Late in April the Canterbury Regional Council, Environment Canterbury, accepted recommendations from independent commissioners on Variation 1 of the council’s Land and Water Regional Plan, leaving just appeals to the High Court, on matters of law only, as the last hurdle.
Among the alterations to the initial plan was the inclusion of the words “in the order of” when detailing the percentage reductions in nitrate leaching from different farming sectors.
In the initial draft, dairying was required to cut nitrate leaching by 30% by 2037 as an absolute number and dairy support operations by 22%. Cuts for other sector groups were significantly less.
The numbers for dairying and dairy support remain but the new wording – in the order of 30%, or in the order of 22% – might create some leeway even if it’s likely to mean only small variations will be allowed.
That’s because total nitrate leaching load limits for the zone remain the same.
All farms leaching more than 15kg N/ha/year will require a consent to farm by 2017 as will those in phosphorus-sensitive zones located around Lake Ellesmere-Te Waihora, areas in the foothills and isolated pockets on the plains. Farms in specific areas deemed culturally sensitive, near the lake, will also require consents.
Based on the initial draft, farms in phosphorus-sensitive zones had expected they wouldn’t be required to apply for consents providing they were within the 15kg limit.
They’d expected they could detail their actions to prevent phosphorus loss in their farm environment plans, but that hasn’t been deemed robust enough by commissioners.
All farms must have a farm environment plan by 2017.
Selwyn-Waihora zone committee member and dairy farmer John Sunckell said there was no doubt the nitrate leaching reductions required by 2037 would create significant challenges for many but the fact was total nitrate leaching within the zone must come down. The zone committee had settled on the numbers having spent three years considering extensive evidence and numerous reports.
It had been a time-consuming but inclusive, collaborative process that all sector groups and individuals were able to take part in and while that didn’t mean everyone would agree with the outcome, all had their chance to be heard.
The time-frame around the rules created some breathing room, Sunckell said.
“We have 22 years to find the solutions to make those reductions. For someone starting out farming now that’s half their farming life, half a generation.”
Much hinges then on finding mitigations that don’t create unsustainable hits on profitability.
Between now and 2017 dairy farms exceeding 15kg N/ha/year are expected to operate within their baseline nitrate leaching limit. The baseline being the average nitrate leaching of the three seasons from 2009.
The final variation released last month provided some leeway on this too, with consents issued on a discretionary basis if they could show they didn’t leach more than the highest nitrate loss in any one year over the baseline period.
However, the consent would be considered along with conditions that the farming system had changed or been intensified through capital investment and management practices defined as good management had been and continued to be carried out.
A wording change to the timelines appeared to have brought compliance
with reductions forward to 2022 rather than 2037, requiring farms leaching
more than 15kg N/ha/year to show they were implementing management practices that were at least half-way between good management practice (as per the Matrix of Good Management) and maximum feasible mitigation (yet to be defined).
But subsequent clauses in the variation revealed consents might be granted based on considerations that included: whether nitrogen loss reductions had already been made and the extent of them; the implications on achieving the catchment nitrogen load; the capital and operational costs of making nitrogen loss rate reductions and the benefit, in terms of maintaining financial viability, of spreading that investment over
time.
From 2017 the baseline approach would be replaced with leaching limits determined through the MGM project.
Farmers will be able to go online and find out what their farm-specific limit
will be with the limit set based on soil type, location and farming type together with the assumption farms are operating
at good management practice level.
Definitions of what’s deemed good management have just been finalised and leaching numbers for the matrix are due out later this year.
Another variation to Canterbury’s Land and Water Regional Plan is expected to be proposed, also later this year, to accommodate the MGM.
Leaching limits are determined primarily using Overseer and the latest version, that incorporates changes for irrigation among other updates, has created some disquiet. Early indications suggest many irrigated farms would find their nitrate leaching output increased under the new version, (See Expert Eye page 75).
Environment Canterbury commissioner David Caygill said the council was aware of the issues and would be looking at the implications for the Land and Water Plan and its variations over coming months.
