From - Whangarei...PS. I wish to be heard * State the decision you wish Council to make to ensure...

From: [email protected]: Mail RoomSubject: Form 5 - Submission on a change proposed to the District Plan - Information submittedDate: Tuesday, 5 August 2014 7:52:38 p.m.

[Submitted by Anonymous User] Do not reply to this email - This mailbox is not monitored This is a copy of information submitted for your recordsSubmission to the 2011-2012 Draft Annual Plan and Proposed Fees and Charges for 2011-2012’

Form 5 - Submission on a change proposed to the District Plan * Plan Change Number

* Plan Change Name

Please note all of the following details are made publicly available * Full Name

* Postal Address

Telephone Number E-Mail * I could not gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission* I am not directly affected by an effect of the subject matter of the submission that a) adverselyaffects the environment; and b) does not relate to trade competition or the effects to tradecompetition * The specific provisions of the Plan Change that relate to my submission are

The entire plan change (131) * I oppose the specific provision listed above.* My reasons are

Dear Council:

I oppose your proposed plan change to regulate genetically modified organisms under theResource Management Act 1991 (RMA).

The management of genetically modified organisms is the function of the EnvironmentalProtection Authority under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1991.

The Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act was enacted by the government for thepurposes of managing genetically modified organisms. The RMA does not make any mention ofgenetically modified organisms.

Even if it was contemplated by the government that the RMA could be used to regulategenetically modified organisms, there is an "implied repeal" by the Hazardous Substances andNew Organisms Act.

The proposed plan change is nothing short of a reactionary response to a loud interest group thatseeks the prohibition of genetically modified organisms. It is a travesty that the council is usingratepayers money to pursue this legally frail venture, particularly given that the Government hasindicated that it will clarify through an amendment to the RMA that GMO regulation is not a localgovernment function.

The proposed plan change is a sad indictment on your district planners letting their personalpersuasions get in the way of what should be sound, impersonal and objective analysis andadvice to councilors.

I will oppose this silly proposal all of the way.

Yours sincerely.

Catherine

131

Genetically Modified Organisms

Catherine Meger

45 Kiteone RoadParua BayWhangarei

mailto:[email protected]


PS. I wish to be heard * State the decision you wish Council to make to ensure the issues you raise can bedealt with (i.e. give precise details of what you would like included or deleted from the plan)I request that Whangarei District Council withdraw the proposed plan change.

Alternatively, the council should withdraw the proposed plan change until the results of thenational elections and the final decisions on the Proposed Regional Policy Statement forNorthland.* I wish to be heard in support of my submission Yes

* If others make a similar submission, I will considerpresenting a joint case with them at a hearing

Yes

Submission Date

A signature is not required if you make your submission by electronic means Note to person making submission - If you are making a submission to the EnvironmentalProtection Authority, you should use form 16B. If you are a person who could gain an advantagein trade competition through the submission, your right to make a submission may be limited byclause 6 (4) of Part 1 of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991 Please check that the details you have provided are correct before you submit the form – onceyou click the [Submit] button the form cannot be changed. If you have supplied a valid email address a copy of this completed form will be emailed to you,otherwise please print a copy of it for your own records before you close this window. Submit Button - This button will become active when all required information is completed (fieldsmarked with *)

5/08/2014

1

Mail Room

From: Natalie EdwardsSent: Monday, 3 November 2014 1:09 p.m.To: Mail RoomCc: Natalie EdwardsSubject: FW: Form 5 - Submission on a change proposed to the District Plan - Information

submitted

-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]; Sent: 13/08/2014 7:15:25 a.m. To: Mail Room [mailto:[email protected]]; Subject: Form 5 - Submission on a change proposed to the District Plan - Information submitted

[Submitted by Anonymous User] Do not reply to this email - This mailbox is not monitored This is a copy of information submitted for your records Submission to the 2011-2012 Draft Annual Plan and Proposed Fees and Charges for 2011-2012’


* Plan Change Name Please note all of the following details are made publicly available * Full Name

* Postal Address

Telephone Number E-Mail

* I gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission

* I directly affected by an effect of the subject matter of the submission that a) adversely affects the environment; and b) does not relate to trade competition or the effects to trade competition * The specific provisions of the Plan Change that relate to my submission are the collaborative plan between WDC and FNDC regarding GMO's. I support this plan but want it strengthened to completely ban ALL GMO releases and field trials, without exception. If, however, field trials are to be permitted then, complete liability should be borne by the triallers.

* I the specific provision listed above. * My reasons are There has been, to my knowledge, no evidence for the claimed benefits of GMO's but plenty of evidence to show just how invasive and damaging these experimental processes are. Any escape by these modified organisms, as happens often, could lead to destruction, or change equalling destruction, of key elements of the biological cycle on which all our food plants rely.

131

Genetically Modified O i

Carl Mather

141 Te Kowhai Point Rd, Kerikeri

[email protected]

could not

am not

support

2

* State the decision you wish Council to make to ensure the issues you raise can be dealt with (i.e. give precise details of what you would like included or deleted from the plan) I support this plan but want it strengthened to completely ban ALL GMO releases and field trials, without exception. If, however, field trials are to be permitted then, complete liability should be borne by the triallers. * I wish to be heard in support of my submission * If others make a similar submission, I will consider presenting a joint case with them at a hearing Submission Date A signature is not required if you make your submission by electronic means Note to person making submission - If you are making a submission to the Environmental Protection Authority, you should use form 16B. If you are a person who could gain an advantage in trade competition through the submission, your right to make a submission may be limited by clause 6 (4) of Part 1 of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991 Please check that the details you have provided are correct before you submit the form – once you click the [Submit] button the form cannot be changed. If you have supplied a valid email address a copy of this completed form will be emailed to you, otherwise please print a copy of it for your own records before you close this window. Submit Button - This button will become active when all required information is completed (fields marked with *)

