Dead in the water
OPINION: In a victory for common sense over virtue signalling, David Parker's National Policy Statement (NPS) work on freshwater is now dead in the water.
There is no need for nervousness, Anderson says.
The Healthy Rivers plan – the latest one is for the Waikato and Waipa rivers -- requires rivers, and the lakes within their catchments, to be swimmable and fishable within 80 years.
The plans result from the government’s National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management. They are prompting changes in how farms will operate in coming years, e.g. tighter controls on key nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphate, and on bacteria levels and sediment losses.
But Anderson says the plans have lengthy timeframes so that, realistically, farmers – and communities -- can work to improve water quality.
“The Waikato plan has an 80-year timeframe to bring that goal to reality. These changes will not come overnight, and they are being clearly signalled.”
And extensive consultation periods are allowed: the Waikato plan allows 80 working days for submissions, pushing the closing date well beyond the standard 20 days, into next autumn.
“With one million hectares in the Waikato catchment… its communities deserve that sort of time to consider how to respond to such a far reaching plan,” Anderson says.
A report earlier this year by dairy consultant Phil Journeaux is shows that moves to reduce farming’s environmental footprint could somewhat depress land values over coming years, Bayleys says.
Journeaux reckons the national impact of environmental constraints on farm production could depress farm land value by $16.8m. His work shows that a farm’s location in regard to community and recreation facilities and schools can more strongly affect its value than can its profitability.
But there’s a catch in a farm’s proximity to rivers and lakes: this could harm its value as time goes by.
Waikato registered valuer Byron Gray, of Curnow Tizard, says it is too early to say whether the Healthy Rivers plan is affecting property values. The proposed rules may cause some properties to rise in value, including those limited in scope for conversion to arable use.
“For example, growth in Pukekohe is causing growers to look for [cheaper] land elsewhere; this is particularly evident in Matamata and Pukekawa,” says Gray.
“A restriction on land-use changes may lead to increased competition for arable land in the medium term.”
He says properties where the farmer is working on environment issues, for example, planting waterways, and those already compliant with the proposed rules, are likely to be more valuable than properties needing work to comply.
“More farmers are planting riparian strips to absorb phosphate losses, and native trees and wetlands to soak up nitrogen loss, and they are fencing around waterways… adding aesthetic and economic value.”
Bayleys North Canterbury rural specialist Dean Pugh says buyers of rural real estate know about the nutrient regimes in different regions, and the need to take specific catchment regulations into account when making land use and value decisions on properties.
