florencemicoud

20/11/2011
by florencemicoud 1 Comment

Formal opposition to dairy farming in Hawea Flat

Open letter to the Otago Regional Council

I am startled by the prospect of intensive dairy farming in Hawea Flat, a high quality rural lifestyle area. Feeling that it can damage beautiful Hawea river and far beyond, I did a bit of Internet research to understand… Here is gathered and summarised relevant information. Press Ctrl key and click on the blue underlined words to open links to internet documents. I am not a farming specialist and I do not even live in the vicinity… I just hope this letter contributes to an important debate. I also ask some important questions and I hope you will take the time to answer to them.

I have read in the News that it will be done the “Best possible way”. Everything is done by the rules, Otago Regional Council is setting up some monitoring tools, and there will be some jobs (Wanaka Sun 25th August). Great. But in the 25^th September meeting in Hawea, ORC acknowledged that it cannot guarantee water quality.

Intensive dairy farm “the best possible way” does not mean it is good enough. Laws are too loose to protect our waters as detailed in this submission against the Freshwater management act by the Guardians of Lake Wanaka and The Cawtron report on National Policy Statement available from Fish & Game website.

To summarize the issues, Regional councils can let water quality degrade as long as some others are improved. In the case of our pretty good water quality overall in our upland area, it simply means that the law allows our waters to be degraded. It is important to be aware of the fact that the current laws do not set any limits to freshwater pollution. Water quality standard, mainly compliance criteria exist only for public drinking water.

National laws let the Regional Council decide. Now I ask you, my Regional Council, to decides on good water quality levels.

Intensive dairy farming is the main water polluter in NZ

Damming is partly responsible for freshwater species decline when it does not provide migratory routes facilities. Industrial and human pollution are affecting water quality obviously too. But many studies prove that land use intensification is the main cause of water quality decline in New Zealand, in particular intensive dairy farming.

From the detailed article “Clean, Green and endangered” article by David Brooks published in Forest & Bird Issue 341, August 2011, dairy farming leads to:

lots of water being removed from rivers,
pasture erosion, leading to flows of sediments
damaging nutrients from fertilisers and animal waste leaching back into our water bodies.

In a following article “Our Sacred cows”, by Dr Mike Joy says “the number of cows milked in the South Island has increased sevenfold”. He adds:

Only shed effluent is controlled by regulation
Other effluents are unchecked (uncheckable indeed), just an externality
Worse still, cows are fed with imported palm kernel, for which rainforests are massively destroyed
In 20 years, the dairy boom has generated a 700 per cent increase in nitrogen fertiliser use, with the consequences detailed in a previous research.

That is a case against intensive dairy farming alltogether, not only in our backyard.

If intensive dairy farming is a national threat to waters, then surely it is not good for Hawea waters, is it? How doing the same thing could have a different outcome?

What happens when the monitoring tools will show an increase of pollution? Can you remove pollution from water tables? Will they then reduce the numbers of cows when the damage is done?

No resource consent needed

If water if not a resource, then what is? Yet, there is no need for public submission to resource consent for land use intensification. This is why there was no resource consent submission for Hawea dairy farming plan, therefore no avenue for people to say what they think. We cannot trust our Council to protect our waters, because laws do not cover it properly. The community interests are not protected by the law. The laws give advantage to dairy farming which is a leading NZ export sector (i.e. lots of $$ for some), provided that they intensify production. Meanwhile in Europe, the catastrophic state of rivers prompted capping intensification and reducing fertilisers use.

I have explored the MFE website, in particular the “Managing Waterways on Farms” section. Now, tell me if I am wrong but the only thing I found is: “The first priority for the management of nutrient contamination should be excluding livestock from streams and stream channels.” Should! It is not even compulsory! I have also skimmed the Otago Regional Council Plan : Water and found the word “livestock” once. In the FAQ however, I find: “while you are allowed to graze all forms of stock near waterways, they must not damage or pug the bank or contaminate the waterway in any way”.

Even this law is not applied. I often witness cows walking in the rivers around the area, for example: Bulls grazing in Cardrona River on Robrosa Station, or cows roaming Motatapu river below the Wanaka-Mount Aspiring Road bridge.

It is also shown in the beautiful award-winning documentary River Dog by James Muir.

Now cows defecation impact on water quality is well documented for example in this study “Water quality impact of a dairy cow herd crossing a stream” by the Royal Society of New Zealand published in 2004 (find the conclusions on page 7)

It is important to note that even if not poured directly in the river, dejections and fertilisers do reach the water table or the rivers as it is acknowledged on the MFE website page Type of Activities that pose a threat to water quality. Check it out. There is no “Best possible solution”. Cows dejections and fertilisers WILL sooner or later end up in our waters.

May I remind some decision making principles detailed in page 27 of the Know How guide to decision making the Local Government Act 2002? http://www.lgnz.co.nz/library/files/store_021/DecisionMaking.pdf

Consideration of community views.
Recognition of diversity.
Interests of future communities.
Impacts on well-being.
Prudent stewardship.
A sustainable development approach.

It seems to me in this dairy farm decision that all these points have been neglected.

So I ask ORC to impose public submission for resource consent before a farm becomes intensive, and to enforce the recommendations about keeping cows out of waterways.