No

No

13/08/2014

From: Heather RossTo: Mail RoomSubject: FW: Form 5 - Submission on a change proposed to the District Plan - Information submittedDate: Thursday, 14 August 2014 8:55:13 a.m.Attachments: image001.png

image002.pngimage003.pngimage004.pngimage005.pngimage006.pngimage007.pngimage008.pngimage009.pngimage010.pngimage011.png

From: Heather Ross Sent: Thursday, 14 August 2014 7:47 a.m.To: Heather RossCc: Heather RossSubject: FW: TRIM: Form 5 - Submission on a change proposed to the District Plan - Information submitted

-----Original Message-----From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]; Sent: 13/08/2014 10:18:59 a.m.To: Mail Room [mailto:[email protected]]; Subject: TRIM: Form 5 - Submission on a change proposed to the District Plan - Informationsubmitted

[Submitted by Anonymous User] Do not reply to this email - This mailbox is not monitored This is a copy of information submitted for yourrecords Submission to the 2011-2012 Draft Annual Plan and Proposed Fees and Charges for 2011-2012’

Form 5 - Submission on a change proposed to the District Plan * Plan Change Number Plan change 131 * Plan Change Name Genetically moified organisms Please note all of the following details are made publicly available * Full Name Frida Inta

* Postal AddressPO Box 463, Westport,Buller 7866

Telephone Number 03 78 21 813 E-Mail [email protected] * Icould not gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission* Iam not directly affected by an effect of the subject matter of the submission that a) adversely affectsthe environment; and b) does not relate to trade competition or the effects to trade competition * The specific provisions of the Plan Change that relate to my submission areAll of it * Isupport the specific provision listed above.* My reasons are

I support the excellent WDC / FNDC collaborative GMO Plan change but want any EPA approved

mailto:/O=WHANGAREI DISTRICT COUNCIL/OU=GIS/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=HEATHERR





outdoor GE experiments or field trials prohibited as well as all GMO releases prohibited.

I am thrilled that both the Whangarei and Far North district councils have decided that adoptingthe GMO chapter outlined on their websites is the best future for their districts. Although I liveon the west coast of the South Island, this adoption will affect me, as it will be more likely thatmy district council will adopt your GMO policies as such policies gain ground. The larger the areabeing protected from GMO's the healthier the general environment will be. This is a brave,positive, advanced and future-proofing move on your part and I congratulate you warmly.

I have opposed genetically modified organisms in human and animal food supplies since they firstbecame available, many years ago now, and I believe it would be best to prohibit field trials ofGMOs as well all GMO releases into the environment. If the discretionary approach is chosen Ihope that both councils use their discretion to refuse any applications for the use of GMOs in anyform within their districts. I am pleased that any applications will be publicly notified, but hopingthat the outcome will be a refusal based on the adverse environmental effects of contaminationto surrounding areas, especially when there is a lot of organic farming and horticulture in bothdistricts. The extant and potential economic output of organic produce will far outweigh any GMOintroduction to the districts. GMOs have been promoted out of all proportion to their performanceby their creators. Why would Monsanto now be applying for the use of 2,4-D, in addition to thelong-time use of glyphosate weedkillers if GMOs reflected their promotional image? The use ofGMOs have caused misery for farmers contracted into their use, around the world. There iscontinuing strong evidence that glyphosate, the GMO -compatible weedspray, is causinghorrendous teratogenic deformities e.g. .http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2014/15404-roundup-damages-pigs-and-should-be-banned-danish-farmer

An outright refusal to any application will secure the future health of all within your districts,including physical, mental and emotional health.

* State the decision you wish Council to make to ensure the issues you raise can bedealt with (i.e. give precise details of what you would like included or deleted from the plan)I support the excellent WDC / FNDC collaborative GMO Plan change but want any EPA approvedoutdoor GE experiments or field trials prohibited as well as all GMO releases prohibited.* I wish to be heard in support of my submission No* If others make a similar submission, I will considerpresenting a joint case with them at a hearing No

Submission Date 13/08/2014A signature is not required if you make your submission by electronic means Note to person making submission - If you are making a submission to the EnvironmentalProtection Authority, you should use form 16B. If you are a person who could gain an advantagein trade competition through the submission, your right to make a submission may be limited byclause 6 (4) of Part 1 of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991 Please check that the details you have provided are correct before you submit the form – onceyou click the [Submit] button the form cannot be changed. If you have supplied a valid email address a copy of this completed form will be emailed to you,otherwise please print a copy of it for your own records before you close this window. Submit Button - This button will become active when all required information is completed (fieldsmarked with *)

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2014/15404-roundup-damages-pigs-and-should-be-banned-danish-farmer

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2014/15404-roundup-damages-pigs-and-should-be-banned-danish-farmer

-----Original Message-----

From: John and Becky [mailto:[email protected]];

Sent: 13/08/2014 4:34:14 p.m.

To: Mail Room [mailto:[email protected]];

Subject: GMO Plan Change 131 submission

Plan Change Number: Proposed Plan Change 131 Plan Change Name: Genetically Modified Organisms John Sanderson PO Box 941 Kerikeri 0245 09 4077721 I wish to be heard. I could not gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission. I support the excellent WDC / FNDC collaborative GMO Plan change in its entirety. I want the GMO Plan change retained as it is written. I thank the WDC for acting on it's duty of care to protect our environmental, economic, cultural and social well being, ahead of approval of GMO field trials, and banning GMO releases. Providing strict containment criteria and financial bond and liability mechanism's on field trial applicants will force GMO operators to lift their game if they want to continue their research in our region. This is a prudent coarse of action in light of the scientific uncertainty and potential massive consequences surrounding the technology. Please acknowledge receipt of this submission. Kind regards, John Sanderson




From: Rosie Donovan [mailto:[email protected]];

Sent: 16/08/2014 9:49:13 p.m.


