My first opinion is over the debate as to whether the swap of 22ha of DOC land for 145ha of Smedley land is a good deal or not. Apples for apples, or apples for lemons. Of course it's a good deal, but you have to visualise what the Smedley land will look like in 50 years time to appreciate it.
I have an advantage over most of you with that visualisation process, because within the 900ha that we farm in the Wakarara valley we have 75ha in QE2s and our own private "set asides". All this land is regenerating podocarp forest, the matai on the south and the rimu on the northerly wetter areas. Firstly, you grow the manuka (scrub) and then the podocarps return in the cover of the manuka.
The Smedley land will look like our set asides in 30 years especially if they can hasten the manuka growth by lightly grazing the land for a few years more. This will keep the grass low and allow the manuka to regenerate quicker.
Quick DOC. Take the deal.
I thought Jonathan Kreb's Talking Point was a sensible and pragmatic approach to the dam. His thoughts about wishing that his children could have a future in Hawke's Bay was especially poignant, because I have three children who have no future here. I have to travel long distances to see children and grandchildren.
The pragmatism he espouses is especially relevant for us. On our 75ha of set asides there are mortgages (surprise, surprise). Our ability to farm the land, alongside the covenants, more intensively, gives us the ability to pay for the "total package".
That is surely the essence of the dam project. The land will be farmed more intensively delivering higher valued products and extra safeguards will be placed on nutrient runoffs as a result of this.
As an "affected landowner", who is supposed to know things, I am constantly asked by CHB residents "What is happening with the dam?" We are holding out for the start of this project. This is a no-brainer. Why doesn't the government just legislate this through? These are definitely the thoughts and feeling of Jonathan Kreb's silent majority.
Unfortunately I know very little more than the rest of you, apart from my gut feeling that it will proceed and that it will be successful, and that the political protagonists will "show all the flexibility of a Mongolian acrobatic troupe". We were actually for it, provided that it was a success and that safeguards that we fought for were in place.
The last points concern the green movement.
I am too great a cynic to believe that the best environmental work is done through press releases and letters to the editor. I think of our own situation regarding the Mangtaura River that runs through our Wakarara Valley.
From its inception in the Ruahine Forest Park to its confluence with the Waipawa River at Pendle Hill it is fenced off from all livestock. There was no grand committee meeting about it. There was no master plan. There was no press release. It's not controversial, therefore, it is not newsworthy. There are no environmental awards on the mantelpieces. The people involved would despise these things. We don't even have a mantelpiece. There are just farmers mixing pragmatic business decisions with conservation.
So my advice to members of the anti-dam movement is to do what we have done. Purchase land that needs protecting. Mortgage your house, your heart and soul. Worry half the night. Get up and work your guts out to implement the plan through the day. Look at the results in terms of 50 years rather than today, remembering always, that a 1000- mile journey starts with a single step. You will find the results far more satisfying than a concerted, and definitely orchestrated letter writing campaign.
-Craig Preston is the Central Hawke's Bay farmer on whose land the site for the proposed Ruataniwha Water Storage Scheme sits.
-Business and civic leaders, organisers, experts in their field and interest groups can contribute opinions. The views expressed here are the writer's personal opinion. and not the newspaper's. Email: editor@hbtoday.co.nz
