'Unprecedented' freshwater rescue plan unveiled by advocacy groups

Thursday, 8 June 2017

Political parties have been urged to adopt a 'freshwater rescue plan' advocacy groups say can solve the country's freshwater quality issues.

The seven-step plan – jointly announced on Thursday by leaders from tourism, science, health, recreation and environment organisations – is an 'unprecedented' attempt to reverse freshwater degradation.

It would involve stopping public funding of irrigation schemes, a reduction in cow numbers, stricter enforcement of environmental breaches, and forcing polluters to pay for their environmental damage.

The plan is supported by some public health professionals, freshwater ecologists and social scientists.

It was developed in response to the Government's Clean Water Package, which was criticised by freshwater advocates for not going far enough.

The steps were detailed by Dr Russell Death, a Massey University freshwater ecologist, at a press conference in Wellington.

They are:

1. Utilise world leading research to establish strict and enforceable water quality standards based on human and ecosystem health.

2. Withdraw all public subsidies of irrigation; $480 million is earmarked for investment into irrigation schemes.

3. Redirect the irrigation funding to an agriculture transition fund to diversify to more environmentally friendly farming.

4. Begin decreasing cow numbers immediately.

5. Instigate a national 'polluter pays' policy in which those who produce pollution pay to clean it up.

6. Require quarterly reports from the Ministry for the Environment around consent breaches and monitoring by regional councils.

7. Take on board the OECD's recommendation to begin an all of government effort to transition to a low carbon economy.

Death had been studying freshwater for several decades and said: 'It feels like in that time I've just been recording the death and destruction of our waterways.

'Not surprisingly, I've seen the public get increasingly angry about the state of our freshwaters,' he said.

A Federated Farmers spokesman said making such swift changes to the dairy industry would cripple farming-reliant regions and cost people jobs and livelihoods. 

Environment minister Dr Nick Smith said the Government would not adopt the plan, calling its proposals 'simplistic' and citing the Government's progress on freshwater. 

Professor Michael Baker, a public health researcher at the University of Otago, said health issues had grown considerably in rural areas, particularly infections with a strong rural association such as campylobacter.

Rural children used to be safer from health problems than urban children, but that was no longer the case.

'For several important infectious diseases, the rural environment is far more dangerous than it used to be,' he said.

'Personally, I don't think its acceptable in New Zealand in 2017 that contact with recreational water can kill you.'

Lesley Immink, of the Tourism Export Council, said the group was like 'the Fonterra of tourism', responsible for bring overseas visitors to New Zealand.

She said 90 per cent of visitors cited the landscape as the reason for coming to New Zealand and they had to be careful about how New Zealand was marketed.

'We really shouldn't be including images of people drinking freshwater from our streams, rivers and lakes,' she said

'It's not just the tourism industry and the environment that will have reputational damage – agriculture exports are huge . . . sooner or later, if we don't do something now, it won't just be tourism, it will be all of our agriculture exports [tarnished] as well.'

Fish & Game chief executive Bryce Johnson said he had never been involved in such a plan in his 30 years with the group.

'The issue has got so serious that everyone is circling the wagons,' he said.

'The environmental groups and the agencies interested from a passive perspective are the ones actually doing the hard yards in terms of the advocacy, it's not central Government. It's a really sad indictment for a country reliant on its natural resources.'

SWIFT, EXTREME CHANGES WOULD 'CRIPPLE' REGIONS

Federated Farmers North Canterbury provincial dairy chairman Michael Woodward said farmers were open to improving their environmental impact, but implementing some of the plan's 'extreme' suggestions would have a 'massive flow-on effect'. 

'If it's dropping cow numbers, the price of milk would go up. The way land prices have risen, as soon as you take away the productivity of the land - and that's ultimately what they want to do … that flows onto maintenance, the engineer in town misses out on work, service crews miss out … and that flows on to the consumer.' 

Swift changes would 'cripple' places like Southland and Taranaki. Ashburton had already suffered with the decreasing payout, he said. 

'It's not all about money, you're talking about people's lives.'

Even if Kiwis paid more for milk, the majority was exported and needed to compete on the international market. 

While change might knock the older farming generation sideways, younger farmers wanted to learn practical ways to better water quality, without crippling agriculture. 

It was happening in Canterbury already with consents relying on good practice and reducing nutrient leaching every year, Woodward said. 

It was disappointing Forest & Bird recently pulled out of the Land and Water Forum, following Fish and Game in 2015.

The forum was set up so farmers, iwi and environmental groups could develop a common direction and advise the government. 

'If you want to have change, better to work with [farmers],' Woodward said. 

Smith said: 'A complete prohibition on any water augmentation schemes would not actually deliver on the Blue Green vision we have of improving water quality as well as being able to grow the regional economy,' he said during Parliamentary question time.

'I agree we need tighter standards around freshwater… when we came to Government, there was no national policy statements, no environmental standards, that's why I'm so proud of our Government's record on making real progress on these important issues.'

The groups involved in creating the plan include the Tourism Export Council, Fish & Game, Forest & Bird, Greenpeace, Federated Mountain Clubs, Choose Clean Water and OraTaio.