Regenerative Livestyle Blog

Category Archives: Agriculture


by Leave a comment

Doing it again… in Tarras

Tarras irrigation (c) HolgerTake a dry area, beautiful and lean and decide to make dairy farms here! It will be costly… But it’s all right, the ratepayers will pay for it… Sounds unbelievable? or only too familiar?

I have published below the full story and call for help by some Tarras residents, together with the links to the submission documents, to fill in and send by the 3rd of May to the ORC if you care… Click here to see my submission, feel free to copy/paste it and just change the name and address. Cheers.

Florence

Subject: Submission to Otago Regional draft annual plan – Tarras water scheme

Dear friend,

As part of the Otago Regional Council (ORC) draft annual plan, the ORC proposes a $ 3.6 million dollar investment in a privately owned irrigation scheme in the Tarras area (230 residents). The Council’s investment will be even higher as there are ongoing costs during the proposed 5 year investment, bringing the spending of public money up to $ 6-7 million. It is proposed to fund this investment through rates increases.
Any Otago rate payer and resident can make a submission to the Council on this investment proposal. This is your opportunity to have your opinion heard by the 11 councillors who are divided on the subject. Public submissions on the plan close this coming Friday, 3 May 2013, and the councillors will have to make a decision on the proposed investment at their meeting on 24 June 2013.
You might have read some reports over the last few months in the Otago Daily Times on the Tarras water scheme. Here is a brief summary:
Tarras Water Ltd. (TWL), a privately owned company, proposes to pump water from the Clutha river to 6000 hectares of hitherto unirrigated land in the Tarras district. Currently, there are 40 shareholders, mostly farmers, with 8 farmers controlling 90% of the company, four of which are also directors of TWL. The proposed cost for this project ($ 37 million) requires a large bank loan ($ 26 million, 20% of which would be guaranteed by the Central Otago District Council) and the ORC investment in order to proceed. TWL shareholders would fund $ 7-8 million themselves upfront.
Even though the water scheme was initially promoted and presented as a “community” water scheme and public grants sought and used for preliminary studies, the cost of the scheme for the vast majority of the Tarras community is too high to be part of.
However, TWL continues to rely on public money for this private enterprise. TWL proposes the ORC to become a “dry” shareholder, i.e. hold 30% of the shares in the scheme without using the water. The ORC would only recoup its investment if it were able to sell the 30% of the shareholding over a five year period. However, over the last 6 months some landowners in Tarras have already invested in their own irrigation schemes, with others not interested in the TWL scheme for reasons of cost. The high cost will inevitably lead to intensified farming in the area, with the most likely outcome being dairy support and dairy farming in general over the proposed 6000 hectares.
While the ORC is being asked to become an investor in a private irrigation scheme, by law it also has to handle resource consents for water permits, as well as enforcing legislation relating to water quality and use in the Otago area, in other words it would put itself in a position of conflict of interest (private investor and regulator at the same time).
Such an investment would also set a precedent for other irrigation schemes in the wider Otago region, the latest one proposed for the Maniototo area. In fact, it would set a precedent for any private business to ask the ORC for public money to partially fund their enterprise, whatever it might be!
Despite being asked by the ORC for information on alternative funding, TWL has not sought private business investment in its scheme, suggesting that it doesn’t stack up as a good deal. TWL solely relies on public money input and very strongly lobbies the 11 ORC councillors to vote in favour of the investment.
Again, TWL is a private company which asks the ORC for millions of dollars of public money, funded through rates increases affecting every Otago rate payer, with a high risk to the Council to be able to recoup the investment. And TWL is effectively owned by a small number of wealthy farmers.
Should you be concerned about the use of public money in this fashion, please use the attached form to make a submission to the Otago Regional Council by Friday, 3rd May 2013. 
The draft annual plan with the TWL investment proposal is available on the ORC home page, www.orc.govt.nz
Please, also forward this email to anyone you think might like to make a submission.
Best regards,
Holger Reinecke


by 2 Comments

Global Change for Beginners

Puzzle ClipArtSo you sort of sense there are some issues looming, but it is quite confusing, seems still controversial and certainly helpless… Here are some basic elements and inspiration to help you assemble the puzzle.

The links and organizations mentioned in this article (in maroon) have credentials, are reputable and are important sources for further information. I recommend you read the whole article first and then click and explore the links.

