Farming’s image suffers as pollution sickens the waterways
It’s time to face harsh truths on the impact of intensive dairying, writes
OPINION: Where have you been swimming this summer? The beach? A river?
Or have you avoided swimming because you’re not sure about whether the water will make you sick? Or maybe your local swimming hole has dried up.
In recent years, the custom of heading to your nearest river for a dip on a hot summer’s day has all but died out.
My inbox has been cluttered with health warnings, toxic algal bloom alerts and water restriction notices over the past month. Potentially toxic algal blooms in rivers and lakes mean these water bodies are off limits for swimming.
There is extensive scientific and other evidence that pastoral agriculture, dairy farming and intensive sheep and beef and arable farming are the major contributors to declining water quality in New Zealand over the past 25 years.
In a recent opinion piece, NZ Farmer editor Jon Morgan wrote that dairy farmers unfairly cop the blame for poor water quality.
This criticism could ease if the industry recognised that there are enough – and in many places too many – cows, and if the sector’s major focus was to add value to the existing milk supply while reducing its substantial environmental hoofprint.
Many dairy farmers are trying to do the right thing. Yet as a landmark 2013 report by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment made clear, water quality in many catchments across New Zealand would continue to decline even if every farmer used best land management practices such as planting stream banks.
We have reached the limit of dairy cow numbers in New Zealand, but neither Fonterra, with its aim of growing milk supply, nor Dairy NZ will acknowledge this.
While total dairy cow numbers have dropped slightly with the decline in dairy payouts, the national dairy herd of 6.5 million in June 2015 is the equivalent to a human population of more than 90
Here, large amounts of artificial fertiliser and water have to be applied just to grow grass, while the light, stony soils leak nutrients into aquifers.
This landscape was not made to sustain dairy farms, so why are we bending nature to our will to make it happen?
Weak government policy, regional plan provisions under the Resource Management Act and misleading signals mean people are still allowed to choose a land use and a livelihood that we know is unsustainable.
The emphasis in National’s Primary Growth Partnership is on increasing primary sector exports and on technological innovation, and it has spent more than $271 million to date.
Government funding help for agriculture should focus much more on understanding natural systems, soils, climate and waterways; and how we use them to grow food and fibre sustainably within environmental limits.
Massive public subsidies for irrigation through the Crown Irrigation Investment scheme, with its $400m budget and its support for mega dams such as the proposed Ruataniwha scheme, send the wrong signals.
They promote further dairy expansion in areas such as Hawke’s Bay despite the area being better suited to horticulture.
Instead, we need a stronger national policy statement for freshwater that sets a national bottom line of rivers being suitable for swimming not just wading, and which has tighter controls on nutrients.
We need to change the signposts and government incentives to encourage a more diverse and resilient primary sector, one that is less reliant on environmental degradation and financial debt. That’s success for everyone.
Green MP Eugenie Sage is the party’s environment and primary industries spokeswoman.
We have reached the limit of dairy cow numbers in New Zealand.