Consequences on our waters

“Just drink the water from the lake” is now a health hazard, as well as swimming in many areas. Water from the tap, is also an issue. The Ministry of health states in an ESR report dated 2006 that “ the actual number of waterborne cases lies between 18,000 and 34,000 a year”! In Hawea flat, residents take their water from bores reaching the aquifer. They will have to dig deeper to reach water and their water will be polluted one day.

Biodiversity is at great risk, with 60% of native fish, threatened with extinction, including the longfin eels. No fish ? No fishing! And many people have sadly observed a sharp decline in our areas in recent years. Also at risk, invertebrates, birds, freshwater crayfish and mussels.

New Zealand “100% pure” brand, a key to our thriving tourist industry is also at stake of course.

I have read the Otago Daily Time Article written to reassure residents about environmental impacts are that “Hawea is different, with low rainfall and different soil structure”. That raises more questions. How are they going to feed their cows on the famously lush- not!- grass of Hawea, without irrigation? Is irrigation not a factor of run-off? Different soil structure? Will it hold nitrogen in its little arms for ever? Or will the nitrogen take longer to reach the water table? Or what?

In other areas in New Zealand, Regional councils have taken steps once the damage was so obvious that it could not be ignored. After the devastating condition of the Waikato river, Waikato Regional council has established regulations to achieve 20 per cent reduction in the amount of nitrogen entering Lake Taupo, which includes 1.82 hectare per cow.

So I ask ORC to establish a sustainable maximum number of livestock heads per hectares.

Not sustainable!

As somebody texted it in a Wanaka Sun, “We, the people of Wanaka, were able to stop the already consented spread of human waste in Tarras by speaking out. (…) In a previous article in ODT, new owners were considering other options too, so we are not preventing them from doing business if we ask them to revert from their lucrative but damaging intensive dairy farm plan. And the stock will not arrive before next year so there is time for action. Let’s do it!

Fonterra can only collect milk for 10,000kg of milk solids a year or more for a farm situated beyond its usual routes (Alexandra, Omarama or Fox Glacier). Some data found on NZ Agritech website calculates that 250 cows produce an average of 315 milk solid per year. So they actually need 8000 cows on their farm…

Besides, this raises the issue of the fodder, fertilisers and milk travels and petrol use implied… Will Hawea flat milk travel to Christchurch to be processed or to Southland? Just not sustainable…

Now, in the Sustainable Development for New Zealand Programme of Action 2003, it is specified that government decisions should ensure the wellbeing of current and future generations as detailed in full in http://www.beehive.govt.nz/sites/all/files/30199-med-susined-developm.pdf

PRINCIPLES FOR POLICY AND DECISION MAKING

The government recognises that its decisions should ensure the wellbeing of current and future generations. It will take account of the economic, social, economic, environmental, and cultural consequences of its decisions by:

• considering the long-term implications of decisions

• seeking innovative solutions that are mutually reinforcing, rather than accepting that gain in one area will necessarily be achieved at the expense of another

• using the best information available to support decision making

• addressing risks and uncertainty when making choices and taking a precautionary approach when making decisions that may cause serious or irreversible damage

• working in partnership with local government and other sectors and encouraging transparent and participatory processes

• considering the implications of decisions from a global as well as a New Zealand perspective

• decoupling economic growth from pressures on the environment

• respecting environmental limits, protecting ecosystems and promoting the integrated management of land, water and living resources

• working in partnership with appropriate Maori authorities to empower Maori in development decisions that affect them

• respecting human rights, the rule of law and cultural diversity.

It seems to me that the approval ORC gave does not follow these principles. It is just not professional !

You are paid by our rates to do a good job, to think before you sign an application. It is not too late to prevent the damage.

To summarise, I ask ORC:

to decides on good water quality levels
to impose public submission for resource consent before a farm becomes intensive,
to establish a sustainable maximum number of livestock heads per hectares.
to enforce the recommendations about keeping cows out of waterways
to create all rules with the future in mind. We can decide now on things that will make a good future. If we mitigate now, we will have to repair (if possible! ) in the future. The council is responsible for now and for later.

I thank you very much for your attention and look forward to your answers.

Florence Micoud

021 027 92481

Wanaka

florencemicoud@gmail.com

Sent on the 20/11/2011 to ORC http://www.orc.govt.nz/About-us-and-the-Region/Contact-Us/Contact-Us/, to the ODT odt.editorial@alliedpress.co.nz, to the Wanaka Sun theeditor@thewanakasun.co.nz and to email contacts, link posted on Facebook and sent on Twitter

Click here https://wildclarisse.wordpress.com/2011/09/05/intensive-dairy-farming-in-hawea/ for a previous post on the subject and interesting comments.

17/10/2011
by florencemicoud 1 Comment

Urban Gardening

Why gardening ?

Because it is one of the solutions to:

the population problem (people feeding themselves),
the carbon footprint problem (no food kilometres),
the affordability of food (seeds and seedlings are cheaper than food, then can be harvested for the next year, or swapped…)

Because it contributes to:

community strenghtening (gardening together, intergenerations, between neighbours)
better health (fresh -full of vitamins, no pesticides residues, physical activity)
connecting to the Earth and its natural cycles
relax people, provides pleasure and satisfaction therefore taking care of the gardener too!