Hard facts

There is proven human induced climate change. In its latest Climate Change Report dated 2007, the IPCC states that temperatures had already increased by an  average of 1 degree in the 20th century, and will continue to increase by 2 to 4 degrees by 2100 if greenhouse gas emissions are not curbed. Climate changes also include an increase of extremes, draughts, winds, floods, colds and heatwaves. Some places will become colder. The next report is in progress but intermediary announcements have underlined that the projections and scenarios are lower than what is actually happening. People who cast doubt about it have either an interest in keeping business-as-usual or are looking for excuses, being unable to consider change yet.

Human activity and settlement is creating irreversible damage on world biodiversity, jeopardizing its capacity to regenerate itself.  It is not only sad that many species disappear but it is also hugely harmful to human society as biodiversity provides us with a wide range of services, free and taken for granted. Here is the summary of the very official Convention of the Global Diversity.

Resources are running out, whether it is water, oil, or minerals… Clean air too! Some, like phosphorus, are not directly essential for us but their rarity would have dire consequences… The nitrogen cycle change is another example of the human activities tremendous impact.

There is a global economic and social crisis -just watch TV!- and despite rebounds, we all know that doing more of the same thing is not going to improve anything.

Well, the reality is that our earth has boundaries and we have been in ecological overshoot for many decades.

I have a “Drivers of Change” set with 175 cards each detailing different aspects of energy, waste, climate change, water, demographics, urbanisation, poverty. One group game consists in picking up one card each and meeting every other participant and discussing the links between the two seemingly totally distinct subjects. An amazing eye-opening experience.

Everything is connected. For example, the practices of modern agriculture, combined with the world demographics, creates a catch-22 to feed the everyone when productive land is being depleted or constructed for human expansion, resulting in rocketing food prices, worsening the social crisis and the state of the environment… “Whatever befalls the Earth – befalls the sons of the Earth. (…) Whatever Man does to the web, he does to himself.” Says Chief Seattle in his famous 1854 speech.

Ostrich clipartFlight or Fight!

Too much!! Panic!!!

You may prefer to ignore or escape in consumerism, in drugs, in hopes that we will go on Mars…

Or read on…

There are solutions! Lots! And we need lots of people to make them happen. It is a team work. Everyone’s little action at his level contributes.

30 years ago, we were wacky… or pioneers. And yes some of us are extremist! Many people like me worked to identify, analyse and communicate the issues; many people have been experimenting and finding solutions. It may be new to you, but it not new and many solutions have been tested and approved.

Today, we are innovators and there are many early adopters. Be part of them!

It has been demonstrated that when 13.5% of the population has embraced a change, then the majority engages. No need to spend energy to convince people, they will come on board. Just Change yourself, what you can, when you can. That is your part of the Global Change.

Change is not easy and everyone is not venturesome. Around us, many people act to make change easier, for example creating cycle lanes to enable people to cycle to work safely. So while more and more people embark on the boat- bike!- , more and more change is possible in a virtuous spiral. Listen to Elizabeth Sahtouris inspirational talk.

Change for what?

Here I introduce the sustainability principles as guidelines for change, from the Natural Step (explained in 2mn, or for kids)

  1. Is a choice/ an action taking always more resources from the earth crust?
  2. Is it creating things that the earth cannot digest and therefore persist and accumulate in our ecosystems or atmosphere?
  3. Is it somehow destroying part of the biosphere, undermining its regenerative capacity?
  4. Is it preventing other people from having a decent life?

If an answer is Yes, then try and change it. If all answers are No, then your choice / action is sustainable. Simple, no?

Solutions levels

Intergovernmental and governments decide on rules and laws

I do not expect much from them as they are very lobbied.  However we can influence these:

  • with online activism following Avaaz, Choice and many others ;
  • write submissions and get involved politically;
  • or for the bravest, stand as a candidate for the Local Government elections

Business and industry profit more when saving the planet

Business is driven by profit, which derives from the difference between the selling price and the cost to produce a good or service. Therefore,  for many MANY years, business has tried to get the cheapest resources, get more work done by workers paid minimally and externalizing costs.  Today resources are increasingly expensive. Delocalisation for cheap labor reaches its limits, polluting is getting to visible, laws and consumers are more demanding…

Paul Hawken demonstrated way back in 1994, that business and industry can be restorative of the environment. Because it is more profitable, more and more businesses, like InterfaceFlor,  are redesigning the way of producing. Sustainable and socially responsible business is the way of the future.

