Freshwater national direction

Closes 27 Jul 2025

Section 2 part 2.6: Simplifying the wetlands provisions

There are questions that can be answered within part 2.6.

You can read part 2.6 and the questions either:

Read part 2.6: Simplifying the wetlands provisions - HTML format

The Government has committed to:

  • reviewing the definition of ‘natural inland wetland’ in the NPS-FM to exclude, among other things, artificial wetlands created by burst pipes
  • amending the NES-F to make the creation and maintenance of wetlands a permitted activity.

Context

The NPS-FM and NES-F provide national direction and rules about how wetlands should be managed (together referred to as the ‘wetland regulations’). The NPS-FM aims to embed long‑term change through regional plans, including policies to protect and restore wetlands. The NES-F restricts certain activities in and around wetlands and, in combination with the NPS-FM, provides consenting pathways so these activities can still occur for specific purposes.

There is strong support for protecting wetlands, and support for clearer and simpler wetland regulations, including:

  • a clearer and more workable definition of wetlands
  • clearer and more appropriate provision for farming activities
  • clearer and more appropriate provision for wetland construction
  • less-onerous requirements to map natural inland wetlands.

The Government is also consulting on changes to address inconsistencies in quarrying and mining provisions across several national direction instruments (eg, in wetlands and significant natural areas). This is set out in full detail in the Package 2: Primary sector discussion document.

Clearer and more workable definition of wetlands

Feedback has indicated the wetland regulations are restricting activities in and around low-value induced wetlands, and that this is making the maintenance, use and upgrade of infrastructure difficult.

There is also concern that the definition of ‘natural inland wetland’ in the wetland regulations is too complex, and that its exclusion of wetlands dominated by pasture has led to complex ecological assessments being necessary to determine whether the regulations apply.

We are consulting on:

  • defining induced wetlands as wetlands that have developed unintentionally as an outcome of human activity for purposes other than creating a wetland or water body, and excluding these from wetland provisions in the NPS-FM and NES-F, except where a council identifies them as regionally significant
  • removing the pasture exclusion from the definition of a ‘natural inland wetland’ and instead permitting farming activities that can occur in and around wetlands (see next proposal).

Clearer and more appropriate provision for farming activities

Feedback has indicated that the current provision for farming activities (ie, the pasture exclusion) is not working as intended, and that both farmers and councils want clarity about the status of farming activities such as irrigation, on-farm water storage and fencing.

We are consulting on creating a new permitted activity standard (and potentially a consenting pathway if needed) for farming activities that are unlikely to have an adverse effect on a wetland – for example, fencing and irrigation.

We are seeking your feedback on what activities should be permitted in this way, and what conditions, if any, would be added to a consent pathway (and whether this should be a controlled activity or other activity status).

Clearer and more appropriate provision for wetland construction

The Government wants to promote activities that will have good environmental outcomes. Feedback has indicated it is too hard to construct wetlands that can attenuate nutrient losses and provide valuable habitat.

We are consulting on:

  • defining ‘wetland construction’ as ‘an area that is artificially engineered to mimic the functions of a wetland where one did not previously exist’
  • creating a new permitted activity standard for activities related to wetland construction, as well as a consenting pathway
  • further encouraging wetland construction and edge-of-field mitigations through a new objective and/or policy in the NPS-FM.

We are seeking feedback on what conditions would be suitable for a permitted activity standard, and what activity class is appropriate for wetland construction.

Removing mapping requirements

Some councils may struggle to meet the requirements to map all natural inland wetlands by 2030, due to a lack of adequate resourcing and available mapping technology. There is no consistent mapping methodology being used by councils across the country, and any change to definitions (as described above) would also change what needs to be mapped.

We are consulting on removing the requirement for councils to map natural inland wetlands within 10 years (currently in clause 3.23 of the NPS-FM).

For further information on this topic, refer to the impact analysis document entitled Interim Regulatory Impact Statement: Simplifying the wetland provisions in the NPS Freshwater Management and NES Freshwater.

21. What else is needed to support farmers and others to do things that benefit the environment or improve water quality?
22. What should a farming activities pathway include?

Is a farming activities pathway likely to be more efficient and/or effective at enabling activities in and around wetlands?

23. What will be the impact of removing the requirement to map wetlands by 2030?
24. Could the current permitted activity conditions in the NES-F be made clearer or more workable?