Subject: Whangarei District Council Proposed GMO Plan Change 131

This is an email submission for Whangarei District Council Proposed GMO Plan Change 131 My name is Rosanna Donovan. My address is: 3317 Mititai Road, R.D. 10, Dargaville 0370. I wish to be heard. I could not gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission. I support the collaborative between the WDC/ FNDC for the GMO plan change, but would like any EPA approved outdoor GE experiments or field trials prohibited as well as all GMO releases prohibited. Rosanna Donovan 16/08/14



From: John ClarkeTo: Mail RoomSubject: Submission re GMO Plan change #131 - attn. Melissa NeedhamDate: Sunday, 17 August 2014 2:53:50 p.m.

Attention: Melissa Needham, Policy Department

Submission to WDC re proposed GMO Plan change #131

#1 Date 17th August 2014

#2 Submission to the WDC proposed GMO Plan change #131

Whangarei District Council

Private Bag 9023

Whangarei

#2 Submission by: Mr John Clarke

#3 Contact details: Home address: 138 Puriri Park Road, Maunu, Whangarei

Phone: 09 438 0557

Email: [email protected]

#4

I support the excellent WDC / FNDC collaborative GMO Plan change but want any EPA approvedoutdoor GE experiments or field trials prohibited as well as all GMO releases prohibited. I supportWDC proposed Plan change #131 and I wish to see precautionary and prohibitive rules retainedand strengthened.

In addition, I wanted to address the following points mentioned in the proposed plan changes#131:

1. The proposed plan changes state:




The application of an adaptive risk management approach is to avoid foreclosure ofpotential opportunities associated with a GMO development that could benefit the district.There is the ability to review a particular GMO activity if it were to become evident duringthe field trial stage, or in light of other new information, that the particular GMO activitywould be of net benefit to the district and that potential risks can be managed to thesatisfaction of Council. Council or a GMO developer can initiate a plan change to changethe status of an activity

While I agree that opportunities to develop GMOs safely should be encouraged, I feel nervous aboutany proviso allowing changes to the plan if it can be shown to be of net benefit to the district andthat potential open air trial risks can be safely managed. My concern arises from the numerouscases in New Zealand and around the world where promises of tight GMO trial control haveproved that “safe” and “open air” are mutually exclusive terms not only because of human failingbut also because windborne GMO pollen cannot be controlled no matter how convincing andalluring the argument.

In addition, there have been cases, such as in the USA, Canada and Australia where aggressivemultinationals such as Monsanto have not only been the direct cause of contaminating otherpeople's crops with GMOs but have then taken them to court, claiming damages for patentviolations. I ask the council to address this issue in their plan and make it absolutely clear thatcontamination by any means and rectifying its consequences remains solely the problem of theGMO grower and researcher.

I ask that you make those wanting to experiment with GMO’s outdoors (ie. CEO'S/ GMs of researchentities and their management boards, GMO farmers – specific, named people) personallyfinancially responsible for all adverse impacts of GMO trials including unintended/unforeseenones.

2. The proposed plan changes also state:

It is anticipated that the objectives, policies, eligibility rules and general development andperformance standards in this chapter will achieve the following results:1. Adoption of a precautionary approach to manage potential risks (social, cultural,environmental and economic) associated with the outdoor use of GMOs.2. Ensuring users of GMOs are financially accountable in the long-term through bondingand financial fitness provisions for the full costs associated with the GMO activity. Thisincludes accidental or unintentional contamination, clean-up, monitoring and remediation.3. Protection of local/regional marketing advantages through reducing risks of adverseeffects associated with market rejection and loss of income from GM contamination ofnon-GM crops, and negative effects on marketing, branding and tourism opportunities.

I would like points 2 and 3 to more clearly identify that any costs/losses incurred by non-GMOgrowers due to contamination of their crops or land or loss of markets will be fully met by the GMOresearchers/growers/developers until that person's livelihood has been restored eg. Loss of incomefully reimbursed until a conventional, IPM or organic grower has their previous non-GM statusreinstated and financial assistance to ensure that they can clean up any GE contamination to bestpractice levels. I believe it is crucial that organic primary producers, who produce safe, cleannourishing food in sustainable way, can continue their activities and have access to key marketsand premiums. This to include all costs incurred in restoring full organic status, including anylegal costs.

3. The proposed plan changes go on to state:1. Precautionary PrincipleTo adopt a precautionary approach by prohibiting Release of a GMO, and bymaking Field Trials of a GMO a discretionary activity.

I ask that all GMO trials/research adopt a precautionary approach and that GMO field trials notbe made a discretionary activity. I want all outdoor GE experiments/Field trials approved by theEPA in Wellington prohibited in Whangarei District, Far North District and the widerAuckland/Northland region due to the serious risks of GMOs to our biosecurity, uniquebiodiversity, existing non-GMO primary producers, our economy and the public health.

My concern is that NZ indoor GE experiments/ trials (ie. in glass houses or laboratories) done byNZ crown research institutes like Crop & Food Research have resulted in GMO's escaping outdoors.I am also concerned that MAF/MPI has in the past failed to adequately monitor such activities toensure that the operator is in full compliance with any conditions of approval (by ERMA/ the EPA).

When we already have evidence that NZ researchers have failed to contain GMOs indoors, andwhen the potential risk of GMO infected material is potentially so serious, then I ask that anyoutdoor GE experiments or field trials be prohibited in our district/region until they have proven tobe safe and without the serious unwanted effects being observed around the world ie. Roundupresistant seed needing increasingly heavy use of Roundup to manage crop weeds with consequentemergence of super-weeds requiring the use of even more toxic herbicides to control weeds.