Community level can be very effective

Together, we achieve lotsBe part of or create associations that promote energy descent, nature restoration, social justice… The Transition Town movement is getting momentum and induces a lot of change. In New Zealand, Transition Town Aotearoa networks and support communities, responding to the twin challenges of climate change and peak oil.

Also locally, write submissions and get involved politically. It may be worthwhile participating in Community Associations to bend them in a sustainable direction.

There are many global-change-friendly communities in the world, even some large ones like Whistler in Canada, Curitiba in Brazil or Nelson in New Zealand.

Individual level is the most reachable

How you spend your money is a powerful tool with which you can really make a difference. For example, you choose to support an industrial farmer using pesticides, polluting water, harming his animals etc when buying his produce at the supermarket OR you support the living of a friend at the local farmers market. Do you see how strong your choice is?

Changing requires a mind shift, a change in yourself. It requires you realize that you are a human,  part of the society, itself part of the environment. Economy is not an aim nor the ruler of all life, but the mere tool for societies to function.

From  to 

It requires that you realize that you ARE either contributing to the problem or you ARE part of the solution, from “what can I do anyway-I’d better keep going as usual” to “Wherever I am on this track, it is worthwhile for me, for the planet and for future generations, and I am going there”. And just start.

Think on how you eat (best is organic, local, vegetarian food), how you move (prefer bike or collective transports), how you heat your dwelling (reduce your energy consumption). And sieve them through the 4 questions above. Here is a Sustainability at home comprehensive  Checklist, courtesy of The Natural Step Canada.

We are all at a different stage on the path, and depending on circumstances one may have to go backwards. No judgement. It is not an excuse not to “keep aiming at” sustainability.

working together4

I hope that by now, terror and oblivion has been replaced hope and determination. The only problem left is “Are we early enough?” but better late than never...

Lots of actions and initiatives have already contributed to mitigate the issues, giving nature and beings more time to adapt to change. For example, the ozone layer depletion has started to reduce since 2009, thanks to the 1987 Montreal protocol.

Remember, you are not alone, we need many hands to go faster and also”the more the merrier“!

Here are some resources to give you information in specific domains and a lot of inspiration. Have a wonderful voyage!

More main resources

For positive news: Happyzine in NZ ; Guardian Green Living blog (Yes UK but quite worldwide) ; Tree Hugger with humour ; Celsias NZ, solid source but not always fun…

For news about New Zealand nature : Forest and Bird

Check out the resources from the Centre for Alternative Technologies in Wales and Terre Vivante in French

Here are Sustainable Initiatives and projects in NZ, mainly by the Centre for Sustainable Practice students.

Here is the American Earth Policy Institute Action plan B.

Lots of cool stuff on RSA Animate and TED talks

 

Agriculture, gardening, food and health

Organic New Zealand and Permaculture New Zealand

Information about Pesticides, in New Zealand and internationally, also What’s wrong with Pesticides?

Energy, transport, building

Rocky Mountain Institute, US based but lots of positive information about energy, transport and housing. See Amory Lovins inspiring TED talk here.

Renewable Energy World blog

The Future From black oil to a green future

Economics

Living Economy website in New Zealand

New Economics Foundation, Economics as if people and the planet mattered

Here a New Zealand online guide to eco-accommodation, organic cafes, food supplies, Māori cultural tourism, and environmental tourism activities.

Sustainable business network in New Zealand

Here are many more interesting links . It is also worthwhile “Liking” some organisations of your interest on Facebook and exploring their “Likes”. Focus on the good news and practical how-to aspects.

Please leave a comment if you find inaccuracies or to suggest too-good-to-miss links.


by 1 Comment

Slow travel

100_7128

Good clean fair travel

How to enjoy travels without much money and without impacting too much on the planet? We have Slow Food. Here is a Slow Travel concept.

No! I am not going to rant about these motor boats queuing at the petrol station in the morning and wasting it doing loops in the water; Nor am I going to name and shame people who fly for a 5-day discounted trip to a paradise international resort built on native land destroying coral… No.

Travelling and holidaying can use resources parsimoniously and be a meaningful experience, not just another consumption trap. One of the keys is to travel less far and less often but longer, and in combinaison with another purpose. Could be studying, volunteering,  working or running competitions…

Simple things

I enjoy no-travel-holidays, just staying home to make up for when I go to France. Enjoy my friends. Enjoy good books and rest. These walks I did not have time to walk yet. Catch up on sewing and repairs. Try new things, start the sourdough, patisseries, decorating the staircase, sun salutations, family games… I enjoy simple things.

