More on water shortages and drought in New Zealand

This is worth listening to because it describes what Pam and I have been describing, namely that such rain as we have been having is sufficient to give a flush of green but insufficient to moisten the subsoil.

It is my contention that we have seen droughts come and go within the context of a longer-term process of drying. The only basis I have for saying this are the observations we have been making over a few years at Makara and the Hutt 

River.

The official narrative does not back this up but talks only of the latest emergency. Every summer for a while now there has been a dry or drought somewhere in the country.

Name the last time when the summer was WETTER than usual.

Dry weather prompts push for water limits in Tasman

The Tasman District is to meet under urgency as drought conditions loom.

Radio NZ,

3 February, 2019

Water cuts of 50 percent will be in place from Monday for consent holders on the Waimea Plains, and will soon expand across the district as water flows run very low.

Mayor Richard Kempthorne said at the moment staff did not have the authority to enforce a water use bylaw that applied to householders.

Right now, it was against the rules in some areas to water gardens with a hose, but staff did not have the power to stop it.

Mr Kempthorne said this would be rectified at a special meeting.

"I requisitioned it as what we're looking at delivering is delegations to staff to give enforcement powers for the urban water bylaw that we have, because at the moment the staff don't have that authority to enforce the bylaw."

Mr Kempthorne said the district was on the verge of a significant water shortage, and for everyone in the community to be treated fairly when rationing came in, staff needed the ability to take action if people were not respecting the restrictions in place.

The council will act on tip-offs if people report others they see using hoses. Photo: 123RF

He said if people were seen hosing their gardens or lawns during a ban, or if there were green lawns that were obviously being watered, or any signs of excessive water use, then staff could step in.

He said it did not mean council staff would be driving around checking, but would rely on the usual means of acting on phone calls from residents and following up.

"It's not that the council would smack people with a fine, but to talk with homeowners to let them know there's a water shortage," Mr Kempthorne said.

"If people refuse to follow suit and do what's reasonable, then it gives staff the power to enforce."

He acknowledged some homeowners could have their own water tanks.

The Tasman council has recently signed off on a project to build a $105 million dam south of Richmond, ending almost two decades of planning and increased public opposition over growing costs.

Mr Kempthorne said once the dam was built, it would take exceptional circumstances to impose rationing on the Waimea Plains.

"There will be enough water for the irrigators, for the urban supply for Brightwater, Hope, Richmond and Māpua but we don't have it at the moment."

Crops struggling as Tasman region sees early drought

TV1 News,

28 January, 2019

Crops in the Tasman region are struggling with the region now in early drought and the driest region in New Zealand.

The Waimea Plains has been left parched as persistent winds and high temperatures drain much-needed moisture from the soil.

"The small, leafy [vegetables] - your lettuces, your spinaches and silverbeet - they're struggling. They're struggling," Mark Connor of Appleby Fresh said.

But the wait for water is only lengthening in the Tasman, and river water levels are getting low.

"Across the region, we're getting to the serious stage. All the rivers are what we call below mean annual low flow, so that's getting low," Tasman District Council's Dennis Bush-King said.

Marlborough District Council has also advised irrigators to monitor their usage and river levels closely.

The Rai River fell below its minimum flow level on Sunday, ceasing all 18 consented water takes.

Most other rivers in the district are dropping and may also become unavailable, including the Wairua River, affecting 39 consents.

Two weeks ago, the Nelson-Richmond area saw around four millimetres of rainfall, but it was dry leading up to that, and NIWA says the next seven to 10 days is expected to be dry overall.

Up in the hills, hikers have been advised to carry plenty of water, with tanks running dry along popular local trails at a number of huts and campsites.

Tasman Council-owned forests and popular Nelson tracks are now off-limits.

As the water recedes, the water restrictions are increasing, and parts of the region may soon have to cut their water consumption in half.

"Could be as early as next week, and that's when it really starts to bite and hurt," Mr Bush-King said.

Dry weather stressing Tasman farmers: 'Things aren't looking that flash'

The intense, hot weather at the top of the South Island has some farmers worried they could be on the brink of drought

New Zealand's American-style feedlot

I was not aware until very recently that we had this shit. 

The Canterbury I was brought up in with its sheep and 'mixed' farms is DEAD.

This is a disgrace.

Massive NZ feedlot non-compliant for months

New Zealand's only large-scale American style feedlot has been "technically non-compliant" for three months but is yet to be fined or prosecuted.