4. The proposed plan changes also states:2. Financial AccountabilityTo ensure that a resource consent granted for the Field Trials of a GMO is subjectto conditions that ensures that the consent holder is financially accountable (to theextent possible) for any adverse effects associated with the activity, includingclean-up costs and remediation, including via the use of bonds

Please can you clarify what you mean by “to the extent possible”? Does this mean that if thecompany or individual files for bankruptcy that they will not be held accountable? To increase thelevel of protection for local industry, I ask Council to insist that GMO growers and researchersobtain proof of substantial insurance cover to extend at least 3 years past the end of the trials sothat any nasty surprises do not become the liability of affected non-GMO parties. The amount ofthe insurance to be not less than a stated amount, say $20m, and based on researched evidence ofthe typical total costs incurred (including court costs).

I consider it to be critical that those who wish to experiment with GMOs outdoors (such as in fieldtrials) should have to prove financial fitness, should post a substantive bond, and be personally andfinancially liable for unintended/unforeseen adverse impacts of EPA approved outdoor GEactivities. Again, I prefer outright prohibition of all EPA approved outdoor GE experiments/fieldtrials.

5. The proposed plan goes on to address risk avoidance, stating:3. Risk AvoidanceTo ensure that a resource consent granted for the Field Trials of a GMO is subjectto conditions that serve to avoid, as far as can reasonably be achieved, risk to theenvironment from the use, storage, cultivation, harvesting, processing ortransportation of a GMO.

Does this mean that if a grower or researcher can demonstrate that they took every reasonablemeasure to avoid a problem, that they will not be held accountable? If so, I would ask that it bemade clear in the council plan that any problem created by a GMO grower or researcher, nomatter how careful they have been, will still render them completely liable for any adverseconsequences. My view is that if GMO growers and researchers want to gamble with other people'senvironment, livelihood and lives then they need to be aware that the risks and the costs are whollytheirs.

Again, I prefer outright prohibition of all outdoor use of GMOs and I ask that even those who wantto experiment with GMOs in the laboratory have to meet stringent, strict liability requirements(rules in WDC and FNDC district plans)

6. The proposed plan changes address liability as follows:5. LiabilityTo require consent holders for a GMO activity to be liable (to the extent possible)for any adverse effects caused beyond the site for which consent has beengranted for the activity.

Again, using the phrase, “to the extent possible”, I would ask that a substantial and pre-statedamount of insurance be insisted upon that continues for at least 3 years after the trial, and that thisamount is based on research showing how much the total clean up, reimbursement and legal costsare reasonably likely to be. I also ask that anyone who wishes to experiment with GMOs outdoorshas to meet strict liability requirements imposed by our council. I note again that I want to see alloutdoor GE experiments/field trials classed a prohibited activity (rather than discretionary).

7. Lastly, the proposed plan changes address the issue of an adaptive approach:6. Adaptive ApproachTo adopt an adaptive approach to the management of the outdoor use, storage,cultivation, harvesting, processing or transportation of a GMO in the district throughperiodic reviews of these plan provisions, particularly if new information on thebenefits and/or adverse effects of a GMO activity becomes available.

An adaptive approach seems sensible, however, can it also be made clear that any adaptivechanges which lead to the incurring of costs by the GMO grower and researchers will have to beborne by them alone and that consent to proceed is given on the basis that there will be no legal orfinancial come-back on the council for any new adaptive changes that the council see fit toimplement – even if the GMO growers and researchers disagree. I strongly support a very strongstrict liability regime and i want to see all outdoor use of GMOs in our district/ region classed a

prohibited activity, due to the serious environmental and economic risks incurred through outdooruse of GMOs. Reputable overseas evidence has shown that it is impossible to contain transgenicpollution, and outdoor GE field trials are not actually "in containment" as the transgenic plantshave their roots in the soils, and there are many vectors for contamination (ie. Wind, pollen, seeds,machinery, soils, storage, human error)

Thank you. I wish to be heard and would like to be kept informed.

John Clarke Date: 17/8/2014

From: [email protected]: Mail RoomSubject: Form 5 - Submission on a change proposed to the District Plan - Information submittedDate: Monday, 18 August 2014 10:41:20 a.m.



* Plan Change Name


* Postal Address

Telephone Number

E-Mail * I could not gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission* I am not directly affected by an effect of the subject matter of the submission that a) adverselyaffects the environment; and b) does not relate to trade competition or the effects to tradecompetition * The specific provisions of the Plan Change that relate to my submission are

I support the proposed Plan Change 18 in its entirety. * I support the specific provision listed above.* My reasons are The science addressing safety for field trials and growing of GE crops is not satisfactory.The science addressing safety of food products is not satisfactory.The science surrounding the long term effects of GMO crops of any kind, on the environment andhuman consumption of the produce is not satisfactory.The economics benefits of New Zealand remaining a boutique food supplier in the world, as GMOfree, are vitally important * State the decision you wish Council to make to ensure the issues you raise can bedealt with (i.e. give precise details of what you would like included or deleted from the plan)I support the proposed Plan Change 18 in its entirety.* I wish to be heard in support of my submission No


No

Submission Date


18

GMO Plan chenge

Robin Lieffering

R D 4, Whangarei 0174

09 4340 751

18/08/2014



From: Trish MonahanTo: Mail RoomSubject: Whangarei District Council proposed GMO Plan change #131Date: Wednesday, 20 August 2014 11:19:13 a.m.

Submission on theWhangarei District Council proposed GMO Plan change #131

Trish Monahan28 Landing RoadKerikeri 0230

Email;[email protected]

I support the excellent WDC / FNDC collaborative GMO Plan changebut want any EPA approved outdoor GE experiments or field trialsprohibited as well as all GMO releases prohibited.

