Transparent Overseer is called for to regulate water quality

A report on whether Overseer is suitable for use in regulation to help clean up New Zealand’s rivers and lakes  has been released by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Simon Upton.

The report recommends that if the Government wants Overseer to be used as a regulatory tool, several issues must be addressed.  It also calls for greater transparency.

“It is time to open up Overseer,” Mr Upton says. “If the Government wants to see the model being used as a regulatory tool then a large measure of transparency is needed.”

Overseer was originally developed as a farm management tool to calculate nutrient loss but is increasingly being used by councils in regulation. Excessive nutrient run-off from farms has an impact on the health of waterways.

To ensure cleaner water, farmers and regional councils need to be confident that Overseer’s outputs are reliable,  Mr Upton said.

“To help build confidence there needs to be more transparency around how the model operates. Any model operates with a measure of uncertainty. That’s normal. The question is whether the level of uncertainty is an acceptable one.

“Confidence in Overseer can only be improved by opening up its workings to greater scrutiny.

“It will take time to improve Overseer and provide transparency around how it operates. In the meantime, regional councils can continue to use it but they need to be aware of its limitations.”

The Overseer and regulatory oversight report finds that important elements of the model are not open for review, and some gaps and shortcomings need to be addressed.

Other issues that must be addressed for Overseer to be used as a regulatory tool include:

  • Commissioning a comprehensive evaluation to ensure the Overseer model is independently peer reviewed, and is subject to sensitivity and uncertainty analysis;
  • Providing greater transparency around how the model works;
  • Aligning Overseer’s ownership, governance and funding arrangements with the transparency required for it to be used as a regulatory tool;
  • Providing official guidance on how Overseer should be used by regional councils.

Source:  Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, 


EPA aims to establish modern chemical management system for NZ

The Environmental Protection Authority is pressing ahead with its programme of work to create a modern chemical management system for New Zealand.

The approach features in the EPA’s latest Annual Report alongside key activities that span consumer safety around hazardous substances, its risk assessment approach; an extensive chemical reassessments programme and a prototype chemical atlas to map New Zealand’s chemical loading by geographic region.

The authority’s Annual Report covers a wide range of activities including:

  • The introduction and issuing of Caution Notices that signal to New Zealanders when extra vigilance is needed around the use of certain common chemicals.
  • The Safer Homes Programme which aims to help families stay safe around household chemical products.
  • Workshops for importers, suppliers and operators of low-cost stores to promote a better understanding of their obligations under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) Act.
  • The public release of the decision to grant, subject to conditions, marine consents and marine discharge consents to Trans-Tasman Resources Ltd. This set a record of 13,733 submissions.
  • Two Boards of Inquiry for the East West Link and Northern Corridor Proposals of National Significance, both in Auckland.
  • The investigation into fire-fighting foams manufactured using PFOS or PFOA.
  • The approval of a genetically-modified virus Telomelysin, as part of a clinical trial for patients with advanced and inoperable melanoma.

Source: Environmental Protection Authority

The fuss about beef feedlots in NZ – experts give their views

Intensive beef farming is the latest farming practice to be called into question by animal welfare activists in a spate of news items.

Most of New Zealand’s beef herd are entirely grass-fed, but there are some feedlots around the country where cattle are sent to spend their final few months fattening up on grains.

Animal rights group SAFE released images last week of the Five Star Beef Ltd feedlot near Ashburton, using them to call for a ban on feedlots in New Zealand. The group has concerns about animal welfare and says the system puts our international reputation at risk, while Fish and Game are worried about the environmental impacts of the farming system.

The Science Media Centre asked experts about the need for feedlots, their environmental impact and the influence of consumer attitudes on farming systems.

  • Dr Dave Houlbrooke, AgResearch science team leader for Environmental Research, comments:

How are feedlot systems used in New Zealand?

“There has been limited research about feedlots established in New Zealand, and the few feedlot operations there are here are typically different in scale to those we see overseas.

“We are not aware of any trend towards more of this type of farming system in NZ. Clearly there is a perceived advantage in some markets where the meat is recognised as coming from animals raised on pasture in New Zealand, but equally there are markets where grain-fed product has an advantage.”

Does farming this way change the meat?

“The meat will be different where the farming system is different, but that difference will depend on the feed used and how long the animals spend in the feedlots compared to being farmed on pasture.”

What are the environmental impacts of this type of farming compared to pasture-fed cattle or dairy?

“It’s important that feedlots are designed for drainage and for effluent to be captured and stored according to good practice guidelines that are already in place for standoff and feed pads which we see commonly in New Zealand. Where a good system like this is in place, the feedlots can present an advantage in less urine patches on the ground that result in nitrate leaching.”

Conflict of interest statement: AgResearch has commercial relationships with meat producers, including those who operate or are involved with feedlot systems in New Zealand.

  • Dr Anne Galloway, Associate Professor, Design for Social Innovation, Victoria University of Wellington comments:

How important are consumer attitudes towards farming styles?

“New Zealand livestock farming’s social license to operate is strongly influenced by consumer attitudes towards different farming styles. Current concerns about beef feedlot operations highlight the role that cultural values play in any public controversy.

