If the activity you are undertaking has permitted activity criteria under the notified plan and you can’t meet one or some of those criteria, you can apply for resource consent to do the activity. The timing of when you need consent depends on the rule. 

When new rules are notified and are going through the submissions and hearing process, existing activities can carry on as they were. Six months after any new rules become operative (which means after any appeals are settled and could be as far away as 2026), existing activities need to: 

1. alter or adjust to meet the requirements of the new permitted activity rules; or
2. seek a resource consent; or
3. cease.

The exception to this is activities that already have a resource consent, such as a water take – those can continue until the existing consent expires or is reviewed. 

For more information, please see:
Practice Note: Consenting under Proposed and Operative Plans

Who can I contact for further information? 

If you have questions that couldn’t be answered today or you want to get in contact with Otago Regional Council, please feel free to call us on 0800 474 082 and ask for the Land and Water Policy team, or email policy@orc.govt.nz. 

We are actively looking at the most efficient way to manage effects on the environment, and Freshwater Farm Plans might be one of those opportunities we can leverage. Given lots of people will need them, we are keen to hear your feedback on what we could include as part of a Farm Plan.  

Freshwater Farm Plans are very useful to improve environmental performance, particularly in tailoring actions to individual farms so that ‘good management practices’ are adopted. However, the science investigations have shown that in some areas of the region, ‘good management practices’ will not address declining water quality trends or result in the more substantial water quality improvements required. 

At this stage, it seems unlikely that Freshwater Farm Plans can achieve that on their own.  

In those situations, resource consents will likely be needed, alongside Freshwater Farm Plans, to push for more significant reduction in contaminant losses. However, it is still important that we get feedback on the types of activities you think could be managed through Freshwater Farm Plans, noting this may not be able to apply everywhere and for everything. 

Who can I contact for further information? 

If you have questions that couldn’t be answered today or you want to get in contact with Otago Regional Council, please feel free to call us on 0800 474 082 and ask for the Land and Water Policy team, or email policy@orc.govt.nz. 

There are a wide range of setback requirements in the draft plan. The setbacks vary, depending on the kind of activity, the level of risk, and the level of environmental improvement required. In general, they ensure that activities or structures that pose a risk to water quality (such as discharges of effluent to land, cultivation, or wastewater treatment plants) do not take place or are not established in a location that is too close to waterbodies.  

For farming activities, one of the biggest sources of contaminants is overland flow of water into waterbodies, when that water contains, or has the opportunity to pick up sediment, dung and other contaminants. A setback (preferably vegetated), usually varying in width depending on the slope, is one way to filter out these contaminants. Some higher-risk activities, such as intensive winter grazing and sacrifice paddocks, have large areas of exposed soil in winter, and are a high risk of sediment and dung getting into waterbodies, unless there is some separation. 

Typical setbacks for farming activities are: 

• General stock exclusion: No change from Stock Exclusion Regulations (generally 3 metres). 
• Intensive Winter Grazing: No change from National Environmental Standard for Freshwater (generally 5 metres. 
• FMUs where sediment and E.coli are an issue (Taiari, Dunedin and Coast, Catlins FMUs and Lower Clutha rohe): On low slope land – livestock must be excluded 10 metres from the beds of lakes and rivers over 1m wide, 3 metres for all other rivers. This applies to all livestock, including sheep. Where there are existing stock exclusion fences there is a 10yr lead-in period. 
• FMUs where sediment and phosphorus are an issue (Taiari, Dunedin and Coast FMUs, Dunstan, Manuherekia, Roxburgh rohe): setbacks for cultivation - 5m for land with a slope less than 10 degrees, 10m for 10-20 degrees (no-till permitted within setbacks and for over 20 degrees). 

For forestry planting, the setbacks are intended to provide for some protection of water quality at all stages of the forestry process, acknowledging that if trees are setback from waterbodies, related activities, such as harvesting are less likely to occur close to waterbodies. The setbacks will also protect waterbodies from some of the effects of standing trees, such as shading. Within the setback, riparian planting will be able to occur.  At this stage the setbacks are 20m for forestry on slopes less than 10 degrees and 50m for above 10 degrees. 