Because it tastes good, it looks nice, it is enjoyable, rewarding and nearly free!

Where?

When owning a land, even small, it is easy to transform parts of it in vege patches, starting small, enriching the soil over the years with homemade compost.

Even when renting, most owners will allow the tenants to create raise-beds and are often happy for patches to be dug, as long as the land is restored when leaving, which is easy to do (just flatten it and saw lawn seeds). It is however more expensive as usually shorter term than above, compost usually have to be added initially and the improvement of the soil is left behind.

People living in a flat can grow on their balconies and windows… and roofs. They can advocate the creation of gardens on the shared property, in place of concreted yards or useless lawns. They can also look for some land they could use, perhaps in exchange of some work on the rest of the property. Many cities have available land that is used for gardening, family gardens or collective gardens or community gardens… Here is a list of New Zealand community gardens. If there aren’t any in your town, get some interested persons together and ask the local council for it.

If all fails, you can always start guerilla gardening, which consists in sowing and planting in public places without authorisation, even practising seed bombing. Very Naughty!

How?

– Start small, get some books from the library (Dewey 632) or buy from http://www.organicnz.org/bookclub/ or http://www.touchwoodbooks.co.nz/Home.htm

– Do not use any chemical fertiliser nor pesticides, although you will be told it is good for your plants, even compulsory! Or you will be deceived by “natural” labels. In fact, unless it shows the Biogro label, it is not organic. So how do you take care for your plants? Compost, green manure, companion planting, crop rotation, compost, mulch, choice of local varieties, soil preparation, comfrey, nasturtium, biodiversity, observation, patience, experience and compost are some of your key-words. Did I mention compost?!

– Talk “gardening” around you. You might be surprised how many people love gardening, and have seedlings and advice to give away.

Here in Upper-Clutha…

There is no community garden… yet. It is true that we are lucky in our town, as most people do have a little patch of land around the house where to grow some veges, and many people do. It is still time to start now, if you have not yet.

There is an Upper Clutha Herb Society whose focus is on Herbs rather than veges.

Free Compost workshops are happening soon (22nd Oct 2011 and 12th Nov, 9.30-12-30, at Wanaka Wastebusters) and there is a Bio-dynamic workshops series starting 30th October.

From Green Drinks, a small group is meeting quite regularly to visit each others garden and share seedlings and knowledge.

More is probably coming, with tomorrow a forum about the Future of Food and a growing interest and need for it.

21/09/2011
by florencemicoud Leave a comment

Pakeha perspective

Tena koutou e nga kaipanui haere mai nei ki tenei kupu ki te whiriwhiri i maori matauranga ratou ko kauneke tawhiro.

Ko Alps toku maunga
Ko Fure toku awa
Ko Boeing whitu wha whitu toku waka!
No Dauphine no France oku tupuna
Ko Gaulois toku iwi
No Wanaka ahau
Ko Florence toku ingoa.

Greetings to you, readers, welcome to this letter that discusses maori culture and sustainability.

The Alps are my mountains
The Fure is my river
I arrived in New Zealand in Boeing 747
My ancestors are from Dauphine in France
My tribe is the Gauls.
I live in Wanaka and my name is Florence.

I chose to live in New Zealand with my family for its pristine landscapes and the warmth and welcoming of its people, which we experienced when we visited in 1998-99. We felt it was possible here to live a grassroot connected life, unlike in crowded and nuclearised France.

I can’t love a country and not its people. Therefore interested in Maori people and culture, I was fascinated by the unique case in colonisation history of “equality” between natives and colons, as signed in 1848 in the Treaty of Waitangi. I read lots of books about maori myths and legends, maori lore, history and tahunga. I joined and enjoyed a waiata a ringaringa local group and recently passed a certificate in Te Ara Reo Maori level 2, at Te Wananga o Aotearoa, where our great Tutor taught us maori perspective, so intricated in the language. I came to understand that the assets I initially admired in this country were linked to the Maori presence.

We became New Zealander in 2008. Pakehas. Proud to be. Pakeha is the word Maori gave to the first “fair-skinned” visitors. Pakeha is a word gifted by the Maori to the people who came to live here. It is a recognition that we are part of this land too. That we belong.

Caring for the land

Belonging to the land is a central notion for many indigenous people. Whanaungatanga. People do not possess the land but belong to it. Fundamental difference. It feels good to belong. It means I need to respect and take care of the place. Not to use it, consume it, exploit it… It is linked to the protection and conservation of resources. Kaitiakitanga. Hence the vast protected landscapes and forests. Tane-Mahuta, the first son, guardian of the forests, is still very strong. We can learn a lot from the maori knowledge and perception of the environment.

Caring for the people

Hospitality and welcoming also derive from Maori culture and has warmly diffused the whole country. Manaakitanga was Maori Language week theme this year and is widely acknowledged by tourists of the Rugby World Cup.

Maori have coded social structures, which I was lucky to experience on a marae. Communication skills korero, shared decision making, connectedness and support, transmission of knowledge and values, cooperation and participation, sense of belonging -again, are all essential skills to build a sustainable society.