“The large majority of New Zealand beef is produced in extensive, pasture-based systems that reinforce the cultural value of ‘clean and green’ food production. Any alternative can be seen by consumers as a betrayal of their values.

“Intensive farming feedlots, even if only used rarely and for short periods, can be seen by consumers as unnatural and therefore undesirable. As long as consumers see feedlots as a threat to animal welfare or the environment, they are also considered to be unsustainable and therefore unacceptable.

“Farmer and industry responses to these consumer concerns can be seen as defensive or evasive if they only justify existing practices and fail to address perceived conflicts in values, or what people believe to be important and good.

“As long as producers and consumers are seen to have incompatible cultural values, conflict resolution may remain elusive and largely immune to ‘evidence-based’ arguments. This does not necessarily mean that scientific research is being ignored or denied in favour of emotional responses, but rather that there is a breakdown in trust that there is a shared set of cultural values that will keep people fed, animals cared for, and the environment protected.”

Conflict of interest statement: None.

Source: Science Media Centre

Meeting the challenge of how NZ can reduce its agricultural emissions

The Royal Society of New Zealand, which is featuring its Annual Collection of Reviews on its website, this week is highlighting an article by Professor Hong Di FRSNZ and reviewing the potential of inhibiting ammonia oxidisers to significantly reduce nitrogen leaching and emissions in grazing pastures.

In the review article, ‘Ammonia oxidisers and their inhibition to reduce nitrogen losses in grazed grassland: a review‘, Professors Hong Di and Keith Cameron, from Lincoln University’s Centre for Soil and Environmental Research, discuss evidence from the laboratory, and in the field that demonstrates the efficacy of using nitrification inhibitors on pastures to reduce nitrogen leaching and emissions, as well as the roles played by different ammonia oxidisers.

The post says:

Nitrous oxide is a potent greenhouse gas with a long-term global warming potential 265–298 times that of carbon dioxide. The dominant source of nitrogen leaching and emissions is through animal excrement, with urine making up about 80% of the nitrogen released back into the pasture. About 70-80% of the nitrogen ingested by the animals is returned to the soil.

In New Zealand our dominant land use is pastoral agriculture. Animals graze the land throughout the year and a large chunk of our economy is built upon the agricultural industry. Accordingly, as New Zealand works towards becoming a low-emissions economy by 2050, finding effective ways to mitigate our agricultural emissions is a significant goal for society to work towards.

A single urination from a cow produces a nitrate deposit well beyond what can be utilised by plants. This surplus is prone to leaching after it is converted to nitrates, or lost as nitrous oxide gas. Most of the nitrate in animal urine is urea, which is swiftly converted to ammonia when deposited in the soil.

When the urea in the urine hits the surface of the ground, it becomes ammonium (NH4+) and is adsorbed into negatively charged soil cation surfaces, meaning there is minimal leaching in soils with good cation exchange capacity. However, in the soil the ammonium is oxidised quickly and a process known as nitrification occurs. As nitrate is an anion, it is not retained by the negatively charged soil particles, this means when drainage occurs it is leached out of the soil into groundwater or surface waters and will contribute to water contamination. Nitrous oxide is also produced as a byproduct through the denitrification process that occurs alongside the leaching.

If a nitrification inhibitor (NI) is applied to the soil to inhibit ammonia oxidation (the first step of the nitrification process), this can lower the concentrations of NO3 and nitrous oxide emissions caused by nitrification and denitrification.

Significant advances have been made in understanding the role of different ammonia oxidisers, including ammonia oxidising bacteria (AOB) and ammonia oxidising archaea (AOA). Archaea organisms are a relatively recent addition to our understanding of life on earth, and were discovered in the 1970s.

For well over a century it was believed that the nitrification process was mostly carried out by a bacteria called chemolithoautotrophic ammonia oxidising bacteria (meaning a type of microbe that utilises chemicals from the soil—in this case from ammonia, to make food for themselves).

But the discovery that archaea have the gene (amoA) to produce an important enzyme for oxidising ammonia (ammonia monooxygenase) has suggesed archaea may have more of an important role in nitrification than previously thought.

Populations of archaea carrying the ammonia oxidising gene were found to be much more abundant than the AOB in a range of soils, which suggested the archaea play a greater role in the oxidisation of ammonia than AOB. However, recent research targeting the amoA gene have shown that the abundance and activity of AOA and AOB fluctuate depending on the soil and environmental conditions.

Professor Di and his team conducted a study of intensively grazed New Zealand dairy pastures. They collected evidence that AOB grew significantly in number and activity in response to cattle urine, whereas the AOA did not appear to increase upon coming into contact with the urine.

Di’s research team also found that the AOB was significantly inhibited by applying a nitrate inhibitor called dicyandimide (DCD). In his review article Professor Di suggests that AOB and AOA prefer different soil and nitrogen conditions to grow and thrive in, with AOB playing a dominant role in grazed grassland and AOA in soils which are highly acidic or low in nitrate.

