Section 2: Defining lower intensity farming for the purpose of an exception
1. Do you consider stocking rate (ie, SU/ha) is an appropriate measure to define lower intensity farming or do you recommend a different approach?
Please select one item
Radio button:
Ticked
Yes
Radio button:
Unticked
No
Radio button:
Unticked
A different approach
Please explain your answer here
I agree that defining lower intensity farming operations can be mostly determined by su/ha. However, i see grey areas with this approach.
1. Effective farming land, - if for example a farmer has 100ha but only 30ha of this is productive land, that would alter the effectiveness of using SU/ha and could result in the same damage as intensive farming. I believe it should be calculated based on SU’s/effective grazing land - not unproductive land.
2. Farm management practises, - again different scenario if a farmer has 100ha of effective grazing and only 600SU in total he is classified as “lower intensity farming”. What is to stop him through farming practises intensively grazing these areas (example running all 600su’s in small paddocks block grazing, when majority of the farm is locked up for cash crops?), which again would result in ultimately intensively grazing a “lower intensity operation”. - something to consider.
1. Effective farming land, - if for example a farmer has 100ha but only 30ha of this is productive land, that would alter the effectiveness of using SU/ha and could result in the same damage as intensive farming. I believe it should be calculated based on SU’s/effective grazing land - not unproductive land.
2. Farm management practises, - again different scenario if a farmer has 100ha of effective grazing and only 600SU in total he is classified as “lower intensity farming”. What is to stop him through farming practises intensively grazing these areas (example running all 600su’s in small paddocks block grazing, when majority of the farm is locked up for cash crops?), which again would result in ultimately intensively grazing a “lower intensity operation”. - something to consider.
2. What do you think is the appropriate stocking rate threshold (in SU/ha) for the definition of lower intensity farming?
Please explain your answer here
12SU/ha.
3. Do you think there should be different stocking rate thresholds for beef cattle and deer, or one threshold for all stock types?
Please explain your answer here
SU’s represent different stock classes so i would say no.
Even tho one bull compared to 6 ewes would make more damage to the environment if left in the same size small pen, the point of this is to classify a lower intensity systems by limiting su per ha. Seen the rate would be so low it wouldn’t impact the environment in anyway.
Even tho one bull compared to 6 ewes would make more damage to the environment if left in the same size small pen, the point of this is to classify a lower intensity systems by limiting su per ha. Seen the rate would be so low it wouldn’t impact the environment in anyway.
Please select one item
Radio button:
Unticked
Different stocking rates
Radio button:
Ticked
One threshold for all stock types
Radio button:
Unticked
Unsure
4. Is there any other information that you think we should consider in relation to developing an exception for lower intensity farming?
Please write your answer here
Areas that already have stocking limitations on them should be excluded, as there already being overseen by DOC, LINZ etc, and already have stocking limits in place to protect the environment.
5. Do you consider that there are any situations where an exception for lower intensity farming should not apply, and the map should continue to apply?
Please explain your answer here
Yes,
If farming operations have for whatever reason ( cash crops or uneffective grazing land etc) been managed intensively but the su’s/ha are being classified as “lower intenstity” due to su/ha they should be excluded.
If farming operations have for whatever reason ( cash crops or uneffective grazing land etc) been managed intensively but the su’s/ha are being classified as “lower intenstity” due to su/ha they should be excluded.
6. Do you have any views on how those specific situations should be identified?
Please write your answer here
Water quality testing could be required, that would be a way ensure that the farming practises within the lower intensity threshold are adhering to appropriate grazing management and not causing pollution to waterways.
7. Is there information that is readily available to farmers and councils to support the implementation of an exception based on stocking rates?
Please select one item
Radio button:
Unticked
Yes
Radio button:
Ticked
No
Radio button:
Unticked
Unsure
Section 3: Using certified freshwater farm plans
8. Do you consider that certified freshwater farm plans should be used as the basis for an exception, or an alternative, to the map and associated requirements to exclude stock?
Please select one item
Radio button:
Ticked
Yes
Radio button:
Unticked
No
Radio button:
Unticked
Unsure
9. Is there any other information that you think we should consider?
Please write your answer here
Areas like southwestland have large parcels of land already managed by doc, linz etc with stock limitations already in place.
Section 4: Stock exclusion for natural wetlands
10. Do you consider that an exception for lower intensity farming systems, or the alternative approach using certified freshwater farm plans, should apply more broadly to natural wetlands?
Please select one item
Radio button:
Ticked
Yes
Radio button:
Unticked
No
Radio button:
Unticked
Unsure
11. Are there any situations where any exception, or the alternative approach using certified freshwater farm plans, should not apply?
Please select one item
Radio button:
Unticked
Yes
Radio button:
Ticked
No
Radio button:
Unticked
Unsure
12. Is there any other information that you think we should we consider in relation to wetlands within lower intensity farming systems?
Please write your answer here
Would like to see exisiting evidence in areas like the southwestland cattle runs to prove cattle have had any effect on wetlands.
They’ve been grazed there and the management systems have hardly changed in 100 years, so if there was going to be any damage to wetlands it would have already occurred.
They’ve been grazed there and the management systems have hardly changed in 100 years, so if there was going to be any damage to wetlands it would have already occurred.