I believe organically grown food to be the best deal for human health,the ecology, the environment and the economy. This is compromisedby any release of GMOs.

GMOs have been promoted for the benefit overseas corporations to theexclusion of ethical, moral, and spiritual considerationsand history shows this always leads to disaster.



mailto:Email;[email protected]


From: neilTo: Mail RoomSubject: Whangarei District Council proposed GMO Plan change #131Date: Wednesday, 20 August 2014 7:57:02 a.m.

Submission on theWhangarei District Council proposed GMO Plan change #131

Neil Thomas28 Landing RoadKerikeri 0230

Email; [email protected]

I support the excellent WDC / FNDC collaborative GMO Plan changebut want any EPA approved outdoor GE experiments or field trialsprohibited as well as all GMO releases prohibited.

I believe organically grown food to be the best deal for human health,the ecology, the environment and the economy. This is compromisedby any release of GMOs.

GMOs have been promoted for the benefit overseas corporations to theexclusion of ethical, moral, and spiritual considerationsand history shows this always leads to disaster.

Thanks

Neil Thomas




From: [email protected]: Mail RoomSubject: Form 5 - Submission on a change proposed to the District Plan - Information submittedDate: Wednesday, 20 August 2014 3:19:35 p.m.



* Plan Change Name


* Postal Address


* I could not gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission* I am not directly affected by an effect of the subject matter of the submission that a) adverselyaffects the environment; and b) does not relate to trade competition or the effects to tradecompetition * The specific provisions of the Plan Change that relate to my submission areMy submission pertains to the provisions of the Plan Change which will ban all GMO releasesand make any EPA approved outdoor GE experiments/field trials a discretionary activity, subjectto additional local requirements beyond those required by the HSNO Act. * I seek ammendment to the specific provision listed above.* My reasons are While this provision is an excellent start, I believe our local biosecurity, our unique biodiversity,existing non-GE primary producers, our economy and the public health need further protection from the risks associated with the outdooruse of GMOs * State the decision you wish Council to make to ensure the issues you raise can bedealt with (i.e. give precise details of what you would like included or deleted from the plan)I support the excellent WDC / FNDC collaborative GMO Plan change but want any EPA approvedoutdoor GE experiments or field trials prohibited, in addition to the ban prohibiting all GMOreleases.* I wish to be heard in support of my submission Yes


Yes

Submission Date


131

Genetically Modified Organis…

Sean Phillip Wilhelm Stanley

123 Worsnop RoadRuatangata R.D.6Whangarei 0176

[email protected]

20/08/2014



From: [email protected]: Mail RoomSubject: Form 5 - Submission on a change proposed to the District Plan - Information submittedDate: Wednesday, 20 August 2014 3:15:00 p.m.



* Plan Change Name


* Postal Address


* I could not gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission* I am not directly affected by an effect of the subject matter of the submission that a) adverselyaffects the environment; and b) does not relate to trade competition or the effects to tradecompetition * The specific provisions of the Plan Change that relate to my submission areMy submission relates to the provisions of the Plan Change to make EPA approved outdoorGE experiments/field trials a discretionary activity, subject to additional localrequirements beyond those required by the HSNO Act, and to ban the release of GMOs. * I seek ammendment to the specific provision listed above.* My reasons are While this provision is an excellent start, I believe our local biosecurity, biodiversity, existing non-GE primary producers, economy and the public health need further protection from the risksassociated with the outdoor use of GMOs. * State the decision you wish Council to make to ensure the issues you raise can bedealt with (i.e. give precise details of what you would like included or deleted from the plan)I support the excellent WDC / FNDC collaborative GMO Plan Change, but want any EPA approvedoutdoor GE experiments or field trials classed as Prohibited Activity, in addition to GMO releasesbeing prohibited.* I wish to be heard in support of my submission Yes


Yes

Submission Date


131

Genetically Modified Organis…

Rowan Nola Catherine Stanley

123 Worsnop RoadRuatangata R.D.6Whangarei 0176

[email protected]

20/08/2014



From: Terry GoodallTo: Mail RoomSubject: Personal submission to Proposed Plan Change 131 - Genetically Modified OrganismsDate: Thursday, 21 August 2014 2:10:47 p.m.

Please accept this personal submission. I have followed the format of Form 5, re Cl 6 RMA 1991

I wish to congratulate the elected WDC members for proposing this plan change, apparentlycontrary to the wishes of central government, and several large "vested interests".

Terry Goodall, 094073356, [email protected], 91 Rangitane Loop Rd, RD1 Kerikeri 0294

I wish to be heard, at a Far North location. I will consider presenting a joint case with authors ofsimilar submissions.

I could not gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission.

I am NOT affected by any effect of the subject matter in the submission that adversely affects theenvironment or relates to trade competition or its effects.

I support the excellent WDC/FNDC collaborative GMO Plan change, but want any EPA-approvedoutdoor GE experiments or field trials prohibited as well as all GMO releases prohibited.

Thank you for receiving my submission - I hope there will be many more from concerned citizens ofNorthland.

Warm regards

Terry Goodall(CT Goodall)

21 August 2014



From: Terry & Ali GoodallTo: Mail RoomSubject: Personal Submission re Proposed Plan Change 131 - GMOsDate: Thursday, 21 August 2014 2:23:35 p.m.

Please accept this personal submission. I have followed the format of Form 5, re Cl 6 RMA 1991

I wish to congratulate the elected WDC members for proposing this plan change, apparentlycontrary to the wishes of central government, and several large "vested interests". I am alsodelighted that this proposed change is in line with that published in the Proposed Unitary Plan forAuckland City

Ali Goodall, 094073356, [email protected], 91 Rangitane Loop Rd, RD1 Kerikeri 0294

I wish to be heard, at a Far North location. I will consider presenting a joint case with authors ofsimilar submissions.


