The NFF’s 5 March 2015 submission outlines that while farmers are not the direct recipients of the regulations imposed by the Water Act 2007 (the Act), they inevitably bear the ultimate cost of those regulations. Referring to its previous submission to the recent review of the Act, NFF notes that a comprehensive evaluation of the costs and benefits is required, not just an exercise in identifying and removing duplication. NFF underlines their support for the views of IIOs, and for their request through their peak organisation National Irrigators’ Council to have a more formal role in the inter-agency process. NFF suggests that detailed engagement with the IIOs would provide the best avenue for the interagency working group to best understand the concerns of the irrigation sector.
You may also like
Periodic Review of the Soil Organic Carbon Method 2021 April
The NFF understands that this Periodic Review will inform the development of the proposed Integrated Farm and Land Management (IFLM) Method. While this is supported, all methodology reviews, not just those focussed on...
Chrissy KerinReview of the Animal Effluent Management ACCU Method
The AEM methodology provides an important pathway for reducing CH4 emissions from animal effluent. For the method to remain effective, it must be financially viable, administratively practical, and aligned with evolving...
Carbon Farming Outreach Program: Knowledge Bank Discussion Paper
The intended purpose of the Knowledge Bank as stated by DCCEEW is problematic and misses the broader purpose of its creation. The purpose of the Knowledge Bank is to serve as an information resource for farmers and land...
Add comment