We are looking at ways that the setbacks can be refined, while still providing the environmental improvements required and are keen for your feedback on this.  For example, this may come with  greater emphasis on critical source areas for farming activities, or slash and sediment management for forestry. 

The way the rules have been designed mean that if you can't or don't want to meet the setbacks, you can apply for consent to undertake your activity closer than the setbacks state. The consent would put mitigations in place to ensure the risk was adequately managed. We are also looking into whether a Freshwater Farm Plan can be used as an alternative to some of these setback requirements – your feedback on the ways this could work is sought. 

Who can I contact for further information? 

If you have questions that couldn’t be answered today or you want to get in contact with Otago Regional Council, please feel free to call us on 0800 474 082 and ask for the Land and Water Policy team, or email policy@orc.govt.nz. 

Sacrifice paddock is defined in the National Environmental Standards for Freshwater (NES): as an area on which — 

(a) cattle are repeatedly, but temporarily, contained (typically during extended periods of wet weather); and 

(b) the resulting damage caused to the soil by pugging is so severe as to require resowing with pasture species 

The rule has been included because it is an activity that is highlighted in the NES, and in the Environment Court considering Southland’s plan. 

Sacrifice paddocks are used to reduce soil damage on large areas of the farm and minimise other risks to the environment and animal welfare. The use of sacrifice paddocks is infrequent and for short periods of time (i.e. as a planned back-up option for bad weather or other circumstances). 

Risks associated with sacrifice paddocks are similar to those of intensive winter grazing and pasture-based wintering – pugging, run-off into waterways, devegetation, loss of soil armouring and delays to pasture regrowth. 

The time limit (the use of a sacrifice paddock should not exceed a total of more than 60 days in any 12month period) is based on the fifth interim decision of the Environment Court (23 December 2022) on the proposed Southland Water and Land Plan. It is understood that sacrifice paddocks are not used consistently over long periods of time (then it would become pasture-based wintering). Similarly, the size limit (5 ha for landholdings less than 500ha, or 1% or up to 30ha for landholdings greater than 500ha, whichever is lesser) is based on the Southland Environment Court Decision.  

We are keen to understand if sacrifice paddocks are always part of an intensive winter grazing operation and can be managed as part of that existing consenting process, or if there is a better way of managing the activity. 

We are also keen to hear if the time limits and/or size restrictions are workable for Otago.  

Who can I contact for further information? 

If you have questions that couldn’t be answered today or you want to get in contact with Otago Regional Council, please feel free to call us on 0800 474 082 and ask for the Land and Water Policy team, or email policy@orc.govt.nz. 

The current permitted volume (20 m³/month, 240 m³/year) results in large quantities of gravel extraction, with no oversight by council because consent is not required. While gravel extraction can be useful in managing a river’s flood carrying capacity, it can negatively impact the river’s health when not managed well. We think the current volume is too high to be sure it’s not impacting the health of the river. 

The smaller volume (5 m³ in any 12 consecutive months) will retain some ability to extract gravel at a level that should not impact river health. A consent will be required for larger extractions, to enable the inclusion of site-specific good practice type conditions and ensure that the health of the river can be maintained.  

This conservative approach is an interim step, while additional work is undertaken to improve our knowledge of gravel across Otago. In the longer term, it is intended that there will be greater guidance for gravel extractions, which may support larger permitted volumes in some waterbodies. 

Who can I contact for further information? 

If you have questions that couldn’t be answered today or you want to get in contact with Otago Regional Council, please feel free to call us on 0800 474 082 and ask for the Land and Water Policy team, or email policy@orc.govt.nz. 

Typically, reductions in water allocation to ensure that the total consented allocation in a catchment is, overtime, brought in line with the relevant take limits in the LWRP will be done through the consent replacement process. (The RMA specifies that a consent authority may review the conditions of consent to align the levels, flows, rates or standards set by a regional rule with consent conditions. However, the RMA does not give the Council the power to cancel a consent upon review, and only allows Council to reduce the amount taken by a certain extent.)