Radio NZ,

10 October, 2018

The Five Star Beef feedlot in Ashburton, owned by ANZCO, can farm up to 19,000 cattle on less than one square kilometre.

It has been there since 1991 and has been required to submit an report to Environment Canterbury (ECan) since at least 2005.

But its 2017 report was missing several key measures. 

ECan's Ashburton zone lead Janine Holland said: "Annual volumes of manure they're applying per hectare and its location on site, groundwater quality, monitoring of bores, and current and proposed management practices for the feedlot."

Ms Holland, despite having intimate knowledge of the feedlot's consent, said she didn't know why Five Star Beef had omitted the data.

The feedlot was widely criticised earlier this year, particularly by animal welfare groups, as having no place in a clean, green New Zealand.

Ms Holland described the feedlot as "technically non-compliant" because she said there was no evidence of environmental non-compliance.

However, there could be environmental non-compliance in the yet-to-be reported data.

Victoria University ecologist and senior researcher Mike Joy said red flag should come up when such a report made its way to a compliance officer's desk.

"What's completely lacking in the report is any methodology. Any freshwater scientist who looked at it would just walk away shaking their head going, 'We don't know what's happening here'.

"This report is so lacking in detail we can't be sure what's happening."

It is now known how the data is measured. 

ECan does not do its own identical tests to ensure the feedlot's self-reported data is accurate.

"The onus is on the consent holder to prove their compliance. It's a user pays system," Ms Holland said.

"We've got nearly 20,000 consents that we monitor across Canterbury."

Mr Joy said the feedlot's water bore samples were in excess of guideline values and several did not meet World Health Organisation limits for drinking water.

"So you could glean a little from it, but you could drive a truck through the gaps in the methodology."

There were repeated instances of copy-paste mistakes in the 2017 environmental report Five Star Beef provided to ECan. Some were very basic - the 2017 report's contents incorrectly read "2016".

The Five Star Beef feedlot is the biggest in New Zealand. Photo: Supplied / SAFE

Last year the feedlot's effluent pond overflowed in July, breaching its consent conditions. No enforcement action was taken.

Instead ECan made changes to the feedlot's conditions to allow it to happen again. 

"It's a temporary measure, part of the action plan that we're undertaking with Five Star Beef, which will be reviewed in December this year."

Mr Joy said that response is "indicative of a council that's not taking environmental issues around freshwater seriously".

Ms Holland said her team preferred to "work with" consent holders rather than issue penalties for non-compliance.

"We're working through remediating the data omissions and the other information that we need, and sorting those things within an appropriate time frame.

"And then we will be able to identify whether we need to take any further action."

ANZCO declined to be interviewed but in a statement its general manager of livestock and agriculture Grant Buntin, disputed ECan's version of events.

"This monitoring was addressed, and subsequent sample results were shown to be within consent parameters.

"Despite occurring in 2017 and being rectified, the non-compliance notice remains in place for a full calendar year and will expire at the end of 2018."

New Zealand's tanking economy

TVNZ
NZ Farming economy tightening belt

To watch video GO HERE

If you want to hear the politicians and talking heads GO HERE

NZ farmer suicides

John Key's "rockstar economy"

I want to relay this, without any specifiics, from a friend...

"Just been chatting with my friend ,R who lives just a few metres from your old place ....... he is also a financial advisor contracting to several rural lenders

R has a huge experience in banking and is now charged with helping farmers to recover from downwards spirals

He said that he has several clients who are near suicidal.

R is putting his resignation together tomorrow and from now on,will do part time consultants work"

Rural Networks Plan to Reduce Alarming Suicide Rates in Farmers

Scoop,

9 May, 2015

Rising pressures on farmers and alarming statistics that show depression is a real issue in rural communities has prompted rural organisations to get together to find real solutions.

A group of prominent rural networks have met to brainstorm on ways to promote farmer wellness. The group included Rural Women New Zealand, Federated Farmers, Dairy NZ, Dairy Women’s Network, Beef + Lamb NZ, AgResearch, Young Farmers, Rural Support Trusts, Farmsafe, Ministry for Primary Industries, New Zealand Rural General Practice Network, Rural Health Alliance Aotearoa New Zealand and FMG.

Several groups have committed policies and action plans on mental wellbeing and reducing farmer suicides, however the time has come to pool those resources and ideas into one holistic strategy that puts the farmer first.

The meeting highlighted the fact that the poorer outcomes in terms of mental health of people living in rural communities compared to urban centres in New Zealand is of major concern to the people living and working in those communities. Ministry of Health data shows the suicide rate for those living in rural areas is 16 per 100,000 people, compared to a rate of 11.2 per 100,000 people in urban areas.

