Gore's Iconic Brown Trout Statue Latest Victim Of Township's Drinking Water Crisis
Greenpeace has also rebranded the 'Welcome to Gore' sign, which now reads 'Welcome to Gore - where dirty dairy wrecked the water'.
Last Friday, residents of Gore were issued a do-not-drink notice after their town water supply exceeded 11.3 mg/L of nitrate, which is the legal limit set in the 1950s to avoid blue baby syndrome. While this notice has since been lifted, Greenpeace warns that it is only a matter of time before this happens again.
Greenpeace spokesperson Will Appelbe says "The dirty dairy industry has wrecked Gore's drinking water, putting people's health at risk due to nitrate contamination. It is unacceptable that this community is increasingly unable to drink the water coming out of their kitchen taps. Gore's giant brown trout statue is now a beacon of the industry's pollution of drinking water."
A growing body of scientific evidence has linked several health risks with long term exposure to nitrate at levels below the current legal limits. Long-term exposure to nitrate in drinking water at levels as low as 1 mg/L has been linked to an increased risk of bowel cancer, and this risk increases with higher levels of nitrate. At levels of nitrate above 5 mg/L, the New Zealand College of Midwives advises pregnant people to consider an alternative source of drinking water, because of an increased risk of preterm birth.
Appelbe says, " Two years ago, we offered free nitrate tests to Gore residents, and found that 45% of the samples we tested from the town supply were above 4 mg/L of nitrate. Since then, levels of nitrate contamination have more than doubled, to above 10 mg/L.
"This problem isn't going to go away simply by diluting the water - for many rural communities, nitrate contamination will get worse unless action is taken to address the source of the pollution: the intensive dairy industry, led by Fonterra.
"There are too many cows and the industry is using too much synthetic nitrogen fertiliser. Nitrate contamination across the country is increasing as a result, particularly in rural areas.
"We need regional councils and the Government to take action now. But instead of protecting people's drinking water, Luxon's Government is attempting to weaken freshwater protections. They've proposed removing the cap on synthetic nitrogen fertiliser, which will enable dairy expansion. That means more cows, more fertiliser, and ultimately more contaminated drinking water."
Greenpeace is calling on the Government to scrap its proposed changes to the National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management and the National Environmental Standards for Freshwater, which are currently going through consultation. The organisation says that these changes will make freshwater pollution worse, impacting lakes, rivers, and drinking water across the country.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsroom
6 hours ago
- Newsroom
Making heated tobacco products cheaper than cigarettes is no scandal
Opinion: The Government's decision to introduce a lower excise rate for heated tobacco products (HTPs) has been widely framed as 'giving tax breaks to tobacco companies'. It's a provocative line – and politically potent – but it doesn't help us have an honest, evidence-informed discussion about how to reduce smoking harm, particularly for the most disadvantaged New Zealanders, or how to deal with conflicts of interest. Let's be clear: this isn't a corporate subsidy, so long as the reduced tax is passed on with cheaper products. It's an excise adjustment applied to a class of tobacco products that heat rather than burn tobacco. (Like vaping products, HTPs are marketed as smoke-free alternatives to cigarettes, but are not the same thing.) Combustion is what makes smoking lethal. Cigarettes burn at over 800C, releasing thousands of toxic compounds. Heated tobacco products operate at much lower temperatures and don't produce smoke – just an aerosol – with far fewer harmful constituents. That distinction matters. The multinational tobacco company Philip Morris does hold a monopoly over HTPs in New Zealand. That's not ideal, but it doesn't mean the tax policy exists for Philip Morris International. The intention is to make a less harmful product more affordable than cigarettes – a principle long accepted in tobacco harm reduction, and already applied to vaping. Unfortunately, it appears Philip Morris International hasn't yet passed on the tax savings to the small number of HTP users in New Zealand – this is the real scandal. In addition, the apparent impact of PMI on government policy is tough to ignore, and contrary to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which seeks to protect government policy from tobacco industry influence. New Zealand has rightly taxed cigarettes heavily to deter use. But excise taxes are also regressive. The remaining people who smoke – fewer than 7 percent of adults – are disproportionately Māori, Pasifika, low-income, and more likely to experience mental health distress. The associate minister of health, Casey Costello, justified the excise differential by citing relative harm