The first step in reducing water allocation to ensure that the consented allocation in a catchment is brought in line with the relevant take limit is by removing “paper” allocation. This means that when a consent holder applies for a new resource consent to replace an existing one, ORC will only allocate a quantity of water that does not exceed the historic actual use of water under the previous consent and that reflects reasonable and efficient use of that water.

Where removing “paper” allocation will not be sufficient to achieve the take limit, reductions in water allocation will need to occur in stages. During the first stage (i.e. first consent replacement process) “paper” allocation will be removed. During the second stage further reductions will need to be achieved through either the implementation of a community-led proposal for achieving the take limit (for example through water sharing) or, alternatively, through pro rata claw backs across the different users.

ORC seeks to improve the accuracy of future technical work that informs the development of regulatory and non-regulatory approaches for managing nutrients and other contaminants in the region. The information provided in Freshwater Farm Plans can help ORC developing a better understanding of how farming contributes to overall loadings and make sure that these management approaches are effective.

ORC will make sure that any such information provided through the Freshwater Farm Plans will be treated confidentially and will not be made available to the public (unless it is aggregated and or shared in a manner that does not allow for the source of this information (i.e. the individual farm) to be identified.

Dairy support is one of the more intense activities that can occur on a farm and often has a higher risk of contaminant losses to the environment. If water quality is to be maintained where it is good, and improved where it is poor, a first step needs to be keeping a close watch on activities that might result in an increase of losses – hence the need for a resource consent for any new or increased area of dairy support. 

There is a region-wide rule that requires resource consent for new or increased areas of dairy support. The application would need to show how losses of contaminants from the farming operation will be reduced. 

Existing dairy support can continue under a Freshwater Farm Plan, unless it is in an area that requires consent for dairy or dairy support (currently proposed to be Taiari/Taieri, North Otago, Dunedin and Coast FMUs, and Manuherekia and Lower Clutha rohe). These areas have been identified because they have more water quality challenges that need to be addressed. 

The definition of pasture-based wintering means break feeding cattle, other than lactating dairy cows, on pasture between 1 May and 30 September inclusive where supplementary feed offered is more than 10,000 kgDM/ha. 

This is based on the fifth interim decision of the Environment Court (23 December 2022) from the proposed Southland Water and Land Plan. 

Pasture-based wintering is the supplementary feeding of cattle that are grazing on pasture over winter.  It is distinguished from intensive winter grazing where stock graze on fodder crops as well as supplementary feed. Sheep are excluded from this definition – we are interested in your views on that. 

Grazing cattle on pasture over winter has the potential to generate adverse environmental effects, including sediment run-off into waterways, devegetation, loss of soil armouring and delays to pasture regrowth. The risk arising from such grazing on pasture is generally related to how intensively the pasture is grazed, hence the threshold on how much introduced feed there is.  At high levels of introduced feed, the risk can become similar to the risks from intensive winter grazing on forage crops (where grazing leaves little or no residual cover). 

Based on the Environment Court’s direction for Southland, we think we should be managing this activity and are keen to understand the implications of the rule for Otago. 

Who can I contact for further information? 

If you have questions that couldn’t be answered today or you want to get in contact with Otago Regional Council, please feel free to call us on 0800 474 082 and ask for the Land and Water Policy team, or email policy@orc.govt.nz. 

The intention of this threshold was to be able to look more closely at those farms that were applying comparatively high levels of synthetic nitrogen fertiliser. We understand that very few Otago farms breach the 190kg/ha/yr NES cap of synthetic nitrogen fertiliser. In some areas of Otago (some specific FMUs or parts of FMUs), there is a need to reduce the amount of nitrogen entering waterbodies, and in some other areas the trend for nitrogen in waterbodies is getting worse. A 190kg/ha/yr threshold for synthetic nitrogen fertiliser is unlikely to help address this problem, as it doesn’t affect many farms. 