The coalition wants to raise awareness of anxiety and depression in rural communities and to reduce the stigma associated with mental illness. Stigma is a serious issue and often prevents people seeking help when they need it.

It is expected that stronger connections and partnerships between the organisations will ensure better outcomes for those suffering from severe stress, anxiety, depression and suicide.

The downstream effects of anxiety and depression are numerous. Poorer decision making on farm, affecting animals and the whole farm system, must not be underrated. This often leads to poorer farm productivity and profitability. The most significant effect of course is on the family and those closest to the person affected.

The new coalition will explore the development of a Rural Health Policy, along the lines of the Australian framework.

Farmer suicides raise alarm

Farmer suicide statistics are a ''national disgrace'', and more funding is needed to deal with rural mental health, says Federated Farmers.

According to Statistics New Zealand figures from 2013, suicide rates are higher in rural areas at 16 per 100,000 people compared with 11.2 for every 100,000 people living in cities.

New Zealand's water

Who owns New Zealand’s water?

Wake Up NZ,

17 April, 2015

A recent expose by Campbell Live has shown New Zealanders the truth surrounding how water resources are allocated and profited from, which leaves us with the question, who owns New Zealand’s high quality fresh water?

The answer seems pretty simple, New Zealanders as a collective own the water. However, is this reflected in current council regulations in how water resources are allocated?

A Chinese owned bottling plant, One Pure has recently set up in the Hawke’s Bay and once operating at full capacity, will run 24/7 to export an expected 400 million litres of pristine aquifer water per year back to China. Fresh drinking water makes up only 2.5% of all water on the planet, with the remaining 97.5% being salt water. 


New Zealand has such a high quality of aquifer water that foreign investors are shipping millions of bottles out of the country per year, all of which has been taken at zero cost besides a tiny council resource consent. Surely our water should be allocated to New Zealanders, so our businesses and economy can benefit from our resources. Currently, this water will all be taken at the cost of New Zealanders at a time when water is increasingly becoming polluted around the country.

Thanks to intensive dairy farming, our rivers and lakes now have high concentrations of nutrients, sediments and faecal bacteria, and a result a large increase in algae blooms. Heavy amounts of fertilisers from farm run-off enters our waterways and causes destruction throughout the entire ecosystem. The result is half of New Zealand’s rivers and lakes are now of such poor water quality that they are a health hazard to swim in. This is all in a country which attempts to market itself internationally as ’100% Pure NZ’. The irrigation needs of these dairy farms is also sucking dry the rivers which support entire communities further down the line.

The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Jan Wright, recently released a water quality report focused on the two nutrient pollutants – nitrogen and phosphorus.

“On land they are valuable nutrients, helping plants to grow. But when there is too much of them in water, they become pollutants, and can lead to excessive growth of weeds, slime and algae.

“New Zealand is undergoing huge changes to land use and decision makers need to be aware of the consequences for the future.

“Over recent years, hundreds of thousands of hectares used for sheep and beef farming have been converted to dairy farming on the one hand, and forestry on the other.

“Conversion to dairying increases nutrient loads on water; conversion to forestry does the opposite.”

So who is to blame?

The council and government only see dollar signs and do not listen to the concerns raised by industry experts. The dairy farming lobby groups have a strong grip around the neck of the country, led by a government which relies heavily on the farmers for re-election. The government is also attempting to alter the Resource Management Act, which of course would also have a devastating effect on the protection of water resources and the environment going forward.

Fresh water will soon be the new gold, and we need to have much tighter council and government regulation around what companies can profit from our aquifers, what levels of nitrates and pollution will be allowed in waterways and what projects will have resource priorities. The changing climate is also going to put heavy pressure on water in New Zealand as summer droughts become more common and water restrictions placed on every day New Zealanders while foreign companies and farmers still have full water resource consents.

The cost of not acting now is a future where our once pristine water needs to be treated before consuming in a country which has an abundance. Unfortunately there’s also an underlying mindset of greed and profit at any cost, filtered down from the government which is causing considerable damage to our environment. If concerns are not voiced now, the ability to provide sustainable fresh water to future generations will be lost

To watch Campbell Live programme GO HERE

Climate change denial

Climate change is spoken of in hushed tones, but it wasn't always this way

Farming communities still differ widely in their opinions on the environment, despite clear awareness some years ago

the Guardian,

27 January, 2014

There is a term that is not generally used in polite company in the bush. That term is climate change.