I am NOT affected by any effect of the subject matter in the submission that adversely affects theenvironment or relates to trade competition or its effects.

I support the excellent WDC/FNDC collaborative GMO Plan change, but want any EPA-approvedoutdoor GE experiments or field trials prohibited as well as all GMO releases prohibited.

I appreciate the opportunity to state my views as a concerned citizen of Northland, New Zealand.And I do mean - concerned! (there are many aspects to this....)

("signed")

Ali Goodall(Alison M Goodall)

21/08/2014



From: [email protected]: Mail RoomSubject: Form 5 - Submission on a change proposed to the District Plan - Information submittedDate: Friday, 22 August 2014 1:21:58 p.m.



* Plan Change Name


* Postal Address


* I could not gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission* I am directly affected by an effect of the subject matter of the submission that a) adverselyaffects the environment; and b) does not relate to trade competition or the effects to tradecompetition * The specific provisions of the Plan Change that relate to my submission are• A description of the purpose and expectations of the new GMO chapter, which is to manage theoutdoor use of GMOs.• Eligibility rules that outline what GMO activities are covered and what GMO activities are notcovered by the new provisions.• Notification criteria, which states that all applications for resource consent under the proposedGMO provisions must be publicly notified.• Objectives specifying outcomes sought for the outdoor use of GMOs.• Policies specifying courses of action to achieve outcomes sought for the outdoor use of GMOs.• Information requirements for applications for GMO field trials.• General development and performance standards outlining minimum controls without limitingthe discretion reserved to Council.• Particular matters to be considered when determining the amount of bond required and amonitoring strategy for a GMO discretionary activity.

New definitions to be inserted into chapter 4, meaning of words in the District Plan for thefollowing terms:• Field Trials (tests)• Genetically Modified Organism and GMO• Release• Environmental Protection Authority and EPA• Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act and HSNO

* I support the specific provision listed above.* My reasons are No independent trials on GMOs has shown them to be safe in the environment or in the foodchain. In fact, independent trials on gmos intended for the food chain have shown that they arefar from safe.

Also, independent research has shown that gmos will spread into and change the genetic makeupof native and other species. * State the decision you wish Council to make to ensure the issues you raise can bedealt with (i.e. give precise details of what you would like included or deleted from the plan)

I generally support the WDC / FNDC collaborative GMO Plan change but want any EPA approved

#131

PROPOSED GMO Plan change

Asta Wistrand

757 Diggers Valley RoadR D 1Kaitaia 0481

[email protected]



outdoor GE experiments or field trials prohibited as well as all GMO releases prohibited.

* I wish to be heard in support of my submission Yes


No

Submission Date


22/08/2014

-----Original Message----- From: Jane [mailto:[email protected]]; Sent: 26/08/2014 9:50:43 a.m. To: Mail Room [mailto:[email protected]]; Subject: GMO submission

Please find attached my submission on GMOs



Jane Cunningham

144 Harris Rd

RD5

Whangarei

I wish to be heard


I support the WDC/FNDC collaborative GMO plan change but want any EPA approved outdorr GE experiments or field trials prohibitied as well as all GMO releases prohibited.

I am strongly opposed to the use of GMO in any circumstance and believe our region has a great chance to take a strong stand against this.

Thank you for receiving this submission.

Yours sincerely

Jane Cunningham

26.8.2014

FAR NORTH ORGANIC GROWERS & PRODUCERS Soc. (Inc.) P.O. Box 157, Kaitaia 0441, Northland, New Zealand Website: www.farnorthorganics.co.nz 26th August, 2014 Whangarei District Council Proposed Plan Change 131 Far North District Council Proposed Plan Change 18 We totally support the collaboration of Whangarei and Far North District Councils to strengthen existing precautionary stances, but want any EPA approved outdoor GE experiments or field trials prohibited as well as all GE/GMO releases prohibited.. We wish to see the release of GE/GMO’s made illegal and prohibited and ineligible for resource consent applications. Far North Organic Growers & Producers Soc (Inc.) have been in existence for 25 years, our members spending fifteen years questioning, researching and ultimately finding this irreversible pollution has not become any safer. We wish to continue to protect the health of our environment, our non-GE producers and members and the public health from the risks of outdoor use of GE/GMO’s. These excellent Plan Changes are in alignment with those of Auckland Council, which now have excellent precautionary and prohibitive GE provisions in its Proposed Unitary Plan. This collaboration of Councils will give Northland a corridor of protection and a head start to providing a safe production environment. We thank you for providing us with this opportunity to have a say in this collaborative GE/GMO Plan Change. We do not wish to be heard Kristen Khaine (FNOG Secretary & Certification Manager for FNOG & Far North OFNZ) 155 Wells Rd, R.D.2, Kaitaia 0482 09 408 4212 [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]�


From: Tibor [mailto:[email protected]];

Sent: 26/08/2014 12:56:48 p.m.


Subject: GMO in Northland - NO - GMO Plan change #131

to:

Planning Department,

Attn: Melissa Needham

Whangarei District Council

Private Bag 9023

Whangarei 0148

Dear SMadam,

Dear Sir,

My name is

Tibor Vogel

16 The Ridge

Kerikeri

I wish to be heard.


I support the excellent WDC / FNDC collaborative GMO Plan change but

want any EPA approved outdoor GE experiments or field trials prohibited

as well as all GMO !!!

releases prohibited.

Your name and the date

Kind regards

Tibor Vogel



From: Yannick WakelamTo: Mail RoomSubject: Fwd: Submission GMODate: Tuesday, August 26, 2014 10:27:38 AM

Subject: Whangarei District Council proposed GMO Plan change #131

Submission on theProposed Plan Change 18 – Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

Yannick Wakelam314 Waipapa [email protected]

26 August, 2014

To whom it may concern,

I support the excellent WDC / FNDC collaborative GMO Plan change, butwant any EPA approved outdoor GE experiments or field trials prohibited,as well as all GMO releases prohibited.

