Poo in the creek.

[J Dory]

So having just returned from 3 weeks in NZ, majority of which was spent in the North, I wanted to give my renewed impressions on this topic. I was at a beach in Whananaki North, there was a sign stating swimming was not recommended due to fecal contamination from stock and birds. I was disgusted. However there wasn't a dairy farm for miles. In fact, with a bit more digging, turns out 99% of waterways on dairy farms are fully fenced. Goal is 100% to be fenced within a short time frame. Driving through the metal backroads between Whananaki North and South (all of Rodney and Northland for that matter), you notice the waterways that aren't fenced. They are almost all on beef or sheep farms. My (less than scientific) conclusion, as dairy farming is economically viable, dairy farmers can afford to properly fence waterways to prevent fecal contamination. Beef and sheep farming is much more marginal, and increasingly undertaken on more rugged terrain. I'd suggest these farms are more likely to be sources of fecal contamination in NZ waterways. This is of course a separate issue to that of fertilizer run off due to intensification. However from my short time in NZ, I don't feel this is what kiwis are primarily concerned about. Ecoli in our swimming and seafood spots seems to be the main beef (see what i did there).

Perhaps the energy being spent directing anger at "rich" dairy farmers would be better spent understanding the real problem and looking at real solutions. Lots of what were traditionally sheep and beef farms up north have gone to the wall, been sold off as lifestyle blocks or converted to dairy. Many of them that still exist won't be in a financial position to fence waterways. I'm not sure what the solution is, but understanding the real source of the problem would be a good start.

[J Dory]

On a related note. Instead of undertaking the task of understanding the source of contamination and addressing it, the government has chosen to redefine what polluted means.

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/on-the-in ... 'swimmable'

I don't usually vote in the NZ election, seemed unfair given my longstanding non-residence, but will this year. These guys have to go.

[morepork]

It's a little more complicated than just shitting in the water. All intensive farming practices are culpable, it is just that dairy has exploded more than others. The whole picture affects nutrient cycles.....fertilizer, tapping into the water table, and run off from piss and shit.

As for the government moving the goal posts......are you really surprised. Science be bad in NZ agricultural public relations.

[jared_7]

On a related note. Instead of undertaking the task of understanding the source of contamination and addressing it, the government has chosen to redefine what polluted means.

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/on-the-in ... 'swimmable'

I don't usually vote in the NZ election, seemed unfair given my longstanding non-residence, but will this year. These guys have to go.

Can you vote in the election? Last time round I'm sure I found something that said I had to have resided in NZ within the last 3 years? So I didn't.

To be honest, JD, whether its dairy or cattle farming I don't really care. I just want something done about it. And this group saying its these guys, and them saying its those other guys, and them saying city folk need to get off their back - the end result is sweet fuck all. Its a bit like the climate change debate, we've known the issues for over 50 years but have spent that time arguing whether its man made or not, like it matters one bit to the result.

Something should be done, and yes I'm certain that redefining what polluted means is not the right answer. But at least setting a target, any target, means they accept its an issue.

[J Dory]

http://www.elections.org.nz/voters/get- ... e-overseas

You are eligible to enrol and vote from overseas if you:

are 18 years of age or older,
have lived in New Zealand for more than one year continuously at some time in your life,
and are either:

a New Zealand citizen who has been in New Zealand at any point in the past three years,or
a New Zealand permanent resident who has been in New Zealand at any point in the past 12 months.

Have you been there on vacation in the last three years?

[jared_7]

Ahhh OK, so thats why; hadn't been back for 4 years last time. This time the election will sneak in a few months before my cutoff.

Cheers

[J Dory]

To be honest, JD, whether its dairy or cattle farming I don't really care.

I just want something done about it. And this group saying its these guys, and them saying its those other guys, and them saying city folk need to get off their back - the end result is sweet fuck all. Its a bit like the climate change debate, we've known the issues for over 50 years but have spent that time arguing whether its man made or not, like it matters one bit to the result.