New Zealanders welcoming habits, community sense and cool-she’ll-be-allright-attitude has much to do with maori culture and has changed the anglo-saxon immigrant into a Pakeha, a blessed citizen of Aotearoa.

Holistic approach

Most importantly, Maori have an holistic approach as they “never separate the sea from the land and the land from the air.”
Interestingly, the sustainability pages of Landcare Research are bathed in Maori culture. Not only sustainability could not be achieved in New Zealand without a deep inclusiveness of all people of New Zealand. But also Maori people behold the sustainability principles deeply and therefore mātauranga Māori is naturally at the core of landcare research sustainability.

All over the world, indigenous people have a great connection with living systems, as poetically detailed in the famous -if not authentic- Chief Seattle Speech. While humans deconnect from nature to live the “modern life”, understanding and respect of natural cycles also decrease. It is urgent to reverse the decline of the state of the environment by reconnecting with the world thanks to indigenous values.

Titi story

While on the marae in Bluff, we were offered muttonbird stories (also some to eat, yum). I was amazed to hear that birds numbers actually increase when the island is well looked after, following knowledge transmitted from generations. Not only they know when and how many birds they can catch to get the best harvests over the years. But also, muttonbirders restore nests and look after the trees the birds need to take off. That is sustainable management of the land, guardianship.

To thank our hosts on the Marae, we created a song. Like the muttonbirds who take off to migrate towards unknown lands, we have to listen to our destiny, open our minds to change, open our wings to fly into the unknown, and all this is possible thanks to the great nurture provided by the marae.

“Maori principles can help us deepen our appreciation of the environment, sound social structures and a connective view of sustainability”, as summarised in the Maori Perspective leaflet published on the Outlookforsomeday Sustainability Film challenge for young people website.

Tena koutou, tena koutou katoa.

Florence

—————————————–

Maori language resources

Learning a language is directly connected with learning a culture, because the way people express their ideas reflect their way of understanding the world. Knowing a culture is respecting and embracing it. Maori language is now widely taught in pre- and primary schools. There are 800 and a growing number of kohanga reo schools (maori language) and 3 maori tertiary education institutes. Give it a Go!

http://www.maorilanguage.net/
http://www.maorilanguage.info/
http://www.korero.maori.nz/
http://kupu.maori.nz/ One Maori word a day and much more
http://www.tetaurawhiri.govt.nz/ Maori Language commission

More Maori resources

Maori culture is becoming a strong and integrated part of New Zealand, thanks to great leaders (Apirana Ngata, Dame Whina Cooper), thanks to the Treaty of Waitangi, thanks to many Maori and Pakeha who know if they do not strenghten this culture, nobody will… And increasingly both Maori and Pakeha realise they enrich each other, and learn to live respectfully with each other … And all are proud of the Haka ;) New Zealand is one of the few countries worldwide who managed to maintain indigenous identity in a diverse society.

http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/maori Te Ara Encyclopedia of NZ about Maori history and culture
http://www.waitangi-tribunal.govt.nz/ deals with maori claims.
http://www.maoritelevision.com/Default.aspx

10/09/2011
by florencemicoud Leave a comment

Funnel vision!

A funnel is a metaphore used by The Natural Step to illustrate the sustainability challenge. What is increasing over time? What is decreasing over time? Visualise how this squeeze is getting critical! What can be done to reverse the trends and possibly improve the situation?

Following the 4 Sustainability principles, symbolised by the 4 Earth icons, will create a sustainable situation.

Here is a video created by Whistler municipality, that explains the funnel in 2 minutes.

I have “played” at creating funnels.

New Zealand funnel

Click to enlarge

I was amazed at how this tool make complex and interconnected issues look easy to solve.

Tourism funnel

One of my assignment is a sustainability study for a local guiding business. Here is a funnel that can be adapted to many tourism activities.

Click on the picture to enlarge

Libraries funnel

Well yes, I am librarian. Although it is not quite a sustainability subject, I gave the funnel metaphor a go with libraries squeeze. As you may be aware, many libraries are being closed in the US and in the UK. Libraries are threatened nearly everywhere, and are generally affected by budget reduction. It is all too common to hear that libraries (and books) are not useful anymore, as there is so much on the Internet nowadays.

Click to enlarge

Here again, solutions are quite obvious when the problems are laid in the funnel metaphor. Opportunities naturally arise from it.

For example, e-books are not a threat but the solution to cover customers needs with new books. They all want to read the same book at the same time? They can and the librarian does not have to purchase several copies that will clutter the shelves when the fashion is finished.

A lot of information is on the Internet? Good! Librarians do not need to buy every book on every subject in the world and will still be able to provide information about any query.

Transforming a library into a community place is a success criteria for libraries. People come for a variety of reasons and are exposed to a variety of experiences and knowledge (including reading).

Dematerialisation is quite visible, less books vs more access. It is also about replacing a product (book) by a service (advice on how to find the information). It is interesting to note that applying a sustainable practice tool to a different subject leads to solutions common in sustainable practice: dematerialisation and “service rather than product”.

From the tunnel vision metaphor to the funnel vision!