I believe organically grown food to be the best deal for human health,the ecology, the environment and the economy. This is compromised byany release of GMOs.

GMOs have been promoted for the benefit of overseas corporations to theexclusion of ethical, moral, and spiritual considerations

and history shows this always leads to disaster.

Yours sincerely

Yannick Wakelam




From: Finbar KiddleTo: Mail RoomCc: Natasha TodSubject: Submission on proposed Plan Change 131 – Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)Date: Thursday, 28 August 2014 8:51:20 a.m.Attachments: Submission to WDC on Plan Change 131.pdf

Hello Please find attached a submission on proposed Plan Change 131 – Genetically ModifiedOrganisms (GMO). The attachment contains the submission from Hon Amy Adams, Minister for the Environment,and a letter from Glenn Wigley, Director of the Environmental Systems Directorate at theMinistry for the Environment. This letter contains the relevant contact information for thesubmission. I have also mailed a hard copy of the submission to you. Regards, Finbar Kiddle – Policy Analyst, Environmental Risk and InnovationMinistry for the Environment – Manatu Mo Te TaiaoDDI: 04 439 7758 Website: www.mfe.govt.nz23 Kate Sheppard Place, PO Box 10362, Wellington 6143

P Please consider the environment before printing this email

*********************************************************************************************

Please Note: The information contained in this e-mail message and any attached files may be confid*entialinformation, and may also be the subject of legal professional privilege. It is not necessarily the official view of theMinistry for the Environment. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this e-mail isunauthorised. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and delete theoriginal. Thank you.

*********************************************************************************************




http://www.mfe.govt.nz/

From: Ross ClarkTo: Mail Room; [email protected]: Proposed GMO Plan Change 131 & 18, WDC & FNDC respectively.Date: Thursday, 28 August 2014 3:06:35 p.m.Attachments: WDCFNDCGEsubmission 2014.docx

Planning Dept, WDC - attention Melissa Needham; FNDC attention TammyWooster

Dear Mesdames,Attached is my submission for the above

Thank you

Ross Clark09 4343782




14th August 2014 Planning Department, Whangarei District Council Attn: Melissa Needham District Plan Department Far North District Council Attn: Tammy Wooster Dear Mesdames, WDC – Proposed GMO Plan change # 131; FNDC Proposed GMO change #18 I am Ross Gordon Clark, 1504 Ngunguru Road, RD 3, Whangarei 0173, Email [email protected] (previously [email protected]) I wish to be heard and advise I could not gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission. I support the excellent WDC/FNDC collaborative GMO Plan change. I would further ask that any EPA approved outdoor GE experiments or field trials are prohibited, as well as the prohibition of all GMO releases. Executive Summary

• My submission supports the inclusion of a GE precautionary clause • GE brings concerns for the environment, for human and animal health and for the future

resilience of our communities. • The proclaimed benefits of GMO’s are refutted • Civilisations need to respond to the future uncertainties of extreme weather and fuel/energy

supplies. • Building inclusive resilient communities is one response instigated by the global Transition

Movement. • Local food production is a major component of this resilience • There is growing global demand for ‘real’ food • Current industrial farming and genetically modified organisms will not achieve the above. • A unique market opportunity exists for New Zealand which would be severely curtailed with

the introduction of GE. • Once GE systems are released, there is no turning back, thus the requirement for a

precautionary clause. • The precautionary concept is a globally accepted concept of a conservative approach when

faced with uncertainties. • There is covert influence of governments by large corporates to further their own goals thus

local councils must reflect the democratic wishes of their constituents.


My background

Higher education at Lincoln Agriculture College, Canterbury, graduating in Diploma I & II (Gold medallist) and Valuation and Farm Management and subsequent career of farm supervision and valuation.

Thus I have great respect for the efficiency and ability of NZ farmers and appreciate the vital importance of the industry to New Zealand.

I have no personal involvement/conflict of interest with the subject of this issue. My concern is as a private individual for the long term future of Northland, New Zealand and indeed all civilisation and the planet. I am currently involved with the Transition Movement.

The Transition Movement is a global grass roots response to build resilient, inclusive communities to cope with the future uncertainties with the transition from a fossil-energy-intense system.

Introduction

Science has proven beyond doubt that the global climate is gradually changing in unprecedented ways due to increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Uncertainty exists with the timeframe and extent, but it is widely accepted that our civilisation will need to adapt to increases in sea level and increased frequency and severity of storms/droughts.

In New Zealand, whilst agriculture is the backbone of the economy, it also is the largest source of emissions at some 50 per cent of the national total of which 30 per cent is nitrous oxide (being fertiliser and urine). The balance is methane released from animals' mouths as part of normal digestion and when manure is stored in effluent ponds.

Interrelated and occurring simultaneously to these, are further uncertainties such as the future availability/cost of fossil fuels which will have a major impact on food production. There has been an increased awareness of detrimental ‘externalities’ effects on the environment; these include the much publicized decreasing water quality, pesticide/weedicide effects on health, declining bees, deforestation, ocean acidification, erosion and species decline.

With global leaders being slow to react, communities will need to adapt to a very uncertain future. One such response is the Transition Movement initiatives to build inclusive resilient communities. Local food production will be a major requirement of this resilience and the introduction of GE food systems may be detrimental to this goal.

Modern Food Production

In New Zealand, capital gain is a major part of the return to farmers which has created the need for huge financial investment/liability required to enter the industry with the subsequent pressure to produce and adopt ‘industrial’ farming methods.

