The conclusion comes in her latest report, Water quality in New Zealand: Land use and nutrient pollution, which examines how New Zealanders are changing the way they use land and the pressure this puts on water quality.
“The report is 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.
“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.
Dr Wright added: “I applaud the effort that is being put into environmental mitigation on dairy farms. Unfortunately, it is particularly difficult to control nitrogen. Nitrogen – in the form of nitrate – is so soluble that I think of it as the ‘elusive’ pollutant.
“I am pleased that fresh water policy is very much on the Government’s agenda with the recent release of a discussion paper on setting ‘bottom lines’ for water quality. I hope that this report will better inform both the general public and those who make decisions on their behalf.”
The full report is here.
Dr Wright was interviewed by Kathryn Ryan on Nine to Noon this morning.
We’ve got 20 people coming for dinner tonight and preparing for that is taking priority over reading and discussing the report.
However, given its importance I wanted to give readers the chance to discuss it.
Homepaddock 
I’ve been asked to comment on this. I’ll try and do it as clearly and concisely as possible.
I understand this:
They’ve modelled the future (predicted) by 2 models
They see N and P increasing
They see N as the biggest problem because it is hard to mitigate
They see cows as the biggest issue because the change is linked to their land use change.
They see many of the events/behaviour currently happening will have a big impact on this prediction. Mitigating the outcome.
My view. I agree with many of the statements. I’ve heard them before. What would I say?
Without action N will increase
I think P is under control in most regions.
I see some dairy systems as being problematic
I believe it is easy for us to mitigate the issue of Nitrogen
How do we change it?
Cows are not the problem. Let me say it again. Cows are not the problem. There are dairy systems out there losing very little N
Stocking rate is not a predictor for N loss- intensification schmensification. Don’t bang that drum. Its nonsense.
Urea use is a reasonable predictor for N loss. (I’ve seen 2 reports on this now)
Solution
Farmers need to use less N and use it smarter. Pure and simple. Particularly on Dairy farms. It is a little white grain that threatens our waterways. It is measurable, transportable, and controllable in a very easy manner. It is not some hidden secretly transported drug that cant be controlled.
In the first instance farmers need better education on the use of N. Its sadly lacking. Councils have missed the boat here. Shockingly. Their job is environmental protection and they ignored their greatest opportunity to have an affect. Here in Southland ES field days are rare as hens teeth. ES field days on N are waiting to be invented.
That is diabolical to me. How can the council turn its back on such an opportunity. Disgraceful
Subsequent to that. Farmers need N application limits for regions/ catchments/ districts/ farms.
Here in Southland ES might say they have that covered with their farm management plans for conversions. That’s a load of poppy cock, bull dust, flagbagging (Ok I’m making up words). Farm management plans do nothing but complicate the issue. Already 2 dairy farms have been consented on light dirt. The rule change has no teeth. It never was going to and never will. Even if they apply it to all farms as they’ve suggested. Which frankly is ridiculous. ES have struggled to control the behaviour of some of their staff, how do they expect to control thousands of farmers. It’s laughable.
Our council needs to turn its back on farm management plans and focus on N use. I have said it to many, banged a drum, rallied the troops, even tested the concept with farmers. So far so good.
Sheep farmers lose heaps of N from wintering (rough science but still accepted). We ignore them. Why? We are busy focusing on farm management plans. Why? Who knows. There are 900 odd dairy farms but thousands of sheep. Focus councils focus. Nitrate Nitrates Nitrates. Region wide. Crop farms, sheep farms, deer farms, dairy farms etc
Why do I disagree about phosphate increasing. Simple – Its been decreasing for a least 10 years. All this while much dairy boom has occurred. Here in Southland where the boom has been the loudest, over 72 sites only one deteriorated in soluble P between 2002-2012. One out of 72!
Oddly our council is still banging this drum. Making odd suggestions about keeping stock 10m for waters edge. Focus! Not phosphates. Nitrates.
That’s longer than I anticipated and will bore some. But I am passionate about this. Focus Councils focus Nitrates Nitrates Nitrates.