Try it with any issues that look like an unsolvable problem… and please share your experience below…

05/09/2011
by florencemicoud 6 Comments

Intensive dairy farming in Hawea

7000 dairy cows on a 2322ha farm in Hawea Flat…

Startled by this idea, feeling that it can damage beautiful Hawea river and far beyond, I did a bit of Internet research to understand… Here is gathered and summarised relevant information. Click on the maroon words to open links to internet documents. I am not a specialist and invite you to leave comments if some statements are wrong or incomplete… I hope this post contributes to an important debate. Feel free to use any or all of it.

“Best possible way” not good enough

Intensive dairy farm “the best possible way” does not mean it is good enough. Rules are too loose to protect our waters as detailed in this submission against the Freshwater management act by the Guardians of Lake Wanaka and The Cawtron report on National Policy Statement available from Fish & Game website.

Intensive dairy farming is the main water polluter in NZ

From the detailed article “Clean, Green and endangered” article by David Brooks published in Forest & Bird Issue 341, August 2011, dairy farming leads to:

lots of water being removed from rivers,
pasture erosion, leading to flows of sediments
damaging nutrients from fertilisers and animal waste leaching back into our water bodies.

In a following article “Our Sacred cows”, by Dr Mike Joy says “the number of cows milked in the South Island has increased sevenfold”. He adds:

Only shed effluent is controlled by regulation
Other effluents are unchecked (uncheckable indeed), just an externality
Worse still, cows are fed with imported palm kernel, for which rainforests are massively destroyed
In 20 years, the dairy boom has generated a 700 per cent increase in nitrogen fertiliser use, with the consequences detailed in a previous post.

That is a case against intensive dairy farming alltogether, not only in our backyard.

No resource consent needed

It is also shown in the beautiful award-winning documentary River Dog by James Muir.

: Clutha river

Consequences on our waters

New Zealand “100% pure” brand, a key to our thriving tourist industry is also at stake of course.

In the News

According to the news, everything is done by the rules, Otago Regional Council is setting up some monitoring tools, and there will be some jobs (Wanaka Sun 25th August). Great. But if intensive dairy farming is a national threat to waters, then surely it is not good for Hawea waters, is it? How doing the same thing could have a different outcome? I was confused to discover that the Coopers’ farm consultant, Peter Hook, is also chairperson of Guardians of Lake Wanaka. So it may mean that things are done indeed in the interests of the Upper Clutha waters or, that the laws are well known and used… For whose interests is not sure yet… What happens when the monitoring tools will show an increase of pollution? Can you remove pollution from water tables? Will they then reduce the numbers of cows when the damage is done?

I have read the Otago Daily Time Article about it and wonder why the owners declined a meeting. Do they have something to hide? The answers provided in the article to reassure residents about environmental impacts are that “Hawea is different, with low rainfall and different soil structure”. That raises more questions. How are they going to feed their cows on the famously lush- not!- grass of Hawea, without irrigation? Is irrigation not a factor of run-off? Different soil structure? Will it hold nitrogen in its little arms for ever? Or will the nitrogen take longer to reach the water table? Or what? Many questions are unanswered and a meeting would indeed be great to clarify things…

What can we do?

As somebody texted it in the latest Wanaka Sun, “We, the people of Wanaka, were able to stop the already consented spread of human waste in Tarras by speaking out. (…) so write to or email the Otago Regional Council.” Good idea, thank you for making a stand! I had started to text to Wanaka Sun too but “did not dared”. Now this comment and others published about the subject prompted me to do a bit of research and send it to ORC. In a previous article in ODT, new owners were considering other options too, so we are not preventing them from doing business if we ask them to revert from their lucrative but damaging intensive dairy farm plan. And the stock will not arrive before next year so there is time for action. Let’s do it!

So I ask ORC:

to impose public submission for resource consent before a farm becomes intensive,
to establish a sustainable maximum number of livestock heads per hectares. Waikato Regional council has established regulations to achieve 20 per cent reduction in the amount of nitrogen entering Lake Taupo, which includes 1.82 hectare per cow. *
to decides on good water quality levels
to enforce the recommendations about keeping cows out of waterways
to create all rules with the future in mind. We can decide now on things that will make a good future. If we mitigate now, we will have to repair (if possible! ) in the future. The council is responsible for now and for later.

There will be a meeting shortly organised by Hawea residents. Date and venue To Be Confirmed.

The Otago Regional Council organizes a meeting in Cromwell on Tuesday September 13 at the Presbyterian Church from 11am to 2.30pm. Agenda : update local farmers on proposed changes to the Otago Water Plan at a series of upcoming water quality forums.

For the bigger picture, participate in Forest & Bird Freshwater for life campaign.

* 5.5 times more is planned in Hawea Flat. This rate would imply they “only” put 1277 cows on their land. Now Fonterra can only collect milk for 10,000kg of milk solids a year or more for a farm situated beyond its usual routes (Alexandra, Omarama or Fox Glacier). Some data found on NZ Agritech website calculates that 250 cows produce an average of 315 milk solid per year. 1277 cows will produce 1609 milk solids… Besides, this raises the issue of the fodder, fertilisers and milk travels and petrol use implied… Will Hawea flat milk travel to Christchurch to be processed or to Southland? Just not sustainable…

Florence Micoud, Wanaka

Any other idea? Please leave a comment below…

28/07/2011
by florencemicoud 1 Comment

Footprinting…

I have just learned that New Zealanders would need more than 4 planets if their lifestyle was experienced by all the people on Earth. Another way of saying it is that an average New Zealander lives on 7.7 hectares whereas it is estimated that there are only 1.8 “bioproductive” hectare per person.

