The reason it caught my attention was because it is a comment that has application to just about every community on the planet, whether they be rich or poor.
And it has particular relevance to low decile communities like ours here on the East Coast because the process of achieving this utopian dream will require a greater degree of self sacrifice from the poorer families than those who already live on easy street.
It will require decisions being made that could have an initial negative impact on the most vulnerable members of society - people who are totally dependant on others higher up the food chain for their survival.
It is why I have chosen this opportunity to explain why we must be sensitive to the needs of all sectors when discussing what needs to happen in order to put us all on a sustainable growth path.
We must be prepared to accept some current major income generating activities will need to change in part or possibly be eliminated all together.
These decisions will not come easy for those who have derived incomes from an industry that has been the mainstay for the regional economy for centuries - ie. The livestock and forestry industries.
Science tells us that we can’t continue to abuse the natural environment in a manner that is unsustainable.
The good news is that the leaders of the aforementioned industries (at least in this region) are in agreement - not only that change needs to happen but the degree to which this change must be made.
The bad news is that the local government agencies appear reluctant to accept their role of leadership when making the necessary changes.
I am at a loss to understand why this is so when this region (unlike many others) is blessed with natural resources that will make the change so much easier.
I am talking about 16,000 hectares of relatively unused, high quality, arrable land that is the Poverty Bay Flats which would support the transfer of significant, current economic generating capacity from the livestock and forestry industries to an alternative economy based on the production of high valued non pollutant food crops.
All we need is to get on with the design and build of a group of fresh water storage facilities that would service a reticulated irrigation system and the fresh water needs of a growing associated work force.
One would think this plan would be a “no brainer” but, for whatever reason, the idea is in danger of being stillborn simply because the discussions appear stymied in a debate about who owns the water.
For me, it beggars belief that our local leadership lacks the courage to force the issue.
My guess is that the community would thank them with overwhelming support if they did so.
We could become the first in the country to adopt policies that show the world how it’s done.
Now wouldn’t that be something.
Clive Bibby is a commentator, consultant, farmer and community leader, who lives in Tolaga Bay.
2 comments:
Clive Bibby is right to claim that irrigation can turn land from livestock of dryland farming into food for humans, and thus produce much more to serve mankind, (though I’m not sure about the description that areas of the Poverty Bay flats are much ‘relatively unused’). Indeed, ancient civilizations have shown us that they understood this by the water reticulation systems and the terracing of mountainsides many centuries ago.
But Clive doesn’t tell us what needs to happen for this vision to become a reality. So:
Where will the storage ponds be located?
What’s the source of water? Practical and consentable?
Will the storage pond be prevented from silting up? Always a problem in Gisborne with its eroding soils.
Who is going to foot the very big bill? The direct users or the financially hard-pressed public? Or a combination?
Are the landowners on the Plains supporting this idea? It appears they are not.
After spending the last 40 years promoting my plan for much needed economic re-development in Tairawhiti and finally being able to convince Council that the idea has enough merit for it to be put on the Council Long Term Plan, l am happy to leave it in the hands of the experts to answer the questions posed by Mr McGregor.
I have never claimed to have all the answers to his legitimate questions.
My objective was to force Council to respond positively to a situation that demands change in the way we manage our natural resources so having achieved that objective, clearly my job is done.
My proposal is now in the hands of people with the responsibility to make it happen.
I am confident that the idea, which is based on agreements amongst the current leaders of the most affected Forestry and Livestock Industries that change must happen, is a positive first step in averting further deterioration in our economic output. And those agreements are an important ingredient in preparing the way for the next stage which is planning the development of the Poverty Bay flats as an irrigated producer of high value exportable foods.
Whether the current landowners of the flats will agree to any changes to their farming practices will ultimately depend on the quality of the development proposals that emerge from the investigations currently under way by the Council team.
It is pointless second guessing what may happen further down the track but l have enough confidence in the different sectors of the farming community to believe that the changes we are seeking are necessary and, as a consequence, it will happen.
I am also assured that the funding of the development will be the responsibility of a joint venture that secures the future interests of the most affected parties.
Initial discussions with Government have been promising and we can anticipate support for the idea from what will be our biggest funding agency. No surprises there simply because we don’t intend making the mistakes others have made promoting similar projects in other drought prone regions .
It is an idea whose time has come.
Once the beneficiaries realise what is being proposed, they will recognise the common sense argument that will stand up to close scrutiny.
Post a Comment