In April the Lake Rotorua Incentives Scheme was established to administer and allocate the $40 million of funding made available to reduce nitrogen discharge in the catchment.
The funds were to be allocated to reduce the amount of nitrogen going into the lakes from farming activities by 100t a year by 2022.
The process involved benchmarking properties for nitrogen and phosphorus losses based on farm data from 2001-04 using the Overseer model and farm data.
While landowners in the catchment had input through the Lake Rotorua Stakeholders Action Group, dissent has resulted in another group, Protect Rotorua, forming.
Comprised largely of landowners with 40ha or less, it included deer farmers, drystock operators and lifestyle block owners, effectively pitting it against the existing representative group Lake Rotorua Primary Producers’ Collective.
Protect Rotorua was calling for greater transparency in the allocation of nitrogen losses by land use type, clearer indication of where the money would be spent and had raised concerns over variances in the Overseer data used to calculate nitrogen losses.
Protect Rotorua spokeswoman Sharon Love said the group had raised $42,000 from about 100 donors to engage high profile lawyer Mai Chen to take its claims further. Donors included deer farming groups from the South Island.
In a letter to the council Chen outlined the group’s key concerns.
It claimed there had been a failure to do a lawful consultation process on the discharge rules by not revealing all relevant information to all parties affected so they could make an informed and intelligent response.
That included failing to provide the rate of nitrogen losses to all landowners, regardless of property size and changes to data underlying the rules.
In her letter Chen also claimed the Incentives Board tasked with distributing the $40m to retire land and reduce nitrogen losses risked breaching the law because those determining its structure and terms of reference were people who would benefit to some extent from the incentives fund.
The group also claimed some landowners in the lakes’ catchment could increase their nitrogen output by shifting farming activities to blocks under 40ha where nitrogen allocation benchmarking was more generous, effectively “gaming” the rules.
Despite 300 submissions being lodged on the rule change last October, Love said most felt their concerns were ignored.
“This is why Protect Rotorua was formed and why we took the action with Mai Chen to make sure the community has a voice in this process.”
Landowner representation on stakeholders group came through the collective, with five representatives from it.
Love said Protect Rotorua was not limited to small-scale, lifestyle block owners and included deer and drystock farmers in the lake catchment.
Its concerns were also heightened by variances in the latest Overseer data on nitrogen loss levels.
Love said her own block had a shift in nitrogen losses calculated from 26kg of nitrogen a hectare a year to 70kg of nitrogen a hectare a year.
Council refutes claims
Protect Rotorua is a “Johnny come lately” group to the extensive consultation well under way in the Rotorua catchment, Bay of Plenty Regional Council chairman Doug Leeder says.
However, the council was prepared to extend the consultation process and hear the voices of other stakeholders in the region.
“The original timeline was to notify the rule changes in August.
“That has been pushed out to such a time the regional council has been satisfied everyone’s case has been heard.”
But he was concerned the group risked diverting attention from the material impact the catchment rules were going to have on landowners.
“Until the rules are put in place there is real uncertainty, making it difficult for individuals and financiers. This is something that really needs to be thought about.”
The council had also moved to counter claims made by Protect Rotorua about the board tasked with allocating $40 million for nutrient reduction in the catchment.
In a statement the council said the Incentives Board had not been established to reward the catchment’s largest polluters, a claim made by Protect Rotorua.
The council pointed to the extensive experience, independence and integrity of the board’s chairwoman Judith Stanway, also a managing partner of BDO Rotorua.
It also refuted claims the Stakeholder Advisory Group was controlling the water quality process in Rotorua.
That group was one of several, including the Land Technical Advisory Group and Water Technical Advisory Group contributing to the process.
“STaG has not written the rules. It was established to inform and advise through the design phase. This does not include defining how the Incentives Fund is to be allocated.”
The council said the draft rules had not been formally notified yet and it was still seeking feedback. How the consultation process was delivered had been legally reviewed, with that review being peer reviewed.
“This has confirmed the BoPRC is exemplary in its execution of these legislative processes,” the council said.