I had a look on www.footprintnetwork.org to compare country trends… The data is given on graphs in Global Hectares per Capita (GHC), between the 1960’s and 2005-2007 depending on the countries. It also shows the “biocapacity”. The data is a few years old, unfortunately.

NZ: 5 Global Hectares per capita in 2006
France: 5 GHC in 2006 (increase since the 60’s)
US : 8 GHC since 1980
China: 2 GHC (has rocketed since 2003)
Danemark: 8.5 GHC ! Champions!
Afghanistan: 0.5 GHC ! Real champions!
Japan : 4.5 GHC
Sweden : 6 GHC
Poor countries GHC varies between 1 and 2.

World average: One and a half planet in 2007.

Recent studies are greatly needed, because the trend has not globally improved since 2007 …

Hence the great value of Ella Lawton’s project: it is a 3-year programme to measure footprints related to built settlement types, then establish a vision of the theoretical ideal scale and form of built settlement, then put it in practice in rural and urban environment, and eventually enlarge and empower the rest of the country and beyond…

There are other initiatives in the world based on ecological footprint, like the One Planet Sutton, Foot Prints Wales but if you google “footprint US”, you find … a company that sells shoes, of course!

Environmental footprint is a great awareness tool

So I tried…

The footprint network quiz is interactive and easy to do. It concludes I use 1.9 planet and 3.4 bioproductive hectares! OMG!

I pledged to halve my meat consumption, to reach 1.6 planets and the only way I can yet improve to 1.5 is to pledge to buy less packaging, which “I do”.
It does not make a difference with this quiz if I travel to Europe every 4 years instead of 3.

It is well under the New Zealand average but far too much!

Worse! The Ecological Footprint Quiz by the Center of Sustainable Economy says that I need 2.21 Earths!

Oh, No!

I am reassured by the fact that questions are quite general and do not consider the fact that we have nearly no electrical appliances, for example.

So I tried more detailed calculators, and for them, I need my electricity bills, my vehicule logs, and bank account statements…

Here is the Carbon Footprint calculator result:

Although half the NZ average, I still feel I need to improve a lot. I “played” around with the questions. I would need to halve my electricity consumption ( which would be quite hard), fly only as far as Sydney, buy only local food (and no meat) and get rid of my car to reach the world target. I am not there yet but I know what my goal is…

WA$TED is a NZ clever TV programme and book and website with a comprehensive household footprint calculator specifically designed for NZ. I am somewhat reassured, because it enables me to enter the exact number of lights and appliances etc, which are quite low and therefore I end up with a 3/4 hectare footprint. There is no international travel in this calculator so I would need to add about 1 ton of CO2 for travelling to France every 3 years, that is about 1 hectare and I am just within the available land for me. Just! This seems too light compared with other results.

I am not sure how CO2 tons convert in global hectares. The Ecological Footprint Standards 2009 from the footprint network says “A2.3 The assessment calculates the Footprint of carbon dioxide emissions (e.g., converts tonnes of carbon dioxide into global hectares) using the same methods as the National Footprint Accounts” but I was unable to find it. From various sources on the Internet, I estimated that 1 ton of CO2 is roughly equivalent to 1 hectare. In average, 1 hectare would be able to absorb about a ton of CO2 per year. This needs further research. Would my teacher know?

The most serious is the New Zealand Business Council for Sustainable Development emissions online calculator . It finds that I create 4.5 CO2 tons per year, which is fairly consistent with other results.

It slowly kicks in that although I thought my household was quite sustainable, it is actually twice bigger than what our Earth can make and take and therefore I MUST halve my own footprint. I should have done only the Wa$ted test and I would have felt quite content!

So now HOW do we reduce our carbon footprint?

The Centre for Sustainable Economy advises how to reduce our eco footprint. I feel I do a lot of this already…

In June 2011, an article in the Guardian explains HOW a household can greatly reduce its footprint. Seems easy.

It is actually quite complex. Patagonia has designed an interactive tool to visualise the travels of several products. They are accompanied by interesting videos. For example this Capilene path:

It is amazing to see how many kilometers (therefore carbon) a simple jumper encapsulate, even one that is made by a company that cares. It just give a glimpse of what we need to think about when buying.

21/07/2011
by florencemicoud Leave a comment

Why go sustainable?

I watched this youtube from TED conference by Simon Sinek: “Start with Why: How Great Leaders Inspire Action”.
He explains that companies are successful at selling products when they advertise why they do them. People will buy a product because of why it is done. Decision making is done from the heart, from the belief. Companies who just say what they do, or how they do it do not get as much success.

Simon says… it is the same with ideas…
I thought I’d try to apply it to sustainability…

What?

So what is the problem? What is sustainability? A huge number of studies have gathered data measuring the ampleness of the issues, and created estimations and recommendations. They are essential for governments and international organisation to decide for actions.

Here are some excellent studies with compelling results. We cannot say that we do not know… But you need time to read!