Industrial farming means predominantly mono – culture, big machinery/low labour input, high gross returns but equally high gross inputs such as chemical fertiliser, weed and pesticides, animal health products, energy etc – currently all dependant on cheap fossil fuel energy.

Industrial farming has meant major changes. Performance per animal has been replaced by production per hectare. Nitrogen used to be supplied to pastures via legume clovers, it is now supplied from a hopper. The less labour intensive methods have meant a subsequent decline in rural populations, resulting in a detrimental effect on rural communities. The pressure to meet financial goals, aggravated by extreme weather advents, has brought stress to farmers and their families.

Banks and the present global financial system, together with large corporate companies are the driving force of this equation with their product control and need for shareholder profit.

There is now also strong evidence that the large corporate covert influence of governments is eroding democracy to the point of taking legal action to prevent communities deciding their destiny – a further justification for precautionary clauses in local council plans.

Corporate Genetic Engineering

Overseas, industrial farming is driven by corporate companies aimed at maximising their profit from the sale of their products by ‘controlling’ the industry. The introduction of GE systems is a major component of this.

The main arguments against the introduction of GE systems will be well covered by other submissions but briefly:

Environmental and health concerns: Crops modified to resist Roundup (glyphosate) weedicide have become resistant requiring increased application. Glyphosate has proven not to break down in the soil as advertised. A French Court ruled against Monsanto for false advertising. Glyphosate has been found in water supplies, human foetus and several European Countries have now banned its use.

There is growing medical evidence of the detrimental human health effects due to our chemicals in the food chain, glyphosate being a major one. Such is the volume of this evidence, it is a field of its own best left to medical experts to present, but it is readily available for those that have a position of responsibility in the GE issue.

Animals are also affected. GE food was proven to cause cancer in rats but corporate power/money forced the withdrawal of the published results, not because they were wrong, but because of the small size of the trial – ironically a similar sized trial to that used by chemical companies to support their products. What is ‘Good Science’ is also another subject on its own, outside this report.

Crops modified to resist pests have now become susceptible to a resistant pest strain. BT corn , a GE modified crop to resist root worm and used by three quarters of US farmers, is now susceptible to the worm. Similarly, GE seeds modified to withstand weedicides, the weeds have built up resistance. Thus the requirement for higher application rates and/or GE “new and improved” chemicals which in turn will develop inevitable resistance. Thus the genetically engineered seeds (GMO) the companies produce eventually increase the weed and pesticide usage, not decrease it. Their profit requires the sale of chemicals. It is effectively ‘Planned Obsolescence’

Economics: Increased production with GE crops has not been sustained and has not kept pace with increased input costs. These costs include the now ‘patented’ corporate controlled GE seed and required increased rates of weed and pesticides. Non GE crops are proving more productive and profitable.

Many small farmers have been forced out of business having a huge detrimental effect on rural communities. Cross fertilization has occurred to adjoining non GE farmers resulting in corporate law suit tactics that are far from ethical.

Market: Research at Lincoln University has recently shown there is a growing global demand for ‘real food’. Real food can be described as natural, unprocessed, un-modified and free of chemicals – nutrient dense food. New Zealand can tap into this demand – as an isolated island nation we have the ability to prevent contamination. We are one of the few, if not the only, countries to not have commercially released GMOs. We already have the brand “100% Pure” – why not use it? It is a unique marketing opportunity, also available to Northland, that would be weakened, if not demolished, with the introduction of GE systems.

Future

How will NZ farming adapt to the future uncertainty of climate and cheap available fossil fuel energy? It need not be all ‘doom and gloom’ if one thinks of a ‘move back to the future’. Picture more labour intensive production methods creating an urban drift back to building stronger and resilient rural communities, less financial stress, better farmer, animal and environmental health – is that a bad thing?

Small is good.

There are increasing examples of farmers that have chosen a less intensive operation, accepting lower gross returns but with less inputs costs meaning little change in the net financial result. This has proven a plus for both the farmer and the environment.

Without the need for chemical inputs, the soil and production are built around the natural microbial actions. There is the added benefit of carbon sequestration, a plus for present carbon emissions. Some consider the latter could be a major contribution to mitigating climate change. Lincoln University research shows huge potential to use land management to alter CO2 and nitrous oxide emissions in New Zealand.

An often voiced argument is that industrial farming on a large scale is required to feed the world but this has been proven, not to be the case:

International research 2007 by IAASTD (International Assessment of Agriculture Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development) found that small scale organic farming was the only way to feed the world plus the development of locally-based, ecological agriculture provided better support for farmers.

UNCTAD (United Nations Commission on Trade and Development) – “Trade and Environment Review 2013 – Wake up before it is too late” came to a similar conclusion concluding that “Business as Usual is Not an Option,” and that an urgent shift towards ecological agriculture was necessary for food security and climate resilience.

Local, non-GMO, fresh food grown on small, organic farms are better designed to take care of the farmer, the community and the environment. Besides NZ farmers may not get the choice. Modern industrial farming inputs heavily rely on cheap and available fossil fuels, the future of which is very uncertain.

Summary

To date our elected leaders throughout the world have taken little action to mitigate the uncertainties that civilisations face. It has been left to global grass-root movements, such as Transition Towns, to instigate stronger resilient communities. Future local food production will be a vital part of this resilience and NZ has a strong position to provide real food to itself and other nations. The introduction of GE crops into NZ would be counter-productive to this potential. The evidence of the detrimental effects of GE organisms is steadily growing. Therefore communities such as Northland, have to ban such introductions, or at the very least, include a precautionary provision in our Regional and District Plans.

Thank you,

Ross Clark

From - Whangarei...PS. I wish to be heard * State the decision you wish Council to make to ensure...

Documents

Transcript of From - Whangarei...PS. I wish to be heard * State the decision you wish Council to make to ensure...