The nitrate inhibitor DCD is not currently in commercial use in New Zealand but has proven to effective in reducing nitrate leaching by 44–77% in a variety of rainfall conditions. DCD is awaiting the establishment of a standard for food by the UN Food and Agriculture association before it can be put into commercial use for New Zealand farmers.

The low toxicity of DCD make it an appealing environmental technology, which also has economic benefits of increasing nitrogen use efficiency and pasture dry matter yield. The review article suggests that future research should be investigated to deepen our understanding of the amoA gene, search for potential new nitrate inhibitors, and further understanding of how pasture responds.

Professor Hong Di is Professor of Soil and Environmental Science at Lincoln University and was made a Fellow of Royal Society Te Apārangi in 2016. His major research areas include nitrous oxide emissions, nitrate leaching and relationships with soil microbial communities in agroecosystems.

The review article ‘Ammonia oxidisers and their inhibition to reduce nitrogen losses in grazed grassland: a review’ has been published in Ngā Kete and is available free-to-access for a limited time at Taylor and Francis Online.

Source: Royal Society of New Zealand



Ministers’ Letter of Expectations to the EPA for 2018/19

Environment Minister David Parker and Associate Environment Minister Eugenie Sage have sent the Environmental Protection Authority a formal ‘Letter of Expectations for the 2018/19 Financial Year’

This letter outlines their high-level priorities and operational expectations of the EPA over the year. These expectations will aid the EPA’s Board in its strategic planning.

For more detailed information please read the Letter of Expectations (pdf 1.83MB)

Source: Environmental Protection Authority


Good farming practice plan a step forward for water quality

A plan to help farmers and growers reduce their impact on fresh water, through good farming practices, was launched today.

The Good Farming Practice: Action Plan for Water Quality commits to supporting all farmers and growers to implement good practice principles that will reduce their impact on our freshwater.

The Action Plan, jointly developed by primary sector groups, Regional Councils and the Ministries of Environment and Primary Industries, is a positive step by the primary sector towards improving the health of New Zealand’s waterways, Environment Minister David Parker said.

“This initiative sets out practical measures farmers and growers can take, and also commits them to monitoring and reporting on progress,” Mr Parker said.

“It is intended to ensure that all farmers adopt the good practices needed to protect our rivers.”

Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor said the Good Farming Practice principles in the Action Plan “are not a stretch for many farmers and growers”.

“The difference is that this plan intends to reach those who are not yet using these good farming practices, for whatever reason.

“The aim is that all farmers and growers develop and implement a farm environment plan that identifies the risk areas for water quality on their property and sets out the actions needed to address those risks,” Damien O’Connor said.

Mr Parker said some Regional Councils already required some farmers to have farm environment plans.

“This Action Plan is expected to accelerate the uptake of good farming practices across all catchments, ahead of any regulation. I look forward to regular reports on progress.”

The Action Plan Governance Group responsible for the plan includes representatives of Beef+Lamb NZ, Dairy NZ, Federated Farmers, Horticulture New Zealand, Irrigation New Zealand, Regional Councils and the Ministries for the Environment and Primary Industries.

Source: Ministers of Environment and Agriculture

Budget provides $15m extra for the Sustainable Farming Fund

Budget 2018 includes $15 million of new operating funding over the next four years for the Sustainable Farming Fund to support more inspiring ideas in applied research and extension projects that deliver economic, environmental and social benefits for New Zealand.

In a joint press statement to announce this, Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor and Climate Change Minister James Shaw say the Government is investing in projects to build sustainability, productivity and resilience across the primary sector as the Government works alongside farmers and rural communities to provide leadership on some of New Zealand’s most pressing issues.

The Sustainable Farming Fund (SFF) encourages unique collaborations among farmers and growers, scientists and researchers, iwi, local government and others who are making a real difference for our rural communities and the wider primary industries, Mr O’Connor says.

“There has been a massive oversubscription to the fund in recent years, meaning good projects aren’t getting a look-in because the previous Government did not provide enough investment for the fund,” he says.

“In the last SFF round, 86 eligible applications were received but only 28 of these could be accepted.”

Mr Shaw says these projects are led by those on the front line and help find ways to optimise the use of the country’s natural resources and protect the environment for future generations.

“We have set an ambitious target for New Zealand to become a net-zero-emissions economy by 2050,” Mr Shaw says.

“A range of forward-looking measures are required to achieve this. Cleaner, smarter farming is central to our plan for sustainable growth.”

Mr O’Connor says the SFF funding boost builds on work the Government has already prioritised.

Last year, he announced the pilot for SFF Tere, which translates to “be quick, swift or fast”.

“Smaller producers are often key innovators, and four SFF Tere projects are already progressing,” Mr O/Connor says.

“I’m looking forward to doing more to help our primary sector increase value and resilience, with a head start on ever-changing consumer tastes.”

The move announced today was included in the Confidence and Supply Agreement between Labour and the Green Party.

Mr Shaw says the Government is committed to partnering with the agricultural sector to achieve shared goals for sustainability, modernisation and profitability.

“This boost to the Sustainable Farming Fund injects fresh energy into projects that explore how to farm less intensively and more in tune with the environment, while retaining profitability.”

Find out more about the Sustainable Farming Fund at