To an outsider’s eyes, it might seem to be counterintuitive. Here are people whose living is mostly dependent on the vagaries of the weather. Yet you will hear more conversation about climate change at a city dinner party than a lazy Sunday afternoon lunch in the bush.

The publicly reported attitudes to climate change in rural Australia have been just as confusing.

That is, rural Australians are less likely to be concerned about climate change, less likely to agree it poses a serious threat to our way of life and less likely to trust the science that suggests human activity is responsible for change. Country people are also more likely to think the seriousness of the issue is exaggerated and less likely to think governments need to do more to address climate change. At least, these were the findings of a report last year by the Climate Institute into attitudes towards climate change.

Malcolm Turnbull notwithstanding, climate change has been inextricably linked with one side of politics – Labor – through the emissions trading scheme. Tony Abbott successfully managed to tie climate change to Labor and drag it down by campaigning against the carbon tax. Hence, in conservative country Australia, there is a reticence to discuss the topic. But don’t be fooled. There is still a lot happening away from the public gaze.

It was not always this way. In 2006, the National Farmers’ Federation’s policy-makers made a unanimous call for early action on climate change. From a media release, dated 6 December 2006, the then NFF president, David Crombie, announced the federation’s policy council would be joining the Australian business roundtable calling for early action.

“NFF believes that climate change may be the greatest threat confronting Australian farmers and their productive capacity … now and in the future,” Crombie said at the time. “Today’s announcement, and our keenness to engage, reflects this reality. It threatens Australia’s agricultural productive base – an important contributor to the national economy, the ability for Australian farmers to put food on the table of Australian families, and the long-term sustainability of at least 60% of Australia’s landmass.”

That was a while ago. As in metropolitan Australia, the climate change issue has dropped down the priority list in the country.

By 2009, the public mood had changed and the NFF was welcoming the contribution of Ian Plimer, lending support to other voices in the debate.

Crombie said: “We’ve heard ad nauseam from those scientists convinced that climate change will ruin us all and, seemingly, hellbent on making grim doomsday predictions. But we’ve heard precious little from those experts for whom the jury is still out, or, in the case of Professor Plimer say their research shows extreme climate change predictions are overstated.

“Now, before I’m carted to a stake for public torching, I’m not saying Professor Plimer is right, nor that his colleagues with differing views are wrong. Just that it’s about time we had a balanced, informed discussion and debate ... free from vilification of those who dare to question conventional wisdom.”

Among the farming community there is a range of views from accepting climate change science to entrenched opposition. In most cases, though, the community tends to prefer the term “climate variability” than “climate change”.

Corey Blacksell is a grain farmer on the South Australian side of the Victorian border who grabs modern farming practice and technologies with relish. An active member of the Liberal party, he holds a masters in agribusiness and also trades grain. He believes arguing over what is happening to the climate and why it’s happening is pointless for farmers. A bit like arguing why the baby is crying. You just have to deal with the consequences.

“Most farmers would accept the climate is changing but would rather not argue over why. We just have to do everything to ensure we make the right decisions for our businesses,” he said. “Farmers are now managers of capital and we must ensure we have mitigated the risks until the odds are in our favour. If we can’t, and that means in some years you don’t even sow a crop and go on holidays instead, then we should consider that.”

When I suggest one of the reasons for farmers openly debating the causes of climate change may be to bring about changes in farming practices, Blacksell disagrees.

“If it is the case [that human activity is causing it], then it’s so much bigger than agriculture and it has to be debated at a much higher level. Farmers have adapted over time, history tells us this,” he said. “Climate change is a gradual change, it’s not X today and Y tomorrow. Agriculture can manage any change [or variability] in climate because of this. ”

Closer to home, farmer Peter Holding is one of my neighbours in southern New South Wales. He is a participant in the Climate Champions program, which gives farmers the latest research from climate scientists and provides scientists with farmers’ experiences. It is funded by the Grains Research and Development Corporation, Meat & Livestock Australia and Australian Wool Innovation.

The program is unequivocal in its information booklet on the scientific basis of climate change. The first line: “The scientific evidence is clear: our climate is changing and humans are mostly to blame.”

Holding is one of the few I have heard actively use the term “climate change” as a serious threat to food supply. He is also involved in Landcare and the Rural Fire Service.

He says while farmers deal with climate conditions every day, the larger issue of why the climate changes is overwhelming for people running complex businesses.

