Commonsense prevails in Waimate

"Great Aunt Agatha's cow" was used in an appeal at the Environment Court.

Great Aunt Agatha would have been delighted in the outcome, but critical of the effort needed to achieve it.

The mythical aunt was the example Federated Farmers used when calling for practicality to be used in a decision made during the submission process to the proposed Waimate District Plan.

The original proposal required a stock underpass to be installed where there was frequent (defined as more than 25 crossings in anyone year) movement of stock across the road.

The rule purpose was quite evident, and worthy of some action. Federated Farmers' submission recommended the issue be handled through the bylaw process, with the number of stock and the traffic volume also needing consideration. Council members nodded sympathetically, thanked us for coming - and rejected the submission.

This was perplexing, so Federated Farmers appealed to the Environment Court - an expensive step but, thankfully, one that is preceded by mediation if all parties agree. We did go to mediation and Great Aunt Agatha played her part.

Great Aunt Agatha has retired from farming but, like many farmers, likes to keep her hand in, so she bought a few hectares near the end of a dead-end unsealed road heading to nowhere and got herself a house cow. The road split the property - paddocks on one side, farm house and buildings on the other, with roughly half a dozen traffic movements on a busy day.

Under Waimate's proposed rule, Great Aunt Agatha would be required to build a stock underpass if she wanted to milk her house cow on more than six days a year.

"A bit over the top," we suggested. Within minutes the council agreed and another 10 minutes of constructive dialogue saw a mutually agreeable solution reached which took into account both traffic and stock volumes.

Federated Farmers can be satisfied with this outcome, but why did our appeal end up at the Environment Court? It did not need lawyers or in-depth debate on finer points of law.

Instead, good old-fashioned discussion worked, talking with various parties (rather than at them) to isolate the problem and come up with a practical solution.

Some other commonsense solutions were achieved in mediation too.

We appealed the council's decision to restrict the range of animals able to be farmed within the hill and high country zone, maintaining that as long as farmed animals were adequately fenced there is no justification for discrimination on animal type.

The council agreed and amended the wording to 'commercial livestock' rather than specifying types of animals. We were successful in achieving significant reductions in proposed set-backs for new milking sheds and we gained exclusion for fencing on land above 900 metres in a pastoral intensification rule.