– Living Beyond Our Means from the Millenium Ecosystem Assessment website is a summary of the Millenium Ecosystem Assessement, a 3000 pages document, created by 1360 experts from 95 countries, reviewed by more than 2500 experts from 185 countries. Check out the 107 slides
presentation http://www.maweb.org/documents/document.752.aspx.ppt or my summary of the summary here.

– The Stern Review – The Economics of Climate Change calculates that climate change will reduce global per-capita consumption of around 20% over the next 2 centuries, in the current trends. However, mitigating the impacts of climate change would only cost around 1% of annual global GDP by 2050 for a weak stabilisation of 550ppm Co2e. Policies to reduce emissions include carbon pricing, technology policy and removal to behavioural change.

– Check out the comprehensive IPCC website. For example the Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation or the latest assessment report summary (2007).

– For New Zealand, here is the “Climate Change Effects and Impacts Assessment: A Guidance Manual for Local Government in New Zealand“

These are all very interesting researches that all prompt for urgent collective action, while giving governments and decisions-makers clues on how to do it best. Whether they decide to go for it or not is so far political.

But for many people anyway, although striking and obvious, these graphs and facts are boring and not engaging. The required actions seem beyond their means, whereas they actually have the political choice in their voting card…

Some people even deny that there is a link between climate change and extreme weather, but that won’t last!

How?

How can we become more sustainable?

It is important to give information (ex: how-to-do a garden), and to show examples of successful sustainable actions. But there are so many sources of information and so many topics that I do not attempt a list here. Giving tips on how to cut energy bills or recycle does help, but people may be overwhelmed by the number of things to know and do. They may not see connexions between seemingly different subjects. They will do it, then forget it. They miss the big picture. They need to know why…

Why?

So why go sustainable?

Why do I study sustainability? Why do I choose to buy local or fair trade, to bike or walk when I can, to make my own hand-made organic flour bread, to use eco-bulbs, to plant trees, to bring my old clothes to the recycling centre where I get not-so-old ones, to grow a pesticide-free vege garden, to live with a 6 years-old mobile phone, and so on…
Because I believe I can help changing the world in doing my part. I am convinced we can manage to curb these horrific Green House Gas curves (and others) that threaten to over-heat our planet, if we all do our bit. I believe one day, all humans will be aware and respect the cycles of the nature we are within.

I also believe that the climate change is actually an opportunity for our human specie to grasp our problems as a whole and solve them altogether, from poverty and disparity, to pollutions and ecosystems destructions. Idealist? Yes, I am, because I trust humans. Each human trusts himself, why couldn’t I trust each human?

Therefore I am working towards raising this awareness, as well as spreading the information on the many solutions that do exist.

I know people will not all embark on the sustainability track now. As for products, ideas have an “adoption cycle”. I am humbly an innovator, carving this path for 25 years, despite mockery and derision. I think we are in New Zealand in the early “Early Adopters” phase. I believe this is the decade when we can make a change, and I am not alone. I study sustainability because I want to do professionally what I have been practising at home for long. The more I study, the more I realise we can make it.

Now, one of the most compelling action-prompting Youtube I’ve seen is “The most terrifying video” or the global climate change matrix where Greg Craven brilliantly shows that choosing to take no action is choosing Death! Boy, that is a pretty convincing reason why to go sustainable!

I have a vision of a happy, healthy, sharing era in a sustainable world. I do believe that a majority of people will soon realise that we are better off cooperating with each other and learning to use our resources wisely. Now is a good time to shift your mindset and adopt the sustainability “innovation”.

“I have a dream” we will get there!

Does this post inspire action?

17/07/2011
by florencemicoud Leave a comment

Changing of perspective…

I have enjoyed reading the ”Future of Progress”, by Helena Norberg-Hodge which gives a totally different perspective on the world economic issues. This chapter is part of “The Future of Progress: Reflections on environment and development”, by Edward Goldsmith, Vandana Shiva, Sigmund Kvaloy, Martin Khor, Nicholas Hildyard, Gary Snyder and Helena Norberg-Hodge, a book which was the result of an international conference on environment and development organised near Stockholm by the International Society for Ecology and Culture and Friends of the Earth – Sweden, in 1995. It was made into a video which script can be read here.

The chapter demonstrates the impossibility and indesirability of economic growth in “South” countries.
Drawing a parallel between the crisis in the South (poverty, environmental degradation, ethnic friction, overpopulation and debt) and the crisis in the North (resource depletion, pollution, unemployment, and social breakdown), it argues that the economic growth is the cause of the problem and in no way a solution.
The solutions to both crises are on the one hand, strategies that counter destructive trends linked to the “techno-economic” model, and on the other hand, strategies that foster positive alternatives including:

Small-scale and local initiatives;
Appropriate technology: solar and small scale water power;
Education that integrates connections rather than narrow over-specialised learning; and
Synthetising traditional and post-industrial values, reviving traditions of cooperation, wisdom and local culture.

Simple and well demonstrated.

I am a long term “fan” of Helena as I met her in Terre Vivante in France when I was working there and had considered translating her book “Ancient futures”. Helena’s first book vividly describes the culture of one of the world most remote and harsh place of the world and how the 70’s development policies systematically destructured it.