I agree that the problem needs to be fixed, I want something done too, as I said, I was disgusted, sickened even to see the no swimming sign. The question is, how do we do it? The only viable way I can see is by tracing the pollution to the source and addressing the source on an individual basis. For water contamination at least, surely we can measure pollutants and trace them back "upstream" to establish where they come from.

The point of my original post was, targeting dairy farming won't solve the problem if it isn't the fucking problem.

[J Dory]

Seems I'm to be voting in the Helensville electorate, John Keys old digs. Any chance of anyone other than his replacement winning the electorate?

Haley Holt for the greens and Kurt Taogaga for labour are the representatives listed so far. Can't say I know anything about either of them.

[Spy]

Helensville is safe Nat, not that it matters under mmp. Your vote still counts. Where did you get 99% dairy waterways fenced stat?

[J Dory]

The point of my original post was, targeting dairy farming won't solve the problem if it isn't the fucking problem.

Yes, it fucking is and you driving around a bit doesn't prove a goddamned thing.

Oh it's proof you're after, let's have yours then.

[J Dory]

Helensville is safe Nat, not that it matters under mmp. Your vote still counts. Where did you get 99% dairy waterways fenced stat?

Fair question, most likely social media, let me see if I can dig it up.

[J Dory]

Helensville is safe Nat, not that it matters under mmp. Your vote still counts. Where did you get 99% dairy waterways fenced stat?

Fair question, most likely social media, let me see if I can dig it up.

Found this, though that's not what I saw....still digging.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming ... -waterways

[J Dory]

Yes, it fucking is and you driving around a bit doesn't prove a goddamned thing.

Oh it's proof you're after, let's have yours then.

Besides the various reports on the issue, including this one from the Ministry of Environment?

I'd put more stock in those than "I drove around a bit."

Did you read the report?

[J Dory]

Like, this part?

"High-producing pastures and stock (cows), combined with high stock densities, mean that contaminant losses to fresh water are often greater per hectare of dairy land compared with other land uses. For example, dairying land occupies only 22 per cent of the land area in Waikato, but it is estimated by Environment Waikato to account for 68 per cent of nitrogen and 42 per cent of phosphorus entering the waterways of the region (Environment Waikato, 2008). And although daily faecal loads to land are broadly similar for most types of stock animal (eg, dairy cattle, beef cattle, sheep and deer), the loadings from direct deposition to water are greatest from stock crossings (Wilcock, 2006), which are typically more active on dairy farms."

So you didn't read it.

I'm really not interested in getting into one of your internet cock fights dude. Why don't you take a break from the keyboard, maybe drive round a bit? Would do you good.

[morepork]

Jared's analogy re-climate change is pretty apt. The impact of intensive pastoral farming practices is readily apparent. Has been for some time:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24197562

NIWA provide the only real longitudinal water quality data, but they are squeezed hard by the government who act in concert with Fonterra and other big co-ops to run PR interference (sorry JD....it's true). The clean water accord that hasn't yet come into full effect was in response to campaigns that sought to provide hard data that got through the Gummint/corporate PR filter.

https://www.niwa.co.nz/publications/wa/ ... our-rivers

"Pastoral farming – which accounts for 40 percent of New Zealand’s land area – is undoubtedly the main source of diffuse pollution. Evidence from the NRWQN and catchment studies generally show a gradient in water quality from excellent in native forest, to good in plantation forest, to poor in pastoral and urban streams. Streams in dairy land are among the most polluted."

"There is no doubt that our declining river water quality over the last 20 years is associated with intensification of pastoral farming and the conversion of drystock farmland to dairy farming, particularly in Waikato, Southland, and Canterbury. For example, between 1992 and 2002, the number of cows in Waikato increased by 37 percent; during the same period nitrogen levels in the region’s streams increased by 40 percent and phosphorus levels went up by 25 percent."