The 190kg/ha/yr cap in the NES is a firm ‘cap’. In the draft Plan, a lower threshold is suggested, but it is not a ‘cap’: it will trigger a resource consent, which will allow a more focussed look at how contaminant losses can be reduced. This will likely require implementation through specific provisions in a Freshwater Farm Plan. 

We are still looking at whether 100kg/ha/yr N is the right threshold, and we welcome your feedback. By way of context, for the case study dairy farms in the economic profile work, the average nitrogen fertiliser use was 142kg/ha/yr and the median was of 124kg/ha/yr. For sheep and beef farms, most used less than 30kg/ha/yr of nitrogen fertiliser on pastures. 

The stocking rate was included as a proxy for intensity. The stocking rate of 2.5 cows per hectare is based on what the maximum stocking rate might be for a farm to be self-sufficient in terms of feed (e.g. if it was a finishing sheep and beef farm). It is intended to be a generous interpretation of the basic level needed for efficient pasture management (2.5 cows is roughly equal to 20+ livestock units – a ewe with a lamb at foot). It is not intended to be representative of current stocking rates, which vary across the region. At or below this level, a controlled activity resource consent will be required (likely to be those farms where less than 20% of feed is imported i.e. system 1 to system 3 dairy farms). A controlled activity means consent must be granted, and we can impose conditions on the matters identified as being controlled. 

It is worth keeping in mind that this stocking rate is for a farm’s total area, not effective area. We agree that it may not be best to use a single threshold across all areas of Otago, and welcome suggestions of alternatives.   

More stringent requirements are needed for more intense land uses (likely to be those where 20% or more of feed is imported i.e. some system 3, system 4 and system 5 dairy farms). More focussed reduction of losses is likely to be required from farming that has higher risk or losses.  

Who can I contact for further information? 

If you have questions that couldn’t be answered today or you want to get in contact with Otago Regional Council, please feel free to call us on 0800 474 082 and ask for the Land and Water Policy team, or email policy@orc.govt.nz. 

In general, if both activities were occurring on the same property, that could be covered by a single consent, along with any other activity that required consent. In fact, it would be ORC’s preference to bundle all your activities together and get one application that covered everything.   

For dairy farming and dairy support, there are region-wide rules that require resource consent for any new or increased area, much like the current National Environmental Standard for Freshwater.   

In some areas, where water quality pressures are lower, existing dairy farming and dairy support can continue under a Freshwater Farm Plan. In other areas, where more significant water quality improvements are required, or there are declining trends in water quality, existing dairy farming and dairy support will require a resource consent, and more focussed reduction of losses is likely to be required.  

Who can I contact for further information? 

If you have questions that couldn’t be answered today or you want to get in contact with Otago Regional Council, please feel free to call us on 0800 474 082 and ask for the Land and Water Policy team, or email policy@orc.govt.nz. 

Sacrifice paddock is defined in the National Environmental Standards for Freshwater (NES): as an area on which — 

(a) cattle are repeatedly, but temporarily, contained (typically during extended periods of wet weather); and 

(b) the resulting damage caused to the soil by pugging is so severe as to require resowing with pasture species 

The rule has been included because it is an activity that is highlighted in the NES, and in the Environment Court considering Southland’s plan. 

Sacrifice paddocks are used to reduce soil damage on large areas of the farm and minimise other risks to the environment and animal welfare. The use of sacrifice paddocks is infrequent and for short periods of time (i.e. as a planned back-up option for bad weather or other circumstances). 

Risks associated with sacrifice paddocks are similar to those of intensive winter grazing and pasture-based wintering – pugging, run-off into waterways, devegetation, loss of soil armouring and delays to pasture regrowth. 

The time limit (the use of a sacrifice paddock should not exceed a total of more than 60 days in any 12month period) is based on the fifth interim decision of the Environment Court (23 December 2022) on the proposed Southland Water and Land Plan. It is understood that sacrifice paddocks are not used consistently over long periods of time (then it would become pasture-based wintering). Similarly, the size limit (5 ha for landholdings less than 500ha, or 1% or up to 30ha for landholdings greater than 500ha, whichever is lesser) is based on the Southland Environment Court Decision.