Helena visited Ladakh in the 70’s and mastered the language. She became an international voice of Ladakhi people and by extension all traditional people of the world, revitalizing cultures and diversity, and promoting local communities worldwide.

I have also read “From the Ground Up: Rethinking Industrial Agriculture”, by Helena, Helena Norberg-Hodge, Peter Goering and John Page which analyses the roots of the environmental, social and economic crises facing modern industrial agriculture, while reviewing more sustainable options.
My partner and I tramped through the Zanskar valley in Ladakh in 1991 and we saw how people were happy and sharing whereas they had “nothing”. We witnessed how local people could cultivate this impossible landscape only with a local fine-tuned knowledge of cultivation. We listened to the stories of older children going to the town for school and leaving a gap of workforce while missing their traditional learning, which made them unable to come back living on the land…

Helena has since created a documentary “The Economics of Happiness” which she presents at TED and which I just bought to view and share. I’ll summarise it as soon as I see it.
I am very pleased she managed to create a world-wide awareness. It is great she managed to harness the power of social media for her quest.

All these resources can be purchased from http://www.localfutures.org/isec-online-shop

09/07/2011
by florencemicoud Leave a comment

Learning to learn

Starting studying again after many years is a challenge, so I decided to put all the tools and knowledge about learning on my side.

Research has shown that the aim of learning is not gathering and remembering an enormous amount of data, but to have or get the correct competencies and attitudes.

The New Zealand curriculum defines the Key Competencies as:

Thinking,
Relating to others,
Using language, signs and texts,
Managing self,
Participating and contributing.

Click to enlarge

If we know how to do these, and show that we do know, then we have lots of TRUMPs in our hands.

To reach a better learning, we need to have the right disposition. There are 16 “Habits of Mind” as defined by Professor Arthur L. Costa which are making us better learners. I made a poster and displayed it in the toilets, to remind them frequently to me, and my family. Feel free to print it and do the same!

Click to enlarge

There are also lots of great thinking tools, like mind mapping or diagrams and many more. Here is a collection of Thinking tools with descriptions and links to templates or online free softwares. And I have made a wordle poster for my office to remind me of using them.

As Benjamin Bloom has described in 1956, there is an order in thinking skills and being aware of it greatly helps reaching the highest level of critical thinking, which is expected in our case of graduate studies. Here are those levels, the easiest at the bottom.

Creating: Generating new ideas, products, or ways of viewing things:
Designing, constructing, planning, producing, inventing.

Evaluating: Justifying a decision or course of action
Checking, hypothesising, critiquing, experimenting, judging

Analysing: Breaking information into parts to explore understandings and relationships
Comparing, organising, de-constructing, interrogating, finding

Applying: Using information in another familiar situation
Implementing, carrying out, using, executing

Understanding: Explaining ideas or concepts
Interpreting, summarising, paraphrasing, classifying, explaining

Remembering: Recalling information
Recognising, listing, describing, retrieving, naming, finding

Another useful awareness is our sensory preferences for learning or learning style. Here is an online quiz to discover yours or confirm it.

My results show that I am a multi-modal learner:

Visual: 8 : Earlier tests had shown a stronger visual preference: I see it = I remember it. Maybe I am older and this does not work as well now!?
Aural: 7 – I need to read aloud to hear myself when I want to learn something by heart.
Read/Write: 13 – normal for a librarian! Quite useful too … I need to write during reading or a lecture / conference to assimilate the content. Well taking notes is always useful I suppose!
Kinesthetic: 9 – fairly obvious with computer skills, I prefer to explore every menu and try every function rather than reading instructions and I’ve noticed I do not learn computer at all when just looking.

Ready to learn!

03/07/2011
by florencemicoud Leave a comment

Population popuLATION POPULATION

I invite you to read my Population & Sustainability essay in PDF format.

I hope you will find it interesting. Feel free to leave comments below. Thank you.

(Click here if you need to get Adobe reader to open the PDF)

Reflections…

While writing it, I have learnt that I need to choose a more precise subject for my learning journal entries. Such a LARGE subject as “Population and sustainability” required more than 30 hours work, and nearly a month to complete, while it is only a tiny part of my studies.

I had to revise my statistics. I enjoyed playing with the abundant data on the UN site and creating meaningful graphs. I had not been manipulating large numbers for a long time and it does stretch the mind !

I was keen to dig in depth of the subject and not only collate information but also to find connections and critically analyse what I read, to create an innovative interpretation on the subject.

In fact, the subject was disturbing to me because I did not quite comprehend it. It was like a needle in my political point of views. I was amazed at my findings and even surprised I could actually conclude that the population issue is an opportunity!

When writing, the trickiest was to find appropriate words to name “rich” countries and “poor” countries. Helena Nobert-Hodge uses North and South but this does not apply well from a New Zealand perspective. Developed/developing is so biaised and wrong, I don’t like it but I did use it. Third World does not apply now that the bi-polar USA/USSR situation has disappeared. “Industrialised” does not mean rich… Over-consuming / surviving ? Nah! Capitalist or Occidental world or G10 perhaps / then what are the other countries? Well there is not really such a divide but a whole range, so I have tried to name the countries, rather than making generalities.

Thank you, Alexis, for pre-reading and questioning as well as looking after the family while I study.