It's not all down to dairy, but if we realistically want to do something about this, we must addressing the major sources. Some water sources are just about fucked beyond repair, and we haven't even scratched the surface for water table data. It should be noted that Northland is relatively clean, but I can tell you that Canterbury and Southland are pretty grim in places. The lowland water is just shocking. Thank fuck for the Southern Alps or else the whole island would be one massive converted toilet.

[J Dory]

Jared's analogy re-climate change is pretty apt. The impact of intensive pastoral farming practices is readily apparent. Has been for some time:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24197562

NIWA provide the only real longitudinal water quality data, but they are squeezed hard by the government who act in concert with Fonterra and other big co-ops to run PR interference (sorry JD....it's true). The clean water accord that hasn't yet come into full effect was in response to campaigns that sought to provide hard data that got through the Gummint/corporate PR filter.

https://www.niwa.co.nz/publications/wa/ ... our-rivers

"Pastoral farming – which accounts for 40 percent of New Zealand’s land area – is undoubtedly the main source of diffuse pollution. Evidence from the NRWQN and catchment studies generally show a gradient in water quality from excellent in native forest, to good in plantation forest, to poor in pastoral and urban streams. Streams in dairy land are among the most polluted."

"There is no doubt that our declining river water quality over the last 20 years is associated with intensification of pastoral farming and the conversion of drystock farmland to dairy farming, particularly in Waikato, Southland, and Canterbury. For example, between 1992 and 2002, the number of cows in Waikato increased by 37 percent; during the same period nitrogen levels in the region’s streams increased by 40 percent and phosphorus levels went up by 25 percent."


It's not all down to dairy, but if we realistically want to do something about this, we must addressing the major sources. Some water sources are just about fucked beyond repair, and we haven't even scratched the surface for water table data. It should be noted that Northland is relatively clean, but I can tell you that Canterbury and Southland are pretty grim in places. The lowland water is just shocking. Thank fuck for the Southern Alps or else the whole island would be one massive converted toilet.

Fairymuff.

This report is from 2010, Cas's is from 2009, I feel like there's been significant progress on dairy farms since then, but that's based on what I've seen from my own family and farms in the region. Am I being naive?

[J Dory]

Like, this part?

"High-producing pastures and stock (cows), combined with high stock densities, mean that contaminant losses to fresh water are often greater per hectare of dairy land compared with other land uses. For example, dairying land occupies only 22 per cent of the land area in Waikato, but it is estimated by Environment Waikato to account for 68 per cent of nitrogen and 42 per cent of phosphorus entering the waterways of the region (Environment Waikato, 2008). And although daily faecal loads to land are broadly similar for most types of stock animal (eg, dairy cattle, beef cattle, sheep and deer), the loadings from direct deposition to water are greatest from stock crossings (Wilcock, 2006), which are typically more active on dairy farms."

So you didn't read it.

I'm really not interested in getting into one of your internet cock fights dude. Why don't you take a break from the keyboard, maybe drive round a bit? Would do you good.

What's quite telling is that you're in complete denial of the impact of farming on water quality. The MfE report is quite explicit in linking declining water quality to farming, and in its summary, take note of high concentrations of E.coli in the water. Are you employed by Fed. Farmers, or something? Does your name start with "C" and end with "olin English?"

I'm curious as to what your evidence is, in proving that farming has had a minimal impact on water quality.

No I'm not you twat.

[morepork]

There has been progress in terms of riparian fencing and planting. The effects of this will take some time to manifest, and I think what I am trying to reinforce is that the pace of land conversions is much faster than the ecosystem can deal with and there very much is a tipping point. This has to be made clear and fuck PR and shareholders. The reason that there isn't a lot in the way of current up to date data is twofold: firstly, longitudinal data is much much more powerful than an individual snapshot. That's what makes NIWAS 20-year plus monitoring program so vital for hard data. The second reason is that the Government has clamped down on scientific dissent. That is no conspiracy theory, that is withholding resources for proper environmental monitoring. If they capitulated to the dairy lobby we would lose the one data set that we have that approached anything resembling objective. Then we really would be up shit creek without a paddle.

