The Big Picture Presentation

8/11/2019 The Big Picture Presentation

1/47

Agriculture + Environment: NZ in 2014

1


2/47


3/47

National Level= Water

Reforms1. Fresh Start for Freshwater 2010 + National Policy

Statement in 2011 for Water + amended 2014

2. Allocation + Policy was not working, change happeningin less than 10 years..( Canterbury + Waikato Pine toPasture)

3. Land and Water Forum,(2010-2012)

4. National Objectives Framework (NOF)has set nationalenvironmental bottom lines(2013)water only fit for

secondary contact ?(boats + waders in all water bodies) butTOXIC Nlevels as bottom line.

Regional Councils must now go through community ledprocess to impose limits in each region.

(each new plan must give effect to community aspirations)3


4/47

The NZ Growth Agendaincrease contribution to GDP

from 30 to 40% 2025

By doubling the rate of agricultural

growth seen in past decade

4


5/47

Growth Agenda will Test Limits

Business Growth Agenda (AgExports to lift by 30% by 2025)(KPMG, 2013)

Double rate of growth to 7%CAGR compared with 3%CAGR past 20 years. (Ridett Institute, 2010)

Realising the Potential of960000 Ha of Maori OwnedLand(300,000 Ha class 4-6 land intensified tohigher performance each year for next 3 years)(Price Waterhouse Coopers, 2013)

Irrigation Infrastructure Fund(Govt + Crown Investment Schemes to

Accelerate Water Storage + Irrigation: eg:600,000 ha more Sth.Canterbury,)

5


6/47

INTENSIFYING VULNERABLE

LANDSCAPES CAN BE COSTLY

WE NEED TO BETTER MANAGE

PATHOGENS +

NITROGEN + PHOSPHORUS +

SEDIMENT

The public cost to fix these UP at endof catchment is 10-20X what i t costs to

m it igate on farm .

ALL 4 NEED MANAGEMENT. 6


7/47

Nitrate - through the Land

7


8/47

Nitrogen Flows Into Lake or Rivers.Over years or centuries

8


9/47Over the Land9


10/47

10


11/47

Phosphorus Detainment Bunds

11Dylan Clarke Photo


12/47

4: Stream in Wairarapa following intensive grazing pressure on saturated soils.

The stream fails to be protected by GAP. High risk of P loss to 2ndorder streams.

P loss risk will not be quantified by OVERSEER in this case

12

SENSITIVE STREAMS AND MARGINAL AREAS ARE STILL AT RISK


13/47

Stream Upper WaihouNot Protected by Accord : Provided by J Quin (NIWA)

13


14/47

14


15/47

Causes of decline in Freshwater Ecosystem Health

Increasing nutrient levels

Slow increases in P and N in a water ecosystem means moreprimary production in the water = (algal growth).

Eutrophication associated with nitrogen and phosphorus

pollution is undoubtedly one of the major threats to the

associated values of ecosystem health and life supportingcapacity in New Zealand

Nitrate nitrogen (N03-N) typically comprises the majority of the total N pool in rivers and is a form of dissolved nitrogen that is

readily used by primary producers such as periphyton


16/47

16


17/47

Across the

RegionsSimilar Issues

Same Vision for

NZ BUT being

played outdifferently in each

region..

17


18/47

NORTHLAND REGION =ICONIC COASTS

18

Not unexpectedly, the highest

concentrations of nutrients

were generally recorded at

sites located close

to freshwater inputs. (NRC SOE report 2012)


19/47

Dead zones where rivers meet sea

Water lacking oxygen lacks

life, which is why this area

is called the Dead Zone.

The oxygen-depleted

waters force fish and

wildlife to leave, while

bottomdwellers like Gulfshrimp often cannot escape

the Dead Zone and die.Scientists call this oxygen-depleted condition hypoxia

and it is getting worse in the Gulf. Sometimes the Dead

Zone grows larger than the state of Connecticut, nearly

5,800 square miles 19


20/47

BAY OF PLENTY

ICONIC LAKESBAY OF PLENTY +

WAIKATO

20

LAKE ROTORUA


21/47

LAKE TAUPOVariation 5

Grand parented N Loss to allland holders.

180 Tonne of N bought fromland owners + locked owners

into a historical N loss

$80 Million cost to ratepayers.

Unfair allocation system? 21

LAKE ROTORUA270 T N/yr to be removed from the lake

Pastoral Land Use will need to drop by

around 50% - 100T N/Yr paid for by

incentive scheme ($40Mill)

$5.5 Mill to help farmers plan.

By 2032managed reduction must be

achieved.


22/47

Waikato

WAIKATO RIVER

22


23/47

Parliamentary Commissioner for Envt.

"Even with best practice mitigation, the large-scaleconversion of more land to dairy farming willgenerally result in more degraded fresh water," (Wright2013.)

In catchments where there has been large-scale landuse change to dairy farming the gains made byincreased mitigation are swamped

Even 100% compliance with Fonterra's SustainableDairying Accord signed this year does not solve theproblem.

23


24/47

Rotorua State Highway 3024

THE UPPER WAIKATO CATCHMENT

= GROWTH WITH NO LIMITS

+ DECLINING WATER QUALITY

NEW ENTRANTS GRAB POLLUTION LOSS RIGHTS FROM ESTABLISHED FARMERS.

