3 Wool firm makes comeback Vol 16 No 35, September 4, 2017
farmersweekly.co.nz
$3.95
Incl GST
Big irrigation dead? T
When you look around at those projects that have been successful, at the front is exactly where farmers need to be.
Richard Rennie richard.rennie@nzx.com
HE official exit of Hawke’s Bay Regional Council from the Ruataniwha dam project might be the catalyst for landowners nationally to consider smaller, farmer-funded projects without local government funding. The council voted to write off its $14 million investment in the controversial project and shut the door on continued support of the controversial proposal. The project appeared to be in its death throes for weeks after the Supreme Court ruled out a swap of Conservation Department land for another block for the dam to proceed. Federated Farmers Hawke’s Bay president William Foley believed the removal of politicised councils from such projects might be a silver lining, proving the catalyst for farmers to consider their own projects either as smaller-scale, shared schemes or onfarm storage options. For farmers in his area the “Ruataniwha effect” had been stopping them considering alternative projects for water harvesting and storage longer than was good. “But getting the council out of it and possibly having a smaller, lower-priced scheme could mean we see a project more like what we see in the South Island, with farmers in charge of their own project,” Foley said. Meantime, in Nelson the Waimea dam project had stalled
Andrew Curtis Irrigation NZ
SILVER LINING: Getting the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council and removing politics from water storage and irrigation might be a catalyst for farmers to get on with projects themselves, Hawke’s Bay Federated Farmers president William Foley says.
again as a Public Works Act land seizure made by the Tasman District Council moved to the Environment Court in October. Foley’s views were shared by Irrigation New Zealand chief executive Andrew Curtis who said the Ruataniwha project never put its ultimate customer, irrigating farmers, front and centre. It was instead led by the council and its close subsidiary, the Hawke’s Bay Regional Investment Company. “And when you look around at those projects that have been successful, at the front is exactly where farmers need to be. Those projects need farmer champions and Ruataniwha did not get that early on.” Options in Hawke’s Bay could
3407TT01
Weigh Up. Track Ahead.
include a scaled down version with no river flow augmentation built in or offline storage including augmented aquifers that were recharged over winter. Curtis maintained small, farmerowned and operated co-operatives were successful for a reason, with every member having skin in the game. “You often do still need councils as part of these schemes but they need to have clear reasons for investing. The problem with council support is it is viewed as a council using ratepayers’ money to fund wealthy private individuals. “Better to have a clear, separate entity set up which a council may or may not chose to invest into. Reasons may include a need for future town water use or to ensure
minimum environmental flows in a river, for example. It’s important that everything is clearly laid out for why council may be about to get involved.” He cited the proposed Wairarapa scheme as one that ticked more boxes than Ruataniwha. “We are looking at a proposal that does not have the Greater Wellington Regional Council in the middle of it, rather an entity primarily of farmers and then the council can decide if it’s to be in or out.” HBRC councillors Peter Beaven and Debbie Hewitt agreed the door remained open for other investors to become involved in Ruataniwha. “A number of stakeholders have put about $1 million of their
EziWeigh7i Weigh Scale + MP600 Load Bars
= $1999
Terms and Conditions: Offers and pricing valid from 1 September – 30 November 2017. Pricing is GST inclusive, subject to change and includes delivery to the retail store.
own funds into this, alongside the council money and it was pretty clear this project needed to move on without that political interference hanging over it,” Hewitt said. However, she did not believe history would judge the council kindly in its decision to walk away from the project and the benefits it could have brought. “A council cannot have its cake and eat it too. There was employment of 2500-3000 extra people, larger cargo volumes through the port and beneficial environmental river flows coming out of this project. There was also the promise that in 70 years the council would have ownership returned to it.” Curtis said regardless of ownership and structure the need for some form of irrigation in Hawke’s Bay remained. “The reality is quite severe implications exist on users, particularly those with permanent crops like orchards when water bans will become quite likely. Something will have to be done about storage and some sort of shared resource.”
SRS2 EID Stick Reader
$1499
How are you tracking? Let’s talk. 0800 TRU-TEST (878 8378)