[morepork]

Keep in mind that
1. One of the most prominent lobbyists for the dairy industry is Colin English, brother to PM Bill.
2. Journalists such as Rachel Stewart who have extensively covered the issues have found themselves subject to harrassment and threats.

I did not know that.

[J Dory]

There has been progress in terms of riparian fencing and planting. The effects of this will take some time to manifest, and I think what I am trying to reinforce is that the pace of land conversions is much faster than the ecosystem can deal with and there very much is a tipping point. This has to be made clear and fuck PR and shareholders. The reason that there isn't a lot in the way of current up to date data is twofold: firstly, longitudinal data is much much more powerful than an individual snapshot. That's what makes NIWAS 20-year plus monitoring program so vital for hard data. The second reason is that the Government has clamped down on scientific dissent. That is no conspiracy theory, that is withholding resources for proper environmental monitoring. If they capitulated to the dairy lobby we would lose the one data set that we have that approached anything resembling objective. Then we really would be up shit creek without a paddle.

Yeah the 2009 study Cas linked was supposed to be a baseline for subsequent studies for the 16 or so catchments monitored. Either the subsequent monitoring didn't take place, or the data has been tucked away somewhere so it's not easily found. Reminds me of our ex Prime Minister here in Canada, the right horrible Stephen Fuckface Harper. His suppression of science in the name of business was trailblazing.

[Spy]

Good science MP. Sounds from that NIWA link that the best and easiest solutions are the most obvious: fencing off and planting up waterways. What's holding this back?

[J Dory]

Good science MP. Sounds from that NIWA link that the best and easiest solutions are the most obvious: fencing off and planting up waterways. What's holding this back?

I don't think it is being held back, on dairy farms at least. Culvits and bridges for crossings, fencing of waterways, it's been going full bore ahead driven primarily by Fonterra but also by council regulation. It doesn't address the issue of nitrogen and phosphates leaching into groundwater and waterways and I don't know if there is a similar initiative on non-dairy farms.

Cas mentioned fines in environment court, my guess would be they are for effluent spills into waterways. I'm not sure how often that occurs, but punishment needs to be significant enough to act as a deterrent.

[morepork]

It's culvert you mutant.

There has been a lack of a comprehensive management strategy for the rapid intensification of the last 15-20 years. Piss and shit as well as superphosphate, sucking the life out of the water table are all putting a massive strain on the system. Farmers enter into a cooperative, borrow up to the tits to set up, and are constantly on the brink of insolvency depending on the price of a crude raw product. The government has steamrolled environmental regulations meaning we are now having to triage. Fences and planting are excellent, but there needs to be so much more. Bear in mind that industry lobby groups bankrolled by corporate dollars know that is costs less in the short term to contribute financially to a ruling political party under a promise of deregulation and make flash bullshit adds to keep data from the public mind than it is to invest in a controlled environmentally compliant practice.

[morepork]

Bloody townies. This is what happens to dialogue in the absence of hard data. The criticism extends both ways, by the way, but the darts aimed at Mike Joy are particularly depressing from an empirical point of view. Mr. Emmerson unfortunately elects to ignore the common ground in the fecal Venn diagram, namely, that one has to have the means to accommodate the shyte and pish that comes with rapidly expanding populations in order for the existing infrastructure to be sustainable. Fuck off with the criticism of payment for the initiative as well. Fonterra, if you want to monopolise farming, to force farmers to be part of your cult, and be afforded the luxury of influencing legislation, then stump up for the privilege and help them out you ballbags.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/ ... d=11810906

[J Dory]

Does Alan Emerson work for Fonterra?