“They don’t need any more stress in their lives. They don’t know the answer so they just do what they can do,” Holding says. “I see people are very, very stressed. They are like timid dogs. Belt a dog around enough and it will sit down and go quiet. Twenty or 30 years ago, farmers would fight and protest. Now they have just gone quiet.”

Holding believes climate change has real implications for drought policy. If the climate is getting hotter, drought policy, which is currently getting an overhaul for a government white paper, will have to change.

“I cannot for the life of me understand how you can expect governments to provide drought assistance if you don’t accept there is an ongoing climate change,” he says.

And that is what worries me about the muted public participation by agriculture in the climate change discussion. If the farmers who have a vast knowledge and an economic interest in climate policy don’t take part in the public debate, they will kiss goodbye to the chance to influence policy for their industry.

But Blacksell begs to differ, saying farmers are such a small part of the population, their voice on many policy issues is drowned out.

“We only have to look at the live export ban,” he says. “As such I question whether agriculture can have any great influence in policy debate until the supply and demand equation for food becomes a lot tighter.

“That’s how agriculture will alter the declining terms of trade it’s suffering from. While food is plentiful, interests groups can have an influence in how their food is produced. Nothing speaks louder than a hungry stomach.”

Climate change

Climate change rates a mention on NZ media!

I don't know whether to laugh or cry when I listen to this pathetic item on climate change. Either its just 'natural weather patterns' or it's climate change with a nice linear progression with consequences that will have to be 'mitigated'. It's a sick joke.

Give me a break!

FARMERS BEING WARNED TO PREPARE FOR MORE CLIMATE CHANGE

Farmers and growers are being warned to be prepared for a changing climate and not to ignore warning signs, such as extreme dry spells.

Protecting NZ from Antarctic change

Scientists are warning that climate change in Antarctica could have a "dramatic" influence on New Zealand

Stuff,

2 May, 2013

.

To try to understand what might happen, the issue has been included as one of the 10 science challenges announced by the Government this week.

So far, comparatively little has been spent on the problem, and the expert panel that drew up the short list of challenges appears to have been surprised at the extent of the risk.

Panel chair Sir Peter Gluckman, the prime minister's chief science advisor, said that in drawing up the list the panel had started by considering the risks faced by New Zealand.

The so-called deep south challenge had been included "because we could see that was something we really needed to understand", he said.

The panel recognised that of all the various potential risks New Zealand faced, a dramatic change in Southern Ocean currents driven by changes in the Antarctic ice sheet, "would have far more dramatic influence on our economy, through changes in the climate and rainfall patterns, than any of us had realised".

"Therefore, given that we are uniquely committed and associated with Antarctic research, and given our leadership in that area, it was self-evident that to protect our future as a country, we need to understand what's going to happen in the Southern Ocean far better than we do now," Sir Peter said.

Despite concerns about the issue, it attracted relatively little funding in the current financial year.

A cabinet paper by Science and Innovation Minister Steven Joyce calculated that only $4.1 million was spent on research areas connected with the deep south challenge in 2012/13, out of the $523 million provided through contestable funding and crown research institutes. Those figures did not include research funded through the tertiary education sector and other government agencies.

The expert panel's report to the cabinet said the major purpose of the deep south challenge, and a major reason it was prioritised, was to examine the key role climate change would play in affecting New Zealand through changes in the Antarctic and Southern Ocean.

The New Zealand Antarctic Research Institute (NZARI) said a goal of the challenge was to reduce the uncertainty of Antarctica's impact on New Zealand's oceans, climate and ecosystems in a changing global climate.

Any change in Antarctica's natural systems would have profound downstream effects for this country. Melting ice would raise sea levels, while increased temperatures in Antarctica would change ocean and atmospheric circulation.

"Antarctic ice melt may result in sea levels rising by up to five metres and as fast as 4cm per year," NZARI said.

Along with sea level rise, the other critical issue for New Zealand was ocean temperatures as controlled by ocean current strength and position.

"The critical elements controlling this are ice shelves and sea ice, as they provide the buffer between the atmosphere, ice sheets and ocean."

Research into the impact of a warming world on New Zealand's vast exclusive economic zone and adjacent Antarctic Treaty sector was almost nonexistent, NZARI said.

New Zealand's ocean and climate system was sandwiched between the world's biggest current - the Antarctic Circumpolar Current - in the south and the South Pacific Subtropical Gyre from the north.

"Only within the last decade have scientists fully realised the role of the Southern Annular Mode, an Antarctic driven ring of climate variability, on the westerly wind system on New Zealand winds, rainfall and temperatures."