These are my views. You asked for them. You got em.
LikeLike
What do you mean by wintering? I’ve not come across the term before.
LikeLike
Farmers need to use less urea, Mr E?
You sound like a Green. They’ve been saying this for years. This is not a new idea, at least for an environmentalist like me. In our council, the councillors who are most adamant that nitrates are the issue, are Jan Riddell, Maurice Rodway and myself. We three are indeed focused, focused, focused on nitrates, despite being told repeatedly by industry spokespeople, that nitrates are not the issue. You can imagine how anyone not an adroit thinker might be confused.
As to your ‘consented even though they’re on light dirt’ statement, we could hardly be in greater agreement. Would you like the names of the councillors who argued strongly in favour of granting those consents and those who vigorously opposed? If you have followed my comments anywhere on the make-up of our council and the ideological ‘corners’ we occupy, you’ll know immediately who it is that’s condoning the wrong behaviours.
LikeLike
Phosphates, btw, are of huge significance in the Waituna situation. Silt carries phosphate, Mr E and there’s more than a lot of silt entering the Waituna and more than enough in there already. It’s not a minor issue there. By any means.
LikeLike
Robert. You’re a team player? No? Why are you so keen to throw your other team mates under the bus.
I don’t blame your team mates for these decisions Robert. The problem is the rule is flawed. It always was and always will be. They’re doing the best they can to apply the rule in an appropriate way. I can see that.
Sure, I realise phosphates have been an issue Waituna. So is bank stability due to those wonderful fence off rules. That dratted soil sloughing away without stock pressure to consolidate it. And peat soils that act more like a phosphate sieve than structured soil. These have been developing understandings and it is hard to blame farmers for any behaviour there. But I recognise a bit of phosphate research helps here. But is should not be the council focus.
I want your focus to be Nitrates. We know its the main problem. Why so little attention is being put towards it by your council, is beyond me. Some blame farmers for the nitrates. But on balance I think it’s fair to shed some blame towards ES. The focus is wrong, resources are being focused in the wrong areas.
Nitrates Robert
Ditch the Farm management Rule Robert.
Establish a series of 20 field days on N science, N management and best practice.
Sit down with catchments and communities (collaborate). Ask them how they think they can reduce N after presenting best science. Say to dairy farmers 170kgN is too much. Can you reduce it with out our enforcement? Ask the fertiliser companies if they will help to this end. Include Fonterra.
Process some Nitrate booklets – Do an RD drop
If communities are lazy and not forth coming, establish some N limits. Hell even moot a quota system.
N management needs to change. And with N use being one of the most obvious predictors of N loss, reducing N use will have an impact. Not remove it. Just less combined with better management
Winter crops Robert. Is there a best management practice of using N? Do you know it? Do farmers know it? Do fertiliser companies know it? What is the variability of using N on these areas? If that variability is high, are the highest users using too much? Is high use of N being wasted and hurting the back pocket? When profits are affected behaviour change is easier.
Progibb, can it be exchanged for Nitrate use? Maybe on crops?Some might say yes. Apply your scientist. I know one has a PhD.
Nitrates Robert. Focus please. There are sooooo many ways to improve if you just focus.
I might be repeating myself – I’ve been doing it for a long time. Some might say I am pleading. I tend to agree.
LikeLike
In Southland winter can be cold and wet. Stock need special treatment to ensure they don’t destroy all the pastures. We tend to concentrate them and the feed into small areas that can leak nutrients. We call it wintering.
Huge N gains to be made here in my opinion.
LikeLike
Mr E, I had no idea that it was soil compaction by stock that protected the banks of waterways from collapsing. How did the banks stay there before cows?
LikeLike
Moa Viv.
These environments have always been in constant flux naturally. It’s how plains were formed. Now days we reject change and blame farmers. This happened with waituna. Council shed the blame on farmers. The truth was bank stability was the major issue. When discovered and reported by the Feds a programme for bank stability was established. Seemingly embarrassed the council went quiet quick on the matter, that’s my assessment at least.
LikeLike