20121231_235222Not far

We love to drive to the sea with our tent and enjoy the beach and bonfire. We treasure tramping in the wilderness on a DOC track or walk – see also ideas on the interactive website NZ walks Info. Check the weather forecast on Metservice AND Metvuw.

Further…

When we do travel overseas, we have our tents or we  stay at locals accomodations, it’s cheaper and you know your money is going to feed the kids. It also provides a more genuine experience.

Ethical and environmental tourism

If you want to plan your travels, then think about the environmental and ethical impact of your choice. There are many travel agencies that really support communities and enhance biodiversity. Find some on Ethical Traveler, Tourism Concern,  or check if they are members of Leave No Trace, the International Ecotourism Society or other…

Carbon Off-setting

There are benefits in carbon off-setting and many companies will take your money to hopefully -check carefully- finance some carbon reduction programs. I personally can’t afford it and prefer keeping my daily carbon footprint as small as I can and avoid yet another monetarization of life.

Volunteering

A great cheap and meaningful way to go places and create friendships is to work in exchange of board in New Zealand and abroad:

When I will be wiser and free.. ?!

I may become peacekeeper for a few months through some of these organisations, Volunteer Service Abroad   (NZ) , Global Exchange , Peace Brigades ,  Service International para La Paz,
Nonviolent Peaceforce or
Friend Peace Team (quaker)
 And Arbinger Institute will provide for most background issues.

If I was younger and free!…

I would go around the world cruise hiking  and stay at friendly people thanks to couch surfing . Read the advice from an experienced bunch on Matador Network.

Welcoming travelers is a way to travel –  proxy travel !

This year we met two awesome couples, traveling with not much at all, with a very low impact on the environment and maximum contact with the people:
  • Olivier and Nadege, traveling by bike, as light as possible, boarding on sailing boats, using a kite to drive long patches and going around the world in 7 years- planned…The nec plus ultra of Slow travel! Follow them on http://www.enrouteavecaile.com/

    100_7029

  • Adeline and Mark, arriving by chance at our place one evening, travelling in tandem http://letandemetlavie.fr/ .
What an overseas experience! To the four of them, we were very pleased to offer a home-so-far-away-from-home and wish you all the best.
Even with a family, Slow travel is possible. Raphaël, Sophie, Hugo et Adèle travelled one year (took a sabbatical leave), wwoofing, and meeting hundreds of people for an unforgettable experience… Nice to have met you all!

And the librarian in me can’t help mentioning books…

Travel books will take you place, for free and nearly zero-carbon:

  • a good fiction set in Africa, India, in a Pacific Island or wherever will probably transport you in another time/space. Sea Wall, by Marguerite Duras and White Tiger, by Aravind Adiga immediately spring to my mind.
  • A recount or a logbook that tell of a journey may make you feel that you actually walk next to the author. The first that I think of is Endurance: Shackleton’s Incredible Voyage, by Alfred Lansing and I was very pleased not to be with them! Another well written travel book with a mission is Three Cups of Tea, by Greg Mortenson.
  • an adventure story will take you there and beyond, depending how realist it wants to be. I walked and rode and walked for weeks reading The Hobbit, by J.R.R. Tolkien!

How do YOU make your travel good, clean and fair?

Please contribute to the slow travel concept by telling your experience in a comment. Thank you!


by Leave a comment

Localising food tour coming to Wanaka

Flower

While Wanaka transition town people were starting to meet regularly to try and set up a transition town framework,  we were contacted by the Localising Food Tour Aotearoa team who would be in our part of the country in 5 weeks.

So the meetings changed to organising the Local Food event and here it comes, from 5th to 9th December.

Here is the Localising Food Tour Schedule and here is the website for bookings and more information about the workshops, presentations and facilitators.

I hope it will launch a local movement for more local food production, both as individuals and as a community, to build on the Farmers’ market.


by Leave a comment

Trees trees trees

My favourite activity is to walk in a forest. I enjoy the softness of the forest floor, the smells, the noises, the atmosphere and hearing and spotting birds. It calms, regenerates and grounds me. But ever since I was a kid, I have always heard that forests are destroyed. When I check on the Internet to find how quickly, it is worse than I could imagine: 33 soccer fields per minute, as calculated in 1999 in a  FAO Study! It is estimated that only between 20 and 30% of the native forests remain worldwide. In New Zealand, Te Ara Encyclopedia states that 80% ot the New Zealand islands was covered in forests before human settlement. In 1997, natural forest covered just 24% of the land area, and planted forest covers 5% of land area, the FAO reports.

