Kristy McGregor: Local values and waterways

Kristy McGregor.

Stock access to water can be an emotive issue that sparks strong reactions.

It is critical in the debate about water quality and the agricultural sector's impact.

As part of the Kellogg Rural Leadership Programme, I undertook research earlier this year on the topic.

It became strikingly clear that debate becomes heated not so much over whether stock should be able to access waterways for drinking or to cross to other land - often critical to farming operations - but over community expectations.

Balancing differing values is a delicate and difficult task at times. Pathogens and nitrogen from stock urine and faeces, stirring up sediment and damage to stream habitats are among the problems.

Dairy experience is colouring community perceptions on what should be expected of sheep and beef farmers.

A Marlborough case study described in my report noted that water quality in that region is very good.

Most rivers are in the 'A' national objectives band, with a few in the 'B' band.

Yet Marlborough's recently notified Environment Plan will prohibit access by intensively-farmed stock to waterways, which will capture high country farmers taking in dairy grazing, and some beef and deer farmers.

Study interviewees frequently cited absence of knowledge. One reflected on his 20 years' work with DOC and Fish & Game in the Top of the South region.

"Dairy farmers I've worked with over the last decade want to do the right thing. There has just been a bit of an information deficit."

Council officers suggested that better communication between farm staff and riparian planting and fencing would solve things easily.

But farmers with experience of planting and fencing braided streams pointed out there were numerous other difficulties.

Critically, what appeared initially to be stock access issues, on further examination turned out to be concerns with other environmental problems, such as protection of bird nesting sites and pest management.

Stock access was the proxy for dealing with this, whether effective or not.

While current regulation is focused on fencing off waterways, a scientist said runoff from stock camping near streams and rivers was a bigger issue.

Sound management practices were needed.

My report concluded that we need to develop good frameworks to ensure environmental problems are well defined.

Local communities need to be empowered to determine their desired water quality outcomes and to have on-going input.

We are on the cusp of regulation from central government that will determine stock access down to the slope of the paddock animals are in and types of fences required.

We are about to determine how we want our landscape to look, and will hand the cost burden to farmers. Have we lost sight of the real issues confronting us?

Fundamentally, the stock access debate is about values.

It is unlikely that national regulation will address community values held at the local level.

It is local partnerships between community organisations, industry, council and farmers that have the greatest potential to deliver on these community values.