reduction and the growing inequity of uniform excise. Her reasoning deserves more attention than it has been given. Critics argue there's insufficient evidence that HTPs help people quit, but the UK Office for Health Improvement and Disabilities, the UK Committee on Toxicity, and the US Food and Drug Administration all acknowledge HTPs reduce exposure to toxicants compared with cigarettes. That doesn't make them harmless – but being less harmful than smoking is enough to warrant a differential tax. The example of Japan is instructive. There, HTPs make up over 30 percent of tobacco sales. Though vaping is banned, cigarette consumption has plummeted by 40 percent in some markets. Surveys suggest many smokers switched completely to HTPs. Youth uptake has been minimal. No policy is perfect, but that's a shift in the right direction. What's really at stake here? Not a tax break for big tobacco – but increasing the options for people who smoke and want to quit, and whether we believe in a response to nicotine products based on their comparative risks to human health as a foundation for public health policy. A more productive debate would ask: • Are they less harmful than cigarettes, and do they help smokers quit? • Are tax savings being passed on to consumers? • Are HTPs being promoted responsibly? • Will there be an independent evaluation of their impact on smoking rates? In a country that leads the world with its Smokefree 2025 goal, we should be asking how to accelerate the decline in smoking, not defending a one-size-fits-all excise regime that's increasingly disconnected from the realities of risk, behaviour, and equity. If HTPs can help some people switch, pricing them appropriately is not a scandal. It's a good policy – provided it's transparent, monitored, and grounded in evidence, and the tax savings are passed on to consumers.
NZ Herald
6 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Majority of Government's $231m spend on Advanced Technology Institute funded through planned research funding cuts
Funding is reallocated from: Endeavour Fund – $13.489m (from 2028/29) Health Research Fund – $11.487m (from 2028/29) Marsden Fund – $15.119m (in 2028/29) New to R&D Grant – $18.084m across 2025–2028 Callaghan Innovation Operations – $24.336m across 2027–2029 Contract Management – $3m across 2026–2029 In addition, $37.537m is being reprioritised from the Strategic Science Investment Fund from the 2025/26 financial year to the 2028/29 financial year, from contracts coming to an end over the three years. Funding for the new research agency is also being made up of $21.603m from unallocated funding for the National Science Challenge. In a statement, the Public Service Association union expressed disappointment in the move, adding the Government was 'trying to quietly cut funding from respected and established research funds'. PSA national secretary Fleur Fitzsimons said scientists rely on these funds for ground-breaking work and they deserve ongoing support. 'The Government says it wants kickstart our economy with investment in science, meanwhile chopping science off at the knees and hoping no one will notice,' Fitzsimons said. 'It's robbing Peter to pay Paul, raiding science funds without providing the increased funding science needs to drive growth. The economy will be worse off and we will keep losing scientists to other countries which value them.' Similar concerns were expressed by physicist Dr Ben Wylie-van Eerd, speaking for the Save Science Coalition. In an interview, he said it would have been nice if the Government was clear this was partially a reprioritisation when it made this announcement. 'It's quite disappointing,' he said. 'I feel massively let down by learning this.' Wylie-van Eerd said he was particularly upset about plans to reduce the total of the Marsden Fund, which he said was an area for 'complete blue-skies research' that did not necessarily have to have any commercial outcomes. Green Party science spokesman Scott Willis said the Health Research Fund supported research into kidney disease, diabetes and epilepsy. He also expressed concern over reduction in funding for the Endeavour Fund, which supports climate research. Willis said it appeared the Government was 'shuffling funding' and the changes seen last year and proposed over the coming years will weaken the science system and its capacity. 'We definitely need investment in science for the public good,' he said, and issues such as health, the climate and the cost of living would not be solved by 'science-for-profit'. In a statement, Reti, the minister in charge of the reforms, said what was taking place was important. 'Reform of our decades-old science system, including the establishment of the New Zealand Institute for Advanced Technology, is a priority for the Government's economic agenda,' he said. 