Established Farmers in the Upper Waikato Catchment may have to reduce nitrogen loss

by 30% just to make room for 25000 ha of conversions underway now. Even this action

will not be enough to protect the river.


25/47

Waikato River at Tutukau Road : 60K North of Taupo

25


26/47

Waikato River at

Cambridge

120 K Nth of Tutukau Rd

Clarity has decline by 1%

per year (fine sediment?)

E Coli(upper river)

+ N loads are increasing.

26


27/47

Upper Waikato Catchment

First Step is to Retard the Water Quality Decline

If we do nothing, then the N load leaching to

the hydro lakes in 2030 will be 70% higher

than that now

Bill Vant (EW) 2006

27

HAWKES BAY


28/47

Hawkes Bay

Tukituki River + Ruataniwha Dam Proposal - (800-1200 mm rainfall) 25000 ha

irrigated + 14000 ha intensified. Proposed Land Use 37% Dairy, 32% mixed arable,9% orchard/vineyard.

HAWKES BAY +

RUATANIWHA

DAM PROPOSAL

28


29/47

Hawkes Bay Regional Council

Originally sought to have N at TOXIC levels (3.8 mg/L)

Assumed that if P is managed then N can be toxic =contentious science.

EPA has ruled single nutrient(P only) management isinappropriate

2 weeks ago ruled that TWO NUTRIENTS (N + P) MUST

BE MANAGED and 0.8 mg/L N is the tukituki river limitto protect ecosystem health.

Land Use Capability is the Allocation System used for N.

29


30/47

Limits set to protect water health

Limits are based on FIT FOR PURPOSE.

In river nitrate - N limits are supposed to be set to

protect freshwater aquatic life + provide lifesupport capacity + maintain ecosystem health.

The limits have nothing to do withdrinking water for stock orhumans.

30


31/47

Real Story in Ruataniwha

Economic argument did not stack up

Land once converted will amount to $46000/Ha

No longer LOW COST DOWN UNDER due to price of land forpasture = $3800/TDM harvested vs $750/TDM in SW Vic

Cost of production using realisticfigures $5.00-5.50kg

Milksolids.

Add Debt servicing and require $9.00 kg MS long term to

be viable.

31


32/47

HORIZONS - Manawatu

Allocation of N limits based on Land UseCapabilityallocation of N by land class.

Nitrate N limits based on ecosystem healthguidelines for Manawatu River: 0.44 mg/L Nitratenitrogen

FARMING DOES HAVE TIME TO ADAPT.

32


33/47

CANTERBURY

33

70% of region is at risk or

overallocatedOrangeand RedZones

Selwyn and Hurunui River limits are

based on Toxic N Levels

All Farms grand parented N loss.


34/47

30% of shallow wells show N and

pathogen trends within a decade of

development

Ashburton has some of the highest

rates of gastro intestinal disease in

the developed world.

7 of the main rivers - algal blooms

2013 Summer= Not Swimmable.

70% of dairying is on shallow soils

in Canterbury

No Validation of OVERSEER for

these soils

Plans to double irrigation in the

region. 600000 Ha to 1200000 Ha

34


35/47

Managing to Limits:

Toxicity vs ecosystem healththe battle over nitrogen

This discussion is still to be had


36/47

National Objectives Framework

36


37/47

37


38/47

Over the past 20 years we have cleaned up POINT

SOURCE POLLUTIONBut, the effects of DIFFUSE

POLLUTON has overtaken these effects, to lead to

continued degradation of our water bodies.

38


39/47

Summary

Half of NZ is managing to ECOSYSTEM HEALTH LIMITS.

Otago, Horizons, Hawkes Bay, Taupo, Rotorua are now

configuring systems to farming within N limits.

Canterbury sub zone limits are still based on nitrogen TOXICITY.

The Waikato Catchment will be bound by the Vision andStrategy for the Waikato River

39

Resilient Farming for the Future


40/47

Resilient Farming for the Future

Tomorrows

FarmsToday

40


41/47

TOMORROWS FARMING TODAY

Upper Waikato catchment 25 farms/3 years

Increasing milk solids per hectare or per cow,stocking rate, N use, or total pasture harvested didnot correlate with higher profits in 2010-2012.

Keeping a low cost of production per kg MS hadthe biggest effect on return on capital.

Amongst the grouponly 3.5% of the variation inprofit could be explained by the variation in Nleaching.

41


42/47

Strongest Performers

Strong MS per ha and per cow.

>85% of bodyweight as MS from high tonnage of

home grown feed

Low cost of production per kg MS.($3.22 -3.71)

Low management & staff costs per cow

42


43/47

Volatilitymakes it hard work

WE NEED RESILIENT FARMING

+/- 25% change in milk price over three years

+/- 30% change in pasture harvested (non drought)

Drought (12-13) on some farms 40% drop in pastureharvested.

Changes to Overseer has made our job challenging

43


44/47

The Treadmill of Marginal Returns

more marginal

and riskier

returns result

Profit $

More fertiliser + more feed

+ more cows do not always

lead to more and more

milk.

44

INPUTS

h S


45/47

The Sweet ZoneBusiness Indicators

Risk

Sweet Zone

Profit (ROC)

Cow Liveweight per Hectare

Production

45


46/47

Jumping with out a plan can be planning to fail.


47/47

Plan together for resilience + farming within

ecosystem health limits.

Documents

The Big Picture Presentation