement of impartiality was at odds with his role with the sports fishing body.

Fish and Game was asked last year to put someone forward for consideration but declined.

Writing to Faulkner – himself a farmer and shareholder in AIC whose irrigation water is supplied by the company – Forest and Bird conservation manager Jen Miller questioned why they should 'waste [their] time' by attending meetings.

Irrigation firm AIC wants to put back the rules so it can continue providing water for farmers while it investigates building a new dam.

'Our views are routinely dismissed by a zone committee dominated by farming interests … and Forest and Bird and other environmental organisations are expressly excluded.'

Miller said despite the Hurunui community being split between farming supporters and those concerned by its effects, 'the divisions are not replicated at the zone committee, which only represents those that support the economic benefits of farming and expressly excludes those who may have another perspective'.

Committee members are chosen by ECan, and Miller accused the council's politically-appointed commissioners of picking pro-farming members and excluding environmental groups 'in order to advance the previous National government's desire for increased irrigation'.

'Our interests are better served by keeping [a] watching brief and referring egregious actions to the Environment Court.'

Pearson claimed a report on when minimum flows should happen is biased towards a delay.

The zone committee's focus in recent years was on 'minimising or avoiding impacts on the farming community', something 'not surprising given the appointed make-up of a land-user dominated committee'.

Writing to tell Faulkner he too would no longer attend meetings, he said: 'The high probability is that we would see token consideration of our concerns from the majority of committee members.'

Roberts urged the organisations to stay involved, saying they offer a 'valuable perspective', while Lowndes said 'many of the farmers would be most upset if you didn't think of them as environmentalists'.

'The issues which zone committees deal with need to have as many voices around discussions as possible. By withdrawing, Fish and Game and Forest and Bird don't do themselves any service at all,' Lowndes said.

Meanwhile, Forest and Bird has withdrawn an application to the Environment Court asking it to declare that a potential agreement between ECan and AIC to put off a review of the company's resource consents was unlawful.

A second application over resource consents for dryland farmers remains before the court.