'Previously, New Zealand has been slow to focus on the role of advanced technologies across the economy and investment in the potential of advanced technologies has been under-weighted within the research and innovation system.' Reti said the Government was continuing to support public good science and a strong economy would allow for more choices. When the announcement of the new institute was made, the Government said the importance of a return on investment was a significant focus. Last month, the Government announced it was committing $231m over four years to the new tech institute, aiming to focus on artificial intelligence, quantum technologies and innovation that could lead to economic growth. At the time of the announcement, Reti confirmed about $80m was being leveraged from Callaghan Innovation. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said the country needed to embrace new technologies and that it 'will actually make our businesses and our research much more commercial and actually improve productivity'. Budget 2025 allocated $20m across two financial years for the establishment of four new Public Research Organisations (PROs), of which the Advanced Technology Institute is one. Last year, the then Science, Innovation and Technology Minister Judith Collins said the contestable Endeavour Fund, which is proposed to lose about $13m in the advanced technology institute changes, was being updated to 'grow the economy'. 'Commercialisation is essential to realising the social and economic potential of our science, innovation and technology system. I look forward to learning more about the impactful projects funded through future funding rounds,' Collins said. Azaria Howell is a multimedia reporter working from Parliament's press gallery. She joined NZME in 2022 and became a Newstalk ZB political reporter in late 2024, with a keen interest in public service agency reform and government spending.
NZ Herald
6 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Letters: AT needs to find a solution that works for disability card-holders
Nicky Foster, Blockhouse Bay. Two-tiered health system The health system has become two-tiered. One for the haves and another for the have-nots, or to use the PM's language, one for the wealthy and sorted and another for the bottom feeders. I had an aortic valve replacement 13 years ago. To begin with, as a result of this operation, I was required to have it checked every two years and, for the past three years, once a year. I was to have a check-up at the beginning of the year, and when my doctor put in a request for this I received a letter from Health NZ to say they were short-staffed and I would be put on a list. Eight months have gone by. I asked my doctor what I should do and he said I could go private as it was important that I have the valve checked. This will cost me over one month's government super. Fortunately, I had some savings but I would not be able to afford this on an annual basis. What about those who do not have any savings? Are they supposed to go into a corner and wait to die? I believe a good, well-paid health system is possible. It is about priorities. A good health system saves money in the end. Mark Beale, Wattle Downs. Act Party's legacy I have always regarded David Seymour as the most astute and sophisticated politician in the House, but his mana is diminishing by the day with the bizarre policies his party is pursuing. His legacy when he departs next year will be getting dogs into beauty salons, spending thousands of dollars training operators for the cone hotline, and on staff checking the safety of children collecting eggs, while hundreds of people cannot pay their power bills because the Government cannot control the cost of living. But his latest effort, changing the wording of the Early Childhood Education Regulations to get parents back into the workforce, will presumably only result in thousands more joining the more than 210,000 on the JobSeeker benefit! Fiona Downes, Hobsonville. Luxon needs time I fail to understand why there are so many people critical of Chris Luxon and his coalition Government. I feel they have a very strong team, are trying very hard to get New Zealand back on track, and are already achieving quite a lot. We all must be supportive and give them time, even though we are doing things tough at present. Those who are critical of them must have very short memories of our previous Government, which was extremely divisive and irresponsible with the public purse, plunging the country into an uncontrollable level of debt. Warren Cossey, Morrinsville. Ferries making waves So, Auckland Council has said that any new ferries it gets will be diesel-powered, not electric. Well, I imagine next Shane Jones will announce legislation, to be passed under urgency of course, that all new or replacement ferries throughout the country must be powered by coal. The new mines will be open-cast, making them excellent visitor attractions, particularly in our national parks. The brilliance of this should take your breath away, as will the air quality. Keith L Muir, Mount Maunganui. Ban sale of fireworks In three months we will yet again be subjected to fires, frightened animals, noise, and money which could be spent on essentials being squandered on fireworks Guy Fawkes Day has no relevance to New Zealand. There is still time to ban the sale of fireworks. It is a no-brainer which surely should receive cross-party support Ray Gilbert, Pāpāmoa Beach.
