Please note: Page numbers in this submission in square brackets [] refer to page numbers in the online PDF version of the consultation document entitled Action for Healthy Waterways (AHW) available at: https:// www.mfe. govt.nz/consultation/action-for-healthy-waterways. TDC's key concern is that we, as well as other councils, have determined and are working to communicate changes to the plan based on the requirements of the previous NPS-FM and taking into account community concerns, risk and capacity.
General position of TDC on freshwater proposals
Key concerns and outcomes sought
This is compounded by the need to ensure that any freshwater plan changes integrate with the rest of the plan. A further concern is the application of the hearing panel process beyond the initial NPS-FM. There needs to be much greater linkage between the MPI IVP work stream and the implementation of the FEP components of the NES-FW and NPS-FM.
Central Government assistance to Councils
Timeframe and resourcing impacts on Council capacity
The additional temporary resources are considered necessary to overcome the transitional hump of changes needed before the council can return to a business as usual context. We have significant concerns about our ability to pay for additional resources (temporary and ongoing), as well as to attract qualified personnel to the region to fill these positions in time to meet deadlines. QTD is already experiencing significant difficulties in the recruitment processes for these positions and we understand that other councils are in the same position.
Motupipi Catchment – removal from Schedule 1 of NES-FW
Groundwater is naturally higher in nitrate than surface water and nitrate levels in the Motupipi River are a reflection of groundwater discharge. iv). Due to the nature of the groundwater, its residence time and geology, removing all livestock from the basin is unlikely to have any impact on nitrate levels in the Motupipi River. Water health concerns in the Motupipi River are wider than just nitrate and include Fine sediment deposited, sediment nutrient load, phosphorus, dissolved oxygen and habitat quality and an integrated response is needed.
The community-led Freshwater and Land Advisory Group (FLAG) has recommended Integrated Farm Management Plans (for quantity and quality) to address water quality issues in the Takaka watershed, along with a number of other methods. FLAG recommendations cover all land uses in the contributing catchment of this river, including consideration of impacts on. Dairy farms in the lower catchment already have farm environmental plans with water quality modules and have undertaken stock exclusion.
Clause 31 (2b) of the NES-FW sets out the applicability of subsection 4 and, as currently written, clause 31 (2b) includes new requirements for the council in the form of action plans and amendments to the RPS and regional plan. We are concerned that the requirements in Subpart 4 do not represent an appropriate value for costs in the Motupipi catchments.
General position of TDC
23 (xii) We are concerned about being able to set a robust and legally defensible nitrate limit. The approach in Annex 1 is based on the assumption that nitrate problems are wholly on-farm, wholly farm-derived and result of run-off, with clause 47(1) relying on aggregating the nitrogen loss rates from dairy farms only in the catchment area. Information from regulators will help the council understand some of the nitrate problem in this watershed, but given the potential non-dairy and non-agricultural sources, including natural. background levels, on-site sewage and wildlife in the upper watersheds, we do not believe that calculating a watershed threshold based on dairy farming will provide a robust approach for inferring farm authorization status or justifying requirements for farms to reduce their nitrate losses. xiii).
Application of the threshold approach in terms of clauses 47 and 44/45 (and as per the example in the Action for Health Waterways document) may result in only one farm being targeted in terms of subsection 4 because it does not meet the catchment area threshold (set as per clause 47) does not reach ( 2)). In addition, the wording of NPS-FM 3.15 (3a), which states that the regional policy must be read subject to rules in the NES, appears to turn the planning framework on its head where rules guide interpretation of policy rather than the other way around. round.
Specific comments
All definitions should be in definition sections - even if this means duplicating the text of the definitions. Having some definitions in the definitions section and some embedded in the text by referring to clause numbers is not helpful to users. Words that have specific definitions should be highlighted in some way in the text (ie, bold) and preferably hyperlinked to the definitions in electronic versions for ease of use.
Reference to the endangered species attribute in NPS-FM should be modified to refer to endangered species habitats. The term "filling" needs to be defined in the definitions, as it is not obvious. In Tasman we are well above the national targets set out in the 2017 amendments.
Regarding point 3.18, subsection 3. It should be specified in the requirement when the daily sampling can cease. Consideration must also be given to time frames/deadlines for the time needed to collect and analyze sufficient data to inform decisions.
Amendments sought to Attributes and NPS-FM Appendix 2a and 2b
Although these situations are not common, an exclusion should be allowed to enable councils to set locally appropriate property state bonds. It would be very useful to have a 3 or 4 day limit with the numeric attribute state fitting between the one and seven day limits. The statistic to which the turbidity numerical property condition applies must be stated in Table 10 (the relevant statistics must be clear in all Tables).
It is the load of fine sediment that is most important and there should be more guidance on setting load limits. Sediment discharges from winter grazing can cause turbidity in waterways in the high 100's to 1000's FTU over a 1-2 day period. An attribute state for SAM4 may need to be developed based on much more data.
This means that the requirement should be for monitoring using this measure, rather than having a feature condition limit. There was discussion at the consultation meetings that any standards for metals and other urban toxics in the NES yet to be developed would be for stormwater.
General position of TDC
35 look at emerging contaminants, and identify key contaminants at the national level, and provide research-based guidance on appropriate and cost-effective council monitoring methods and regimes.
Specific comments
Reference to "occupancy of the bed" in addition to "construction" is necessary in the first clause on subsection 1 of both clauses 21, 22 and 23. This may seem like a minor point, but these things can often fall into the implementation . . These should all be included in the list of definitions at the front of this part.
In addition, there is no clear connection in the NPS-FM with the regulations, so there are no supporting objectives and policies in the NPS-FM. It is essential that the system does not result in the perverse outcome where specialists are brought in to develop plans and farmers lose the opportunity to learn and buy in from their own farm. Two key aspects of this approach were, firstly, to certify that the operational programs meet the requirements for content in the freshwater modules of the FEPs that members are required to develop, and secondly, to close the compliance gap by requiring operational programs to regularly submit compliance information to the Advice provided. basis and to communicate serious non-compliance immediately.
In addition, to be in compliance with the Resource Management (National Environmental Standard for Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil to Protect Human Health) Regulations 2011 (NESCS), the identification of HAIL must include land where it is more likely than not that an activity or industry described in the HAIL is being or has begun (e.g. this condition should be repeated in the frame where necessary to ensure adequate sediment control.
General Position of TDC
Specific comments
Use existing stock rates instead of a hypothetical base carrying capacity to determine the application of the regulations. TDC considers that further work is needed to clarify the purpose of the slope distinction and to review the research supporting each specific slope used. TDC support an average setback of 5m, but would like further information on the basis for this distance and clarification of the purposes of barriers and would prefer that appropriate barriers are put in place through Farm Environment Plans (refer to section 7.1).
As discussed in key concerns section 3.2.12, TDC requested the removal of the requirement for existing fences that adequately exclude stock to meet the new setback distances. Questions raised in the Action for Health Waterways document were difficult to answer due to the lack of detail for the proposed NESs for the three waters. TDC supports in principle the proposal for risk management plans and standardized reporting metrics (see section 7.3 of the Action for Healthy Waterways document).
How the proposed standards for source protection areas (and how these are defined) in NES-DW will relate to the requirements under both NPS-FM and NES-FW. The MfE will undertake a second round of consultation once the NPS-FM and NES-FW have been revised following submissions and made available together with policy positions for the NES content for wastewater, stormwater and drinking water in 2020, so that a full assessment of the impacts and implications of the complete package may be completed before NPS-FM and NES-FW are finalized and published.