2011 was the International Year of forests to say loudly and clearly that it’s more than time to stop the destruction and start regenerating them. Why and how is summarised below.
Feel free to leave a comment to add or discuss a point.

Role and importance of forests

    • Forest ecosystems act as a sink of carbon. A fifth of greenhouse gases come from forest destruction was calculated in the  FAO Study .
    • Forests are vital in rain and water regulation. Trees are water column, and attract and retain water and humidity thus regulating water cycle. Haikai Tane from  the Living Water Foundation says for example “in Twizel, our two met stations during the hydro project days 1970-1985 recorded atmospheric humidity below 50% (MOSTLY 20-40%). Now with the arboreta of trees maturing, Twizel’s humidity rarely falls below 60% now… it’s a micro-meso-meteorological process… storing and recycling moisture through ecosystem performance...
    • They are hugely important ecosystems for biodiversity: they are the habitats of 2/3 of land animals. Vitally important for plants too which provide us for food and cure.
    • They usually have a high degree of endemism: in New Zealand for example, more than 80% of the approx 2300 native species in NZ forests occur nowhere else in the world (1), meaning that if we let them being destroyed, we loose these species and their genetic qualities all together.
    • When healthy, forests are an incredible resource for people who live near them (food, refuge, medicine, materials, firewood) and love them too.

Why are they destroyed?

  • For timber, sometimes just a few valuable trunks are taken (example the kauri in NZ), some is used for charcoal and wood chipping
  • For making space for farmland, particularly cattle farming and other exportation crops
  • Also burnt for hunting (example: the moa in NZ).
  • For mining and other uses. Here in the South Island forests were burnt to allow access for gold mining. Still today in many places forests are heavily damaged for mining and transport, oil rigging and dams. Example: open-cast mining in Denniston Plateau
  • For human settlements as we do not like to feel enclosed or they hide the view… and more and more humans need space.
  • Or they menace to change the landscape. That’s what happening currently in New Zealand with this wilding pine control frenzy!   They invade the pasture land, which is not natural in the first place… This is very controversial, sorry, and does not refer to the native forest indeed. But they grow so well, they would still be a useful resource (firewood… How much firewood do you use each year? Is it actually replaced by plantations?) and would help catch much needed rain too…

How can we stop it?

Support groups who protect them, for example:

Buy carefully:

    • paper with FSC label ,
    • wood products made from non exotic woods,
    • local or organic fair trade foods will ensure they have not been extracted from forests (unlike palm oil based food for example)

Campaign locally and globally (Avaaz, Greenpeace, for example) to protect forests.

And go and enjoy them, if National Parks are utilised, then they will not be as easily dismissed and nibbled. In some countries, eco-tourism is essential to keep National Parks doing their conservation work (example in Kenya).

Tree plantingAnd we can be restorative

Read the moving novella The Man who planted trees, by Jean Giono translated by Peter Doyle  http://www.pinetum.org/GionoUK.htm

The power of reforestation is fascinating. Wildlife comes back (example  QEII ), nature becomes abundant again. Watch for example this Oasis en tous lieux experience in Mali   or this amazing, complex and successful project of recreating rainforest  in Borneo, by biologist Willie Smits.

And locally, we can volunteer at Te Kakano nursery every Tuesday and Wednesday and there are Saturday planting days too. It is wonderful that a few passionate people managed to create a movement that allows us to regenerate native bush in our area. Thank you!

Or we can learn how to Grow Seedlings from the Wild and do it in our backyard.

Every tree counts and many trees recreate a forest…

Sources:

(1) New Zealand’s native trees, by John Dawson and Rob Lucas, Nelson: Craig Potton, 2011

http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/ARTICLE/WFC/XII/MS14-E.HTM

http://www.globalforestwatch.org/english/about/faqs.htm

http://www.wri.org/project/global-forest-watch


by 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 25th 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

    1. Consideration of community views.

    2. Recognition of diversity.

    3. Interests of future communities.

    4. Impacts on well-being.

    5. Prudent stewardship.

    6. 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.


by 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.


by 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.

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.

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 post.

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

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.

Clutha river

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.

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:

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…


by 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.


by 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